Ben Nelson

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Madam President, we are all very proud of the outstanding service of our military personnel during a series of significant military operations. Our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines, both Active and Reserve, have responded admirably to our Nation's call to service. These brave military personnel have demonstrated superb service by their participation in Operation Noble Eagle, Operation Enduring Freedom, and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Since the 1991 Persian Gulf war, our personnel have served in a number of other contingency operations, including operations in Kosovo, Bosnia, Southwest Asia, and Haiti. For the most part, our service men and women serve without complaint. However, we know that continuous deployments create hardships for them, their families, and for employers of members of the Guard and Reserve who have been ordered to active duty. There is no way to remove all of the hardships that go with extended and dangerous military service, but we can make sure that they are adequately compensated when they do endure these hardships. The Personnel Subcommittee of the Armed Services Committee recently held two hearings that included testimony about our Guard and Reserve Troops. We learned: Although income loss data for current operations is not available, data for past military operations show that about a third of mobilized Guard and Reserve personnel have some income loss, a third have no change, and a third actually report an income increase. GAO reported that a DoD survey conducted in 2000 revealed that ``the average total income change for all members (including losses and gains) was almost $1700 in losses.'' Certain groups, such as self-employed reservists and medical professionals in private practice, reported greater income loss than the average estimated for all reservists. Reserve component members who have been mobilized are eligible for the same pay and benefits, health care, and family support as their Active component counterparts, although some of them face challenges in understanding and accessing their benefits. All of the services have programs in place to help the members and their families to obtain their benefits. Despite the isolated news reports about income loss, Reserve component leaders indicate that their service members are not complaining about income loss and that they are happy about being called up to do what they signed up to do. It is very important that we not create an income disparity whereby a mobilized Reserve component member would be paid more than his or her Active component counterpart of the same grade and experience performing the same duties. About a third of Reserve component members are involved in some sort of educational program. Some have reported difficulties in maintaining their educational status; loss of academic credits, scholarships and grants; and loss of tuition and other fees paid when they were ordered to active duty. Although many colleges and universities are providing relief, not all are. We also know that our Active component service members have been stretched with these frequent and lengthy deployments. Granted, they are in a little different circumstance because they volunteered for full-time military service, but these deployments are wearing on them and their families just as much as the mobilization affects Reserve component members and their families. With this in mind, I recently introduced two bills, the Deployed Service Members Financial Security and Education Act of 2003 and the Mobilized Reserve Savings Account Act. Deployed Service Members Financial Security and Education Act of 2003 is designed to compensate both Active and Reserve military personnel for frequent and lengthy deployments. It will authorize a new special pay of $1,000 per month for: Active and Reserve component military personnel who are deployed for 191 or more consecutive days; Active and Reserve component military personnel who are deployed for 401 or more days out of a rolling 730 day period; and Reserve component military personnel who are mobilized for a second time within a year of being released from and earlier call-up. This bill will also amend the Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act to protect the educational status and tuition payments of service members ordered to active duty and it will limit interest rates on their student loans while on active duty. The Mobilized Reserve Savings Account Act will authorize a pretax savings plan for Guard and Reserve members that they can use to supplement their military income when they are ordered to active duty. This will serve as an incentive for those who know that their income on active duty will be less than their normal income. These bills are relatively modest proposals that will assist our service men and women who are asked to spend the most time away from their homes and families. It is the least we can do. I would like to end my remarks by also, once again, thanking all the members of our armed services and their families for the sacrifices made to defend this nation. Your efforts have not gone unappreciated by the folks back home. I ask that the proposal be printed in the Record. The proposal follows.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the amendment of my good friend from Indiana that will help State and local health departments pay for the cost of administering the smallpox vaccine. The threat of terrorism, both foreign and domestic, is real and should not be taken lightly. We prepare for these threats by preparing our first responders--including our health care professionals. Whenever and wherever disasters have struck, health care professionals have responded selflessly by lending their skills, time, and expertise to help victims and their families. Now we are asking them to safeguard the health care infrastructure by being vaccinated against smallpox. The least we can do is make sure that the funds are available to provide the vaccinations. The vaccinations are more expensive than anticipated. Vaccinating against smallpox is not like giving flu shots. Preparation and training is needed to administer the vaccine by trained professionals who must be able to carefully screen vaccine recipients for potential adverse reactions. Followup is also needed to check on health status. All of this takes time and resources. My State of Nebraska has already vaccinated 2500 workers at a cost of about $140 per person for a total of $350,000. The resources to pay for and administer these vaccinations have been diverted from other important bioterrorism preparedness activities. The financial assistance provided in this amendment will allow States to dually safeguard against smallpox without diverting funds ``from other important bioterrorism preparation efforts. Without this additional funding, vaccinating against smallpox is essentially an unfunded mandate to the States. As any biological attack would certainly be a Federal priority, it is both unfair and ineffective not to provide Federal funds to prepare for the possibility. A virus will not stop at State lines. Our efforts to prevent the spread of a devastating illness should be national in scope, as should be the funding to pay for it. I commend the Senator from Indiana for introducing the amendment.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Madam President, I thank my colleague from Arkansas for yielding time to speak this morning and compliment the Senator from Texas for a very graphic expression of the treatment of the Iraqi people by our military. I rise today to show my support for our troops, both those serving abroad and those providing vital support here at home and their families. Our men and women in uniform have proven over and over that they are the best military force in the history of the world. Today I would like to pay tribute to their bravery and their continued commitment to America and to freedom. Americans show their gratitude through words and through deeds. But often it seems like that is not quite enough. Our soldiers on the frontlines are putting their own lives at risk in defense of this Nation and the freedoms we unfortunately sometimes take for granted. We cannot match that sacrifice, but we can do our utmost to let them know that the entire Nation is united behind them. As we fight battles in Iraq and continue our military presence in Afghanistan, Bosnia, South Korea, and other nations around the world, it is more important now than ever that we pledge ourselves to honoring the commitments we make to our troops, just as they honor our country through their service. And we must pledge that we will all support and comfort their families while they are deployed. It is very difficult to be separated from loved ones in the best of circumstances--I hope that all our military men and women know that we will help their families through this difficult period until they are able to come back home and rejoin their families. I would also like to express my gratitude to the service personnel deployed stateside, at bases like Offutt Air Force Base in Bellevue, NE and the National Guard headquarters in Lincoln and all those who serve all over the country serving in similar capacities. Through their work maintaining equipment, keeping our intelligence channels open, and keeping our homeland safe, they continue to ensure that our nation has the best run, best trained, and best staffed military in the history of the world. We must also recognize the changing face of our military. No longer are our Nation's armed forces primarily composed of full-time troops. Now, a sizable number of our service members are reservists and guardsmen. We do not make the distinction of the troops in the field who are active duty, ready Reserves or Guard members. We should not make a distinction in our policies that affect them. This week, this Chamber spoke