Barack Obama

Mr. OBAMA

Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my distinguished colleague, the Senator from Kentucky, Mr. Bunning, in introducing this important legislation. The geologic deposit known as Illinois Basin Coal--which lies beneath Illinois, Indiana and Kentucky--has more untapped energy potential than the combined oil reserves of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. This coal deposit underlies more than 65 percent of the surface of the State of Illinois, with recoverable reserves estimated to be in excess of 38 billion tons from my State alone. Moreover, with just a glance at a map of Illinois, one can see that my State is dotted with towns that reflect our 200- year coal mining history--towns with names like Carbondale, Energy, Carbon Hill, Coal City, and Zeigler. In some parts of Illinois, however, these names are just shadows of the past. More than 15 years ago, upon the enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, coal mining in Illinois was drastically transformed. Given the high sulfur content of Illinois coal, many users switched from Illinois coal to other, lower sulfur coals mined out West. As a result, thousands of Illinois jobs vanished, and with it, the life force of many of these towns. Air quality throughout the Nation improved drastically, but vast energy resources were rendered idle, awaiting new future technologies. Today, we are exploring those new technologies, which promise a renaissance for coal communities. Two east central Illinois towns, for example, are under consideration for the billion-dollar FutureGen project, which many of my colleagues know will be the first near zero- emissions coal-fired powerplant in the world. But coal from the Illinois Basin, with its high energy content, is a superb feedstock not just for power generation, as promised by FutureGen, but also for the manufacture of Fischer-Tropsch--FT--fuel. Created in the 1920s by German scientists and used during World War II, the FT process is the major fuel source for vehicles in South Africa. In both nations, the production of diesels from coal was developed as a response to petroleum embargoes against those nations at various points in their history. Meanwhile, in the United States, more than 55 percent of our fuel consumption continues to come from foreign oil, and that number is growing. Our economy is exposed to potential jeopardy from oil supply disruptions and price shocks. We must diversify our fuel supply, and that means all domestic options should be on the table for consideration. Fischer-Tropsch fuel is interchangeable with standard diesel, functioning in existing engines with little or no modification. FT fuels can be transported in our existing fuel distribution infrastructure. Moreover, FT fuels have far lower emissions than standard diesel. The Department of Defense, the largest consumer of petroleum in the United States, has great interest in acquiring this fuel. But Fischer-Tropsch is not manufactured in the U.S., and no focused federal initiatives exist to encourage the development of a Fischer-Tropsch manufacturing base. The bill introduced by Senator Bunning and myself will provide that Federal focus. This bill will help to create a new market for abandoned and abundant Illinois Basin coal, revitalizing economic development and jobs in the coal communities of our States. It will help develop the capital infrastructure for producing FT fuels at the levels necessary for preliminary testing by the Department of Defense and for the private sector. It will explore carbon sequestration for this technology before we can pursue construction. And it will play a key role in reducing our Nation's dependence on foreign oil. I know that there are no perfect answers in the pursuit of energy independence. There is no single fuel or feedstock that offers affordability, reliability, transportability, and sensitivity to the environment in equal ways. But, as we pursue the best course of action for our energy independence, we cannot delay action until we reach the perfect solution. Maintaining our dependency on unstable regions of the world for the fuel that we cannot live without is far too great a risk. Actions taken today must be accompanied by rigorous concurrent debate in preparation for the second and third generation choices of our alternative fuel infrastructure. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. OBAMA

Mr. OBAMA. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. OBAMA. Madam President, in November, the American people sent a clear message to their representatives in Washington. After a year in which too many scandals revealed the influence special interests have in this town, the American people told us that we better clean up our act, and we better do it fast. But it would be a mistake if we conclude this message was intended for just one party or one politician. After all, the votes hadn't even been counted in the last election before we started hearing reports that corporations were already recruiting lobbyists with Democratic connections to carry their water in the next Congress. This is why it is not enough to just change the players; we have to change the game. Americans put their faith in us this time around because they want us to restore their faith in Government, and that means more than window dressing when it comes to ethics reform. I was hopeful that last year's scandals would have made it obvious to us that we need meaningful ethics legislation, but last year, despite some good efforts on this side of the aisle, the bill we ended up with, I thought, was too weak. It left too many loopholes, and it did too little to enforce the rules. It was a lost opportunity. It would not have restored the people's faith in Congress, and in that end I had no choice but to vote against it. I don't want that to happen this time. Fortunately, the substitute amendment the majority leader, Harry Reid, has offered today brings us close to the bill that will achieve his stated goal, and that is to pass the most significant ethics and lobbying reform since Watergate. We owe the American people real reform, and if we work hard this week and next, we will get it done. This time out, we must stop any and all practices that would lead a responsible person to believe a public servant has become indebted to a lobbyist. That means a full gift and meal ban. That means prohibiting lobbyist-funded travel that is more about playing golf than learning policy. And that means closing the revolving door to ensure that Capitol Hill service, whether as a Member of Congress or as a staffer, isn't all about lining up a high-paying lobbying job. We should not tolerate a committee chairman shepherding the Medicare prescription drug bill through Congress at the same time he is negotiating a job with the pharmaceutical industry to be their top lobbyist. The substitute bill offered by Majority Leader Reid contains many of these reforms. I thank him for working with Senator Feingold and me in crafting this package. But in two important respects, I think we still need to go further. First, we need to go further with respect to enforcement. I will save my remarks on this subject for a later time, but I fully support the creation of an office of public integrity, as Senators Lieberman and Collins have proposed. It is similar to the independent ethics commission I proposed last February. Regardless of what approach we adopt, we have to take politics out of the initial factfinding phase of ethics investigations, and we have to ensure sufficient transparency in the findings of those investigations so the American people can have confidence that Congress can police itself. The second area in which we need to go further is corporate jets. Myself and Senator Feingold introduced a comprehensive ethics bill that, among other things, would close the loopholes that allow for subsidized travel on corporate jets. Today, I am very pleased to see the majority leader has offered an amendment that would serve the same purpose. I fully support him in his effort. Let me point out that I fully understand the appeal of corporate jets. Like many of my colleagues, I traveled a good deal recently from Illinois to Washington, from Chicago to downstate, from fundraisers to political events for candidates all across the country. I realize finding a commercial flight that gets you home in time to tuck in the kids at the end of a long day can be extremely difficult. This is simply an unfortunate reality that goes along with our jobs. Yet we have to realize these corporate jets don't simply provide a welcome convenience for us; they provide undue access for the lobbyists and corporations that offer them. These companies don't just fly us around out of the goodness of their hearts. Most of the time we have lobbyists riding along with us so they can make their company's case for a particular bill or a particular vote. It would be one thing if Congressmen and Senators paid the full rate for these flights, but we don't. We get a discount--a big discount. Right now a flight on a corporate jet usually costs us the equivalent of a first-class ticket on a commercial airplane. But if we paid the real price, the full charter rate would cost us thousands upon thousands of dollars more. In a recent USA Today story about use of corporate jets, it was reported that over the course of 3 days in November 2005, BellSouth's jet carried six Senators and their wives to various Republican and Democratic fundraising events in the Southeast. If they had paid the full charter rate, it would have cost the Democratic and Republican campaign committees more than $40,000. But because of the corporate jet perk, it only cost a little more than $8,000. There is going to be a lot of talk in the coming days about how important it is to ban free meals and fancy gifts, and I couldn't agree more, but if we are going to go ahead and call a $50 lunch unethical, I can't see why we wouldn't do the same for the $32,000 that BellSouth is offering in the form of airplane discounts. That is why I applaud Senator Reid on his amendment to require Members to pay the full charter rate for the use of corporate jets. As I said, I understand that for many Members, these jets are an issue of convenience. They allow us to get home to our constituents, to our families, and to the events that are often necessary for our jobs. But in November, the American people told us very clearly they are tired of the influence special interest wields over the legislative process. The vast majority of Americans can't afford to buy cheap rides on corporate jets. They don't get to sit with us on 3-hour flights and talk about the heating bills they can't pay, or the health care costs that keep rising, or the taxes they can't afford, or their concerns about college tuition. They can't buy our attention, and they shouldn't have to. And the corporation lobbyists shouldn't be able to either. That is why we need to end this corporate jet perk if we are to pass real, meaningful ethics reform. The truth is, we cannot change the way Washington works unless we first change the way Congress works. On November 7, voters gave us the chance to do this, but if we miss this opportunity to clean up our act and restore this country's faith in Government, the American people might not give us another opportunity. I urge my colleagues to support both the substitute amendment and the Reid amendment to close the corporate jet loophole. I ask unanimous consent that I be added as a cosponsor to the Reid-McConnell amendment No. 3 and Reid amendment No. 4.

