Mark Pryor

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read three times and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and that any statements relating to the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 1983, introduced earlier today by Senators Harkin and Chambliss.

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, en bloc.

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed en bloc to the consideration of the following Senate resolutions which were submitted earlier today: S. Res. 294, S. Res. 295, S. Res. 296, S. Res. 297, and S. Res. 298.

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I understand there are two bills at the desk due for a second reading.

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the HELP Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 87, and that the Senate then proceed to its consideration.

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I would like to join my colleagues in congratulating Senator Alexander of Tennessee for his hard work and his great legislative success on this piece of legislation which passed the Senate tonight. I will just remark, if I may, that once again he has proven himself to be an effective leader and a thoughtful legislator. He is really the kind of Senators who is putting America first and trying to get great things done. And, obviously, you can tell by his speech that he is sharing credit with anybody and everybody. We all know that it was Senator Lamar Alexander's hard work and dedication that made that legislation a reality.

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to add Senator Feinstein as a cosponsor of this amendment.

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I would like to pick up on some of the comments my colleagues on the Republican side have made on this amendment. One of the things Senator Sessions just mentioned is that this is a concrete proposal. I know he didn't intend the play on words, but this is concrete. We are talking about adding real border enforcement. It is real. It is bricks and mortar. It is physical barriers. It will definitely slow the influx of people coming into this country who are not playing by the rules. Again, I want to thank my colleagues, both Democrats and Republicans. We have been adding cosponsors this morning to this legislation. I want to thank all of my colleagues who participated. I need to give a special thanks to Senator Harry Reid who helped pull this amendment together. To put $3 billion on border enforcement on the Homeland Security appropriations makes perfect sense. It makes perfect sense in terms of good government, and it makes perfect sense to the people all across this Nation. One of the messages I heard loudly and clearly during the immigration debate which we finished a few weeks ago is, people want more border enforcement. They want the U.S. Government to secure our border. There is no doubt about that; this is something the Federal Government has failed to do or has been pretty lax in trying to do over the last several years. Again, this didn't start with the Bush administration. I think it has probably gotten worse during this time, but it goes back several administrations. I am not here to point fingers today. By voting for this amendment today, Senators would add 23,000 additional full-time border agents. We would add new border monitoring technology. We would add 300 miles of vehicle barriers, 700 miles of fence, 105 radar and camera towers. We would add resources to detain 45,000 illegal immigrants. So this is, as Senator Sessions said, a concrete step in the right direction. This is good public policy. I know we have broad bipartisan support for this legislation. I want to thank my colleagues for giving this strong consideration, and I ask that they look at this legislation before we vote in just a few minutes. Before I sit down, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Landrieu and Senator McCaskill be added as cosponsors to this amendment.

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I am very pleased that Senator Graham and others have come together to increase and enhance our border security in this country. We all know in this Chamber we have tried very hard to reform our immigration system that we have on the books. In fact, I have been very vocal saying I am for immigration reform. I think we need to do that. But so far we have not been able to get that done in the Senate. I believe, honestly, we need more involvement with the White House in trying to get that done. But regardless of that, today one of the things that came through to me loudly and clearly from the people in Arkansas is we need to secure our border. People do not want to wait 2 years, 3 years, 5 years, whatever it may be, to have border security; they want us to start working on that now. That is what we are trying to accomplish with this amendment today. Again, I am very pleased that Senator Graham, a true South Carolina conservative Member of this body, someone whom we all respect, someone who, even though he has impeccable conservative and Republican credentials, is willing to reach across the aisle to work with others to try to get good things done for his State and for our country. He and Senator Cornyn of Texas and many others have worked on this issue. I am very pleased to be part of a bipartisan solution on border security. One of the things I like about this legislation is it adds $3 billion for border security. That means we will get 23,000 additional full-time border agents, we will get new border-monitoring technology, we will get 300 miles of vehicle barriers, we will get 700 miles of fence. That is funded by this amendment. We will get 105 radar and camera towers, and we will get resources to detain an additional 45,000 illegal immigrations who are in this country right now. It also includes money to help with some internal matters in this country, to help do some processing and look at employee issues and employer issues, et cetera. This is a good amendment. I think one of the things I heard loudly and clearly from the immigration debates we had on the Senate floor was people in Arkansas want us to secure the border first, let's enforce the laws we have on the books. They have been on the books for a long time, and we have not done a very good job of enforcing those laws. When I say ``we,'' I mean the administration. The will to try to enforce the laws we have on the books has not been there. I am not trying to point fingers. It is not only this administration; we can go back for a couple of decades. Regardless of that, I am not trying to point fingers. Right now I want to look forward. I want to add to this amendment an additional $3 billion for border enforcement to enhance this Nation's security. I encourage my colleagues to look at this, give it very strong consideration, and support this amendment. It is bipartisan. We have a number of Senators who were on it originally, a number more have been added as we go today. So I would, in closing, recommend to my colleagues that they give this very strong consideration. It will allow us to enforce the laws we have on the books, it allows us to enhance our border security in very real and very meaningful ways. I think it is what the American public wants. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum and ask that the time be equally divided.