with one voice in resolving to make sure our Reserve and Guard members have the equipment and support they need. We will now see that vote through. I also note that reservists are particularly likely to come from the ranks of the Nation's first responders. For those police officers, firefighters, and EMTs who serve in the Reserves, they honor our Nation twice--providing hometown security and then putting on another uniform to provide national security. We need to make sure that the burdens placed on them and their families do not make it more difficult for them to serve. It is my pleasure to be here today to address these issues and to make sure that we join together in support of our troops and we do so recognizing not only their sacrifice but also the sacrifice their families make. I would particularly like to recognize those Nebraskans serving in uniform. Right now, we have approximately 400 Nebraska Army National Guardsmen participating in peacekeeping missions in Bosnia and 675 Guardsmen serving in Afghanistan as part of Operations Enduring Freedom and Noble Eagle. These men and women hail from Chadron, Gering, Scottsbluff, North Platte, Lincoln, Kearney, Falls City, Wahoo, Fremont and a number of other cities across our State. There is no part of Nebraska that is not represented overseas in our military. Nebraskans are also represented by 25 members of the 24th Medical Company training for deployment to Kosovo as well as 125 Nebraska Air National Guardsmen deployed in regions around the world. I am very proud of the service of my fellow cornhuskers. I had the opportunity this past fall to visit with a few of these troops serving at Aviano Air Force Base in Italy. It was a real pleasure to sit down with SSgt Michale Varney of Murray, SrA Aaron Mueller of Weeping Water, MSgt Edward Coufal of Plattsmouth, and Airman Elizabeth Ahrens of my hometown of McCook. I can honestly say that they are truly among the best Nebraskans that our State has ever produced. Thank you for this opportunity to show my support for our troops. The ACTING PRESIDING pro tempore. The Senator from Idaho.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. I thank my colleagues and thank the Presiding Officer for this time.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, it is a pleasure to join with my colleague from the State of Maine. We have been working for a long time to bring about help for the States in the area of Medicaid and in the area of welfare reform and social services. Our amendment makes it clear that the Senate recognizes the partnership between the Federal Government and the States, and is committed to helping the States see their way out of their dire budget situation. How bad is this budget shortfall? The States are currently experiencing the worst fiscal crisis since World War II. States have accumulated $26 billion in deficits this year on top of $50 billion in deficits from last year. Even greater gaps, reaching upwards of $70 to $85 billion in deficits, are projected for the next fiscal year. It is, in fact, a crisis. But the budget crisis is more than just numbers and dollars. This is about real people. And the people of our States have been hit hard by the tough economic times. Nearly every State is required to have a balanced budget, even during a recession. The rainy day funds have run dry and funding for programs as critical as Medicaid have been cut to the bone. The only option left for many States is to cut critical programs even further or raise taxes. Just last year, Nebraska reduced the number of low-income working families that were eligible for assistance with childcare. More than 2,000 Nebraska families have lost childcare assistance as a result of this change. Those hardest hit are families that have managed to stay off welfare for more than 2 years. These families who have slowly but steadily made progress to self-sufficiency may soon find themselves struggling to pay their childcare bills and returning to the welfare rolls. Childcare assistance is integral to any effort to move families from welfare to work and to keeping low-income parents employed. State fiscal relief will protect the progress we have made in welfare reform over the past decade from being undone. Many of the other cuts are being considered in the areas of education, health care, social services, and corrections. My office recently received a call from Sharon Walters of Omaha, NE. The message she relayed is a good illustration of how these proposed cuts are affecting real people. She wanted to make sure I know the importance of my efforts to provide State fiscal relief. She represents Bethphage, an organization that provides community-based services for people with disabilities. She was worried because much of their funding comes from Medicaid. Because of so many proposed cuts to the Medicaid program, Bethphage and other programs like theirs, may soon be forced to limit the good work they do if State budgets do not see some relief soon. State fiscal relief is not only needed to protect education, health care, Medicaid and other social service programs, it is needed to stimulate our economy. In discussing various jobs and growth proposals with my colleagues this year, I have repeatedly asked them to ``Show me the Stimulus'' and demonstrate how proposed tax cuts or spending will get our economy back on track. Although economists differ on the stimulative effect of the varying tax cut proposals, I think there is little question that providing States with fiscal relief would be a boost to the economy. In fact, State fiscal relief may provide more ``bang for the buck'' than many of the other stimulus proposals being discussed. According to a recent study done by Mark Zandi at economy.com every dollar spent in State fiscal relief will create $1.24 in demand the following year. At a time when we are trying to get the economy back on track, it would be irresponsible for the Senate to turn its back on this nationwide crisis and do nothing. It doesn't make much sense to cut taxes in Washington while States are forced to raise them in Lincoln, Des Moines, Topeka, Pierre, Saint Paul, or wherever and other State capitals throughout the United States. State fiscal relief is a commonsense approach to getting our economy back on track. As well, it is the right thing to do. Not only will State fiscal relief shield the people of our States from some of the tough economic times, to some extent, it will also stimulate our economy and return individuals and States alike to financial security. Again, I thank my colleagues--Senators Collins and Rockefeller--for their work on this important effort and urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this amendment.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. I estimate 5 minutes.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, today it is my honor to recognize Michael Neil Nelson for his many years of dedicated and selfless service to the State of Nebraska. Since 1992, Michael Nelson has worked for the Lincoln, NE Department of Housing and Urban Development. As a housing rehabilitation specialist, he has aided hundreds of Lincoln families by rehabilitating their homes and improving their quality of life. Mr. Nelson has also assisted first-time home buyers in finding suitable housing for their families, and has taught many homeowners how to maintain their investment and enhance the neighborhood. Mr. Nelson was instrumental in establishing a Rebuilding Together affiliate organization in Lincoln. Rebuilding Together preserves and revitalizes houses and communities, assuring that low-income homeowners, particularly those who are elderly and disabled, and families with children, live in warmth, safety, and independence. Through this worthwhile initiative, Mr. Nelson spent countless hours recruiting and organizing volunteers in our community. He worked tirelessly to secure donations from community members and often spent his weekends arranging project publicity and outreach efforts. Mr. Nelson has always viewed his job with housing initiatives as his way of improving our community. His construction management expertise, coupled with his ability to connect with citizens, makes him a valuable asset to our community. His hard work was often noticed, and he received many accolades from his clients and awards from the city for going above and beyond his responsibilities. I am proud to represent Nebraskans like Michael Nelson who are committed public servants. Volunteer services are an essential part of communities. The selfless efforts of committed citizens like Mr. Nelson make our communities a better place to live and improve the quality of life for our neighbors. The city of Lincoln and State of Nebraska are fortunate to have Michael Nelson as a member of their community.