Mr. OBAMA. I thank the Chair.

Mr. OBAMA

Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I rise to speak about the Child Tax Credit and to support S. 218, a bill I've worked on with Senators Snowe and Lincoln. Working families should get the tax relief they deserve, and I am proud to cosponsor this bill to help realize this aspiration. The Child Credit is an important component of our Federal tax code, and S. 218 is an important step in making the credit more valuable and more fair for those who need it most. Raising children is expensive and has become even more so in recent years. The Child Tax Credit allows middle class families to claim a credit of $1,000 per child against their Federal income tax. That's a big help in covering these rising costs. Importantly, the Child Credit also recognizes the particular vulnerability low-income families with children. Since the credit is refundable to the extent of 15 percent of a taxpayer's earned income in excess of $11,300, families earning more than that threshold level of income get at least a partial benefit even if they have no Federal income tax liability. The benefit may be small for families with low incomes, but every penny helps defray the rising costs of being a working parent in America today. Unfortunately, as currently structured, the Child Credit leaves more and more families out of the benefit each year. That's because the income threshold for eligibility rises annually at the rate of inflation even though family incomes may not rise as fast. That means that if you earn the minimum wage, or if your wage is low and you didn't get a raise, or if you worked fewer hours than the year before, then your tax refund probably shrunk. It may even have disappeared. Given that an estimated four and a half million households with children experienced this decline last year alone, we must reverse this unintended--and unfair--effect. In many cases, indexing the parameters of the tax system for inflation makes sense because it neutralizes the effects of inflation on the tax system. In this case, however, indexing the threshold results in an unfair tax increase for low-income, working families whose incomes are not keeping up with rising costs. Recent data indicates that the typical low-income household actually saw its earnings decline during the first few years ofthis decade. At the same time, the costs of housing, childcare, and driving to work have increased sharply. This bill returns the threshold to its original level of $10,000 and freezes it, thereby expanding the benefit to include more kids and protecting those families from unfair tax increases due to inflation. This is an important step in improving the fairness of our tax code and providing necessary support to working families. In time, I hope we will do more. It is unfair that more than eight million children in families with incomes too low to qualify for even a partial credit get no benefit at all. These are families whose incomes are far below the Federal poverty level and whose children ironically have the greatest needs--even as their parents pay an enormous share of their incomes in taxes and basic services, such as food, housing, and clothing. America can do better. In the new Congress, I hope we will tackle the broader challenge of ensuring that their parents have jobs that pay living wages, a home they can afford, a school district that enables a life of opportunity, a community that cares for its children, and the faith that hard work and personal commitment payoff. America can do this. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important bill as a first step in addressing the broader goal of equal opportunity for all Americans.