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senators Lincoln, Baucus, and Webb be added as cosponsors to this amendment.

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to add Senator Byrd as a cosponsor to this amendment.

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, earlier today I joined with Senators Cochran and Enzi to introduce the Pharmacist Access and Recognition in Medicare Act of 2007. This is bipartisan legislation that will help ensure patients have access to local pharmacies. I am concerned that the Medicare Modernization Act that was enacted in 2003 failed to sufficiently ensure Medicare patients would have quality access to prescription medicines available at local pharmacies. The new drug program took effect at the beginning of 2006. We now know that during that year over 1,100 community pharmacies across the country closed their doors according to the National Community Pharmacists Association. It is critical to me that patients living in small towns throughout Arkansas and across America have access to community pharmacies. While I believe major reforms need to be made in the Medicare prescription drug benefit, I believe that the bipartisan bill I introduced with Senator Cochran and Enzi today is an achievable first step in making the Medicare drug benefit work better for patients and pharmacists who are local front line health care providers. This bill will ensure that pharmacies are paid on a timely basis for prescriptions that are filled for Medicare beneficiaries. It can take a month for pharmacies to be paid now, and this bill will ensure that pharmacies get paid electronically for clean claims within 10 business days. Seniors should have a choice concerning what pharmacy they use. Our bill codifies regulations ensuring that Medicare drug cards are not cobranded with the name of a pharmacy, leaving beneficiaries under the impression that the card may only be good at a single, large chain pharmacy. Cards could be cobranded in the first year of the program. Regulations prohibit that happening this year, but our bill ensures this will not be a problem in the future. The bill will also help ensure that medicines are used appropriately. Pharmacists are the best trained providers in our health care system to ensure prescribed medications are used correctly. The bill creates a 2 year community-based medication therapy management demonstration program using pharmacists to provide services.

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, earlier today I joined with Senators Cochran and Enzi to introduce the Pharmacist Access and Recognition in Medicare Act of 2007. This is bipartisan legislation that will help ensure patients have access to local pharmacies. I am concerned that the Medicare Modernization Act that was enacted in 2003 failed to sufficiently ensure Medicare patients would have quality access to prescription medicines available at local pharmacies. The new drug program took effect at the beginning of 2006. We now know that during that year over 1,100 community pharmacies across the country closed their doors according to the National Community Pharmacists Association. It is critical to me that patients living in small towns throughout Arkansas and across America have access to community pharmacies. While I believe major reforms need to be made in the Medicare prescription drug benefit, I believe that the bipartisan bill I introduced with Senator Cochran and Enzi today is an achievable first step in making the Medicare drug benefit work better for patients and pharmacists who are local front line health care providers. This bill will ensure that pharmacies are paid on a timely basis for prescriptions that are filled for Medicare beneficiaries. It can take a month for pharmacies to be paid now, and this bill will ensure that pharmacies get paid electronically for clean claims within 10 business days. Seniors should have a choice concerning what pharmacy they use. Our bill codifies regulations ensuring that Medicare drug cards are not cobranded with the name of a pharmacy, leaving beneficiaries under the impression that the card may only be good at a single, large chain pharmacy. Cards could be cobranded in the first year of the program. Regulations prohibit that happening this year, but our bill ensures this will not be a problem in the future. The bill will also help ensure that medicines are used appropriately. Pharmacists are the best trained providers in our health care system to ensure prescribed medications are used correctly. The bill creates a 2 year community-based medication therapy management demonstration program using pharmacists to provide services.