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, today it is my honor to recognize Kathleen ``Kathy'' Danek for her many years of dedicated and selfless service to the State of Nebraska. Ms. Danek exemplifies true volunteerism: dependable, endless energy and passionate commitment to worthwhile causes. Kathy Danek has long been a distinguished member of the American Postal Workers Union, AFL-CIO. Ms. Danek, through tireless work in several State and local agencies, earned the position as National Legislative Aide and Editor for the Auxiliary to the American Postal Workers Union. She has participated in numerous training activities to help auxiliary and union members understand the importance of grassroots involvement. Ms. Danek was also resoundingly elected to the District 1 Board of Education for the Lincoln Public Schools. In addition to her service on the Board of Education and with the Postal Workers, Ms. Danek has always been an active member of St. Patrick's Catholic Church, often spending her free time teaching students and volunteering with St. Patrick's athletic programs. Her work also includes service with the Girl Scouts, the Lincoln Juniors Volleyball club, the Lancaster County Democratic Party, the YMCA as a softball and volleyball coach, and fundraising for the Doris Blair Softball Complex. Because of her tireless work in the community, her peers have elected her President of the Lincoln Northeast High School Parent Advisory Board, President of the Lincoln Northeast High School Booster Club and Community Representative for the Lincoln Public Schools Graduation Requirement Committee. In addition, she has been selected as a member of the LPS High School Principal Selection Committee and was a community representative for the Northeast High School Media Center Committee. Ms. Danek has also devoted her time to Huntington and Dawes Middle schools. Ms. Danek is a longtime resident of Lincoln, NE. She has been married to her husband Terry for 30 years. Together they have four daughters; Christine Goche, Wendy Danek, Kelly Witter, Megan Danek. They have two grandchildren, Bailey and Harrison Goche. I am proud to represent Nebraskans like Ms. Danek who are committed public servants. Volunteer services are an essential part of communities. The selfless efforts of committed citizens like Ms. Danek, make our communities a better place to live and improve the quality of life for our neighbors. The city of Lincoln and State of Nebraska are fortunate to have Kathy Danek as a member of their community.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, I would like to express my strong support for Lincoln, NE's application for a community health center. I met recently with Secretary Tommy Thompson and discussed the proposal with him. He reacted positively, assuring me that the application would be given top priority. The need for this facility in Lincoln is great. Lincoln is experiencing an influx of immigrant families who lack health care coverage and are in critical need of medical care. And Nebraska, like other States, is facing budgetary constraints due to the downturn in the economy and reduced its Medicaid rolls leaving more people without health insurance. The new health center, which will be called the Peoples' Health Center of Lincoln, will provide many services to the area including: primary medical care, primary dental care and oral health education, lab services, social work and health education. With the Federal funds, the community will be able to proceed to develop these health services to the uninsured and underinsured in Lincoln. I look forward to HHS's grant announcement and am hopeful that Lincoln's application will be approved.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, today it is my great honor to recognize the valiant efforts of two volunteer firefighters from Ainsworth, NE. Mr. Bill Carr and Mr. Jeff Keezer of the Ainsworth Volunteer Firefighter Department were instrumental in the April 22, 2002 rescue attempt of Timothy Culpepper, a digital communications worker who was stranded more than one thousand one hundred feet in the air when a fifteen hundred foot telecommunications tower he was working on partially collapsed near Bassett, NE. When a wire snapped disabling and stranding Mr. Culpepper, several agencies, including the Nebraska Emergency Management Agency, were called upon for the dangerous rescue mission. However, upon arriving at the scene, response teams realized they were ill-equipped to perform the high-altitude rescue. Bill Carr, a carpenter and married father of three, had spent many summers during college painting tall communications towers. Jeff Keezer, a married father of one, works for a steel company that erects hundred-foot grain elevators. Though these experiences could not have adequately prepared them for this dangerous and technically challenging rescue. They quickly volunteered to help. With no regard for their personal safety, Mr. Carr and Mr. Keezer, armed only with estimations of the exact height of the stranded worker, began to make the physically challenging two-hour ascent to rescue the man who was hanging only by a harness. Carrying bundles of rope and heavy rescue equipment, these brave firefighters, along with a handful on colleagues from the Lincoln Fire Department, scaled the tower amid 30-mph winds and with dwindling daylight. Upon reaching Mr. Culpepper it was discovered that tragically he did not survive the impact of tumbling debris. Mr. Carr and two other firefighters managed to scale the total distance to Mr. Culppeper in ninety minutes while Mr. Keezer, with heavy rescue equipment on his back, and two other firefighters scaled to the half-way point to manage the recovery effort and descent that lasted more than 3 hours. Unfortunately these two brave and selfless first-responders were omitted from an award ceremony in Washington, D.C. on February 14. Though the Department of Justice didn't recognize their efforts, Mr. Carr and Mr. Keezer can forever hold their heads high knowing their bravery and the fabric of their character has made all Nebraskans, and especially their neighbors in Ainsworth, proud of their actions. Mr. President, heroism comes in many forms and the courage displayed by Mr. Carr and Mr. Keezer with danger present is a shining example. Nebraskans like Mr. Carr and Mr. Keezer are selfless, honorable and just and they are what makes living in Nebraska living ``the good life.'' I am proud to represent Nebraskans like Mr. Carr and Mr. Keezer who are committed public servants. Volunteer services are an essential part of small-town America. Without the brave and selfless efforts of everyday citizens like Mr. Keezer and Mr. Carr, many rural communities would lack vital protection and security. The city of Ainsworth and the state of Nebraska are fortunate to have courageous citizens like Jeff Keezer and Bill Carr. These men are true heroes.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, on Monday, February 24, I was unable to be present to vote on S. 151, the PROTECT Act, because I was part of the U.S. Presidential Delegation attending the inauguration of His Excellency Roh Moo-Huyn, President of the Republic of Korea. Had I been present I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, today at the White House six brave Nebraska firefighters will be honored by the Vice President of the United States for their stirring acts of bravery and heroism during a dangerous and daring rescue in Nebraska. All Nebraskans are tremendously proud of these men. They showed uncommon bravery when they selflessly risked their lives in service of others and today's honor is but a small payment toward all they have given for their communities. The Vice President will present Deputy Chief Ron Kennett, Captain Rick Klein, and Firefighters Bob Borer, Jeremy Hosek, Guy Jones, and Mike Wright of the Lincoln Fire Department with Public Safety Officer Medal of Valor awards. The award recognizes the firefighters' role in recovering an accident victim from a television tower in Bassett, NE, on April 22, 2002 During that rescue a man was trapped on a 1,500-foot tall Nebraska Educational Telecommunications, NET, tower. The man, Timothy Culpepper of Meridian, MS, was part of a crew installing a new cable and transmission line on the tower about 15 miles south of Bassett. It is believed Culpepper was killed instantly when a steel cable snapped. His body was about 1,180 feet above ground. After an air rescue was determined to be impossible due to winds, tower wires and lack of expertise, Lincoln Fire and Rescue was called in. The six-person crew was flown to Bassett in a Nebraska State Patrol aircraft, usually used by the Governor's Office. Deputy Chief Kennett and Captain Klein directed the recovery operation from the ground. The six firefighters climbed for an hour and a half to reach the accident victim. They lowered Mr. Culpepper's body 300 feet at a time, with the descent taking more than 3 hours. Men and women like these firefighters are our first line of defense whenever tragedy strikes. They are truly an inspiration to us all. I join with my fellow Nebraskans and this entire nation in thanking them for their courage and for making my home State proud.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Madam President, I thank you for the opportunity to speak about what is clearly a bipartisan issue. I would like to add to what my colleague from Minnesota said about the Fuels Security Act offered by Senators Daschle and Lugar on a bipartisan basis. I am here today to support the Fuels Security Act of 2003. This important renewable fuels legislation is one of the pillars for economic development for rural--America one segment of the population that has lagged behind during the economic surge of the 1990's and is suffering under the combined effects of the current economic slowdown and a two-year devastating drought which I had the audacity to name ``Drought David.'' This legislation is important for rural America. Last year, we completed the farm bill--the first part of the economic revitalization plan for rural America. For the last several months, we have been struggling over the most important short-term economic stimulus plan for rural America--comprehensive drought assistance. Though I believe what the Senate passed and what we hear will be included in the omnibus is insufficient to adequately compensate for the drought, it might provide some initial assistance to farmers and ranchers. In addition to the farm bill and disaster assistance, I believe we need to craft a comprehensive rural development plan that will spur investment in agri-business and promote economic activity in the agriculture center. We need to consider opening new markets like Cuba-- to ensure American products can be sold and farmers and ranchers can earn a living. The Fuels Security Act of 2003, is the latest piece of the puzzle. It is clear that use of ethanol, as part of a renewable fuels standard is a win-win-win situation: a win for farmers, a win for consumers, and a win for the environment. That is why I rise as an original co-sponsor and strong