Mr. OBAMA

Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I rise to speak about the Child Tax Credit and to support S. 218, a bill I've worked on with Senators Snowe and Lincoln. Working families should get the tax relief they deserve, and I am proud to cosponsor this bill to help realize this aspiration. The Child Credit is an important component of our Federal tax code, and S. 218 is an important step in making the credit more valuable and more fair for those who need it most. Raising children is expensive and has become even more so in recent years. The Child Tax Credit allows middle class families to claim a credit of $1,000 per child against their Federal income tax. That's a big help in covering these rising costs. Importantly, the Child Credit also recognizes the particular vulnerability low-income families with children. Since the credit is refundable to the extent of 15 percent of a taxpayer's earned income in excess of $11,300, families earning more than that threshold level of income get at least a partial benefit even if they have no Federal income tax liability. The benefit may be small for families with low incomes, but every penny helps defray the rising costs of being a working parent in America today. Unfortunately, as currently structured, the Child Credit leaves more and more families out of the benefit each year. That's because the income threshold for eligibility rises annually at the rate of inflation even though family incomes may not rise as fast. That means that if you earn the minimum wage, or if your wage is low and you didn't get a raise, or if you worked fewer hours than the year before, then your tax refund probably shrunk. It may even have disappeared. Given that an estimated four and a half million households with children experienced this decline last year alone, we must reverse this unintended--and unfair--effect. In many cases, indexing the parameters of the tax system for inflation makes sense because it neutralizes the effects of inflation on the tax system. In this case, however, indexing the threshold results in an unfair tax increase for low-income, working families whose incomes are not keeping up with rising costs. Recent data indicates that the typical low-income household actually saw its earnings decline during the first few years ofthis decade. At the same time, the costs of housing, childcare, and driving to work have increased sharply. This bill returns the threshold to its original level of $10,000 and freezes it, thereby expanding the benefit to include more kids and protecting those families from unfair tax increases due to inflation. This is an important step in improving the fairness of our tax code and providing necessary support to working families. In time, I hope we will do more. It is unfair that more than eight million children in families with incomes too low to qualify for even a partial credit get no benefit at all. These are families whose incomes are far below the Federal poverty level and whose children ironically have the greatest needs--even as their parents pay an enormous share of their incomes in taxes and basic services, such as food, housing, and clothing. America can do better. In the new Congress, I hope we will tackle the broader challenge of ensuring that their parents have jobs that pay living wages, a home they can afford, a school district that enables a life of opportunity, a community that cares for its children, and the faith that hard work and personal commitment payoff. America can do this. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important bill as a first step in addressing the broader goal of equal opportunity for all Americans.

Mr. OBAMA

Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I rise today in memory of Gerald Ford, the 38th President of the United States. President Ford shouldered his burden with a unique sense of humility and good humor, in an office not known for nourishing those traits. President Ford's unusual combination of courage, strength, and conviction led America out of a deep crisis, healing our wounds and strengthening our Constitution in the process. Gerald Ford was a self-made Michigander who worked part-time jobs as a young man to help support his family, and later to put himself through Yale Law School. A man of many talents, he could have been a professional football player, or lived well as an attorney. But instead, he chose a life of service, first as a decorated naval officer, then a 24-year Member of Congress, leader of his party in the House of Representatives, and Presiding Officer of this Chamber as Vice President. Domestic turmoil and foreign policy challenges marked the mid-1970s, and President Ford addressed them both. History has favorably judged his actions to move the country beyond the Watergate scandal, although he paid a heavy price at the time. He also acknowledged the severe economic difficulties faced by millions of Americans and worked head-on to alleviate them. Despite the host of domestic challenges America faced, President Ford remained a committed internationalist. He advanced the cause of peace in the Middle East, helping to end hostilities between Israel and Egypt and laying the groundwork for a peace between those two countries that endures to this day. His backing of the Helsinki Accords, while controversial, gave important support to dissidents living under Soviet rule who sought respect for their human rights. Throughout his life, Gerald Ford handled the responsibilities and challenges that circumstance thrust on him without losing his Midwestern openness and sensibility. To many who disagreed with him, he still came across as a comforting figure who had the Nation's best interests at heart. Central to this ability to connect with people was his self-deprecating sense of humor, summed up by the quip, ``I'm a Ford, not a Lincoln.'' And while he may not have been a Lincoln, he certainly was not a common President. America is a better place because of him, and we all owe President Ford and his wife, Betty, a tremendous debt of gratitude.

Mr. OBAMA

Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that is significant both in the problems it seeks to address and the man it seeks to honor. Since the day he arrived in Congress more than two decades ago, Lane Evans was a tireless advocate for the men and women with whom he served. When Vietnam vets started falling ill from Agent Orange, he led the effort to get them compensation. Lane was one of the first in Congress to speak out about the health problems facing Persian Gulf War veterans. He worked to help veterans suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, and he also helped make sure thousands of homeless veterans in our country have a place to sleep. Lane Evans fought these battles for more than 20 years, and even in the face of his own debilitating disease, he kept fighting. Today, veterans across America have Lane Evans to thank for reminding this country of its duty to take care of those who have risked their lives to defend ours. I am very proud today to introduce the Lane Evans Veterans Healthcare and Benefits Improvement Act of 2007. This bill honors a legislator who left behind an enduring legacy of service to our veterans. The legislation also is an important step towards caring for our men and women who are currently fighting for us. I am being joined today by Senator Olympia Snowe, the lead cosponsor of this bill. Senator Snowe has long been an advocate for veterans in her state, and I have been honored to work with her in the past on veterans issues. We have fought to reduce the backlog of disability claims at the Veterans Benefits Administration and to improve the military's ability to identify and treat Traumatic Brain Injury. Our introduction of the Lane Evans Bill is a continuation of these efforts. Today, more than 1.5 million American troops have been deployed overseas as part of the Global War on Terror. These brave men and women who protected us are beginning to return home. Six hundred thousand people who served in Iraq and Afghanistan are now veterans, and more than 185,000 have already received treatment at the VA. That number is increasing every day. Many of these fighting men and women are coming home with major injuries. As a country, we are only beginning to understand the true costs of the Global War on Terror. The Government Accountability Office reported that VA has faced $3 billion in budget shortfalls since 2005 because it underestimated the costs of caring for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans. The VA wasn't getting the information it needed from the Pentagon and was relying on outdated data and incorrect forecasting models. We cannot let these kind of bureaucratic blunders get in the way of the care and support we owe our servicemembers. To avoid these costly shortfalls in the future, we have to do a better job keeping track of veterans. That's why the first thing the Lane Evans Act does is to establish a system to track Global War on Terror veterans. The VA established a similar data system following the Persian Gulf War. That effort has been invaluable in budget planning as well as in monitoring emerging health trends and diseases linked to the Gulf War. The Gulf War Veterans Information System also has been important to medical research and improved care for veterans. The sooner we begin keeping accurate track of our fighting men and women in Iraq, Afghanistan and beyond, the better and more efficiently we will be able to care for them. The Lane Evans Act also tackles Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Mental health patients account for about one-third of the new veterans seeking care at the VA. The VA's National Center for PTSD reports that ``the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are the most sustained combat operations since the Vietnam War, and initial signs imply that these ongoing wars are likely to produce a new generation of veterans with chronic mental health problems.'' This bill addresses PTSD in two ways. First, it extends the window during which new veterans can automatically get care for mental health from two years to five years. Right now, any servicemember discharged from the military has up to two years to walk into a VA facility and get care, no questions asked. After that, vets have to prove that they are disabled because of a service-connected injury, or they have to prove their income is below threshold levels. Unfortunately, it can take years for symptoms of PTSD to manifest. The time it takes to prove service-connection for mental health illness is valuable time lost during which veterans are not receiving critically needed treatment. The Lane Evans Act allows veterans to walk into a VA facility any time five years after discharge and get assessed for mental health care. This both extends the window and shortens the wait for vets to get care. Second, the legislation makes face-to-face physical and mental health screening mandatory 30 to 90 days after a soldier is deployed in a war zone. This will ensure that our fighting force is ready for battle, and that we can identify and treat those at risk for PTSD. By making the exams mandatory, we can help eliminate the stigma associated with mental health screening and treatment. Another problem veterans face is that the VA and DoD do not effectively share medical and military records. Older veterans often have to wait years for their benefits as the Department of Defense recovers aging and lost paper records. Under the Lane Evans Act, the Department of Defense would provide each separating service member at the time of discharge with a secure full electronic copy of all military and medical records to help them apply for healthcare and benefits. DoD possesses the technology to do this now. The information could be useful to VA to quickly and accurately document receipt of vaccinations or deployment to a war zone. The electronic data will also be helpful in future generations when family members of veterans seek information about military service, awards, and wartime deployment that go well beyond the existing single-sheet DD-214 discharge certificate, which is all veterans currently receive. Finally, the legislation improves the transition assistance that National Guardsmen and military reservists receive when they return from deployment. A 2005 GAO report found that because demobilization for guardsmen and reservists is accelerated, reserve units get abbreviated and perfunctory transition assistance including limited employment training. VA should provide equal briefings and transition services for all service members regarding VA healthcare, disability compensation, and other benefits, regardless of their duty status. Lane Evans dedicated his life to serving this country and serving veterans. The legislation Senator Snowe and I are introducing today, honors both the man and his mission, and will continue his legacy to the next generation of American veterans.

