Jay Rockefeller

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today with my friend and colleague from Rhode Island, Mr. Chafee, to introduce legislation that will protect the health and well-being of America's children by restoring funds to the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP). In 1997, Senator Chafee and I worked together to create the Children's Health Insurance Program as part of the Balanced Budget Act. I am proud of the work we have done over the years to make improvements to this critical program, which helps so many of our nation's children. Since its inception, the CHIP program has been an unqualified success. It has directly contributed to the decline in the number of children without health insurance in recent years. Last year, 5.8 million children were enrolled in CHIP, including over 35,000 children in my home state of West Virginia. However, the continued success of the CHIP program is in serious jeopardy. A number of States are projected to have insufficient Federal funding to sustain their existing CHIP programs over the next several years. On September 30, 2004, $1.07 billion in Federal CHIP funds are scheduled to expire and revert to the national treasury, despite growing unmet need in a number of States. If Congress does not act to preserve these funds, States will have no choice but to cut coverage for low-income children. Last year, we acted to protect children's health care by passing legislation to prevent $2.7 billion in Federal funding for CHIP from reverting to the treasury. While this legislation went a long way to address immediate CHIP funding shortfalls, it did not address the long- term financing problems that will persist until CHIP is reauthorized in fiscal year 2007. The legislation we are introducing today would solve the current CHIP financing problems and preserve health care coverage for children through reauthorization, when Congress will have to consider a better Federal financing mechanism for the program. I am pleased to be joined by Senators Chafee, Kennedy, and Snowe in introducing legislation that represents a comprehensive approach to shoring up CHIP financing through reauthorization, thereby preventing a devastating enrollment decline and facilitating continued CHIP growth. Our bill would extend the availability of the $1.07 billion in expiring CHIP funds and target some of the funds to the States that need them the most. It would also establish redistribution rules that will keep CHIP money in the CHIP program through fiscal year 2007. The Children's Health Protection and Improvement Act will allow States to continue offering health care to our Nation's children--the most vulnerable population among us. It will ensure that healthy children have access to preventative check-ups and exams and that sick children can get the medication and treatment they need. This legislation enjoys bipartisan support and is endorsed by the National Governor's Association (NGA). I urge my colleagues to make enactment of this critical legislation a priority. Congress must act on this legislation this year. We must do this when we return. I recognize that we have very few legislative days left, but this must be at the top of our list because our children cannot afford to wait. We must guarantee the continued success of the CHIP program and sustain the significant progress CHIP has made over the years in reducing the ranks of uninsured children. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today with my friend and colleague from Rhode Island, Mr. Chafee, to introduce legislation that will protect the health and well-being of America's children by restoring funds to the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP). In 1997, Senator Chafee and I worked together to create the Children's Health Insurance Program as part of the Balanced Budget Act. I am proud of the work we have done over the years to make improvements to this critical program, which helps so many of our nation's children. Since its inception, the CHIP program has been an unqualified success. It has directly contributed to the decline in the number of children without health insurance in recent years. Last year, 5.8 million children were enrolled in CHIP, including over 35,000 children in my home state of West Virginia. However, the continued success of the CHIP program is in serious jeopardy. A number of States are projected to have insufficient Federal funding to sustain their existing CHIP programs over the next several years. On September 30, 2004, $1.07 billion in Federal CHIP funds are scheduled to expire and revert to the national treasury, despite growing unmet need in a number of States. If Congress does not act to preserve these funds, States will have no choice but to cut coverage for low-income children. Last year, we acted to protect children's health care by passing legislation to prevent $2.7 billion in Federal funding for CHIP from reverting to the treasury. While this legislation went a long way to address immediate CHIP funding shortfalls, it did not address the long- term financing problems that will persist until CHIP is reauthorized in fiscal year 2007. The legislation we are introducing today would solve the current CHIP financing problems and preserve health care coverage for children through reauthorization, when Congress will have to consider a better Federal financing mechanism for the program. I am pleased to be joined by Senators Chafee, Kennedy, and Snowe in introducing legislation that represents a comprehensive approach to shoring up CHIP financing through reauthorization, thereby preventing a devastating enrollment decline and facilitating continued CHIP growth. Our bill would extend the availability of the $1.07 billion in expiring CHIP funds and target some of the funds to the States that need them the most. It would also establish redistribution rules that will keep CHIP money in the CHIP program through fiscal year 2007. The Children's Health Protection and Improvement Act will allow States to continue offering health care to our Nation's children--the most vulnerable population among us. It will ensure that healthy children have access to preventative check-ups and exams and that sick children can get the medication and treatment they need. This legislation enjoys bipartisan support and is endorsed by the National Governor's Association (NGA). I urge my colleagues to make enactment of this critical legislation a priority. Congress must act on this legislation this year. We must do this when we return. I recognize that we have very few legislative days left, but this must be at the top of our list because our children cannot afford to wait. We must guarantee the continued success of the CHIP program and sustain the significant progress CHIP has made over the years in reducing the ranks of uninsured children. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today with my friend and colleague from Oregon, Mr. Smith, to introduce the State Fiscal Relief Act of 2004. This legislation will extend the Federal fiscal relief enacted last year in order to give states a much needed boost as they continue to struggle to recover from the persisting economic downturn. Over the last three years, states have experienced the worst fiscal crisis since World War II. The loss of state tax revenue has caused substantial state budget deficits, which totaled over $250 billion in fiscal years 2002, 2003 and 2004. These shortfalls forced states to consider raising taxes or making substantial cuts to critical programs such as public education, health care, and public safety. As my colleagues know, Federal efforts to stimulate economic growth can be futile if states are forced to cut spending and increase taxes. We recognized this last year, and we did something about it. We enacted legislation that provided $20 billion in federal assistance to the states--$10 billion for Medicaid and $10 billion for general revenue grants. Some of my colleagues have since questioned the benefit of this type of federal assistance to the States. They have charged that the relief was not stimulative and that states did not use the additional resources appropriately. Well, I encourage my colleagues to take a very careful look at the facts. When you analyze all the available data on the $20 billion fiscal relief package enacted last year, only one logical conclusion can be reached--during the worst stages of the economic downturn, when many Americans lost their jobs, states were able to step up and fill major gaps in programs and services because they had the benefit of federal fiscal relief. My home state of West Virginia used the $125 million it received in federal assistance to resolve budget shortfalls and prevent cuts in Medicaid. That was the goal of our efforts all along--to reduce state budget deficits and prevent cuts to critical programs and services--and states used this temporary assistance as it was intended. In West Virginia and States across the country, fiscal relief strengthened state economies and protected our most vulnerable citizens by helping to reduce the massive spending cuts and tax increases states would otherwise have had to make. The Medicaid portion of fiscal relief was particularly important in helping to stabilize State budgets. As many of my colleagues are aware, Medicaid spending provides a critical form of economic stimulus in addition to delivering essential health services to our most vulnerable citizens. The Medicaid program supports jobs in every state. It helps keep hospitals and nursing homes operating in our communities. Every dollar invested in Medicaid results in an almost three-fold return in state economic benefit. In January, the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured released a study which confirms that, because of the timeliness of the Medicaid assistance, all fifty states were able to maintain their Medicaid eligibility levels. This means that access to critical health services and programs for pregnant women, children, the elderly, and workers who lost their jobs and employer-sponsored health coverage was preserved. Without these increased Medicaid payments to States, the number of uninsured Americans would have been far greater over the past several years. Unfortunately, when we passed fiscal relief last year, we did not include appropriate safeguards to make sure this Federal assistance would remain available to States if the economic downturn lasted longer than anticipated. Many who supported the $20 billion fiscal relief package hoped the economy would rebound quickly and that federal assistance to the States would not be necessary beyond fiscal year 2004. Well, the fact of the matter is that the economy remains weak, and fiscal relief is still necessary. While states are beginning to report stronger revenue growth, it is clear they are not out of the woods yet. State revenues are still far below pre-recession levels and are growing at a sluggish pace. In April, the National Conference of State Legislatures reported that states are struggling with an aggregate budget deficit of $36 billion going into fiscal year 2005. Eliminating fiscal relief now will deal a serious blow to the states as they struggle to climb out of the economic downturn. To remedy this problem, the bill we are introducing today provides $4.8 billion over 15 months to help states maintain the coverage they are currently providing through Medicaid. This additional funding, which is still temporary, will finish the job we started last year. It will help states weather the entirety of the economic downturn without having to cut vital programs and services for low-income women, children, and seniors. While I would have liked to have incorporated even more money for enhanced Medicaid payments to states, I recognize the federal budget realities currently before us. The $4.8 billion included in our bill represents a workable phase-down transition from the $10 billion states received last year, and I know it will go a long way to preserve health care coverage for Medicaid beneficiaries during this ongoing recession. In addition to providing $4.8 billion for Medicaid, our bill also reimburses states for the $1.2 billion in net costs they will incur in fiscal years 2004, 2005, and 2006 as a result of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act. As I stated when I voted against this bill, the Medicare Modernization Act has several major flaws that must be addressed. One such flaw is the fact that the new law undermines state revenues in the midst of their efforts to rebuild their economies. The State Fiscal Relief Act will correct that mistake. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation and to stand up for the millions of Americans who are working at low-wage jobs, who benefit from the numerous public programs and services that fiscal relief has helped to maintain, and who are in the process of reinvigorating our economy.