supporter this renewable fuels legislation. If passed, the Fuels Security Act will establish a 2.3 billion gallon renewable fuels standard in 2004, growing every year until it reaches 5 billion gallons by 2012. There are many benefits to this legislation. It will displace 1.6 billion barrels of oil over the next decade; reduce our trade deficit by $34.1 billion; increase new investment in rural communities by more than $5.3 billion; boost the demand for feed grains and soybeans by more than 1.5 billion bushels over the next decade; create more than 214,000 new jobs throughout the U.S. economy; and it will expand household income by an additional $51.7 billion over the next decade It is quite apparent that increased use of ethanol will do much to boost a struggling U.S. agriculture economy, and will help establish a more sound national energy policy. The greater production of ethanol will also be beneficial to the environment. Studies show ethanol reduces emissions of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons by 20 percent and particulates by 40 percent in 1990 and newer vehicles. In 2001 ethanol reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 3.6 million tons, the equivalent of removing more than 520,000 vehicles from the road. A choice for ethanol is a choice for America, and its energy consumers, its farmers, and its environment. Enactment of the Fuel Security Act will help us to reverse our 100- year-old near total reliance on fossil fuels; a more pressing concern than ever given the possibility of military conflict in the Mid East and the continuing economic turmoil in Venezuela. It was recently reported we are currently exporting about 80,000 gallons of fuel to Venezuela right now to help in their shortfall because of the turmoil in that part of our world. I am unabashedly proud of what my home State has accomplished in this area. Within the State of Nebraska, during the period from 1991 to 2001, seven ethanol plants were constructed and several of these facilities were expanded more than once during the decade. Specific benefits of the ethanol program in Nebraska include: $1.15 billion in new capital investment in ethanol processing plants. They include 1,005 permanent jobs at the ethanol facilities and 5,115 induced jobs directly related to plant construction, operation, and maintenance. The permanent jobs alone generate an annual payroll of $44 million. And more than 210 million bushels of corn and grain sorghum is processed at the plants annually. These economic benefits and others have increased each year during the past decade due to plant expansion, employment increases, and additional capital investment. If each State produces 10 percent of its own domestic, renewable fuel, as Nebraska does, America will have turned the corner away from dependence on foreign sources of energy. And it is possible because ethanol and biodiesel can be made from biomass from other than corn or sorghum or other row crops. It can be produced from garbage. It can be produced from switch grass and all kinds of other biomass. When you take a hard look at the facts, you will see that this legislation is nothing but beneficial for America. The Fuels Security Act is balanced, comprehensive, and is the result of the dedication of so many, especially Senator Daschle and Senator Lugar. So now I ask my colleagues to join me in promoting new opportunities for the technologies that will put our Nation and the world's transportation fuels on solid, sustainable, and environmentally enhancing ground. We owe it to our country now--and to future generations--to pass this legislation without any further delay.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Madam President, I thank you for the opportunity to speak about what is clearly a bipartisan issue. I would like to add to what my colleague from Minnesota said about the Fuels Security Act offered by Senators Daschle and Lugar on a bipartisan basis. I am here today to support the Fuels Security Act of 2003. This important renewable fuels legislation is one of the pillars for economic development for rural--America one segment of the population that has lagged behind during the economic surge of the 1990's and is suffering under the combined effects of the current economic slowdown and a two-year devastating drought which I had the audacity to name ``Drought David.'' This legislation is important for rural America. Last year, we completed the farm bill--the first part of the economic revitalization plan for rural America. For the last several months, we have been struggling over the most important short-term economic stimulus plan for rural America--comprehensive drought assistance. Though I believe what the Senate passed and what we hear will be included in the omnibus is insufficient to adequately compensate for the drought, it might provide some initial assistance to farmers and ranchers. In addition to the farm bill and disaster assistance, I believe we need to craft a comprehensive rural development plan that will spur investment in agri-business and promote economic activity in the agriculture center. We need to consider opening new markets like Cuba-- to ensure American products can be sold and farmers and ranchers can earn a living. The Fuels Security Act of 2003, is the latest piece of the puzzle. It is clear that use of ethanol, as part of a renewable fuels standard is a win-win-win situation: a win for farmers, a win for consumers, and a win for the environment. That is why I rise as an original co-sponsor and strong supporter this renewable fuels legislation. If passed, the Fuels Security Act will establish a 2.3 billion gallon renewable fuels standard in 2004, growing every year until it reaches 5 billion gallons by 2012. There are many benefits to this legislation. It will displace 1.6 billion barrels of oil over the next decade; reduce our trade deficit by $34.1 billion; increase new investment in rural communities by more than $5.3 billion; boost the demand for feed grains and soybeans by more than 1.5 billion bushels over the next decade; create more than 214,000 new jobs throughout the U.S. economy; and it will expand household income by an additional $51.7 billion over the next decade It is quite apparent that increased use of ethanol will do much to boost a struggling U.S. agriculture economy, and will help establish a more sound national energy policy. The greater production of ethanol will also be beneficial to the environment. Studies show ethanol reduces emissions of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons by 20 percent and particulates by 40 percent in 1990 and newer vehicles. In 2001 ethanol reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 3.6 million tons, the equivalent of removing more than 520,000 vehicles from the road. A choice for ethanol is a choice for America, and its energy consumers, its farmers, and its environment. Enactment of the Fuel Security Act will help us to reverse our 100- year-old near total reliance on fossil fuels; a more pressing concern than ever given the possibility of military conflict in the Mid East and the continuing economic turmoil in Venezuela. It was recently reported we are currently exporting about 80,000 gallons of fuel to Venezuela right now to help in their shortfall because of the turmoil in that part of our world. I am unabashedly proud of what my home State has accomplished in this area. Within the State of Nebraska, during the period from 1991 to 2001, seven ethanol plants were constructed and several of these facilities were expanded more than once during the decade. Specific benefits of the ethanol program in Nebraska include: $1.15 billion in new capital investment in ethanol processing plants. They include 1,005 permanent jobs at the ethanol facilities and 5,115 induced jobs directly related to plant construction, operation, and maintenance. The permanent jobs alone generate an annual payroll of $44 million. And more than 210 million bushels of corn and grain sorghum is processed at the plants annually. These economic benefits and others have increased each year during the past decade due to plant expansion, employment increases, and additional capital investment. If each State produces 10 percent of its own domestic, renewable fuel, as Nebraska does, America will have turned the corner away from dependence on foreign sources of energy. And it is possible because ethanol and biodiesel can be made from biomass from other than corn or sorghum or other row crops. It can be produced from garbage. It can be produced from switch grass and all kinds of other biomass. When you take a hard look at the facts, you will see that this legislation is nothing but beneficial for America. The Fuels Security Act is balanced, comprehensive, and is the result of the dedication of so many, especially Senator Daschle and Senator Lugar. So now I ask my colleagues to join me in promoting new opportunities for the technologies that will put our Nation and the world's transportation fuels on solid, sustainable, and environmentally enhancing ground. We owe it to our country now--and to future generations--to pass this legislation without any further delay.