Mr. OBAMA

Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, in 2005, Congress enacted the Renewable Fuels Standard, RFS, as part of the Energy Policy Act. The RFS is a commitment by the United States government that, henceforth, ethanol must comprise a substantial part of the national vehicle fuel supply, with a goal of 7.5 billion gallons of ethanol in our gasoline by 2012. Ethanol production has responded vigorously to this national policy. In fact, in only two years, ethanol production has boomed to where it now far exceeds the RFS target for this year. It is widely anticipated that ethanol production will surpass the target for the year 2012 by the end of this year, five years early. Clearly, it is time to increase the RFS targets. I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of the bill introduced today by my colleagues, Senator Harkin and Senator Lugar, that will increase those targets to 30 billion gallons by the year 2020 and 60 billion gallons by the year 2030. I hope my colleagues will support the provisions of that bill. But for an expanded RFS to be successful, we must lay further groundwork. We cannot meet the targets and deadlines of an expanded RFS without a robust package of policies that set the stage for the next decade. So far, we've met our biofuels goals by producing ethanol made from sugars that come from corn. This approach, by itself, has been profoundly successful in many rural communities but will eventually reach its maximum capacity. While that day is still several years away, we must begin preparations now. We must build upon our current path. We must continue our pursuit in cracking the code for corn cellulosics. We must pour the foundation for the next generation of biofuels made from the broadest range of agriculture feedstocks. Our vocabulary must expand to cellulosics and biobut- anols, manure and miscanthus. The American Fuels Act, which I introduce today, breathes life into an expanded RFS. The American Fuels Act is the heart, the centerpiece, the key to ensuring that an expanded RFS is successful. That's why I am pleased to be joined today by my esteemed colleagues, Senator Lugar and Senator Harkin, in the introduction of this bill. The premise of the American Fuels Act is to create a ``Biofuels Triangle'' that focuses on (1). production, (2). distribution, and (3) consumption. To expand production, we create an ``Alternative Diesel Standard'' for diesels that complements the RFS for gasoline. The Alternative Diesel Standard requires 2 billion gallons of alternative diesels into the 40 billion gallon domestic diesel supply by the year 2016, encouraging greater use of biofuel feedstocks like vegetable oils, animal fats, coal-to-liquids, manure, and municipal waste. We call for the establishment of a cellulosic biomass fuels credit of an additional 76.5 cents per gallon so that first-generation cellulosic plants can be built to meet the 250 million gallon production goals by 2012. To expand distribution, the American Fuels Act provides a tax credit for ethanol producers to invest in on-site blending equipment, bypassing oil refineries so that E-85 can be transported directly to the pump at your local gas station. Our bill also provides freedom for fuel franchisers by making it illegal for oil companies to stop their branded franchises from selling biofuels should these local businessmen wish to respond to their customer's request for biofuels. This bill also gives franchisers the power to sue oil companies for imposing any restrictions. And to expand consumption, the American Fuels Act encourages the manufacture of more vehicles that can function on higher ethanol blends like E-85 so that more passenger cars to be flexible fuel vehicles. We provide a $100 tax credit to automakers for each ethanol-capable vehicle produced beyond the CAFE credit or any other government requirement. We require that 100 percent of the Federal fleet must be ethanol-capable or hybrids in the next 7 years. And we require that any public transit agency that uses Federal dollars to upgrade bus fleets must purchase an alternative fuel bus, or pledge to use alternative fuels in those buses. To oversee these efforts, we create a Director of Energy Security in the Office of the President to ensure that our massive investment in domestically produced fuels get the national security leadership and coordination it requires. Our dependence on oil is hurting our economy and jeopardizing our national security by keeping us tied to the world's most dangerous and unstable regimes. It's the fossil fuels we insist on burning-- particularly oil--that are the single greatest cause of climate change and the damaging weather patterns that have been its result. Never has the failure to take on a single challenge so detrimentally affected nearly every aspect of our well-being as Nation. And never have the possible solutions had the potential to do so much good for so many generations to come. That's why I urge my colleagues to join us in cosponsoring the American Fuels Act. I ask for their support, and for the swift enactment of this bill. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the American Fuels Act be printed in the Record.