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today with my friend and colleague from Oregon, Mr. Smith, to introduce the State Fiscal Relief Act of 2004. This legislation will extend the Federal fiscal relief enacted last year in order to give states a much needed boost as they continue to struggle to recover from the persisting economic downturn. Over the last three years, states have experienced the worst fiscal crisis since World War II. The loss of state tax revenue has caused substantial state budget deficits, which totaled over $250 billion in fiscal years 2002, 2003 and 2004. These shortfalls forced states to consider raising taxes or making substantial cuts to critical programs such as public education, health care, and public safety. As my colleagues know, Federal efforts to stimulate economic growth can be futile if states are forced to cut spending and increase taxes. We recognized this last year, and we did something about it. We enacted legislation that provided $20 billion in federal assistance to the states--$10 billion for Medicaid and $10 billion for general revenue grants. Some of my colleagues have since questioned the benefit of this type of federal assistance to the States. They have charged that the relief was not stimulative and that states did not use the additional resources appropriately. Well, I encourage my colleagues to take a very careful look at the facts. When you analyze all the available data on the $20 billion fiscal relief package enacted last year, only one logical conclusion can be reached--during the worst stages of the economic downturn, when many Americans lost their jobs, states were able to step up and fill major gaps in programs and services because they had the benefit of federal fiscal relief. My home state of West Virginia used the $125 million it received in federal assistance to resolve budget shortfalls and prevent cuts in Medicaid. That was the goal of our efforts all along--to reduce state budget deficits and prevent cuts to critical programs and services--and states used this temporary assistance as it was intended. In West Virginia and States across the country, fiscal relief strengthened state economies and protected our most vulnerable citizens by helping to reduce the massive spending cuts and tax increases states would otherwise have had to make. The Medicaid portion of fiscal relief was particularly important in helping to stabilize State budgets. As many of my colleagues are aware, Medicaid spending provides a critical form of economic stimulus in addition to delivering essential health services to our most vulnerable citizens. The Medicaid program supports jobs in every state. It helps keep hospitals and nursing homes operating in our communities. Every dollar invested in Medicaid results in an almost three-fold return in state economic benefit. In January, the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured released a study which confirms that, because of the timeliness of the Medicaid assistance, all fifty states were able to maintain their Medicaid eligibility levels. This means that access to critical health services and programs for pregnant women, children, the elderly, and workers who lost their jobs and employer-sponsored health coverage was preserved. Without these increased Medicaid payments to States, the number of uninsured Americans would have been far greater over the past several years. Unfortunately, when we passed fiscal relief last year, we did not include appropriate safeguards to make sure this Federal assistance would remain available to States if the economic downturn lasted longer than anticipated. Many who supported the $20 billion fiscal relief package hoped the economy would rebound quickly and that federal assistance to the States would not be necessary beyond fiscal year 2004. Well, the fact of the matter is that the economy remains weak, and fiscal relief is still necessary. While states are beginning to report stronger revenue growth, it is clear they are not out of the woods yet. State revenues are still far below pre-recession levels and are growing at a sluggish pace. In April, the National Conference of State Legislatures reported that states are struggling with an aggregate budget deficit of $36 billion going into fiscal year 2005. Eliminating fiscal relief now will deal a serious blow to the states as they struggle to climb out of the economic downturn. To remedy this problem, the bill we are introducing today provides $4.8 billion over 15 months to help states maintain the coverage they are currently providing through Medicaid. This additional funding, which is still temporary, will finish the job we started last year. It will help states weather the entirety of the economic downturn without having to cut vital programs and services for low-income women, children, and seniors. While I would have liked to have incorporated even more money for enhanced Medicaid payments to states, I recognize the federal budget realities currently before us. The $4.8 billion included in our bill represents a workable phase-down transition from the $10 billion states received last year, and I know it will go a long way to preserve health care coverage for Medicaid beneficiaries during this ongoing recession. In addition to providing $4.8 billion for Medicaid, our bill also reimburses states for the $1.2 billion in net costs they will incur in fiscal years 2004, 2005, and 2006 as a result of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act. As I stated when I voted against this bill, the Medicare Modernization Act has several major flaws that must be addressed. One such flaw is the fact that the new law undermines state revenues in the midst of their efforts to rebuild their economies. The State Fiscal Relief Act will correct that mistake. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation and to stand up for the millions of Americans who are working at low-wage jobs, who benefit from the numerous public programs and services that fiscal relief has helped to maintain, and who are in the process of reinvigorating our economy.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, a good friend of ours, Ambassador C. J. (Chien-Jen) Chen, will soon be leaving Washington, DC, after having served for nearly 4 years as Taiwan's principal representative. We are going to miss him very much. C. J. brought a wealth of experience to his job. He was first assigned to Washington, DC in 1971, and he spent most of his distinguished 37-year career promoting good relations between Taiwan and the United States. Over the years, he won many friends for himself and for his country. An eloquent speaker and polished diplomat, C. J. also has a reputation for being a ``straight shooter.'' He was always prepared to provide an informed, balanced, and fair opinion on the complex relationship between Taiwan and the United States as well as the broad range of political, economic, cultural and other issues of common interest to our two countries. Owing in large part to his efforts, much progress has been made on these issues. During his most recent assignment in Washington, with U.S. support, Taiwan has acceded to the World Trade Organization and become our eighth largest trading partner. At the same time, Taiwan has also contributed greatly to U.S.-led international humanitarian efforts in places such as Afghanistan and Iraq, and it has cooperated with the United States in fighting proliferation, terrorism, and money laundering in Asia. All these matters required intensive communication and coordination, and we were lucky to have someone like C. J. in place to lead the way. One of the most notable and likeable things about C. J. is his inexhaustible optimism. While the U.S.-Taiwan relationship has certainly experienced its fair share of twists and turns, ups and downs, as C. J. will surely attest, he has always remained consistently upbeat. His confidence is contagious, and I agree wholeheartedly with his observation, that Taiwan and the United States, united by shared values and common interests, will continue to work closely together, not only for their mutual benefit but also for the sake of lasting peace and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific. Now, after having served as his chief representative in the United States, as his country's foreign minister, as member of Taiwan's Legislative Yuan, and as a university professor, this man of extraordinary talent and vision is leaving Washington, DC. While he will be sorely missed, I am certain that he has established an admirable legacy of friendship, trust, and cooperation that will long endure.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Madam President, I would like to take a moment to recognize the beautiful State which I am proud to call my home, West Virginia. Yesterday, June 20, was truly a day to celebrate our great State. One hundred and forty one years ago, West Virginia became the 35th State to join our Nation. West Virginia's travel slogan ``Wild and Wonderful'' captures the essence of West Virginia's terrain. In reference to the spirit of our landscape abundant with roaming rivers and dense forests, the early settlers created the state motto: ``Mountaineers are always free.'' To this day, West Virginia remains known for its breathtaking natural beauty. It is a growing destination for people from around the world interested in hiking, mountain biking, hunting, fishing, white water rafting, skiing, golf, and many other outdoor activities which take advantage of the natural beauty of the West Virginia hills. Visitors to the State are often impressed by our sweeping vistas, mountainous terrain, and undisturbed wilderness. Much of our beauty is preserved for the ages in several world class National and State Parks. While the landscape of the Mountain State is inspiring, it is the people of West Virginia who truly encapsulate the majesty and spirit of our State. Over the last 141 years, many different people have called West Virginia home. Native Americans came here for our rich hunting grounds. Civil War soldiers fought many battles on our land, diverse waves of immigrants worked in our thriving industries of glass, coal, steel, wood products, oil and the railroad. We have come so far over the last 141 years, and yet we maintain the same sense of pride in our culture, people, and rolling West Virginia hills. These historical influences helped to diversify our population and create the vibrant culture we enjoy today. West Virginia culture is famous for its pottery, glass, history, stories, and in particular, its music. This music, including bluegrass, ballads and gospel songs, has a special tie to our culture and our people, telling of our history and our industry. Aside from what we produce, it is who we are that makes West Virginia a place of which to be proud. We are a hard-working people, creative and sincere. The fervent, spirited people of West Virginia invigorate all aspects of the greater American society and culture. With the world turning to a newer high technology economy, West Virginia remains at the forefront with its strong contributions to biometrics through its growing network of biometrics companies, government agencies and universities. While West Virginia contributes in the global economy, our traditional industries of coal, steel, timber, and chemicals continue proudly as the base of our economy. Some of our finest academic institutions offer strong programs in engineering, physics and medicine, which contribute to our growing success in new fields such as biometrics technology and development. Also, with the ever-expanding broadband internet, more West Virginians are joining the internet community. Particularly in the classroom, the presence of high-speed internet is keeping West Virginian students worldly and capable in this age of technology. Now, as we stand at the gateway of the 21st Century, I am honored to recognize West Virginia's 141st birthday, and I am enormously proud to be a West Virginian.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, on this 3rd day of June, in the year 2004, I am honored to commemorate the 250th birthday of Hampshire County. This historically and culturally rich county showcases the best of West Virginia, and I am very proud to represent the citizens of this great county. Hampshire County has a vibrant history beginning in the early 1700s, when tradesmen and hunters eager to begin a new life settled in the beautiful wilderness. Settlers, such as John and Job Pearsall, built houses in the area that would become known as Romney which has served as the county seat since 1762--some 200-plus years, which is longer than Washington, DC has served as our capital city. The history of Hampshire County encompasses many of the great conflicts in our Nation's early history. It was the turmoil of the French and Indian War that prevented official organization of the county in 1757, despite actual creation several years earlier. In 1794, men from Hampshire County serving under GEN Daniel Morgan took part in overcoming the Whiskey Rebellion. These brave men volunteered to quell the rebellion. The county also endured the Civil War, and was frequently occupied by either Confederate or Union Armies. In fact, according to surviving records, Romney changed hands at least 56 times which is more frequently than any other city during the Civil War except for Winchester, VA. Only a few years later, in 1870, Hampshire County became home to the State School for the Deaf and Blind through the efforts of Professor H.H. Johnson. The Romney Literary Society donated several buildings and land for the school, which was crucial to the decision regarding the school's location in Romney. The school now serves over 275 students on the 40-acre campus, and plays an integral role in the community. Today, Hampshire County continues to be a great asset to the State of West Virginia and our country. Hampshire County remains a pristine example of West Virginia's natural beauty. Its many rivers and streams flow through the county and provide residents and visitors alike with recreational and fishing opportunities. An area along the South Branch of the Potomac River, known as the Trough, is visited frequently by those hoping to view the bald eagles that occupy the area. Ice Mountain is another excellent location to observe eagles and the beautiful West Virginia scenery viewed from its peak. Ice Mountain contains small caves where ice can be found throughout the hot summer days. Hampshire County is a fine example of all West Virginia has to offer--its sense of history and culture, its fine citizens, and its natural beauty. Since its beginning, courageous settlers, who returned time and again to Hampshire County, laid the foundation that is now a well-known trait of all West Virginians--loyalty to the State they love. I am proud to recognize Hampshire County, WV, on its 250th anniversary.