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, today I will address a different subject than has been addressed this morning. The Senate recently passed a disaster assistance package consisting of $3.1 billion to aid those affected by the worst drought since the Dust Bowl years of the 1930s. Some have referred to this package as drought disaster relief. I cannot quite call it drought relief because it does not really provide drought relief. It may provide some arid condition relief and some oasis assistance, but I cannot bring myself to call it real drought relief, for two reasons: No. 1, because $3.1 billion is inadequate. It is not enough. No. 2, it does not do enough for farmers and ranchers who are actually suffering the losses due to the devastating drought. I decided to give the drought a name, and I gave it the name ``David'' to give it an identity like other natural disasters and to show that this drought, the same as a hurricane, required immediate emergency Federal assistance. Several of my colleagues wore Drought David ribbons that I distributed to them to remind all Senators of the severe impact of the drought, and I thank those who proudly wore them. Back home, the newspaper Journal Star in Lincoln thought my proposal to name the drought was worth asking readers to submit their suggestions, and many creative suggestions were submitted but one stood out. For Shannon Sutherland of Lincoln, the drought summons up thoughts of the devil in hell. Among her suggestions was ``The Devil's Bull's Eye'' in reference to the drought maps looking like a bull's eye right over Nebraska. The Journal Star reported that on Monday. Shannon Sutherland is absolutely right. The Drought Monitor maps do resemble a target with Nebraska in the crosshairs, but our neighboring States share the target, unfortunately. If we go look at this chart, if that is not a bull's eye, I do not know what a bull's eye would look like. Unfortunately, that bull's eye is right over my hometown of McCook, NE. As we can see, that area has suffered the worst drought conditions in the State of Nebraska. We are not alone. The darkest brown is where the worst conditions are being experienced, and even though this disaster assistance was passed last week and is now over in the House, the drought continues. I think we have a tendency at times to think when we have passed something, that takes care of it. Well, first, it was inadequate to take care of the past needs, and it certainly is not going to be adequate to take care of the additional needs. Yet despite my efforts to raise awareness--and others who have attempted to raise awareness--of this drought, the Senate still could not manage to provide comprehensive drought assistance. I have come today to give my fellow Senators another opportunity to hear a message I received from one of my constituents, Bill Lueck of Arcadia, NE, in the central part of the State. His words came in over the weekend. I spoke to him yesterday. His words are a powerful reminder of how the recent drought relief bill fell short. He said: I have some concerns over the current disaster portion of the omnibus appropriations bill. According to the information I got from the farm bureau, they're considering 42 percent of AMTA payments to farmers. In our area here we have irrigated producers who haven't suffered a loss, who are going to get an additional payment and in the western part of the State our cattle producers out here are hanging on by their fingers. I assumed when they didn't consider the $6 billion anymore and went to the $3.1 billion for agriculture disaster aid that would go more to livestock producers. We've got breeding stock on wholesale bull sale that are down $1,000 average per bull around here. To Bill Lueck, I say thank you. I could not have said it better myself. I could not have drawn the focus more narrowly than he did. A $3.1 billion drought package to address the devastation of a drought this extensive inevitably leaves out people who need help to make it through the disaster. The State of Nebraska will possibly receive about 8 percent of what we need. We asked for $6 billion; we got $3.1 billion. The way in which it is being distributed to those who have severe needs and those who may have some needs but in a uniform manner robs those who really are most affected because they are going to be left with virtually nothing compared to what they need. Richard and Cecelia Carnes of Marquette, NE, which is very close to Sargent, in the middle part of the State as well, also wrote to me regarding true drought assistance. These two truly represent the family farmer. They have been in the farming business for the last 40 years, with some of their land having been in the family for over 100 years. Richard and Cecelia are afraid of losing their farm because of the drought. They are going to sell half of their cow herd to pay for the expenses they incurred during the drought last summer. The expenses are ongoing, even though the income is not forthcoming. They have even gone so far as to invest their retirement savings into keeping their farm afloat, but without significant Federal assistance they cannot prevail, either in the short term or in the long term. In their letter, they made a particularly good point that I will express at this time: This drought is affecting everyone in the country. Whenever there is a disaster for flooding, hurricanes, tornados, and snowstorms the Government is there helping right away. A drought is much worse since the farmer is the one producing the food for the country. People might take issue with whether a drought is worse than other disasters, but I do not think anybody would disagree that a drought that adversely affects the output of food is a disaster that we can ill afford. They concluded the letter by saying that everyone needs to try farming to truly understand what it is like. The Senate needs to realize the seriousness of the problem and put themselves in the shoes of family farmers and ranchers like Richard and Cecelia. Perhaps then we could provide real and substantial drought relief. Yesterday, I spoke with my good friend and colleague Tom Osborne about some concerns raised by House members on the fairness of the drought package passed by the Senate. The Chairman of the House Agriculture Committee indicated that the Senate plan would provide ``relief'' to farmers and ranchers who suffered no losses. The package treats equally farmers and ranchers who did and did not suffer losses. That's right. In a time of budget deficits and fiscal calamity, the Senate package squanders scarce resources and provides assistance to those who actually need it. Farmers and ranchers in my State of Nebraska are not pleased. Nebraska, perhaps, is one of the States hit hardest by Drought David. For two years, we have suffered under dry conditions and dwindling herds and crops. Some estimates say 20,000 of the remaining 55,000 Nebraska family farms are likely to go under this year because of the drought. The drought is a crisis--like a tornado, a hurricane, a flood, or a fire--and the climatologists indicate there is no relief in sight and it may be moving in an easterly direction. Congressman Osborne has worked tirelessly to provide comprehensive drought assistance. He left no stone unturned in his effort to find adequate funding. He knocked on every door, he made every phone call, did everything that could be required of someone in his position. But the message he received in return was that farmers and ranchers suffering from drought needed a budgetary offset to receive Federal assistance. In the end, the Senate version found an offset, but didn't find enough. But we are practical people in Nebraska and around the country--$3.1 billion is better than nothing; but it is not enough. Ask the people of this country; people such as Bill Lueck and Richard and Cecelia Carnes, who have seen this drought dry up their livelihood, and they will tell you it is not enough. I hope my fellow Senator will join me in seeking to provide comprehensive drought relief in this Congress. Nebraska State climatologists recently predicted we are about to face a perfect drought this summer, sort of an oxymoron, but I think it requires an explanation. It is the worst of all factors converging. If our family farmers and ranchers are going to survive this perfect drought, we must provide better comprehensive drought relief now to take care of the past losses and prepare them for the bump ahead they are going to face. I have sent a letter to the House Agriculture Committee, Chairman Goodlatte, encouraging him to revisit the drought package. I know he is looking very carefully at it. I would love to see the House pass a better drought assistance bill, devoid of special interests, set- asides, devoid of wasteful payments to those who need it least, and one that provides real and comprehensive drought assistance to farmers and ranchers who are teetering on the brink of disappearing forever, never to return. We need to provide the most assistance to those who need it most. In the State of the Union Address on Tuesday, the President delivered a speech of 5,050 words. In that speech the word agriculture never appeared. I know he had a lot to say and he could not say everything. He made a strong case in his remarks for the need to stimulate the economy, both with short-term and long-term implications with tax cuts and other economic incentives. I am sure I will be supporting a number of those. How can we give a tax cut to farmers and ranchers with no income? How can we stand by and watch the agricultural sector of the economy wither under drought conditions? The best economic stimulus for a rural state such as Nebraska and many other States right now is a comprehensive rural development program coupled with real emergency drought relief. Anything short of that will be a failure to our farmers, our ranchers, and our Nation. When it comes to making decisions, I will come down on the side of Nebraska every time. If I have to choose between the White House and the farmhouse, I choose the farmhouse. If I have to choose between the White House and the Statehouse, I choose the Statehouse. If I have to choose between the White House and the schoolhouse, I will choose the schoolhouse. If I have to choose between the White House and the average family house in Nebraska and throughout our country, I choose the house of each and every Nebraskan and each and every American every time. My point is the Congress is here to make decisions, not just accept what is dictated as appropriate from the administration. The case of agriculture could not be a better example. Every Member in the Senate knows very well, better than any bureaucrat in the Office of Management and Budget, what is right for our States, our communities, and our constituents. I yield the floor.