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I rise today in support of Senator Levin's amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2008. This legislation is long overdue, and I hope all my colleagues will support its swift implementation. I want to thank the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Levin, Senator McCain, and the chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Senator Akaka, for their leadership on this issue, and I commend them for the good work they have done. I also want to thank my colleagues for working so closely with me to get this legislation passed. A few months ago I had the pleasure of introducing the Wounded Warriors Assistance Act of 2007 with my good friend from Georgia, Senator Saxby Chambliss. Our intent was to correct the injustice done to our returning wounded veterans and to improve the access and quality of health care our military personnel receive. There have been too many cases where our veterans have slipped through cracks in the system, and this is why I support the Levin amendment to H.R. 1585. It is a comprehensive policy of care and management for servicemembers with combat-related injuries or illnesses, a concept which mirrors the intent of the legislation I introduced. I worked on this legislation for a long time, and I am proud to have worked with the Senate Armed Services Committee and Senator Chambliss to put forth meaningful language that has the potential to directly help those who defend our country. This legislation will provide our veterans with assistance to make sure their medical needs are met and bureaucracy does not interfere with their progress. While this legislation addresses enhanced health care, traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress disorder, disability evaluations, and improvement of facilities housing military patients, this amendment will ultimately restore confidence in the integrity and efficiency of the military medical system and ensure our wounded warriors feel secure in the fact they will always receive committed, quality care. This act will also increase training for health care professionals and medical case managers and make a physician or health care professional available to help veterans navigate the medical evaluation board process, translate findings and recommendations, and explaining medical terms and regulations. This process is a critical crossroad in a service man or woman's career and can be very emotional, confusing, and stressful. I do not believe our returning veterans should have to deal with any more adversity or undue stress while trying to recover from their injuries, and this legislation will make this process easier for them. Another provision that I am particularly proud of is the section on disability severance pay. This addition expands the population that is eligible for the enhancement of disability severance pay to include injuries incurred during performance of duty in support of combat operations. Oftentimes our military personnel are wounded in training exercises before they are sent into theater, and in current law they are not eligible to receive disability severance pay. For example, if a soldier is wounded while training to fast rope out of a helicopter, he or she will now be fairly compensated for their sacrifice in support of combat operations. In my home State where 369 Arkansas soldiers have been wounded, my office has provided immeasurable assistance to ensure those veterans get better care. I am honored to support this legislation as it also affects over 25,000 wounded warriors nationwide. I frequently make trips to Walter Reed Hospital, and I visit wounded Arkansans who are some of the most determined and inspiring individuals I have ever met. However, they will still require top notch medical care and a lot of prayer in order to recover, and I want to make sure they get it. Again, I am proud to support Senator Levin's amendment to H.R. 1585, and I am happy to see it adopted into the fiscal year 2008 National Defense Authorization Act. We owe nothing less than the best for our troops who make great sacrifices for defense of this country. I firmly believe this legislation is what we need to reform and modernize the way we care for our wounded soldiers.

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that text of S. 1771, the ``Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act,'' be printed in the Record.

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that text of S. 1771, the ``Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act,'' be printed in the Record.