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, we hold many nomination hearings in this committee, and we say many things about the nominees, usually in praise of them, but at times questioning them. This nomination is a personal one for many of us, as we have all watched Debbie work tirelessly on behalf of us and our constituents. Before I discuss all of the reasons that Debbie is absolutely the right person for this position, I want to proudly state she is a West Virginian. Both of her parents were raised in Roane County, WV. In addition, she has many proud relatives in Spencer and Charleston, WV. I know that the people of West Virginia share my pride in all of Debbie's accomplishments. Before coming to the Senate Commerce Committee, Debbie worked for then Congressman Wise of West Virginia in many capacities, including chief of staff. Governor Wise called me to support her nomination, and we wholeheartedly agreed that there was no better person for the job. Debbie has spent a career for the people of West Virginia, and I know the entire country will benefit from her presence on the National Transportation Safety Board. Each of us has had to call on the National Transportation Safety Board, or watched on CNN, the work that they do in sifting through a disaster site and in dealing with family members following an aviation tragedy. We rely on their independence to provide Congress and the transportation regulatory agencies recommendations to improve safety. It is a critical role that they play, and one divorced from politics and partisanship. The National Transportation Safety Board deals with situations where tragedies affect many people and that makes it all the more important that we select someone with both the technical knowledge to contribute to the board's work and the human compassion needed in the context of these tragedies. Debbie melds these two important requirements in a particularly special manner. Each Board member is an independent source of knowledge and information. While the Board votes on matters, and we hope that all agree on the safety recommendations, each is charged with independently making a decision based on the facts and analysis of its expert staff. A small agency, with some 429 employees, its expertise and knowledge is recognized around the world. Debbie, who has worked on this committee for 5 years, has worked with all of us on transportation safety and regulatory issues, using her expertise and talents to push for improvements. Her primary focus has been surface transportation, but I know that she has spent a considerable amount of time on aviation safety issues, and helped with aviation security matters following 9/11. I know she worked on the highway bill while a House staff member, and that knowledge will help her in her new position. Her talents, wit, charm and expertise will be sorely missed. I wish her the best of luck in her new position, and while none of us hope to see her about a tragedy in our states, we know that whatever the situation, the NTSB will be in good hands with Debbie there.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, Memorial Day is always a time for our country to gratefully remember the brave men and women and their families who risked their lives in defense of our country and our fundamental American values. This year is a special time because we will dedicate a long awaited national memorial for the 16 million men and women who fought in World War II, including the 400,000 Americans who paid the ultimate sacrifice for their country during the war. Almost 234,000 West Virginians served in World War II. At that time, it was 36 percent of the Mountain State's male population, and that was the fourth highest participation rate in the country. They deserve this national tribute. Indeed it is long past due. There are 4 million living World War II veterans who should be proud and honored this Memorial Day. The families of veterans who are no longer with us should take pride to remember the sacrifice of their loved ones, and share those stories with relatives and friends. Such memories are important to pass down to the next generation who can take inspiration from the ordeals and triumphs of their own family members who were part of our ``Greatest Generation.'' The World War II Memorial which will be formally dedicated on May 29th is the end result of an almost 20-year fight. I am honored that I was able to cast a vote to help complete it. It will be an enduring, poignant reminder of the tens of thousands of individual and collective instances of leadership and sacrifice during World War II Today that tradition of leadership and sacrifice continues as so many Americans, including scores of West Virginians serve in the Armed Forces, the National Guard and Army Reserves. Each member of the military, wherever they are stationed are defending our country and protecting American values, but we are especially mindful of our military personnel serving in regions of conflict like Iraq and Afghanistan. They are the new generation of West Virginia veterans who deserve our admiration and respect. As we celebrate Memorial Day Weekend, I hope we all take some time to remember what the holiday is truly about. This is a day designed to honor all the men and women who put their lives on the line to defend and protect the American way of life, from the beaches of Normandy to the deserts of Iraq. Their sacrifice deserves our eternal gratitude and support not just on Memorial Day, but every day.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, monumental achievements are the work of visionary people. On the celebratory occasion marking the opening of a new 100-mile section of the Hatfield-McCoy recreational trail in Wyoming County, it is important to take the time to honor the visionary behind this monumental accomplishment, the late O.L. ``Leff'' Moore. Leff Moore was one of the wisest men I have ever had the great pleasure of knowing, and I consider it an honor to call him my dear friend. I had a habit of calling him ``Uncle Leff''. He just had that affect on people. He had this unique way of encouraging and inspiring people to come together and do great work for their communities. It was rare to hear a negative word from Leff. He was an optimistic who truly thought ahead of his time. Leff was a driving force in the West Virginia Democratic Party, a life-long civil servant, and a tireless advocate for the safe operation of recreational vehicles. A deep love for the Mountain State ran through everything Leff did in his life, and his commitment to public service was evidenced by the numerous boards and committees he served on. His vision and leadership were widely respected in Putnam County, and his efforts contributed greatly to the area's growth and success. In recognition for his work, Leff was the only two-time recipient of the respected Putnam County Chamber of Commerce Mayo Lester Award. Born in 1943, the son of Orville L. Moore, Sr. and Margaret Peyton Moore, Leff graduated Winfield High School and West Virginia State College. He served as the executive director of the West Virginia Manufactured Housing Association for more than 30 years where he helped write the policies and set the laws that will govern safe housing practices in West Virginia for future generations. When his beloved Putnam County started growing rapidly in the 1970's, Leff's vision and determination led to the establishment of Putnam General Hospital, and planning measures brought public water and sewer to aid in the county's growth. Leff's most stunning success, though, may be the Hatfield-McCoy Regional Recreation Authority trail system in southern West Virginia, which is breathing to new life into an entire region's economy. Over a decade ago when many of us had no idea what ATV's were, Leff somehow knew how popular they would become and saw the potential of marrying ATV's to West Virginia's scenic beauty. With little more than a VHS tape of a Utah trail and his gift for articulating ideas in a way that excited people, he sold even the most skeptical on the benefits of a recreational trail that will eventually reach into Kentucky and Virginia. Southern West Virginia has already begun to feel the impact of Leff's vision for the trail as more and more out-of-State tourist dollars flow into the mountains of Mingo, Logan and Boone counties. During the last fiscal year, trail riders bought nearly $400,000 in trail permits, and this year, the Regional Recreation Authority expects that number to rise 25 to 31 percent. The average visitor who comes to take advantage of the Hatfield-McCoy trails spends between $250 and $500 during a 3- day stay. Even at a conservative estimate, that translates into nearly $1 million tourist dollars injected into the local economy every month. These visitors to Southern West Virginia stay in local hotels and eat at local restaurants, many of which have sprung up to feed the growing tourist trade. Leff's plan to stimulate the Southern West Virginia economy and showcase the beauty of the Mountain State has certainly been a resounding triumph thus far, and the potential for further expansion is limitless. The addition of this new section of trail brings the total system up to 500 miles across 4 different counties. I look forward to the day when Leff's original vision of over 2,000 miles of trails over all of Appalachia becomes a reality. Soon, I will participate in the grand opening of the Wyoming County section of the Trail, and I am very happy about what it will mean for the area. I am also proud of all the Wyoming County officials who worked so hard to make the Trail a reality, but there will be a deep sadness in my heart as I miss my friend Leff Moore. I am comforted, however, because I know that his passion and vision for the people of West Virginia will guarantee that he is never forgotten in the hearts of many communities. I know that as his vision continues to expand into a reality, the legacy of Leff Moore will live on for a long time in many positive ways for West Virginia.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am proud today to introduce the Community Security Act of 2004. This bill is intended to help prepare our Nation to cope with future disasters, as well as help the daily work of our first responders, by adequately training and equipping them, and by increasing Federal investments in relevant research and development. While much of the bill applies generally to all first responders, this legislation gives special emphasis to the role of volunteer first responders. As my colleagues surely know, volunteers make up a very significant portion of our Nation's fire service, as well as emergency medical personnel and, to a somewhat lesser degree, law enforcement. The role of volunteers is especially prominent in rural areas, such as in my State of West Virginia. Making certain that local governments can recruit and retain first responders, and that once serving, these dedicated men and women have the necessary tools, are essential factors in protecting our communities. Inspiration for much of this bill came from the West Virginia Summit on Homeland Security, which I hosted in November of last year, and from the numerous roundtable discussions I have had with my State's first responders since the terrorist attacks on our country on September 11, 2001. During the Summit and in the discussions that preceded it, first responders, educators, health officials, and local elected officials from around West Virginia provided me with thoughtful analysis of what works in Federal assistance programs, what doesn't, and what has been completely lacking. Although the President and Congress have made great strides in improving our homeland security, there are still gaping holes in our level of preparedness that must be filled. For the most part, the Federal Government is the only source of funding for this work; work that must be done. This legislation is based on what first responders have told me they need and is intended to address these needs. What was reiterated in meeting after meeting was that the gaps were many, and that additional State funding was unlikely. As almost every State in the Union faces budget shortfalls, I expect my colleagues have heard much the same thing. First responders and local politicians need to recruit and train volunteers; they need the Federal Government to help them supply these men and women with basic lifesaving and interoperable communication equipment; and they need help in fostering cooperation among not only the different professions within the first responder community, but between first responders and the education and social service communities. Many areas of concern were discussed and it became clear to me that no one program could address all of them. Instead of introducing a number of small bills, I've put together a package of legislation that contains several arguably unrelated provisions that have one thing in common--each is designed to improve homeland security at the local level. In West Virginia and across the Nation, the numbers of volunteer first responders have been dwindling due to a number of factors-- National Guard and Reserve call-ups and changing American lifestyles that leave little time for the serious commitment necessary to be a first responder. It is believed that many more people would volunteer, or would continue in their service as volunteers, if there were a way to carve out more time for the training involved. In addition to basic training, West Virginia and other states require additional training for first responders who choose to serve in units specializing in Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) response, or mitigation of biohazards and chemical releases. In fact, Secretary Ridge has cited West Virginia's homeland security plan, including development of highly trained Regional Response Teams, as an example for other States to follow. The problem is, earning the right to be part of one of these teams-- made up of the best of the best in their respective disciplines-- requires training that most volunteers, who are holding down full-time jobs in addition to their public service and family responsibilities, cannot find the time for, or in some cases, afford. For example, West Virginia's Regional Response Team members are required, within the first two years, to complete 200 hours of specialized training over and above what is already required in their roles as firefighters or EMTs. For many volunteer first responders, this time commitment is difficult to meet but, for those whose jurisdictions do not pay training costs, it is impossible to justify. To remedy this situation, this bill creates two tax incentives: a business credit to encourage small businesses to allow their volunteer first responder employees to take time off for training, and a personal deduction for the first responders themselves, when training and related expenses are not reimbursed by their State or local government. My conversations with West Virginia first responders and local officials have also taught me that even when a State is well prepared or, in the case of West Virginia, exceptionally prepared, gaps can still exist at the local level which put citizens at risk. Some local first responder units, especially those in rural areas, do not feel as prepared as they know they should be. For example, a recent report found that most fire departments across the country had only enough radios for one-half of the firefighters on a shift and breathing apparatuses for only one-third. Without these basics, these brave men and women are not adequately equipped to