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Madam President, I thank the Democratic leader for this time to speak about the need for disaster relief, and I commend my good friend and colleague from Mississippi, the chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee, for bringing forth his proposal. The debate today is not simply about disaster relief. It is about economic stimulus, and it looks to me as if the debate has already begun. Part of the stimulus package will involve tax cuts. Obviously, for a State such as Nebraska, tax cuts can be helpful, but to many farmers and ranchers who have no taxable income, who are about to lose their farms, who are about to lose their ranches and everything they have owned and that has been in the family for generations, a tax cut simply is not going to be enough. That is not an argument against the tax cut. It is an argument real stimulus. It is an argument in favor of disaster relief. Let's put a face on this problem. Let's go to southwest Nebraska, my home area, not far from Saint Francis, KS, where the distinguished Democratic leader's wife hails from. Randy Peters, who lives on his family farm that has been in the family for generations, when I say, look, we are getting you tax cuts, he will say, I appreciate that, Senator, that is nice. I then say, maybe part of the package will be eliminating the taxes on your dividends, and he says, that is great but, Senator, but the problem is that right now I do not have any taxable income. I spent all my savings on the farm and so I do not even have any dividends to be sheltered, and besides they are raising my taxes in Lincoln. What can you do to help me? I say to him and I say to my colleagues, the best way we can help those who are experiencing the ravages of this drought is to simply move forward and pass enough in disaster relief to take care of the problem. I have heard, and I suspect it will be suggested, that something is better than nothing. I agree, something is better than nothing, but in this case, something is just not good enough. We ought to be talking about how we are going to do something that is good enough to take care of those who are having this unfortunate experience we are seeing today. There seems to be no relief in sight from the drought. Every forecast, every suggestion for the future, indicates an indefinite drought, but there can be financial relief if we will step forward and make sure we provide for enough, not less than what is required. As we debate the whole area of economic stimulus, I hope we are not going to be in a position where we say to the White House, we know something is better than nothing and they know something is better than nothing. But we are not going to be able to do everything that is necessary because if we are going to require offsets consistently whether it is disaster relief or other spending, then I suppose the question has to be raised: Where is the offset on the stimulus package? If that is the case, maybe there is not enough. Something, of course, is better than nothing. I do not want to make that argument then, and I do not want to hear that argument now, because something is better than nothing, we understand that. But when it is not good enough, we ought to strive towards making sure we can look Randy Peters and the family farmers and ranchers across this Nation who are experiencing these challenges in the eye and say we have done what we can do and it is not just a half a loaf to feed you for a very short period of time. Let's do enough to make sure we take care of our agricultural needs for the future. There is not a better way to take care of rural America than to make sure our farmers and our ranchers do not lose their farms and ranches as an experience of this drought that continues today. It is not over. I have termed it ``Drought David'' as one way of getting it some attention so it has an identity. What I want to do is make sure we take care of those farmers and ranchers whose identity may be a little bit unknown in the hallowed Halls of the Capitol but whose pain is being felt.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Maine for the opportunity to address the nomination of my good friend, Governor Ridge, for this important position that has been created to take care of homeland security. I rise in support of the nomination for a number of reasons. While we were Governors, for 4 years we worked together within the Governors Association to make sure our States were taken care of; that the economies of the States were directed in an appropriate fashion; that we worked together to make clear the State issues before the Congress of the United States. In that experience, I had the opportunity to see firsthand Governor Ridge at work for the benefit of his State and for our country. In the last few months, I have had that same experience of seeing him at work in his new role of developing the homeland security strategy, the homeland security approach that I think will truly bring about homeland security. His background enables him in a very unique way to bring together local, State, and Federal agencies. It is truly an honor for me to be here today to say I am proud to support his nomination, and I look forward to working with him. Last year, as we were finishing up the second session of the 107th Congress, Governor Ridge came to Nebraska and looked at the University of Nebraska Medical Center as a possible site for a biomedical laboratory as part of the homeland security effort to make sure we have the capacity to deal with any kind of bioterrorism that would require medical treatment and for the detection of bioterrorist activity. While he was there, we had an opportunity to look at the facility but I think in a broader sense of what we need to have in terms of laboratories around the country to work with the CDC and to work with others in this new role. At the end of the year, we also had what appeared to be somewhat of a grab for one of those institutions in another part of our country. The then-majority leader agreed with a number of us that we would have a way to deal with this in a compromise this year. That majority leader passed it on to Senator Frist, the new majority leader, to work this through. A good-faith effort has been made--I am not totally convinced the language is as strong as I would like to see it, but clearly a good- faith effort has been made to resolve this issue so that the playing field is level so other institutions will be able to compete fairly to have the biomedical lab in their location based on the criteria. To give an idea of how strong and supportive I am of Governor Ridge, I have been supportive of giving him, if you will, the total authority to set the criteria so that we do not set the criteria by law but he can by rule and regulation set the criteria and make the determination. That is the kind of support I think this gentleman will have from this Congress in so many different ways because of what he has been able to show and reflect in his work thus far. There will be total support along the way. I am looking forward to the days ahead to work with Governor Ridge as he becomes Secretary Ridge in this very important responsibility. On another matter related to this--and I do not come to the floor very often to talk about partisan politics or to respond to those partisan arguments that are sometimes made. I think typically they tend to derail us, distract us, and detract from the subject of the day. So yesterday when I heard someone talking about a partisan deficit as opposed to a deficit because some of us were supportive of firefighters, some of us were supportive of first responders and of police officers on the spot--recognizing that we ought not to simply have our pictures taken with these first responders as a matter of publicity or as a matter of PR; what we should, in fact, do is make sure we are supporting them financially--I was dismayed by what I heard and what I saw on a chart. I wish to respond today because I think if we are going to focus on what homeland security is about, what Governor Ridge is focused on, it is about hometown security. If we are not secure in our hometowns, if we are not supportive financially in every way we possibly can, if we are not responding at the hometown level, the police officers, the firefighters, and the first responders of the emergency service workers and all those who protect our water supply and who protect our food supply, we are not going to have homeland security. That is what it has been about these last several days. We may have different ideas about doing it, we may have a different philosophy whether we do it through this budget or whether we do it in another budget, but that is different than to say it is a growing partisan deficit caused by one group versus another. If we are not going to support our firefighters and we are not going to support our police officers at the local level, then we ought not say we are for homeland security. One cannot be for homeland security if one is not for hometown security. The fact is, there may be disagreements, but I think we ought to set aside the partisan rhetoric and work together to find a way to fund these very important services rather than to talk in a global sense, in a broad sense about homeland security. It sounds great, but the only way it works is if we are focused on what is happening in Charlotte, NC, what is happening in Lincoln, NE, what is happening in Bangor, ME-- what is happening in the localities across our country. If we do not have security at the local level, this homeland is not secure, and none of us are truly safe. I thank the Chair. I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, on Monday, a colleague of ours lost his mother and, as always, when tragedy hits one member of our Senate family, we all feel like we