Mr. OBAMA

Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that is significant both in the problems it seeks to address and the man it seeks to honor. Since the day he arrived in Congress more than two decades ago, Lane Evans was a tireless advocate for the men and women with whom he served. When Vietnam vets started falling ill from Agent Orange, he led the effort to get them compensation. Lane was one of the first in Congress to speak out about the health problems facing Persian Gulf War veterans. He worked to help veterans suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, and he also helped make sure thousands of homeless veterans in our country have a place to sleep. Lane Evans fought these battles for more than 20 years, and even in the face of his own debilitating disease, he kept fighting. Today, veterans across America have Lane Evans to thank for reminding this country of its duty to take care of those who have risked their lives to defend ours. I am very proud today to introduce the Lane Evans Veterans Healthcare and Benefits Improvement Act of 2007. This bill honors a legislator who left behind an enduring legacy of service to our veterans. The legislation also is an important step towards caring for our men and women who are currently fighting for us. I am being joined today by Senator Olympia Snowe, the lead cosponsor of this bill. Senator Snowe has long been an advocate for veterans in her state, and I have been honored to work with her in the past on veterans issues. We have fought to reduce the backlog of disability claims at the Veterans Benefits Administration and to improve the military's ability to identify and treat Traumatic Brain Injury. Our introduction of the Lane Evans Bill is a continuation of these efforts. Today, more than 1.5 million American troops have been deployed overseas as part of the Global War on Terror. These brave men and women who protected us are beginning to return home. Six hundred thousand people who served in Iraq and Afghanistan are now veterans, and more than 185,000 have already received treatment at the VA. That number is increasing every day. Many of these fighting men and women are coming home with major injuries. As a country, we are only beginning to understand the true costs of the Global War on Terror. The Government Accountability Office reported that VA has faced $3 billion in budget shortfalls since 2005 because it underestimated the costs of caring for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans. The VA wasn't getting the information it needed from the Pentagon and was relying on outdated data and incorrect forecasting models. We cannot let these kind of bureaucratic blunders get in the way of the care and support we owe our servicemembers. To avoid these costly shortfalls in the future, we have to do a better job keeping track of veterans. That's why the first thing the Lane Evans Act does is to establish a system to track Global War on Terror veterans. The VA established a similar data system following the Persian Gulf War. That effort has been invaluable in budget planning as well as in monitoring emerging health trends and diseases linked to the Gulf War. The Gulf War Veterans Information System also has been important to medical research and improved care for veterans. The sooner we begin keeping accurate track of our fighting men and women in Iraq, Afghanistan and beyond, the better and more efficiently we will be able to care for them. The Lane Evans Act also tackles Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Mental health patients account for about one-third of the new veterans seeking care at the VA. The VA's National Center for PTSD reports that ``the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are the most sustained combat operations since the Vietnam War, and initial signs imply that these ongoing wars are likely to produce a new generation of veterans with chronic mental health problems.'' This bill addresses PTSD in two ways. First, it extends the window during which new veterans can automatically get care for mental health from two years to five years. Right now, any servicemember discharged from the military has up to two years to walk into a VA facility and get care, no questions asked. After that, vets have to prove that they are disabled because of a service-connected injury, or they have to prove their income is below threshold levels. Unfortunately, it can take years for symptoms of PTSD to manifest. The time it takes to prove service-connection for mental health illness is valuable time lost during which veterans are not receiving critically needed treatment. The Lane Evans Act allows veterans to walk into a VA facility any time five years after discharge and get assessed for mental health care. This both extends the window and shortens the wait for vets to get care. Second, the legislation makes face-to-face physical and mental health screening mandatory 30 to 90 days after a soldier is deployed in a war zone. This will ensure that our fighting force is ready for battle, and that we can identify and treat those at risk for PTSD. By making the exams mandatory, we can help eliminate the stigma associated with mental health screening and treatment. Another problem veterans face is that the VA and DoD do not effectively share medical and military records. Older veterans often have to wait years for their benefits as the Department of Defense recovers aging and lost paper records. Under the Lane Evans Act, the Department of Defense would provide each separating service member at the time of discharge with a secure full electronic copy of all military and medical records to help them apply for healthcare and benefits. DoD possesses the technology to do this now. The information could be useful to VA to quickly and accurately document receipt of vaccinations or deployment to a war zone. The electronic data will also be helpful in future generations when family members of veterans seek information about military service, awards, and wartime deployment that go well beyond the existing single-sheet DD-214 discharge certificate, which is all veterans currently receive. Finally, the legislation improves the transition assistance that National Guardsmen and military reservists receive when they return from deployment. A 2005 GAO report found that because demobilization for guardsmen and reservists is accelerated, reserve units get abbreviated and perfunctory transition assistance including limited employment training. VA should provide equal briefings and transition services for all service members regarding VA healthcare, disability compensation, and other benefits, regardless of their duty status. Lane Evans dedicated his life to serving this country and serving veterans. The legislation Senator Snowe and I are introducing today, honors both the man and his mission, and will continue his legacy to the next generation of American veterans.

Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, in 2005, Congress enacted the Renewable Fuels Standard, RFS, as part of the Energy Policy Act. The RFS is a commitment by the United States government that, henceforth, ethanol must comprise a substantial part of the national vehicle fuel supply, with a goal of 7.5 billion gallons of ethanol in our gasoline by 2012. Ethanol production has responded vigorously to this national policy. In fact, in only two years, ethanol production has boomed to where it now far exceeds the RFS target for this year. It is widely anticipated that ethanol production will surpass the target for the year 2012 by the end of this year, five years early. Clearly, it is time to increase the RFS targets. I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of the bill introduced today by my colleagues, Senator Harkin and Senator Lugar, that will increase those targets to 30 billion gallons by the year 2020 and 60 billion gallons by the year 2030. I hope my colleagues will support the provisions of that bill. But for an expanded RFS to be successful, we must lay further groundwork. We cannot meet the targets and deadlines of an expanded RFS without a robust package of policies that set the stage for the next decade. So far, we've met our biofuels goals by producing ethanol made from sugars that come from corn. This approach, by itself, has been profoundly successful in many rural communities but will eventually reach its maximum capacity. While that day is still several years away, we must begin preparations now. We must build upon our current path. We must continue our pursuit in cracking the code for corn cellulosics. We must pour the foundation for the next generation of biofuels made from the broadest range of agriculture feedstocks. Our vocabulary must expand to cellulosics and biobut- anols, manure and miscanthus. The American Fuels Act, which I introduce today, breathes life into an expanded RFS. The American Fuels Act is the heart, the centerpiece, the key to ensuring that an expanded RFS is successful. That's why I am pleased to be joined today by my esteemed colleagues, Senator Lugar and Senator Harkin, in the introduction of this bill. The premise of the American Fuels Act is to create a ``Biofuels Triangle'' that focuses on (1). production, (2). distribution, and (3) consumption. To expand production, we create an ``Alternative Diesel Standard'' for diesels that complements the RFS for gasoline. The Alternative Diesel Standard requires 2 billion gallons of alternative diesels into the 40 billion gallon domestic diesel supply by the year 2016, encouraging greater use of biofuel feedstocks like vegetable oils, animal fats, coal-to-liquids, manure, and municipal waste. We call for the establishment of a cellulosic biomass fuels credit of an additional 76.5 cents per gallon so that first-generation cellulosic plants can be built to meet the 250 million gallon production goals by 2012. To expand distribution, the American Fuels Act provides a tax credit for ethanol producers to invest in on-site blending equipment, bypassing oil refineries so that E-85 can be transported directly to the pump at your local gas station. Our bill also provides freedom for fuel franchisers by making it illegal for oil companies to stop their branded franchises from selling biofuels should these local businessmen wish to respond to their customer's request for biofuels. This bill also gives franchisers the power to sue oil companies for imposing any restrictions. And to expand consumption, the American Fuels Act encourages the manufacture of more vehicles that can function on higher ethanol blends like E-85 so that more passenger cars to be flexible fuel vehicles. We provide a $100 tax credit to automakers for each ethanol-capable vehicle produced beyond the CAFE credit or any other government requirement. We require that 100 percent of the Federal fleet must be ethanol-capable or hybrids in the next 7 years. And we require that any public transit agency that uses Federal dollars to upgrade bus fleets must purchase an alternative fuel bus, or pledge to use alternative fuels in those buses. To oversee these efforts, we create a Director of Energy Security in the Office of the President to ensure that our massive investment in domestically produced fuels get the national security leadership and coordination it requires. Our dependence on oil is hurting our economy and jeopardizing our national security by keeping us tied to the world's most dangerous and unstable regimes. It's the fossil fuels we insist on burning-- particularly oil--that are the single greatest cause of climate change and the damaging weather patterns that have been its result. Never has the failure to take on a single challenge so detrimentally affected nearly every aspect of our well-being as Nation. And never have the possible solutions had the potential to do so much good for so many generations to come. That's why I urge my colleagues to join us in cosponsoring the American Fuels Act. I ask for their support, and for the swift enactment of this bill. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the American Fuels Act be printed in the Record.

Mr. OBAMA

Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, this year we witnessed a historic election, where the American people said loud and clear that the Nation is going in the wrong direction and things must change. One important part of that change is cleaning up our electoral process. Dirty tricks are not a new thing in American politics. I am from Chicago, and my hometown has seen its share of political tricks. But some of tricks we have seen in recent elections astounded even those of us who thought we had seen everything. For example, in 2002, the executive director of the New Hampshire Republican State Committee saw flyers advertising telephone numbers for Democratic get-out-the-vote efforts that offered voters rides to the polls. The executive director then hatched the idea of jamming those phone lines on election day to prevent voters from getting rides to the polls. He consulted the New England Regional Political Director for the Republican National Committee, who led him to an associate who could handle phone jamming efforts, an outfit called GOP Marketplace. GOP Marketplace contacted an Idaho-based tele-services company that agreed to have employees place hang-up calls to the Manchester Democratic Party and the Manchester Professional Firefighters Association--the two groups offering rides--on election day, November 5, 2002. As a result of these efforts, the New Hampshire Democratic Party's get-out-the-vote volunteers and employees answered the phones only to find callers who said nothing and immediately hung up. Legitimate voters who called the Manchester Democratic Party or the Manchester Professional Firefighters Association seeking a ride to the polls received busy signals. The Department of Justice prosecuted many of those responsible for this dirty campaign, and some of the guilty have already served their sentences. These men were tried under existing phone harassment and civil rights laws. However, it is likely that the perpetrators of the next phone jamming effort will not be so ham-handed. General harassment laws may be insufficient to get at the next conspiracy. And even in the most recent election, we continue to hear about instances in which phone lines are misused. That is why I am introducing the Election Jamming Prevention Act today. This bill will ensure that those who seek to disable election- related telephone communications will be criminally liable. This does not impede political speech--but this does stop nefarious efforts to shut down phone lines to cripple election-related efforts. From get- out-the-vote efforts, to voter education campaigns, qualified voters deserve to have access to information that will assist them in the exercise of their right to vote. Someone's ability to hire a company to place hang-up calls should not determine whether voters get the information they need to go to the polls on election day. This shouldn't be a partisan issue, so I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will join me in supporting this bill. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. OBAMA

Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I rise today to bid farewell to a decent and principled member of this body, Mark Dayton. Over the past 6 years, Senator Dayton has proven his dedication to the highest ideals of this body through his devotion to economic justice, education, and health care concerns. In October 2002, Mark Dayton voted against the Iraq war resolution, despite the fact that President Bush was presenting fairly convincing evidence that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and most of the Nation was supportive of the decision to go to war. Mark Dayton held to his convictions, and history will judge him favorably because of it. As a Senator, Mark has donated his entire Senate salary to help his constituents pay for prescription drugs. His salary goes to the Minnesota Senior Federation for ``Rx Express'' bus trips to help senior citizens buy cheaper prescription drugs in Canada. In the Senate, he has fought to make such trips less necessary by proposing the Meeting Our Responsibility to Medicare Beneficiaries Act to permit the Government to negotiate prescription drug prices with pharmaceutical companies. He has also introduced the Taste of Our Own Medicine Act to require Members of Congress to share the same prescription drug benefits as Medicare recipients. Mark Dayton's 6 years in the Senate are a continuation of his lifelong commitment to public service. He previously worked as a teacher on the Lower East Side of New York, as a counselor for runaways, and as the chief financial officer for a social service agency in Boston. He worked for Senator Walter Mondale and campaigned with him during his Vice Presidential bid with President Jimmy Carter. Mark also served twice as commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development. Mark Dayton has used the economic experience he gained as commissioner, and as Minnesota State auditor to help American workers during his time in the Senate. He has supported extended unemployment assistance and an increase in the minimum wage while opposing outsourcing of American jobs. Senator Dayton has been a strong supporter of increased funding for education. He introduced the Nontraditional Student Success Act and the Restore the Dream Act to help students pay for higher education. He has repeatedly insisted that Congress live up to its promise to America's public schools and children by offering amendments to fully fund the federal government's commitment to special education. Mark has also fought for additional career and technical training. During his time in this body, Mark Dayton has nobly stood up for the American people. In a speech on the Senate floor, he noted: ``A government of the people, by the people, and for the people is a government that tells the truth to its citizens. If it doesn't, it is not a government of them, not by them, and certainly not for them. It is imperative.'' Although Mark Dayton's voice will no longer be heard on the Senate floor, I know that he will continue to do great work for Minnesotans and for all Americans. I am proud to have served with him and wish him all the best. Lincoln Chafee

Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I rise today to bid a fond farewell to my dear colleague and role model, Senator Paul Sarbanes, Maryland's longest serving Senator. Senator Sarbanes represents the greatest traditions of this body and of our country. He is the type of Senator we all imagined in high school civics class--intelligent, diligent, effective, and thoroughly decent. During the course of 30 years in the U.S. Senate and another 10 years in the U.S. House of Representatives and the Maryland House of Delegates, Senator Sarbanes defined what it means to be a trusted public servant in America. Paul Sarbanes grew up on the Eastern Shore of Maryland, the son of Greek immigrants who instilled the values of opportunity and fairness in their child. Motivated and hard working, Paul attended Princeton University, studied in Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar, and earned a law degree from Harvard. Paul first came to the Nation's attention during the Watergate hearings, where as a freshman member of the House Judiciary Committee he introduced the first article of impeachment, which related to obstruction of justice by President Nixon. Paul's own ethics and integrity are beyond reproach, and he has brought dignity and credibility to every task. In the Senate, Paul's legacy reflects his ideals of opportunity and fairness. He has continually fought for legislation to aid veterans, seniors, workers, and indeed, all Americans. He is a tireless champion for his constituents, his country, and the highest ethical standards. As a Princeton alumnus, he has lived Woodrow Wilson's ideal of ``Princeton in the Nation's Service.'' Each and every day, Paul demonstrates that politics can be an honorable profession. It should be an honorable profession, and I can think of no better model for that ideal than Paul Sarbanes. In Senator Sarbanes' tenure as both chairman and ranking member of the Committee on Banking, he led the fight on behalf of working-class Americans to ensure affordable housing. He was instrumental in developing and enacting the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990, legislation that helps States, local governments, and nonprofit organizations work together to build, buy, and rehabilitate housing that hard-working people can afford. Paul has also worked to protect Americans from unscrupulous lending practices and discrimination. His hearings and legislation on predatory lending brought this problem to the attention of the Nation, and his work to reduce the cost of private mortgage insurance helped make home ownership a reality for millions of Americans. After Enron collapsed under the weight of widespread abuse and accounting fraud, thousands of workers woke up to see their jobs and life savings gone, investors lost billions, and the public cried out against corporate malfeasance. The credibility of American business and our financial system was on the line. It was Senator Sarbanes who brought his intelligence and concern to bear to restore investor confidence and implement safeguards against Wall Street abuses. He held comprehensive hearings, nurtured a bipartisan coalition, crafted thoughtful legislation and shepherded it through Congress with Representative Mike Oxley in the House. The Sarbanes-Oxley law was the most comprehensive overhaul of corporate oversight laws since the Great Depression. It created a standard of transparency and accountability to assure investors and protect workers. It is a towering achievement that will strengthen the American economy for many years to come. It has been an honor and a privilege to serve with Senator Sarbanes on the Foreign Relations Committee. I have marveled at his keen intellect and commitment to his responsibilities. During committee hearings and committee markups, Senator Sarbanes is always well- prepared, asks direct, insightful, and important questions, and makes sure that no stone goes unturned. He has played a key role in virtually all of the significant foreign policy debates that have occurred during his 30 years of service on the committee. As a freshman, he was involved in the successful ratification of the Panama Canal Treaties. He worked to enact tough antiapartheid laws in the 1980s. And he has developed a long and impressive record on international economics, foreign assistance, and human rights issues. The American people have been well served by Paul's leadership, and this institution would be well served if each of us was a little more like him. On behalf of all of us, and for my constituents, I want to thank him for his service and his example. Let's wish Senator Sarbanes and his wife Christine well in this next phase of their lives. But let's also hope that we will continue to hear Paul's voice on important policy issues. He may be retiring from this body, but I suspect his commitment to strengthening this country and improving the lives of all Americans will continue. For that, as much as for all that Paul has accomplished through his distinguished career in the Senate, we should be grateful. I know that I am. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. OBAMA

Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, my vote today for Robert Gates is a vote for significant change in our Iraq policy. Last month, the American people uniformly rejected the policy-by- slogan approach to Iraq, rejected the false choice between ``cut-and- run'' and ``stay the course'' rejected ideological, insular, and wrongheaded leadership at the Pentagon. Dr. Gates' challenge will be to help President Bush chart a new course that takes a realistic view of the deteriorating situation in Iraq and makes the hard decisions to salvage an acceptable outcome to this long and misguided war. There are several signs that give me hope that Robert Gates is up to this challenge. First and most important is the environment in which Gates is taking the Pentagon's helm. Following the election, it is clear the American people expect significant change in Iraq. President Bush nominated Gates with a mandate to find ``fresh perspective and new ideas'' for Iraq. And today's Iraq Study Group's report helped create a framework to move forward, in a bipartisan fashion, with a shift in U.S. policy. As I laid out in a speech 3 weeks ago, I believe this shift must include a phased redeployment of U.S. forces in Iraq, a new diplomatic effort that includes engagement with Iran and Syria and other key nations, and a stance that conditions further assistance to progress in Iraq. All of these were also proposed by the Iraq Study Group. Second, in his own congressional testimony and comments, Dr. Gates has expressed openness to new ideas, saying that all options should be on the table for Iraq. He expressed refreshing candor in admitting past mistakes in Iraq. And Gates promised to work in a constructive, respectful way with military commanders, the Iraq Study Group, and Congress to find a new way forward. Third is Gates' extensive experience. He served for 26 years in the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Council, and he was the only career officer in the CIA's history to rise from entry- level employee to Director. Everyone knows that Gates' job will not be easy. There are no good options left in Iraq. There is no set of policy changes that can guarantee a good outcome. There is a great resistance to change in this administration, from the President down. Among Presidential appointees, there still is significant danger in speaking truth to power. The President, Senate, and the American people are putting a great deal on Dr. Gates' shoulders. I am voting for him with the hope that he can make us proud.