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I want to be on the record as thanking you for your leadership on this legislation. You shared it with me more than a couple of months ago now. I know you worked on it for a number of months before that. The Senate and the American people owe Senator Ken Salazar of Colorado a real debt of gratitude for drafting this legislation and pushing it to the point it has gotten to today. I open by reading the first two paragraphs of the executive summary of the Iraq Study Group. This was written 6 months ago. It says: The situation in Iraq is grave and deteriorating. There is no path that can guarantee success, but the prospects can be improved. In this report, we make a number of recommendations for actions to be taken in Iraq, the United States, and the region. Our most important recommendations call for new and enhanced diplomatic and political efforts in Iraq and the region, and a change in the primary mission of U.S. forces in Iraq that will enable the United States to begin to move its combat forces out of Iraq responsibly. We believe that these two recommendations are equally important and reinforce one another. If they are effectively implemented, and if the Iraqi government moves forward with national reconciliation, Iraqis will have an opportunity for a better future, terrorism will be dealt a blow, stability will be enhanced in an important part of the world, and America's credibility, interests, and values will be protected. That was true when it was written 6 months ago, and it is still very relevant today. Today, I want to talk about amendment No. 2063 and encourage my colleagues to consider voting for it and even cosponsoring it. One of the things Senator Salazar did when he drafted this amendment is he worked very hard to try to honor the integrity of the findings and the recommendations of the Baker-Hamilton group, and he has done that. You can look at each paragraph of amendment No. 2063 and see that it reflects the essence of what the Iraq Study Group was trying to communicate to us. In fact, we have had a couple of colleagues come to us in the last several days and say: Well, if you will just change this paragraph or this sentence or this one word, or if we can just work a little bit on this text, then I might be a cosponsor. Well, the problem there is, if we change that, then we would be trying to change what the Iraq Study Group recommended, and we are not going to do that. The purpose of this amendment is to take this bipartisan commission's work and put it into legislation. Some people ask: Who made up this group? What is so magic about the Iraq Study Group? Well, let me tell you, it has two former Secretaries of State, it has the former chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, it has a former Supreme Court Associate Justice, it has a former White House Chief of Staff, it has a former Secretary of Defense, and two former United States Senators. This is a group that comes together with a lot of intelligence, with a lot of experience, and with a lot of knowledge about the region and international affairs and history. I think the Iraq Study Group is the best effort that America has yet put forward on a thoughtful, responsible approach to Iraq. One of the things I like about the Iraq study group's recommendations and their conclusions is it is not just setting an artificial timetable. I am a little bit out of sync with some of my Democratic colleagues on wanting to set a timetable on Iraq. I don't think we ought to have a public timetable in the law. I know many of my Democratic colleagues disagree with me, and a few of my Republican colleagues do as well. But the thing I like about the Iraq Study Group legislation, the Salazar- Alexander amendment, is, it is much more comprehensive than simply a timetable. In fact, it is more comprehensive than just military. It tries to take a different approach. It really tries to change American policy in Iraq. And it is a multifaceted approach on trying to deal with the issues in Iraq and the region. So what you are looking at with the Iraq Study Group is you are not just looking at a military solution. General Petraeus has said if we just have a military solution we are going to lose. So the Iraq Study Group anticipates that, and it says we need a diplomatic solution, an economic solution, a political solution, and a military solution. I think it is the most comprehensive approach that anyone has put forward yet on Iraq. Again, this is a bipartisan group that has come together, and this amendment is bipartisan. We have seven Democrats and six Republicans. By this time tomorrow we may have seven and seven, or eight and eight, or some combination thereof. We don't know exactly the number of cosponsors we will end up with, but certainly we hope we will have a solid majority of Senators who will support this amendment when it has a chance to come up. As Senator Salazar said, and Senator Alexander echoed, part of what this bill does is it gets U.S. forces out of the business of combat and into the business of training and equipping others. And, really, what we are trying to do is stabilize Iraq. One thing I think the Iraq Study Group does over and over, for several pages in its findings, in its report, on several pages, is it talks about diplomacy and regional diplomacy and how important it is to have the neighborhood, so to speak, around Iraq--people inside Iraq and around the region--to have a part in stabilizing Iraq and making the region more stable and stronger. I have heard a couple of criticisms, such as my colleagues mentioned tonight, and one is that it is too prescriptive, that our legislation is too prescriptive. Another is that it doesn't do anything. And those are kind of polar opposite criticisms. In fact, there is an old saying that when you are settling a lawsuit, if both sides are unhappy, maybe you have a good settlement. So I would say in this situation, at least one way to look at it is both sides are unhappy. We are trying to thread the needle. We are trying to find a bipartisan solution on Iraq, a bipartisan consensus in this body. In fact, I would say this: With all due respect to my colleagues, and my House colleagues, and the President, the last thing in the world we should ever have a party-line vote on is Iraq. We have 150,000 troops in Iraq. They are getting shot at every day. They are putting their lives on the line for this country and for Iraq every single day. There are people out there trying to kill them, trying to maim them, trying to blow them up--you name it--every day. We should never have a party- line vote on Iraq. We just shouldn't do it. And this amendment right here, this is an effort to try to bring the consensus that we need on Iraq. Senator Alexander told me a couple of months ago, he said: You know, we talk about needing a political consensus in Baghdad. He said: What we really need is a political consensus in Washington, DC, on Iraq. And I think he is right. The Salazar-Alexander amendment tries to get to that consensus. I will say this: For the Senators who believe this amendment doesn't do anything, I disagree. I think this is a significant step in a new direction, in a positive direction for Iraq. In fact, you can look at the amendment itself, and it has 13 sections. It is true that 3 of the 13 are sense-of-Congress sections--3 out of 13. But that means 10 of 13 are binding, 10 of 13 actually change U.S. policy and have requirements that have teeth. I would encourage my colleagues who mistakenly believe this amendment doesn't do anything to actually look at the language of the amendment and they will see it is a very significant improvement over our current policy in Iraq. Some people say it is too prescriptive. In other words, it binds the President's hands too much. I disagree. When you look at the language that Senator Salazar and members of the Iraq Study Group came up with when they drafted this, really what you are talking about is laying out some very specific things but also giving the President quite a bit of flexibility. And I think that is important. He is the Chief Executive. He is the Commander in Chief, and I think Senator Salazar and Senator Alexander have found the right balance in drafting this amendment. The last thing I will say in closing, going back to the Iraq Study Group Report that came out this past December, and back to the executive summary--I started with reading the first two paragraphs of the executive summary, so let me conclude by reading the last two paragraphs of the executive summary in the Iraq Study Group Report: It is the unanimous view of the Iraq study group that these recommendations offer a new way forward for the United States in Iraq and the region. They are comprehensive and need to be implemented in a coordinated fashion. They should not be separated or carried out in isolation. The dynamics of the region are as important to Iraq as events within Iraq. The challenges are daunting. There will be difficult days ahead. But by pursuing this new way forward, Iraq, the region, and the United States of America can emerge stronger. Again, I think those words were true 6 months ago, I think they are relevant today, and I think we need to give the Iraq Study Group recommendations a chance to succeed. Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum. Mr. WARNER addressed the Chair.