have lost a member of our extended family. Not every American is recognized for the way they lived their lives. Most Americans pass through time making contact with those around them, leading good and decent lives, praying to God for forgiveness and salvation, and leaving behind a modest legacy. Betty Hagel Breeding was just like each one of us. She strived to live her life well; she endured life's unexpected twists and survived its tragedies for 79 years. She passed away this week, a true Nebraskan and a beloved matriarch, grandmother and mother of our colleague and friend Senator Chuck Hagel. Life doesn't prepare you for much, especially the loss of your parents. It's especially difficult to lose someone who has played such an instrumental role in shaping your life, like most parents do. According to her sons, Betty Hagel Breeding was ``the glue'' in the Hagel family, even more so after the death of her husband in 1962 and later her youngest son, Jim. From that point on, she alone faced the realities of life, the uncertainty of the future, and the wonder of fate as she guided her boys as they became young men. When you lose someone like that, there is a bottomless hole in your life. When you reflect on the influence of your parents it crystallizes the role they played in the development of who you are and what you believe. Our parents are the people who teach us how to be, how to treat others and how to live our lives. Betty Hagel Breeding passed away on Monday, but the lessons she taught her children and her children's children will live on through her sons. Her legacy lives today in Nebraska in those who have survived her and the lives of the Nebraskans touched by each one of them. Senator Hagel is in Nebraska today with his friends and family. They are reliving the memories they share of Betty Hagel Breeding and celebrating her life and how she led it. I know many Nebraskans and many in the Senate community join me in sending heartfelt condolences to the Hagel family. In times like these, when Nebraskans reach out to support fellow Nebraskans, it reminds me of why our State motto is ``the good life;'' because neighbor to neighbor, town to town, city to city, Nebraska is home to great men and women, like Betty Hagel Breeding.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce legislation to assist State governments badly hurt by poor economic conditions and declining revenue. This legislation, that I am proud to be introducing with my good friends Senators Collins and Rockefeller, will provide $20 billion in Federal assistance to States. Last July, 75 of our colleagues agreed with us that we need to help the States and passed a similar plan that we authored. Unfortunately, the House failed to act on our bill. In that timeframe, the budget situation in the States has gotten worse, not better. New estimates show the States facing a $60 to $85 billion shortfall next year. This is why I come to the floor today to introduce ``The State Budget Relief Act of 2003.'' The Federal and State governments are a partnership. When State governments are in a budget crisis, the Federal Government must step in and fulfill the obligations to the programs people rely on. We have the same constituents and the same goals. The bipartisan fiscal relief package will provide assistance through a temporary increase in the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage, FMAP, of Medicaid and $10 billion in social service block grants. This bill strikes a good balance by providing direct relief to Medicaid, which is one of the fastest growing programs in State budgets, while giving Governors needed flexibility through the block grants. This 18- month package will provide over $104 million in new funds to Nebraska. As a former Governor, I know how hard it is for States to maintain a balanced budget. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and take that step to avert, at least in part, potentially damaging cuts to Medicaid as well as to other social services programs. If we do not help the States, any other Federal economic stimulus will likely be lost in State and local tax hikes and spending cuts.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce legislation to assist State governments badly hurt by poor economic conditions and declining revenue. This legislation, that I am proud to be introducing with my good friends Senators Collins and Rockefeller, will provide $20 billion in Federal assistance to States. Last July, 75 of our colleagues agreed with us that we need to help the States and passed a similar plan that we authored. Unfortunately, the House failed to act on our bill. In that timeframe, the budget situation in the States has gotten worse, not better. New estimates show the States facing a $60 to $85 billion shortfall next year. This is why I come to the floor today to introduce ``The State Budget Relief Act of 2003.'' The Federal and State governments are a partnership. When State governments are in a budget crisis, the Federal Government must step in and fulfill the obligations to the programs people rely on. We have the same constituents and the same goals. The bipartisan fiscal relief package will provide assistance through a temporary increase in the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage, FMAP, of Medicaid and $10 billion in social service block grants. This bill strikes a good balance by providing direct relief to Medicaid, which is one of the fastest growing programs in State budgets, while giving Governors needed flexibility through the block grants. This 18- month package will provide over $104 million in new funds to Nebraska. As a former Governor, I know how hard it is for States to maintain a balanced budget. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and take that step to avert, at least in part, potentially damaging cuts to Medicaid as well as to other social services programs. If we do not help the States, any other Federal economic stimulus will likely be lost in State and local tax hikes and spending cuts.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, I am here today to thank Gary Chenett, Diane Rey, and John Schniedermeier. They are responsible for awarding the Silver Rose to our veterans in Nebraska. The Order of the Silver Rose was established in 1997 by Mary Elizabeth Marchand. Her father, Chief Hospital Corpsman Frank Davis, died from illnesses resulting from the use of Agent Orange in the Vietnam war. He was a combat veteran; however, he was not wounded in combat, but was exposed to a dangerous substance while fighting for his country that took his life many years later. The Department of Defense has determined that Chief Davis and many like him do not qualify for the Purple Heart. It is the mission of the Order of The Silver Rose organization to recognize the courage, heroism, and contributions of American service personnel found to have been exposed to Agent Orange in a combat zone. I am sure that as time passes, they will expand their focus to members who have died from other conflicts. The Order of the Silver Rose gives many veterans the satisfaction that they are being recognized for giving their Nation the ultimate sacrifice. There are thousands of veterans who served this country faithfully and now find themselves in poor health, some fatal health, directly due to being exposed to harmful substances during war. Gary Chenett, Diane Rey, and John Schniedermeier have awarded 11 Nebraskans with the Silver Rose, I would like to honor them today, they are: Raymond D. Todorovich of Omaha, Edgar Fleharty of Fremont, Randy E. Holke of Fremont, John Schniedermeier of Omaha, Ronald R. Charles of Omaha, Terry H. Greenwell of Omaha, David C. Smith of Firth, Joseph E. Stillwell of Omaha, Roy R. Rogers of Fremont, Albert W. Kowalski of Omaha, and Gilbert J. Styskal, Jr. of Omaha. On behalf of Nebraska, I thank these brave patriots for their sacrifices.

Mr. NELSON

Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleagues, Senator Durbin, Senator Edwards and Senator Cleland in introducing the Nuclear Waste Transportation Security Act. Ensuring the safe and secure transportation of our high-level nuclear waste across this country is of paramount importance. The greatest concern I had voting for the Yucca Mountain Resolution was the safe transportation of our waste to Yucca. This piece of legislation is the first step in what I see as Congress' ongoing duty to oversee and evaluate our Nation's transport of nuclear waste. Specifically, this bill directs the Department of Transportation to develop and carry out a comprehensive safety program that considers, among other things, terrorist threats. State and Federal cooperation is required. States must be consulted by DOT in making routing decisions and notified when shipments are traveling through their State. Dedicated trains, armed escorts and state of the art communication systems must be employed. Full-scale testing of casks to withstand the maximum temperature, water depth and piercing likely to be encountered must also be carried out. The EPA and CDC must conduct a study and report to Congress on the effects, if any, on public health of routine transportation of nuclear waste and accidents involving the transportation of nuclear waste. And, the Federal Emergency Management Agency must administer a public outreach program on nuclear waste to educate the public on appropriate means of responding to an accident or attack involving high-level nuclear waste. Employing the expertise of the DOT, NRC, FEMA, EPA and CDC to protect the American people from any potential danger posed by nuclear waste transport is the aim and goal of this legislation and I hope my colleagues will support it. The first shipments of nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain will not take place until 2010. We need to use the time between now and then to ensure that the transportation system that will carry this waste is a safe as it can possibly be.