respond to a house fire and are at a serious disadvantage when responding to a critical incident. Similarly, some firehouses and police stations lack basic telecommunications equipment. I have been concerned for some time that many of our police departments in rural areas were operating without the crime-fighting tools at their disposal that computers and high- speed Internet connections offer. So, while I was not necessarily surprised, I was a little troubled that the lack of modern telecommunications equipment--computer hardware, Internet service and e-mail, and multiple phone and fax lines--was hampering the ability of fire departments and EMS units to serve their communities. Given the wealth of information available and the greater amounts of first responder work conducted over the Internet, these basic office tools are essential to guarantee the safety and protection of our citizens. For instance, where this equipment is available, some first responder training is now being done over the Internet, saving departments time and money. Rural firehouses are probably the ones least likely to have an Internet-accessible computer and are also the least likely to be able to fund a longer trip to a fire school. So, this legislation requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to assess the critical needs of a first responder unit, from personal safety equipment to office machines, and establishes a grant program to provide the basic equipment essential for carrying out the constantly expanding responsibilities of local first responders. The Secretary is to give emphasis to those departments most in need. These departments will often, but not always, be rural departments. The other areas I cover in this bill are a bit of a departure from standard measures to increase funding and provide better equipment for first responders. They are, I believe, no less important to the goal of improving the safety and security of our towns and cities. Again, my conversations with people on the front lines--in this instance teachers and academic experts on homeland security and mental health--inspired these provisions. Our communities have had to adjust to some new realities. Our schools find themselves thrust into a role in disaster preparedness and response that most educators never before considered. When I asked school personnel what was needed to improve the circumstance of schools in homeland security preparation, response, and mitigation efforts, I was surprised to hear their answer--mental health professionals in the schools and training for school staff in mental health issues. This bill works to address these community needs in two ways. First, in the unfortunate event that a school is the scene of a disaster, or is called upon to assist a community in response to a disaster elsewhere, this bill provides that community with a reimbursement mechanism for related expenses. Second, the bill creates a sustainable program to provide school-based mental health services to all students. I am convinced that having mental health professionals in schools to train students and faculty about disaster avoidance and preparation makes for safer, healthier schools and more stable communities. Our institutions of higher learning are already contributing to homeland security. The Department of Homeland Security has a program of university-based research, and this legislation proposes to expand it with a new research grant program to supplement the surprising dearth of research that has been conducted on human factors in homeland security, including first responder group dynamics, citizens' response to disasters, and the human factors behind preparation efforts. We know that a primary goal of terrorists is to disrupt social systems, and this social disruption is often more devastating to a community then the attack itself. I have actively supported both basic and applied scientific research throughout my Senate career, and I believe science should guide policy. This research grant program will fund research on how terrorism and the threat of terrorism impacts the average citizen, how the inevitable societal disruption can be mitigated, and will help guide disaster planning and optimize the performance of first responder units and the systems designed to assist them. Historically, some States have benefited more than others under traditional grant systems and in response to that situation, our leading science funding organizations have developed special programs to encourage the growth of research in under represented states. For example, the National Science Foundation designed the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research to support academic research and development across the nation and to counteract the trend that concentrated research expertise in a few states. This bill allows for a similar program to be developed within the Department of Homeland Security. Homeland security is regional and research and personnel expertise must be distributed around the country. Unfortunately, terrorist threats against the United States are not restricted to a single geographic area, terrorist group, or method of threat. Terrorism is possible in many parts of our country that have never had to prepare for, or respond to, such attacks. Addressing these threats requires regional and local expertise; thus the homeland security- related scientific and technological workforce and training must not be overly centralized. Our country has worked extraordinarily hard to prepare for disaster. The Local Preparation Act is designed to assist these preparation efforts by guaranteeing adequate numbers of first responders, providing them with the training and protection they need, and improving the safety and security of our communities. Local preparation is the bedrock of our state-wide and national efforts. I firmly believe these goals will be achieved through the innovative programs contained in this bill. I want to thank Summit participants as well as the men and women who have taken time out of their busy schedules to help work through the best way to design these new programs. Also, I want to thank first responders, both volunteer and career. After all, they are the original inspiration for this bill. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am proud today to introduce the Community Security Act of 2004. This bill is intended to help prepare our Nation to cope with future disasters, as well as help the daily work of our first responders, by adequately training and equipping them, and by increasing Federal investments in relevant research and development. While much of the bill applies generally to all first responders, this legislation gives special emphasis to the role of volunteer first responders. As my colleagues surely know, volunteers make up a very significant portion of our Nation's fire service, as well as emergency medical personnel and, to a somewhat lesser degree, law enforcement. The role of volunteers is especially prominent in rural areas, such as in my State of West Virginia. Making certain that local governments can recruit and retain first responders, and that once serving, these dedicated men and women have the necessary tools, are essential factors in protecting our communities. Inspiration for much of this bill came from the West Virginia Summit on Homeland Security, which I hosted in November of last year, and from the numerous roundtable discussions I have had with my State's first responders since the terrorist attacks on our country on September 11, 2001. During the Summit and in the discussions that preceded it, first responders, educators, health officials, and local elected officials from around West Virginia provided me with thoughtful analysis of what works in Federal assistance programs, what doesn't, and what has been completely lacking. Although the President and Congress have made great strides in improving our homeland security, there are still gaping holes in our level of preparedness that must be filled. For the most part, the Federal Government is the only source of funding for this work; work that must be done. This legislation is based on what first responders have told me they need and is intended to address these needs. What was reiterated in meeting after meeting was that the gaps were many, and that additional State funding was unlikely. As almost every State in the Union faces budget shortfalls, I expect my colleagues have heard much the same thing. First responders and local politicians need to recruit and train volunteers; they need the Federal Government to help them supply these men and women with basic lifesaving and interoperable communication equipment; and they need help in fostering cooperation among not only the different professions within the first responder community, but between first responders and the education and social service communities. Many areas of concern were discussed and it became clear to me that no one program could address all of them. Instead of introducing a number of small bills, I've put together a package of legislation that contains several arguably unrelated provisions that have one thing in common--each is designed to improve homeland security at the local level. In West Virginia and across the Nation, the numbers of volunteer first responders have been dwindling due to a number of factors-- National Guard and Reserve call-ups and changing American lifestyles that leave little time for the serious commitment necessary to be a first responder. It is believed that many more people would volunteer, or would continue in their service as volunteers, if there were a way to carve out more time for the training involved. In addition to basic training, West Virginia and other states require additional training for first responders who choose to serve in units specializing in Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) response, or mitigation of biohazards and chemical releases. In fact, Secretary Ridge has cited West Virginia's homeland security plan, including development of highly trained Regional Response Teams, as an example for other States to follow. The problem is, earning the right to be part of one of these teams-- made up of the best of the best in their respective disciplines-- requires training that most volunteers, who are holding down full-time jobs in addition to their public service and family responsibilities, cannot find the time for, or in some cases, afford. For example, West Virginia's Regional Response Team members are required, within the first two years, to complete 200 hours of specialized training over and above what is already required in their roles as firefighters or EMTs. For many volunteer first responders, this time commitment is difficult to meet but, for those whose jurisdictions do not pay training costs, it is impossible to justify. To remedy this situation, this bill creates two tax incentives: a business credit to encourage small businesses to allow their volunteer first responder employees to take time off for training, and a personal deduction for the first responders themselves, when training and related expenses are not reimbursed by their State or local government. My conversations with West Virginia first responders and local officials have also taught me that even when a State is well prepared or, in the case of West Virginia, exceptionally prepared, gaps can still exist at the local level which put citizens at risk. Some local first responder units, especially those in rural areas, do not feel as prepared as they know they should be. For example, a recent report found that most fire departments across the country had only enough radios for one-half of the firefighters on a shift and breathing apparatuses for only one-third. Without these basics, these brave men and women are not adequately equipped to respond to a house fire and are at a serious disadvantage when responding to a critical incident. Similarly, some firehouses and police stations lack basic telecommunications equipment. I have been concerned for some time that many of our police departments in rural areas were operating without the crime-fighting tools at their disposal that computers and high- speed Internet connections offer. So, while I was not necessarily surprised, I was a little troubled that the lack of modern telecommunications equipment--computer hardware, Internet service and e-mail, and multiple phone and fax lines--was hampering the ability of fire departments and EMS units to serve their communities. Given the wealth of information available and the greater amounts of first responder work conducted over the Internet, these basic office tools are essential to guarantee the safety and protection of our citizens. For instance, where this equipment is available, some first responder training is now being done over the Internet, saving departments time and money. Rural firehouses are probably the ones least likely to have an Internet-accessible computer and are also the least likely to be able to fund a longer trip to a fire school. So, this legislation requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to assess the critical needs of a first responder unit, from personal safety equipment to office machines, and establishes a grant program to provide the basic equipment essential for carrying out the constantly expanding responsibilities of local first responders. The Secretary is to give emphasis to those departments most in need. These departments will often, but not always, be rural departments. The other areas I cover in this bill are a bit of a departure from standard measures to increase funding and provide better equipment for first responders. They are, I believe, no less important to the goal of improving the safety and security of our towns and cities. Again, my conversations with people on the front lines--in this instance teachers and academic experts on homeland security and mental health--inspired these provisions. Our communities have had to adjust to some new realities. Our schools find themselves thrust into a role in disaster preparedness and response that most educators never before considered. When I asked school personnel what was needed to improve the circumstance of schools in homeland security preparation, response, and mitigation efforts, I was surprised to hear their answer--mental health professionals in the schools and training for school staff in mental health issues. This bill works to address these community needs in