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, today I honor a man who has given so much of himself to public service, the State of Arkansas and the legal community. In 1957, James Burton (Jim) Blair was admitted to practice law in Arkansas. A successful attorney, he was the only general counsel that Tyson Foods had in the 20th century as the company grew from a regional poultry company to the second largest food producer in the Fortune 500. Jim Blair has shared his success with contributions to his lifelong hometown of Fayetteville, The University of Arkansas, and the State that we both call home. He has contributed to the education of others by establishing funds and chairs at the University of Arkansas. He gave the largest private gift ever given to a public library in Arkansas; the new Fayetteville Public Library is named The Blair Library in memory of Jim's late wife Diane Divers Blair, his grandmother Bessie Motley Blair and his aunt Dr. Mary Grace Blair. A patron of the arts, Jim established a sculpture room at the Walton Arts Center, donated the Anita Huffington sculpture ``Spring'' to the University of Arkansas and also donated the Huffington sculpture ``Earth'' to the Arkansas Arts Center in Little Rock. Jim Blair also has a passion for politics and public service. He was a delegate to the Democratic National Conventions of 1968, 1972, and 1980. He served as campaign manager of Senator William J. Fulbright's 1974 reelection campaign, was vice president of the Clinton for President Committee 1992 and is listed in ``Who's Who in American Politics.'' Jim served for 10 years on the University of Arkansas Board of Trustees, including 2 years as chairman. He also served for 9 years on the Arkansas Board of Higher Education, with 1 year as chairman. These days Jim continues his public service by serving on the Fayetteville Educational Foundation Board, the Fayetteville Public Library Board, the Tyson Family Foundation Board, the Arkansas Tennis Association Board and the Northwest Arkansas Community Foundation. Mr. President, I ask that my colleagues join me in congratulating James Burton (Jim) Blair on his 50th anniversary in the legal profession and many philanthropic contributions to Arkansas.