Mr. OBAMA

Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, today I wish to acknowledge an extraordinary constituent of mine, Dr. Jennifer Richeson. An associate professor at Northwestern University, Jennifer has recently been named a MacArthur Fellow. Each year, the MacArthur Fellows Program typically accepts our Nation's most ingenuous and diligent minds. The Program is highly selective; typically only 20 to 30 applicants are accepted. Moreover, although the fellowship grants a $500,000 stipend, it is not meant to be a reward. Rather, it is an investment in the creative potential of our Nation. To activate this potential, the stipend is free of stipulations; scholars spend their grant on whatever projects they choose. In 1994, Dr. Richeson received a bachelor's degree in psychology from Brown University. Then, in 2000, Jennifer received a doctorate in social psychology from Harvard University. Now, at Northwestern, she has used innovative research techniques to study the effects of racial stereotyping and discrimination on cognition and behavior. With the stipend she receives from her fellowship, Dr. Richeson will surely make further contributions to our society's understanding of psychological and racial issues. I congratulate Dr. Richeson on her accomplishments. She is a model of academic excellence and commitment, and I am proud to be her Senator.

Mr. OBAMA

Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I rise today to express my support for the United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act, S. 3709. As I have said before, I believe strengthening the relationship between our two nations is an important strategic goal and this legislation helps us take a dramatic step in this direction. However, like many of my colleagues, I have concerns with potential nonproliferation consequences of this agreement. Much to my disappointment, the administration has done very little to address these concerns, instead, sending draft legislation to the Congress that was essentially a blank check. The managers of the bill, Senators Lugar and Biden, have done a tremendous job taking the administration's proposal and shaping it into meaningful, bipartisan legislation. The bill now before the Senate helps move us closer to India while addressing some key nonproliferation issues. However, I remain concerned about the issue of nuclear testing. A decision by the Indian Government to conduct such a test could trigger an arms race in South Asia that would be extremely dangerous and destabilizing. The good news is that the joint statement between President Bush and Prime Minister Singh of July 18, 2005 declared that India's unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing will continue. I take Prime Minister Singh at his word, but also believe in following President Reagan's mantra of ``trust but verify.'' To this end, I am wondering if the chairman will take a few moments to clarify a couple matters concerning this legislation. Is it the managers' belief that section 129 of the Atomic Energy Act, AEA, will apply prospectively to India--aside from the sections of the AEA that are explicitly amended by S. 3709?

Mr. OBAMA. On a related note, is it the chairman's interpretation of the legislation that, in the event of a future nuclear test by the Government of India, nuclear power reactor fuel and equipment sales, and nuclear technology cooperation would terminate; other elements of the United States-India nuclear agreement would likely terminate; and the United States would have the right to demand the return of nuclear supplies?

Mr. OBAMA. I offered an amendment that the managers have already accepted pertaining to the supply of nuclear power reactor fuel in safeguarded, civilian nuclear facilities. To further clarify this issue, is it the managers' understanding that provision of a fuel to the Government of India should be sized in a way to maintain a deterrent to Indian nuclear testing, while also providing protections against short-term fluctuations in the supply of nuclear fuel? In other words, is it your understanding that providing a fuel reserve to India is not intended to facilitate a resumption in nuclear testing?

Mr. OBAMA. Does the chairman believe that, as this agreement moves forward to the Nuclear Suppliers Group, NSG, the United States should work to ensure that other nations provide nuclear power reactor fuel in a similar fashion?

Mr. OBAMA. Finally, would the managers agree that section 105 of S. 3709 requires that the President determine, prior to exercising the waivers in section 104, that ``an agreement between India and the IAEA requiring the application of safeguards in perpetuity in accordance with IAEA standards, principles, and practices to civil nuclear facilities, programs, and materials . . . has entered into force,'' and that the most logical approach, as U.S. officials have stated for the record, would be to use the IAEA INFCIRC/66, Rev. 2 agreement as the model for India's safeguards agreement?

Mr. OBAMA. I thank the managers.

Mr. OBAMA

Mr. OBAMA. Because Senator Durbin has hit the major points, I will simply say that the atrocities in Darfur are a moral and humanitarian emergency, and the people of the United States should be searching for effective tools to help end this violence and bloodshed. While not the only answer, I believe that divestment by individual States can be a part of the solution--it certainly was so during the fight to end apartheid in South Africa. I strongly support the provision in the House-passed bill on this issue. My sense is that there was bipartisan, bicameral support for this provision. But because of the objections of a few key members of Congress, this provision was dropped in the interest of passing the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act, which I believe has some important provisions, before the Congress recesses at the end of this month. I am wondering if the senior Senator from Illinois, who is also the Assistant Democratic Leader, shares this view and if he could comment on this issue.

Mr. OBAMA. I thank the senior Senator from Illinois. As Senator Durbin outlined, the State of Illinois has a long and proud history on the issue of divestment. I know that we will both continue to engage to push our government and the international community to do all it can to halt the violence in Darfur and, as part of our efforts, search to enact divestment language into law. I hope to draw upon the support, just mentioned by Senator Durbin, in pushing this measure forward over the coming months. I yield the floor.

Mr. OBAMA

Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleague from South Carolina, Senator Jim DeMint, in introducing the Education Opportunity Act. We often hear that many students who graduate from high school are not ready for the academic rigors of college. This is especially problematic for students from low-income families. For these students to succeed in the transition to college, they must have opportunity, and a continuity of classroom experiences that prepare them for success. Academic rigor in a high school curriculum is essential in establishing the momentum necessary for a student to progress toward a bachelor's degree. The unfortunate fact is that not all students have access to a challenging high school curriculum. Low-income students are often disadvantaged by a lack of rigorous courses in their high school, especially in subjects such as the advanced mathematics courses that are so important for college success. Universities and community colleges have increasingly provided such courses to high school students. But the cost of such classes can be a barrier to low-income students, who are the very students most likely to be enrolled in high schools that provide the most limited access to challenging college preparatory curricula. This legislation will provide a program for grant support to allow thousands of students with limited exposure to college-level programs in their high schools to earn college credit at their local university or community college. I urge my colleagues to join us in extending opportunities for college success to deserving low-income high school students.