two ways. First, in the unfortunate event that a school is the scene of a disaster, or is called upon to assist a community in response to a disaster elsewhere, this bill provides that community with a reimbursement mechanism for related expenses. Second, the bill creates a sustainable program to provide school-based mental health services to all students. I am convinced that having mental health professionals in schools to train students and faculty about disaster avoidance and preparation makes for safer, healthier schools and more stable communities. Our institutions of higher learning are already contributing to homeland security. The Department of Homeland Security has a program of university-based research, and this legislation proposes to expand it with a new research grant program to supplement the surprising dearth of research that has been conducted on human factors in homeland security, including first responder group dynamics, citizens' response to disasters, and the human factors behind preparation efforts. We know that a primary goal of terrorists is to disrupt social systems, and this social disruption is often more devastating to a community then the attack itself. I have actively supported both basic and applied scientific research throughout my Senate career, and I believe science should guide policy. This research grant program will fund research on how terrorism and the threat of terrorism impacts the average citizen, how the inevitable societal disruption can be mitigated, and will help guide disaster planning and optimize the performance of first responder units and the systems designed to assist them. Historically, some States have benefited more than others under traditional grant systems and in response to that situation, our leading science funding organizations have developed special programs to encourage the growth of research in under represented states. For example, the National Science Foundation designed the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research to support academic research and development across the nation and to counteract the trend that concentrated research expertise in a few states. This bill allows for a similar program to be developed within the Department of Homeland Security. Homeland security is regional and research and personnel expertise must be distributed around the country. Unfortunately, terrorist threats against the United States are not restricted to a single geographic area, terrorist group, or method of threat. Terrorism is possible in many parts of our country that have never had to prepare for, or respond to, such attacks. Addressing these threats requires regional and local expertise; thus the homeland security- related scientific and technological workforce and training must not be overly centralized. Our country has worked extraordinarily hard to prepare for disaster. The Local Preparation Act is designed to assist these preparation efforts by guaranteeing adequate numbers of first responders, providing them with the training and protection they need, and improving the safety and security of our communities. Local preparation is the bedrock of our state-wide and national efforts. I firmly believe these goals will be achieved through the innovative programs contained in this bill. I want to thank Summit participants as well as the men and women who have taken time out of their busy schedules to help work through the best way to design these new programs. Also, I want to thank first responders, both volunteer and career. After all, they are the original inspiration for this bill. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, it is my pleasure today to join with 25 of my colleagues in calling on the President to delay scheduled deposits to our Nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), and to release some of the crude currently there to alleviate our current record-high gasoline prices. It is important for families in West Virginia and across the country to have affordable gasoline, and it is crucial that our economy not be dragged down further by spiraling inflation fueled by high prices at the pump. It has been more than a month since I joined with many of the same Senators who have cosponsored this resolution in a letter to the President calling on him to help reduce skyrocketing gasoline prices by putting further deliveries of petroleum into the marketplace instead of the national reserve. Since then, crude oil prices have reached a thirteen-year high of nearly $42 per barrel, which has led to a rise in the price of gasoline to $2.01 a gallon nationally. This is more than 50 cents higher than a year ago. The burden of high gas prices is being felt by all Americans, and is eating away at any ``relief'' the Bush tax cuts may have promised. West Virginia has little or no public transportation, so for most West Virginians the family car is the only lifeline to jobs, school, shopping, and healthcare. The relatively long distances and unforgiving topography that West Virginians have to travel in the normal course of their lives makes an increase of just a few cents at the pump a crushing blow to withstand. Today, from Beckley to Martinsburg, West Virginians can expect to pay close to, or in most cases, well over $2 per gallon. In East Lynn, WV they are paying $2.19 a gallon; in Morgantown they're paying $2.11 a gallon; and in Ripley, my constituents are lucky to find gas going for $2.05 a gallon. In 2003, 56 percent of West Virginians received less than $100 from the 2003 tax bill. This ``relief'' is offset greatly by the current trend in gas prices. The current price spikes mean that the majority of West Virginians will end up spending at least three times as much buying gasoline than in any tax return they will have received. And it is not just short-term affects, or the concerns of our constituents that we have to contend with, but long term consequences as well. On May 12, the International Energy Agency (IEA) released a study stating that higher oil prices have hurt the global economy and will further depress economic growth, fuel inflation, and increase unemployment over the next 2 years if the prices stay near current levels. Knowing all of this, the Bush administration has yet to even address the explosion of high gasoline prices here at home. In fact, Scott McClellan, the White House Press Secretary said today that ``We will continue to do what we've been doing that is to stay in close contact with producers around the world to urge them not to take action that would harm our economy or hurt consumers here in America.'' This means that the administration is content with the status quo and in doing more of the same. That is why I stand with my colleagues in agreement with this resolution on our Nation's oil reserves. This resolution does three things: one) It asks the President to confront OPEC directly; two) it asks the President to have the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission exercise vigorous oversight over the oil markets to protect the American people from price gouging; and three) it asks the President to suspend deliveries of oil to the SPR and release a million barrels of oil per day from the SPR for 30 days following the adoption of this resolution. All of these actions would go a long way in reducing the burden of high gasoline prices on all Americans. We have faced similar circumstances before and taken action. Four years ago, President Clinton halted deposits to the national reserve and that action lowered the burden of high gasoline prices on the American people without compromising our country's stockpile of oil. The current administration needs to be engaged. It needs to take a role and provide leadership at a time when West Virginians and all Americans are feeling a pinch at that pump.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am proud today to cosponsor S. 2411, the Assistance to Firefighters Act of 2004. This legislation, introduced by my colleagues Senators Dodd and DeWine, would reauthorize the FIRE Act grant program through 2010, as well as make a number of improvements to the existing program. This legislation will improve the ability of firefighters across to the country to do their jobs more safely and effectively. Four years ago, I was proud to be an original cosponsor of the Firefighter Investment and Response Enhancement (FIRE) Act, which has generated nearly $2 billion in grants since the program was enacted. It has provided critical dollars enabling fire departments to pay for the purchase of new equipment, to better train their personnel, and to establish fire prevention campaigns. Although this is a notable step forward, in West Virginia, and throughout the country, fire departments remain seriously underfunded. I hope my colleagues will agree that much more needs to be done before we can feel comfortable about the level of preparedness of our firefighters. In West Virginia, almost every single one of our approximately 460 fire departments is undermanned and without the necessary equipment they need to do their jobs. I worry, as I'm sure many of my colleagues do, that communities could find themselves in the unacceptable position of being ill-prepared to respond to an emergency. Very few towns and cities in West Virginia can afford to hire and train more firefighters, or to purchase new firefighting equipment without additional Federal assistance. I will bet most of my colleagues would be surprised at the number of volunteers who currently make up the majority of our Nation's fire service. Volunteers compose nearly 75 percent of all firefighters nationwide. That percentage is much higher in rural States like West Virginia, where 95 percent of our firefighting personnel are volunteers. We rely on firefighters in most communities to assist us not only to put out fires, but also in cases of natural disasters, car accidents, hazardous material spills, and this mostly volunteer fire service would be called upon to respond to any acts of terrorism that might occur. Additional firefighters are needed, as well as an immediate infusion of new and better equipment so that they can do their jobs more effectively. Currently there are not enough portable radios or breathing apparatus equipment, and many departments lack the resources needed for proper vehicle maintenance. Reauthorizing the FIRE Act grant program will allow fire departments to hire more full-time personnel and further alleviate the costs of maintaining up-to-date equipment and training. After 4 years, there are many facets of the program that need updating to reflect the learning process both Congress and the Fire Service we have undergone. This bill would make several improvements to the existing law that reflect the changing nature of the world we live in today and acknowledge that there are better and more efficient ways to administer the program. The measure would align the FIRE Act with new standards in Federal emergency management put in place since the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. It also lowers the matching funds requirement by a third for fire departments serving communities of 50,000 residents, and cut requirements in half for communities of 20,000 people or fewer, in order to lessen current budget strains. It would also open up funding to nonprofit Emergency Medical Service units not affiliated with fire departments. Right now, only EMS units attached to fire departments are eligible for funding. This provision in particular will improve the safety and security of West Virginians, where many of our EJMS units are independent of the local fire department. I agree with the statements that have been made by virtually every Member of Congress that the world we live in today sits in stark contrast to that of the one we knew prior to the tragedies of September 11, 2001. Probably no group knows this better than the dedicated firefighters who place themselves in harm's way every time they respond to a call. Fortunately, we have an opportunity here to demonstrate that we recognize the importance of the work these firefighters do, and help them to protect us by quickly enacting this bill. The Assistance to Firefighters Act of 2004 would translate directly into saved lives and will increase the safety of West Virginians and Americans in communities across this country. I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am extremely pleased at the progress that the Senate has made this week on the legislation before us, known as the JOBS Act. Like most of my colleagues, I support this bill, because I believe that Congress must respond to the increasingly difficult competitive position of our manufacturing industry. I urge my colleagues to continue working on this bill, debate and vote on the relatively few remaining amendments, and then pass this bill. For generations, American manufacturing has been a tremendous source of pride and a ladder to the middle class. Unfortunately, over the last 3 years, the manufacturing sector of our economy has suffered disproportionately and millions of good jobs have been lost. Tomorrow the Labor Department will announce new statistics on employment for the month of April. I understand that many experts expect tomorrow's news to be positive. And certainly, we were all very glad to hear that 308,000 jobs had been created in March. A couple months of strong job growth should not lull this Congress into believing that the manufacturing sector is enjoying a healthy recovery. Indeed, in March no new manufacturing jobs were created at all. Nationwide almost 3 million manufacturing jobs have been lost since January 2001. In my home State of West Virginia, more than 10,000 manufacturing jobs have disappeared in that time. Regardless of tomorrow's news, this Congress must stay focused on the task at hand. We must eliminate the European tariffs that are currently imposed on many of our goods, and we must enact a fair tax policy that will shore up our manufacturing base. The JOBS Act is accomplishes these goals. The JOBS Act repeals the foreign sales corporation/extraterritorial income provisions in our current tax code in order to comply with the ruling of the World Trade Organization. Regardless of whether I agree with the obligations that the WTO has ascribed to the U.S., I believe that Congress must act quickly to resolve this impasse and restore good trade relations with Europe. Because repealing these provisions would impose a new tax burden on American manufacturers just