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, let me say that I am very honored today to join my friends, Senator Salazar of Colorado and Senator Alexander of Tennessee, in their efforts to try to restore some nonpartisanship to our discussion on Iraq. I feel very strongly that we should never have a party-line vote on Iraq. We have 160,000 troops on the ground. It is just too important an issue for one party to take one side, the other party to take another side, and for the White House to do one thing and Congress to do another. In fact, we talk often in this Chamber about how there needs to be a political solution inside Baghdad. The truth is, there needs to be a political resolution inside of Washington, DC, when it comes to Iraq. I am honored to lend my name today to this effort by Senator Salazar and Senator Alexander. One thing I have noticed in the last several weeks and months--maybe in the last year--when it comes to Iraq is that there is a lot of rhetoric. To be honest, that is not helpful. It is not bringing our troops home earlier. It is not providing more stability inside Iraq. It is not allowing Iraq to function as a sovereign nation. We need to tone down the rhetoric and roll up our sleeves and work through this together. I also understand that Senator Bennett, Senator Gregg, and Senator Casey have all joined in this effort as well. It is an honor for me to be part of this bipartisan solution. One of the things we are going to emphasize here is Iraqi accountability. We know that is something which needs to happen inside Iraq. The Iraqis need to take responsibility for their own country. The Iraq Study Group talked about this a lot in the pages of their report, where on page after page they talk about what they believe needs to happen inside Iraq. So this bill which Senators Salazar and Alexander will be filing in the coming weeks talks about diplomatic efforts, about securing Iraq's borders, promotes economic commerce and trade inside Iraq, political support, and it talks about a multilateral diplomatic effort. It talks about milestones and also about redeploying troops. After talking to so many people in my State and around the country, I think that is where America wants us to be. They want a stable Iraq. It is a little bit like what Colin Powell said: It is the Pottery Barn principle; that is, if you break it, you own it. Well, we went into Iraq, and we have a lot of responsibility there. I think most Americans understand that. They don't like what they see on the front pages of the papers every day or on the evening news, but they do know we have a responsibility inside Iraq, and they want us, in the Senate, in the House, and also at the White House, to show leadership. This is a time for leadership, a time for us to come together on these principles which the Iraq Study Group laid out--not that every one of them is exactly right, but they laid out a lot of principles that I believe many people in this Chamber can rally around and hold on to. If we implement these and make that our national policy, then I think we can get better results on Iraq than we have had in the past. I know General Petraeus has mentioned that we cannot rely on a purely military solution inside Iraq. I think he is exactly right; I think he is 100 percent right on that. It needs to be a multifronted effort-- security, political, economic, and diplomatic. We need to do a lot to help Iraq get back on its feet and become a functioning nation again. Mr. President, I am honored to join my colleagues in this effort. I invite other colleagues to look at the Salazar legislation and consider joining it as well in the coming weeks.