Mr. NELSON

Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleagues, Senator Durbin, Senator Edwards and Senator Cleland in introducing the Nuclear Waste Transportation Security Act. Ensuring the safe and secure transportation of our high-level nuclear waste across this country is of paramount importance. The greatest concern I had voting for the Yucca Mountain Resolution was the safe transportation of our waste to Yucca. This piece of legislation is the first step in what I see as Congress' ongoing duty to oversee and evaluate our Nation's transport of nuclear waste. Specifically, this bill directs the Department of Transportation to develop and carry out a comprehensive safety program that considers, among other things, terrorist threats. State and Federal cooperation is required. States must be consulted by DOT in making routing decisions and notified when shipments are traveling through their State. Dedicated trains, armed escorts and state of the art communication systems must be employed. Full-scale testing of casks to withstand the maximum temperature, water depth and piercing likely to be encountered must also be carried out. The EPA and CDC must conduct a study and report to Congress on the effects, if any, on public health of routine transportation of nuclear waste and accidents involving the transportation of nuclear waste. And, the Federal Emergency Management Agency must administer a public outreach program on nuclear waste to educate the public on appropriate means of responding to an accident or attack involving high-level nuclear waste. Employing the expertise of the DOT, NRC, FEMA, EPA and CDC to protect the American people from any potential danger posed by nuclear waste transport is the aim and goal of this legislation and I hope my colleagues will support it. The first shipments of nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain will not take place until 2010. We need to use the time between now and then to ensure that the transportation system that will carry this waste is a safe as it can possibly be.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, I would like to add my voice to the many already heard today in remembrance of a passionate, intelligent, spirited man, Paul Wellstone. Senator Wellstone was an original in a crowd abounding with characters. Paul first gained notoriety for earning this office logging miles on a green school bus, traveling across the State of Minnesota touching the lives of everyone he came across. Once in Washington, Paul made his mark quickly on each Senator, aide, reporter, and officer who has been lucky enough to serve this institution, with him. Paul Wellstone was a man of principle who provided thoughtful analysis of every issue, but unlike some passionate statesmen, for Paul it was never personal. He respected differences in opinion though he was unwavering in his own beliefs. And although I only served with him for two years, I saw many times his warmth towards those around him regardless of political ideology. A few weeks ago we were on the floor giving tribute to another of our Members, Senator Jesse Helms, who will be retiring this year. Senator Wellstone eloquently praised Senator Helms, who has been so often on the other side of the ideological divide. At the conclusion of his remarks, he embraced Senator Helms. Paul was a man of ideas, but also a man of the people. He will be sorely missed and our thoughts and prayers are with his sons, the Wellstone staff, and the people of Minnesota during this difficult time.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Madam President, today I urge the Senate to act on the Beneficiary Access and Medicare Payment Equity package before the end of the session. Nebraska's health care providers are hurting financially. They need help from Congress to stop these Medicare reimbursement cuts or many will not be able to provide treatment to Medicare patients. Our 40 million seniors who depend on the Medicare system for their health care coverage need to know they have access to quality, affordable care. The bill addresses a number of Medicare inequities including cuts to hospitals, home health care providers, physical therapists, physicians, and skilled nursing facilities. The Nebraska Hospital Association estimates that in this bill Nebraska hospitals would receive approximately $56 million in additional revenue for one year and $120 million over three years. the hospitals in my State need this funding to survive financially. This legislation would have a tremendous impact on Nebraska's teaching hospitals. Teaching hospitals receive indirect medical education (IME) payments because they have higher patient care costs than non-teaching hospitals due to the extra costs incurred for teaching. The Balanced Budget Act, BBA, of 1997 cut these payments, and a provision in this bill would provide for additional relief. Nebraska has two academic medical centers--the University of Nebraska Medical Center and Creighton University Medical Center--and both would benefit from this legislation. Other hospitals in my State would also benefit including: Alegent Bergan Mercy in Omaha, Alegent Immanuel in Omaha, Nebraska Methodist in Omaha, BryanLGH Medical Center in Lincoln, St. Elizabeth Regional Medical Center in Lincoln, Good Samaritan in Kearney, and St. Francis in Grand Island. The legislation also increases the Federal Medicaid disproportionate share hospital, DSH, allotment in extremely low-DSH States, such as Nebraska, from 1 percent to 3 percent of program costs. Even though the allotment percentage would be tripled, it is still far less than the national average. The DSH program provides relief to safety net hospitals that provide critical health care access to 42 million uninsured people in our country. Nebraska and 14 other States receive far less funding through the Medicaid DSH program per Medicaid and uninsured resident than the rest of the Nation and this lack of funding threatens the viability of many safety net hospitals. A number of other important provisions are included that would help Nebraska's hospitals including: equalizing the standardized amount for rural and other urban hospitals; adjusting the wage index rate; increasing Medicare DSH payments to rural hospitals; extending the hold harmless provision for rural hospitals for outpatient services for an other year; and improving the Critical Access Hospital program by allowing more flexibility in allocating swing and inpatient acute care beds. In addition to providing much-needed relief to hospitals, the bill also eliminates the 15 percent reduction in home health payments. This cut would reduce payments to home health care providers in my State by nearly $2 million per year. Nebraska providers cannot afford this cut. The legislation also recognizes the additional costs incurred by rural home health care providers and give them an addition 10 percent in payments. I am also pleased that the bill eliminates the $1500 outpatient therapy cap for two years. This arbitrary limit discriminates against Medicare beneficiaries who desperately need outpatient therapy to help them recuperate from surgery, a stroke, or other medical condition. As I mentioned last month, we also need to rectify the physician payment cut. Under current law, Medicare's physician payment rates are projected to fall by 12 percent over the next three years. Nebraska physicians' losses due to the 2003-2005 cuts will total about $63 million or $17,230 per physician. This comes on top of a 5.4 percent payment cut which cost Nebraska doctors a total of $12.9 million or about $3,875 per physician in 2002. I also spoke of the need to help skilled nursing facilities which are experiencing severe financial difficulty. If action isn't taken, Nebraska's facilities will lose $28..48 per patient per day next year for a total of $10 million. Finally, I have spoken many times about providing fiscal relief to our States. This legislation also includes $5 billion in fiscal relief to States by increasing the Federal Medicaid matching rate and by providing a temporary social services block grant. This provision, that I helped author, would give Governors some needed flexibility in assessing the needs of their States. States would be eligible for the Medicaid funding increase as long as the eligibility levels they had in place on January 2, 2002 are maintained. Unfortunately, the Nebraska Legislature made Medicaid eligibility cuts in the recent special session, and these cuts would prevent our State from receiving the full funding available. However, I crafted a provision that would allow Nebraska to receive the funding if they reinstate these Medicaid cuts in the future. We need to pass this legislation before the session ends. Our Nation's seniors need to know that they can depend on the Medicare system for their health care needs. I look forward to working with my colleagues in addressing these important issues.