at a time when they are already struggling to compete globally, the JOBS Act would create a new deduction for our manufacturers to reduce the cost of doing business in the U.S. In that regard, this legislation is very similar to a bill I introduced last year, the Security America's Factory Employment Act. I know that many of the CEOs in my home state find it difficult to offer good wages, provide health insurance and retirement benefits, pay taxes, and still make a reasonable profit. Passing the JOBS Act will dramatically reduce the tax burden these businesses face, helping them succeed and grow. Indeed, while the name of this legislation is certainly awkward, the Jumpstart Our Business Strengths Act, the acronym JOBS is fitting. There are a number of very promising provisions in this bill that can offer hope to struggling businesses and the millions of Americans looking for work. In addition to lowering the tax rate on domestic manufacturing operations, this bill extends valuable tax provisions on which American companies depend. For example, this legislation would improve and extend the research and development tax credit. By spurring investment in innovation this tax credit helps our companies stay competitive and helps keep exciting, well paid jobs in the U.S. The bill also extends tax incentives for the hiring of those who might otherwise depend on public assistance. The work opportunities tax credit and the welfare to work tax credit have been extraordinarily successful, and Congress should ensure that businesses can continue to use them. I am also very pleased to have worked with my colleagues to provide assistance to companies that are subject to alternative minimum tax obligations by enabling them to take advantage of the legitimate tax benefits of bonus depreciation and general business credits even if their AMT liability would otherwise prevent such benefits. While I wish we could have made this provision even more substantial, this assistance creates incentives for companies to invest in new projects and purchase new equipment in--other words, it helps those companies contribute to our economic recovery. Another key to our Nation's economic vitality is technological development and deployment. When the Senate Finance Committee considered the JOBS Act last fall, I was very pleased that the committee accepted my amendment to provide tax incentives for the deployment of cutting edge broadband technology. The United States currently ranks eleventh in the world in broadband availability. Millions of Americans, especially in rural areas, do not have access to broadband. We must remedy this situation so that everyone can benefit from activities such as telemedicine, telecommuting, and distance learning. Widespread broadband technology is critical to increasing our productivity and keeping America competitive with nations that offer technology-savvy workforces. I thank my colleagues who have worked with me to include the broadband tax incentives in this legislation, and I look forward to getting these provisions enacted this year. I am gratified also that the managers of this bill and the leaders on both sides of the aisle have seen their way to including the energy tax provisions that many of us in the Senate have been working to enact for many years. In particular, I am happy to see the Senate working to pass, once again, meaningful incentives to promote the development of clean coal technologies and the expanded development of oil and gas from nonconventional sources. These particular incentives are crucial to meeting our Nation's future energy needs, and I cannot emphasize adequately how important they are to my state of West Virginia. As the high price of gasoline at the pump continues to set new records, the inclusion of new incentives for the use of alternative fuels and the vehicles that use them are especially timely. I am proud to have worked for many years with a bipartisan group of Senators on these provisions, and I join them in hoping our action on the JOBS Act will lead, finally, to their enactment. I have been a long-time advocate for a responsible energy policy for this nation. I am frustrated that the current political mindset of some in the House leadership prevents us from getting a final comprehensive bill that can pass the Senate. Still, I am pleased that the Senate has again demonstrated with these tax provisions, including important incentives for energy efficiency and conservation, the genuine bipartisan consensus the country needs to secure our energy supply and lessen our dependence on foreign sources of energy. Because of the many important provisions I have described, I am looking forward to supporting this bill. As can be said about almost all legislation, this bill is not perfect. Rather it is the result of compromises. I was very disappointed that my colleagues did not agree to add Trade Adjustment Assistance for service workers or to improve the health care tax credit available to workers who lose their job as a result of our trade policies. In addition, I do not believe it is good policy to allow companies who have deliberately avoided U.S. taxes by keeping their profits overseas to now enjoy a tax break on repatriated income. Yet, on balance, this legislation will be beneficial for our manufacturing companies and our economy as a whole. We have made substantial progress this week. I look forward to voting on the few remaining amendments, including a very worthy proposal to extend unemployment benefits for those workers who have been hardest hit in this economy. I urge my colleagues to continue to make progress on this legislation and work with our counterparts in the House of Representatives so that we can send this to the President.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I would like to enter into a colloquy with my good friend, Senator Baucus, regarding the economic substance provision of the Jumpstart Our Business Strength, JOBS Act, S. 1637. I ask my colleague to explain what, if any, impact the codification of economic substance doctrine would have on the new markets tax credit. As my colleague knows, the new markets tax credit, NMTC, was signed into law in 2000 and is the largest Federal economic development initiative to be authorized in 15 years. The credit promises to spur some $15 billion in new private sector investment in economic development activity in poor communities throughout the country. The idea behind the credit is that there are good viable business and economic development opportunities in poor communities that lack access to capital. The NMTC is designed to address this capital gap by providing the incentive of a Federal tax credit to individuals or corporations that invest in Community Development Entities, CDEs, working in these communities. While many of the businesses that receive financing through the credit will present good business opportunities, it is possible that some projects, because of their market, will present only limited economic return on top of the credit. In many cases, the investor's chief incentive will be the tax benefit available through the new markets tax credit. There is some concern among investors and potential NMTC investors that legislation crafted to codify the economic substance doctrine and curtail transactions that are simply motivated by tax incentives would apply to and have negative impact on the NMTC. With $2.5 billion in new markets tax credits having been allocated to CDEs around the country and another $3.5 billion expected to be awarded within the next several months, it is critical that the investor markets get some clarification on this issue. The NMTC holds great promise for communities throughout West Virginia where economic revitalization and business development are sorely needed. It is my understanding that the economic substance doctrine contained in S. 1637 does not apply and I would appreciate my colleague's comments on this issue.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that is intended to help the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) improve our Nation's aviation security system. All of us continue to have real concerns about our Nation's security given the threats that we face, and aviation continues to be a focus of those that want to do us harm. I, first, want to acknowledge the work of Senators McCain and Hollings. We all have spent a lot of time thinking about the problems of our aviation system, and the threats our country faces in today's environment. Their support and thoughts have enabled all of us to put together a better piece of legislation, and we share a common goal--a better, and more secure, aviation system. We began this process right after 9-11, but more needs to be done. Most of us understand that improvements have been made, but it has now been three years and we must complete the job. This bill, the Aviation Security Advancement Act, will move us further toward completion of this task. When terrorists hijacked airlines and used them as weapons of mass destruction against our nation, the American people saw firsthand that we were quite vulnerable to an unseen enemy, and that our way of life was threatened in a way it had never been before. National security immediately became the primary focus of our government, and many other private entities, as everyone understood that another failure of this magnitude would be a devastating blow to the country. In response to 9-11, Congress passed P.L. 107-71, the Aviation and Transportation Security Act or ATSA, which federalized the airport security screener workforce and required an expansive strengthening of aviation security in the U.S. As a frequent flier, I believe that the vast majority of travelers are confident in the new security regime and feel that we are much safer than we were under the system that existed before. This confidence is borne out through increasing passenger levels that are fast approaching those prior to the terror attacks in 2001. With an increased volume of passenger flow and aircraft traffic will come further challenges for aviation security. The Aviation Security Advancement Act is intended to help TSA foster a higher level of security than currently exists and focus on additional tasks that need to be addressed in this rapidly changing environment. Yet I continue to be completely frustrated by the progress we are making with respect to screener effectiveness. Testimony before our Committee, public reports and recent editorials, all tell us that we can not rest until the effectiveness of screeners is improved. In addition, new technologies need to be deployed to help them do their jobs. We can not spend billions of dollars on a system and have it barely measure up to pre-9-11 days. The Aviation Security Advancement Act takes needed steps to bolster aviation security and provides TSA the financial and physical support needed to close numerous loopholes in the current security regime. In response to the increasing use of aviation by the traveling public, this legislation standardizes the Federal screener workforce and requires TSA make efforts to improve the efficiency of passenger screening to insure individuals are processed in a faster, more secure manner. To address shortcomings in cargo security, the bill would overhaul all- cargo aviation security by implementing recommendations developed by the Aviation Security Advisory Committee and by funding a new grant program to pursue technological improvements that will help secure freight on all-cargo and passenger aircraft. The bill also seeks to increase the efficiency of baggage screening by funding capital security projects at airports across the country, while providing money for the research and development of advanced screening machines, and mandating a schedule for in-line placement of Explosive Detection Systems rather than various alternative means now practiced at many airports. In addition, the bill would mandate improvements to a number of other sectors of aviation security where I feel more needs to be done. Among these efforts would be increased support for the Federal Air Marshal program, airport perimeter security, and intelligence information sharing. It also authorizes funding for TSA to develop a biometric center of excellence to focus on definitive identification of travelers and employees which I believe could have a dramatic impact on the speed of passenger screening while providing greater security for the entire system. It is clear that we need to take more action to improve the security of our skies. The Aviation Security Advancement Act will be a big step in the right direction. I appreciate the support of Senators McCain and Hollings and urge my colleagues to co-sponsor the bill so that we can move it through the Committee quickly. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that is intended to help the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) improve our Nation's aviation security system. All of us continue to have real concerns about our Nation's security given the threats that we face, and aviation continues to be a focus of those that want to do us harm. I, first, want to acknowledge the work of Senators McCain and Hollings. We all have spent a lot of time thinking about the problems of our aviation system, and the threats our country faces in today's environment. Their support and thoughts have enabled all of us to put together a better piece of legislation, and we share a common goal--a better, and more secure, aviation system. We began this process right after 9-11, but more needs to be done. Most of us understand that improvements have been made, but it has now been three years and we must complete the job. This bill, the Aviation Security Advancement Act, will move us further toward completion of this task. When terrorists hijacked airlines and used them as weapons of mass destruction against our nation, the American people saw firsthand that we were quite vulnerable to an unseen enemy, and that our way of life was threatened in a way it had never been before. National security immediately became the primary focus of our government, and many other private entities, as everyone understood that another failure of this magnitude would be a devastating blow to the country. In response to 9-11, Congress passed P.L. 107-71, the Aviation and Transportation Security Act or ATSA, which federalized the airport security screener workforce and required an expansive strengthening of aviation security in the U.S. As a frequent flier, I believe that the vast majority of travelers are confident in the new security regime and feel that we are much safer than we were under the system that existed before. This confidence is borne out through increasing passenger levels that are fast approaching those prior to the terror attacks in 2001. With an increased volume of passenger flow and aircraft traffic will come further challenges for aviation security. The Aviation Security Advancement Act is intended to help TSA foster a higher level of security than currently exists and focus on additional tasks that need to be addressed in this rapidly changing environment. Yet I continue to be completely frustrated by the progress we are making with respect to screener effectiveness. Testimony before our Committee, public reports and recent editorials, all tell us that we can not rest until the effectiveness of screeners is improved. In addition, new technologies need to be deployed to help them do their jobs. We can not spend billions of dollars on a system and have it barely measure up to pre-9-11 days. The Aviation Security Advancement Act takes needed steps to bolster aviation security and provides TSA the financial and physical support needed to close numerous loopholes in the current security regime. In response to the increasing use of aviation by the traveling public, this legislation standardizes the Federal screener workforce and requires TSA make efforts to improve the efficiency of passenger screening to insure individuals are processed in a faster, more secure manner. To address shortcomings in cargo security, the bill would overhaul all- cargo aviation security by implementing recommendations developed by the Aviation Security Advisory Committee and by funding a new grant program to pursue technological improvements that will help secure freight on all-cargo and passenger aircraft. The bill also seeks to increase the efficiency of baggage screening by funding capital security projects at airports across the country, while providing money for the research and development of advanced screening machines, and mandating a schedule for in-line placement of Explosive Detection Systems rather than various alternative means now practiced at many airports. In addition, the bill would mandate improvements to a number of other sectors of aviation security where I feel more needs to be done. Among these efforts would be increased support for the Federal Air Marshal program, airport perimeter security, and intelligence information sharing. It also authorizes funding for TSA to develop a biometric center of excellence to focus on definitive identification of travelers and employees which I believe could have a dramatic impact on the speed of passenger screening while providing greater security for the entire system. It is clear that we need to take more action to improve the security of our skies. The Aviation Security Advancement Act will be a big step in the right direction. I appreciate the support of Senators McCain and Hollings and urge my colleagues to co-sponsor the bill so that we can move it through the Committee quickly. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, this afternoon I will vote to adopt the pension reform legislation before the Senate. However, I do so with serious reservations. The reforms in this bill are critical for both pension security and economic growth. Congress cannot allow April 15 to pass without updating the interest rate on which pension liabilities are based. As constructive as this legislation is, it is incomplete. This bill fails to address the needs of multi-employer pension plans. I will support the pension improvements we have before us today, but I will continue to fight for similar relief for the millions of employees who were left behind in this unfortunately partisan process. It is not an exaggeration to say that the bill before us today is critical. If the Senate fails to pass this legislation today, then next week businesses will be required to make contributions to their pension plans based on an outdated interest rate. If we require companies to make billions of dollars in overpayments to their pension plans, then we are hurting economic growth and ultimately undermining the plans. I do not want workers to lose their pension benefits, because their employers determined that they could not comply with unreasonable funding rules. This conference report also provides much needed relief from deficit reduction contributions (DRC), especially for airlines and steel companies. The grace period provided here does not diminish employers' obligations to fully meet the promises they have made to their workers. It simply provides some needed flexibility to help companies recover from the recent economic downturn. This relief is essential for the financial stability of the steel industry and the airline industry. Protecting the pensions of those workers while ensuring that their employers have the opportunity to strengthen their businesses has been one of my main priorities since this debate began. I am very pleased that the DRC relief was included in the final legislation. Mr. President, while there is much to support in this bill, there is also a gaping whole in the pension security we are providing to American workers. Almost 10 million workers, participants in multi- employer pension plans, were abandoned by the conference committee. Despite strong bipartisan support for multi-employer relief in the Senate, the White House insisted it be dropped from the bill. I cannot account for this insensitivity. Participants in multi-employer pension plans are typically lower wage, union workers who are employed by several small businesses over the course of their careers. To claim that these workers do not deserve the same pension security as other workers is unconscionable. When the Senate voted on its own version of pension relief which included multi-employer plans, it garnered 86 votes in favor. Senators were pleased to support a bill that is so important for businesses and workers all across this country. The process by which the conference committee flagrantly disregarded the interests of 86 Senators is another sad example of the partisan dysfunction that has come to characterize House-Senate conference committees. And it is a lesson that this Senator will not forget. So, Mr. President, today I will meet my responsibilities to update the pension funding rules prior to the April 15 deadline for required pension contributions. I will gladly support the DRC relief that this legislation accords single-employer pension plans. But let my colleagues be aware, I will continue to fight to provide similar security to all of the workers who are participating in multi-employer plans. I am hopeful that in the near future Congress will live up to our obligations to those workers as well.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise for a moment to add my voice to those who praise Senator Robert C. Byrd. I think what every public servant deserves, and occasionally gets, is a recognition that his or her service is in fact profoundly appreciated. That is usually not the case. The American people are not as aware of what goes on in these Halls, or even in their own legislative halls, as they ought to be. But I take special happiness out of this day for Senator Byrd because he has accomplished something that nobody else has with his 17,000th vote. He rose to cast his vote, as he always does. When somebody comes to greet him, argue with him, plead with him, and he is at his seat, he always rises, be that a man or a woman. He has brought, in my judgment, not only a tautness to the debates that we have in this Chamber, not always agreeing with the majority or with the minority, but he knows his mind and he knows his soul, and he knows his God. He does not deviate from that and he cares not who appreciates that or who doesn't. In other words, Senator Byrd is a man who, over the years, through the crucible of tough experiences and steadfast devotion not only to his God but also to the great figure who is not here today, who is so much part of his life and who brings out even in saying her name a great emotion in me, and that is his absolutely wonderful, wonderful wife Erma, honors us by his service. I was with him earlier this morning as he was talking to schoolteachers from all over the United States who are trying to get their students to write better. It is called the ``writers project,'' which he has been instrumental in doing. He talked to them of public service and the need for accuracy and being fair. What he was really saying is that doing something in your life which is not only important but which you give yourself to profoundly, completely, an utter devotion to duty, is what separates the great and the near great. I am very proud to serve with Senator Byrd. We have served together for 20 years now and have known each other for close to 40 years. Our wives are good friends; we are good friends. I sit behind him in the seat that Senator Moynihan used to occupy. I enjoy seeing people coming up to him and making their case, which talks not only of his courtesy, because he is so often on the floor, but also of his power to get things done, which then makes me say that there is no possible way to describe, from the point of view of the Senators in my State of West Virginia, what he has meant, does mean, and will mean for that State. West Virginia is a State that has always had to struggle. We have always had to keep pushing the rock uphill, not daring to take one hand off for fear that the rock may roll back over the top of us. It takes a tough person and a moral person and a determined person to fight the battles that are needed to be won for our people in West Virginia. That comes to Senator Byrd instinctively. I am so proud of this day because I cannot help but feel that when Senator Byrd goes to bed tonight, he will have a strong and profound sense of satisfaction--not that he needs to feel that, but that will make me feel better if he does feel that, because he serves our State and our Nation as few people have in the history of our country. I yield the floor.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today to join the distinguished ranking member from Montana, Mr. Baucus, in introducing the Medicaid and CHIP Safety Net Preservation Act of 2004. Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) provide health insurance coverage to more than 50 million vulnerable Americans, including pregnant women, kids, people with disabilities, and seniors in nursing homes. Preserving the integrity of each of these programs should be one of our top priorities. The bill that we are introducing today would ensure that Section 1115 of the Social Security Act--the so-called ``1115 waiver authority''--does not erode the core objectives of Medicaid and CHIP. Medicaid and CHIP form the foundation of our Nation's health care safety net. Without them, many more Americans would be uninsured. Unfortunately, the central objectives of these entitlement programs have been threatened in recent years by short-sighted proposals to cap Federal funding, questionable administrative rules and regulations, and inappropriate waivers that essentially waive the requirements of Federal law. The Medicaid and CHIP Safety Net Preservation Act would address each of these issues by reaffirming the core requirements of Medicaid and SCHIP. Congress created Medicaid in 1965 as Federal-State partnership to provide health insurance coverage to low-income families on welfare. Over the years, Medicaid has evolved into a multi-faceted health insurance program that serves working families, the disabled, and the elderly. Throughout the evolution of Medicaid, two aspects of the program have remained the same: Federal guidelines for program administration and shared Federal and State responsibility for financing. This structure has served the Medicaid program well. It maintains the national health care safety net, while also allowing Federal and State policymakers to tailor the program to meet local needs. In 1997, I was joined by Senator Chafee in introducing the Children's Health Insurance Program as part of the Balanced Budget Act. The purpose of this program has always been to help the children of families that do not qualify for Medicaid. At the time that CHIP was enacted, 10 million children were uninsured. Today, over 5 million children have coverage through CHIP; this includes nearly 23,000 children in the State of West Virginia. While we still have a long way to go in order to provide every child with health insurance, I believe the families touched by the CHIP program thus far would agree it serves its purpose well. The legislation that Senator Baucus and I are introducing today is designed to make it very clear that certain requirements under Medicaid and CHIP are central to the overall objectives of these programs and are not subject to waiver. Specifically, this legislation would ensure that 1115 waivers are not used to impose global caps on Federal payments to Medicaid. It would protect the Federal guarantee of Medicaid for any eligible individual. Children would continue to have access to comprehensive health benefits under the Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic, and Treatment (EPSDT) program. Money intended for the care of children under CHIP would be used for that purpose. Finally, the process for reviewing and approving 1115 waivers would be more transparent, allowing greater opportunities for public notice and comment. The Medicaid and CHIP Safety Net Preservation Act is a good first step toward preserving these critical health insurance programs. However, in order to strengthen Medicaid and CHIP for the future, we must also enact legislation that gives States the resources they need to cover eligible Medicaid beneficiaries, restores funding for the CHIP program, and allows states greater flexibility within the guidelines of the law. I urge my colleagues to support all of these important measures.