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleagues Senator Collins from Maine and Senator Warner from Virginia to introduce legislation to strengthen the Department of Defense nanotechnology initiative. I greatly appreciate their strong leadership on this issue and their understanding of the importance of how the development of nanotechnology will impact our armed forces in the future. This bill, the Defense Nanotechnology Research and Development Act of 2007, sustains the Department's nanotechnology research and development program while at the same time transitioning the technologies developed into products that can enhance the United States military capability. The Department of Defense has done a tremendous job conducting nanotechnology research and development. Examples of this nanotechnology research include improved energy absorbing body armor, lightweight batteries, and novel chemical and biological sensor. I believe now is the time to start the transition of this research into new technologies and products to protect our military personnel and enhance our war fighting capability. The Department of Defense has a long history of successfully supporting innovative nanotechnology research efforts for the future advancement of the war fighter and battle systems. Congress established the defense nanotechnology research program Section 246 of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2003, Public Law 107-314, which this bill updates and enhances. Section 246 requires the Secretary of Defense to carry out a defense nanotechnology research and development program in coordination with other Federal agencies performing nanotechnology research and development activities established by the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act, Public Law 108-153. The investment strategy described in the National Nanotechnology Initiative, or NNI, Strategic Plan identifies and defines 7 major subject categories, or program component areas, relating to areas of investment that are critical to accomplishing the overall goals of the NNI. The Department of Defense has organized its nanotechnology research to align with these 7 program component areas and each year since 2004 has submitted to Congress an annual report on the nanotechnology programs within the Department of Defense. This bill requires the Secretary of Defense to act through the Under Secretary for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, who shall supervise the planning, management, and coordination of the program. We believe this office can best achieve the goals of maintaining a state- of-the-art research and development program while simultaneously accomplishing technology transition. The bill directs the Department to coordinate all nanoscale research and development within the Department of Defense with other departments and agencies of the United States that are involved in the NNI and with the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office, NNCO, including providing appropriate funds to support the NNCO. The bill also directs the Department to develop a strategic plan for defense nanotechnology research and development that integrates with the NNI strategic plan, issue policy guidance each year to the defense agencies and services that prioritizes the Program's research initiatives, state a clear strategy for transitioning the research into products needed by the Department of Defense, and develop a plan to transition nanoscale research and development within the Department of Defense, including the Small Business Innovative Research and Small Business Technology Transfer Research programs, to the Department of Defense Manufacturing Technology program. Finally, the bill requires the Department to submit a biennial report to the congressional defense committees describing the Department's coordination with the other departments and agencies participating in the NNI, a review of the findings relating to the Department by the NNI triennial external review, an assessment of the Department's technology transition from research to enhanced war fighting capability, an evaluation of nanotechnology used in foreign defense systems, and an appraisal of the defense nanotechnology manufacturing and industrial base. Because there is a need for metrics and goals to ensure that the Department's nanotechnology program is well structured and successfully developing needed defense technologies, the bill requires a review by the Government Accountability Office of the overall Department nanotechnology program. Nanotechnology is one of the next great scientific frontiers with the potential to enable novel applications that can enhance war fighting and battle system capabilities. I am proud to say that in Arkansas several universities including the University of Arkansas, the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, and Arkansas State University are performing research and technology development in support of the Department of Defense nanotechnology program. One example of particular note is the Center for Ferroelectric Electronic-Photonic Nanodevices that is developing new nanomagnetic devices for high performance information and communication technology. Our Arkansas small businesses are also contributing to the defense nanotechnology industrial base by developing novel nanoscale materials, devices, and products. I am very excited by the future nanotechnology holds for Arkansas and the United States. As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee I look forward to working to strengthen the Department of Defense nanotechnology program. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleagues Senator Collins from Maine and Senator Warner from Virginia to introduce legislation to strengthen the Department of Defense nanotechnology initiative. I greatly appreciate their strong leadership on this issue and their understanding of the importance of how the development of nanotechnology will impact our armed forces in the future. This bill, the Defense Nanotechnology Research and Development Act of 2007, sustains the Department's nanotechnology research and development program while at the same time transitioning the technologies developed into products that can enhance the United States military capability. The Department of Defense has done a tremendous job conducting nanotechnology research and development. Examples of this nanotechnology research include improved energy absorbing body armor, lightweight batteries, and novel chemical and biological sensor. I believe now is the time to start the transition of this research into new technologies and products to protect our military personnel and enhance our war fighting capability. The Department of Defense has a long history of successfully supporting innovative nanotechnology research efforts for the future advancement of the war fighter and battle systems. Congress established the defense nanotechnology research program Section 246 of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2003, Public Law 107-314, which this bill updates and enhances. Section 246 requires the Secretary of Defense to carry out a defense nanotechnology research and development program in coordination with other Federal agencies performing nanotechnology research and development activities established by the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act, Public Law 108-153. The investment strategy described in the National Nanotechnology Initiative, or NNI, Strategic Plan identifies and defines 7 major subject categories, or program component areas, relating to areas of investment that are critical to accomplishing the overall goals of the NNI. The Department of Defense has organized its nanotechnology research to align with these 7 program component areas and each year since 2004 has submitted to Congress an annual report on the nanotechnology programs within the Department of Defense. This bill requires the Secretary of Defense to act through the Under Secretary for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, who shall supervise the planning, management, and coordination of the program. We believe this office can best achieve the goals of maintaining a state- of-the-art research and development program while simultaneously accomplishing technology transition. The bill directs the Department to coordinate all nanoscale research and development within the Department of Defense with other departments and agencies of the United States that are involved in the NNI and with the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office, NNCO, including providing appropriate funds to support the NNCO. The bill also directs the Department to develop a strategic plan for defense nanotechnology research and development that integrates with the NNI strategic plan, issue policy guidance each year to the defense agencies and services that prioritizes the Program's research initiatives, state a clear strategy for transitioning the research into products needed by the Department of Defense, and develop a plan to transition nanoscale research and development within the Department of Defense, including the Small Business Innovative Research and Small Business Technology Transfer Research programs, to the Department of Defense Manufacturing Technology program. Finally, the bill requires the Department to submit a biennial report to the congressional defense committees describing the Department's coordination with the other departments and agencies participating in the NNI, a review of the findings relating to the Department by the NNI triennial external review, an assessment of the Department's technology transition from research to enhanced war fighting capability, an evaluation of nanotechnology used in foreign defense systems, and an appraisal of the defense nanotechnology manufacturing and industrial base. Because there is a need for metrics and goals to ensure that the Department's nanotechnology program is well structured and successfully developing needed defense technologies, the bill requires a review by the Government Accountability Office of the overall Department nanotechnology program. Nanotechnology is one of the next great scientific frontiers with the potential to enable novel applications that can enhance war fighting and battle system capabilities. I am proud to say that in Arkansas several universities including the University of Arkansas, the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, and Arkansas State University are performing research and technology development in support of the Department of Defense nanotechnology program. One example of particular note is the Center for Ferroelectric Electronic-Photonic Nanodevices that is developing new nanomagnetic devices for high performance information and communication technology. Our Arkansas small businesses are also contributing to the defense nanotechnology industrial base by developing novel nanoscale materials, devices, and products. I am very excited by the future nanotechnology holds for Arkansas and the United States. As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee I look forward to working to strengthen the Department of Defense nanotechnology program. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Madam President, tonight the students who belong to the Future Farmers of America chapter at Centerpoint High School located between Amity and Glenwood, AR, are having their annual banquet. Some of these students will graduate next week and begin new chapters in their lives. While every teacher there has contributed to the education of each student I rise to today to honor one teacher there, Troy W. Buck. Troy Buck is a native of Alpine, which is located in Clark County in the southwest part of my State. He earned his bachelor's and master's degrees in agriculture at the University of Arkansas-Fayetteville and has spent 47 years in vocational agriculture impacting the lives of countless students along the way. Troy Buck taught for 21 years at Hope High School and built the Hope FFA chapter into the largest in the State. He then moved to Amity, which merged with Glenwood in 1995 to create the Centerpoint School District. Today under Troy Buck's leadership, Centerpoint's FFA chapter has almost 300 students, making it one of the State's largest. It operates the only school-supported meats lab in the State and recently 98 acres was purchased for a school farm. In addition to his educational activities, Troy also farms 400 acres, most of which is in pasture or hay. He runs 100 head of cattle, operates 2 breeder hen houses, and produces Bermuda hay sold primarily to the racehorse market in nearby Hot Springs. Troy Buck is also a volunteer in his community. The Rockefeller Foundation has recognized him as a leader in small communities. He helped establish and build a building to house an ambulance service in Amity. Troy has also helped establish volunteer fire departments and a community water system. He serves as president of Alpine Water Association and the Alpine Fire Department. He is a member of the Farm Credit Board, and serves on the State board of Arkansas Farm Bureau. Additionally, he is a certified first responder. My home State of Arkansas is fortunate to have men and women of Troy Buck's caliber who devote their lives to providing excellent education for our children and improving the quality of life in our communities. I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Troy Buck for his commitment and service to the State of Arkansas.