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce legislation today designed to enhance child well-being in every State by collecting data on a State-by-State basis to provide information to advocates and policy makers about the well-being of children. My hope is that this legislation could be incorporated into a welfare reform reauthorization package. I believe that the Senate should reauthorize our welfare program, known as Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), and we should do it soon. But when we reauthorize TANF we must significantly invest in child care which is essential for parents to move from welfare to work, and to be successful on the job once they leave the official welfare rolls. In 1996 this body took a bold step forward in reforming welfare. The driving force behind this reform was to promote work and self- sufficiency for families and to provide flexibility to States to achieve these goals. States have used this flexibility to design different programs that work better for families who rely on them. Because of vast variation among State programs, there is an obvious need for research on child well-being for each State. We currently use the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) to evaluate the progress of welfare. It is an important national longitudinal study designed to provide rich, detailed data; the kinds of data most useful to academic researchers. It does not, however, provide States with good, timely data to help them more effectively accomplish the goals set forth in welfare reform. This bill, the State Child Well Being Research Act of 2004, is intended to fill this information gap by collecting timely, State- specific data that can be used by policy-makers, researchers, and child advocates to assess the well being of children. It would require that a survey examine the physical and emotional health of children, adequately represent the experiences of families in individual States, be consistent across States, be collected annually, articulate results in easy to understand terms, and focus on low-income children and families. The proposed legislation will provide data for all States, including small rural States like West Virginia. Further, this bill avoids some of the other problems that plague the current system by making data files easier to use and more readily available. As a result, the information will be more useful for policy-makers managing welfare reform and programs for children and families. When we reauthorize welfare reform, it will be essential for us to make a modest investment in research for every State. Several private charitable foundations, including the Annie E. Casey, John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur, and McKnight foundations have written Chairman Grassley and Senator Baucus in support of such research. These foundations have offered to form a partnership to provide outreach and support and to guarantee that the data collected would be broadly disseminated. This type of public-private partnership helps to leverage additional resources for children and families and increases the study's impact. One of the most important ways that Congress can demonstrate its commitment to welfare reform and attempt to help States reach the goals outlined in 1996 is to incorporate a strong research component in the welfare reform reauthorization bill. Since each State has used its flexibility to creative innovative welfare reform programs, and many are quite different, we need State-by-State data on basic aspects of child well-being. I hope that my colleagues will support this bill so that we can give States the information they need to monitor and improve child well-being.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce legislation today designed to enhance child well-being in every State by collecting data on a State-by-State basis to provide information to advocates and policy makers about the well-being of children. My hope is that this legislation could be incorporated into a welfare reform reauthorization package. I believe that the Senate should reauthorize our welfare program, known as Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), and we should do it soon. But when we reauthorize TANF we must significantly invest in child care which is essential for parents to move from welfare to work, and to be successful on the job once they leave the official welfare rolls. In 1996 this body took a bold step forward in reforming welfare. The driving force behind this reform was to promote work and self- sufficiency for families and to provide flexibility to States to achieve these goals. States have used this flexibility to design different programs that work better for families who rely on them. Because of vast variation among State programs, there is an obvious need for research on child well-being for each State. We currently use the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) to evaluate the progress of welfare. It is an important national longitudinal study designed to provide rich, detailed data; the kinds of data most useful to academic researchers. It does not, however, provide States with good, timely data to help them more effectively accomplish the goals set forth in welfare reform. This bill, the State Child Well Being Research Act of 2004, is intended to fill this information gap by collecting timely, State- specific data that can be used by policy-makers, researchers, and child advocates to assess the well being of children. It would require that a survey examine the physical and emotional health of children, adequately represent the experiences of families in individual States, be consistent across States, be collected annually, articulate results in easy to understand terms, and focus on low-income children and families. The proposed legislation will provide data for all States, including small rural States like West Virginia. Further, this bill avoids some of the other problems that plague the current system by making data files easier to use and more readily available. As a result, the information will be more useful for policy-makers managing welfare reform and programs for children and families. When we reauthorize welfare reform, it will be essential for us to make a modest investment in research for every State. Several private charitable foundations, including the Annie E. Casey, John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur, and McKnight foundations have written Chairman Grassley and Senator Baucus in support of such research. These foundations have offered to form a partnership to provide outreach and support and to guarantee that the data collected would be broadly disseminated. This type of public-private partnership helps to leverage additional resources for children and families and increases the study's impact. One of the most important ways that Congress can demonstrate its commitment to welfare reform and attempt to help States reach the goals outlined in 1996 is to incorporate a strong research component in the welfare reform reauthorization bill. Since each State has used its flexibility to creative innovative welfare reform programs, and many are quite different, we need State-by-State data on basic aspects of child well-being. I hope that my colleagues will support this bill so that we can give States the information they need to monitor and improve child well-being.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise to oppose the budget resolution that the Senate is considering today. Quite simply, this resolution does not reflect the priorities of West Virginians. The policies promoted here would not be in the best interests of the overwhelming majority of West Virginians. This budget resolution calls for more of the same failed economic policies that have been implemented over the last 3 years. It provides for additional tax cuts for the wealthy. It short-changes investment in important domestic programs. It understates the cost of supporting our troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And it forecasts more outrageous deficits for our children to pay off. West Virginians are rightfully worried about our economy right now. Many of them are unemployed, and many others are nervous that their jobs will be the next ones shipped overseas. They are having trouble making ends meet on wages that have stagnated. They are struggling to have health care for themselves and their families. They have a right to expect that when laying out our economic policy for the coming year, Congress will address these pressing concerns. I am very disappointed that the budget resolution we are considering today offers no leadership on these important issues. Instead, as has been the pattern of the last 3 years, this budget resolution provides for more tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. Let me be clear. Some of the tax cuts called for in this budget resolution are ones that I look forward to supporting. The increase in the child tax credit, relief from the marriage penalty, expansion of the lowest tax bracket--these are tax cuts for hard-working Americans that Democrats have been fighting for all along. Families in West Virginia deserve to have these tax cuts extended, and I will work with my colleagues to ensure that we do so. However, this budget resolution calls for additional tax cuts for the very wealthiest Americans as well. The legislation asks us to accelerate the elimination of estate tax--something that helps married couples with estates worth more than $7 million. The resolution asks us to extend the tax cuts on dividends and capital gains income--something that will benefit less than 20 percent of the people in my state. I simply do not believe that Congress ought to consider additional tax cuts for the most fortunate in our society in a year when our troops are in the fields, millions of Americans are feeling the pain of joblessness, and the government is running record deficits. To those who hid behind the spurious argument that tax cuts for the wealthy are really for small businesses, I would remind them that less than 2 percent of our Nation's small businesses pay taxes in the highest bracket. With tax revenues already at their lowest point in decades, as a share of the economy, critical Government services are underfunded in this budget resolution. The resolution provides just $369 billion for all domestic, discretionary spending outside of homeland security. While that may sound like a great deal of money, it is just $2 billion more than last year, and certainly not enough to keep pace with inflation or program growth. Let me give you just a few examples of the painful results of such a budget. First, this budget turns its back on our schools and reneges on a promise Congress made when it enacted the No Child Left Behind legislation. In 2000, I voted for the No Child Left Behind Act because I strongly believe that education is the key to our future and we must invest in higher academic standards. Based on that legislation, our schools have accepted annual testing, and its expense, higher academic standards for students, and higher standards for teachers. But this budget does not follow through with the resources we promised schools that accepted these changes. This year alone, we are $8.6 billion short of promised funding. In West Virginia, funding is $60 million less than promised. Students are not the only ones to lose out under this budget resolution. Anthony Principi, the Secretary of Veterans' Affairs, told Congress that Veterans Administration health care is underfunded. He testified that he needed $1.2 billion in additional funds. At a time when military personnel are serving in Afghanistan and Iraq, new veterans are coming home, and 60,000 veterans are on waiting lists for health care, we simply must fund VA health care. Yet, this budget does not. The Federal Government also has a responsibility to maintain its commitment to Medicaid in order to protect access to health care for our poor children, needy families and seniors in nursing homes. This is especially true during times of economic downturn when Medicaid beneficiaries need it the most. Last year, I worked with several of my colleagues in the House and Senate to successfully pass $20 billion in State fiscal relief. This legislation prevented several States from making cuts to their Medicaid programs. However, the projected budget deficits for states in the coming year are between $39-$41 billion--in spite of the slight upturn in the economy. Eighteen States have already introduced measures to reduce Medicaid coverage, eliminate benefits, increase copays, limit access to prescription drugs, or decrease payments to providers. Additional states will be forced to enact similar measures if fiscal relief expires on June 30. Instead of trying to undermine Medicaid funding, we should continue to provide state fiscal relief in order to hasten our nation's economic recovery and improve coverage options for the uninsured. And I am very disappointed that this budget resolution offers no assistance to states to prevent these devastating cuts. As the ranking Democrat on the Aviation Subcommittee of the Commerce Committee, I cannot help but note that this resolution does not provide sufficient funds for the Essential Air Service program or the Small Community Air Service Development Program. I will certainly fight for adequate funding to maintain the Federal Government's commitment to making sure that small and rural communities continue to be connected to the national air transportation system. This budget resolution will make that fight an uphill battle. I cannot support this budget. I refuse to believe that this is the best that Congress can do, and I will not try to explain to West Virginians that there is room for additional tax cuts, but not enough money for education, child care, health care, infrastructure improvements, homeland security, and other important domestic initiatives. I also refuse to ask West Virginia's children to assume enormous amounts of additional debt to fund such misguided priorities. Make no mistake, while this budget imposes painful restrictions on services that West Virginians care about, it still increases our national debt by unprecedented amounts in the coming years. These outrageous deficits will have a tangible, negative impact for middle-class Americans. As Government borrowing goes up, we know that interest rates will also arise for families with home mortgages, student loans, car loans, or credit card debt. If this resolution is to be the blueprint for our economic policy this year, then we are in for another dismal year. I ask my colleagues to oppose this budget resolution and to work together to craft a budget that is consistent with the values of hard working American families.

Mr. ROCKEFELLER

Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I thank the Senator and I thank the Chair.