Mr. PRYOR

Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, in 1932 Ray Yarnell bought a bankrupt dairy in Searcy, AR, and created the Yarnell Ice Cream Company. At the time, there were 43 ice cream companies in business in Arkansas. Ray's son Albert began working for the company at the age of 12, riding his bicycle to deliver bills. During World War II, Albert Yarnell left to serve his country as a member of the Army Signal Corps. After his service, he studied dairy production at the University of Missouri and returned to work at the Yarnell Ice Cream Company in 1948. With the passing of his father in 1974, Albert Yarnell became the president of the company. In 1978, he personally created the Nation's first all-natural ice milk, and after becoming chairman of the company in 1985, he led the team that invented the Nation's first non-fat, no- sugar-added ice cream in 1990. He is affectionately known in his hometown of Searcy and at the company as ``Mr. Albert.'' A very successful family business, the Yarnell Ice Cream Company now stands as the only remaining ice cream producer in Arkansas. Albert's son Rogers is the current president of the company and Albert's granddaughter Christina is the treasurer. Albert and his wife Doris both contribute to and are deeply respected in the community they have called home for so many years. Mr. Yarnell also serves on several boards, including Main Street Searcy, the Baptist Health Corporation, the Searcy Chamber of Commerce, as well as the Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce. Earlier this year, Albert Yarnell was inducted into the Arkansas Business Hall of Fame. He joins other distinguished members such as Sam Walton, Jackson Stephens, Don Tyson, and J.B. Hunt. Mr. President, I ask that my colleagues join me in congratulating both Albert Yarnell, the patriarch of the Ice Cream Industry, and the Yarnell Ice Cream Company on the company's 75th anniversary.