Paul Sarbanes

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. The bill has room in it for $726 billion worth of tax cuts. Obviously, this raises the question of priorities. Is it more important to give these particular tax cuts, which, of course, I believe strongly are heavily weighted towards the wealthy, as opposed to making some investment in programs of this sort? We have to connect the two. I am willing to look at doing reasonable tax cuts, but I think what is in the resolution, as the chairman knows from my statements in committee, is far too excessive. If it were up to me, I would reduce that amount. I would use a limited portion of it to fund some of these priority programs. I would use the remainder of it to hold down the deficit so we are not projecting such large deficits out into the future.

Mr. SARBANES. I am happy to yield.

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I express my strong support for the amendment offered by Senators Murray and Kennedy to increase funds for the No Child Left Behind Act by $8.9 billion, fully funding this critical legislation. The amendment also includes $8.9 billion for deficit reduction. Both the education and deficit reduction funding are taken from the dividend tax cut. It is imperative that Congress sends a strong message in support of education that is accompanied by equally strong funding. The budget resolution we consider today fails to provide sufficient funding for education programs at all levels. Despite the Administration rhetoric that places great importance on improving educational opportunities for all Americans, President Bush's budget underfunds a variety of programs--early childhood education, elementary education, vocational education, and higher education--that are especially important to families given the weak economy. States are struggling with budget shortfalls, rising student enrollment, and an increasing number of students with limited English proficiency. At the same time, States are working to meet the new requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act. I supported the No Child Left Behind Act because I agreed with its principles--all public school children should be able to achieve and all schools should be held accountable when their students fail to do so. I believed the President when he said education would be a priority. But now we face a budget that does not make education a priority. Instead, we are asked to support a budget that somehow finds the money to provide a tax cut for the wealthiest individuals, but cannot do so for the education of our Nation's children. This budget provides only a 2 percent overall increase for education programs, and some increases such as those for both Title I and IDEA, are largely paid for with cuts to other valuable education programs. Funding for the No Child Left Behind Act is cut by $700 million below fiscal year 2003 levels. It shortchanges Title I funding by $5.8 billion below the authorized level. Title I could reach only 40 percent of eligible low-income children at this level. This budget also cuts funding for teacher quality programs, after school programs, and eliminates 46 education initiatives. The No Child Left Behind Act places a variety of new requirements on States and local school districts, including annual standardized testing and increased teacher certification. While we can expect our educators to do all within their power to improve our schools, we cannot expect this landmark legislation to be effective if they are not given the resources to implement these programs. If this amendment passes, over 2 million additional needy children will be served by Title I, after school opportunities would be extended to an additional 1.3 million latchkey kids, and 50,000 new teachers could become fully qualified. I find it unconscionable that we can consider a tax cut aimed at the wealthiest Americans while purporting to be unable to adequately fund education programs. Now is the time to move beyond the rhetoric and show teachers, parents and students that we are sincere in our efforts to help them. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the Murray- Kennedy amendment.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleagues in introducing the Commuter Benefits Equity Act of 2003. This measure is another important step forward in our efforts to make transit services more accessible and improve the quality of life for commuters throughout the Nation. All across the Nation, congestion and gridlock are taking their toll in terms of economic loss, environmental impacts, and personal frustration. According to the Texas Transportation Institute, in 2000, Americans in 75 urban areas spent 3.6 billion hours stuck in traffic, with an estimated cost to the Nation of $67.5 billion in lost time and wasted fuel, and the problem is growing. One way in which Federal, State, and local governments are responding to this problem is by promoting greater use of transit as a commuting option. The American Public Transportation Association estimates that last year, Americans took over 9.5 billion trips on transit, the highest level in more than 40 years. But we need to do more to encourage people to get out of their cars and onto public transportation. The Internal Revenue Code currently allows employers to provide a tax-free transit benefit to their employees. Under this ``Commuter Choice'' program, employers can set aside up to $100 per month of an employee's pre-tax income to pay for the cost of commuting by public transportation or vanpool. Alternatively, an employer can choose to offer the same amount as a tax-free benefit in addition to an employee's salary. This program is designed to encourage Americans to leave their cars behind when commuting to work. By all accounts, this program is working. In the Washington area, for example, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority estimates that over 200,000 commuters take advantage of transit pass programs offered by their employers. That means fewer cars on our congested streets and highways. Employees of the federal government account for a large percentage of those benefitting from this program in the Washington area. Under an Executive Order, all Federal agencies in the National Capital Region, which includes Montgomery, Prince George's, and Frederick Counties, Maryland, as well as several counties in Northern Virginia, are required to offer this transit benefit to their employees. The Commuter Choice program is now being used by an estimated 130,000 Washington-area Federal employees who are choosing to take transit to work. However, despite the success of the Commuter Choice program, our tax laws still reflect a bias toward driving. The Internal Revenue Code allows employers to offer a tax-free parking benefit to their employees of up to $190 per month. The striking disparity between the amount allowed for parking--$190 per month--and the amount allowed for transit--$100 per month--undermines our commitment to supporting public transportation use. The Commuter Benefits Equity Act would address this discrepancy by raising the maximum monthly transit benefit to $190, equal to the parking benefit, and providing that the benefits will be adjusted upward together in future years. The Federal Government should not reward those who drive to work more richly than those who take public transportation. Indeed, since the passage of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, Federal transportation policy has endeavored to create a level playing field between highways and transit, favoring neither mode above the other. The Commuter Benefits Equity Act would ensure that our tax laws reflect this balanced approach. In addition, the Commuter Benefits Equity Act would remedy another inconsistency in current law. Private-sector employers can offer their employees the transit benefit in tandem with the parking benefit, to help employees pay for the costs of parking at transit facilities, commuter rail stations, or other locations which serve public transportation or vanpool commuters. However, under current law, Federal agencies cannot offer a parking benefit to their employees who use park-and-ride lots or other remote parking locations. The Commuter Benefits Equity Act would remove this restriction, allowing Federal employees access to the same benefits enjoyed by their private-sector counterparts. The Washington Metropolitan Region is home to thousands of Federal employees. It is also one of the Nation's most highly congested areas, ranking fourth in per capita congestion. This area has the third longest average commute time in the country. It is clearly in our interest to support programs which encourage Federal employees to make greater use of public transportation for their commuting needs. The simple change made by the Commuter Benefits Equity Act would provide a significant benefit to those Federal employees whose commute to work includes parking at a transit facility. For example, a commuter who rides the Metrorail to work and parks at the Rockville park-and- ride lot pays about $45 monthly for parking, on top of the cost of riding the train. A private-sector employee whose employer provides the parking benefit in addition to salary could receive $540 a year tax free to help pay these parking costs. Federal government employees should be allowed the same benefit. I support the Commuter Benefits Equity Act because it creates parity--parity in the tax code between the parking and transit benefits, and parity for Federal employees with their private-sector counterparts. Both of these improvements will aid our efforts to fight congestion and pollution by supporting public transportation. I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting the Commuter Benefits Equity Act.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. We were able to do that because of cooperation from Pakistan.

Mr. SARBANES. I thank the Senator. I would hope the circumstance would be that the Senator from West Virginia would have been presiding in the chair, if I may say so.

Mr. SARBANES. Actually, the U.N. Charter grants the right of self- defense, which would in fact entitle us to act on our own accord if confronted with an imminent danger.

Mr. SARBANES. I thank the distinguished Senator from West Virginia for the enormous contribution he has been making. He has been willing to speak the truth and raise these very important and serious questions, which I am frank to say I don't think have been given adequate attention downtown by the President or by, as the Senator characterizes it, his war cabinet. This course we are on has tremendous implications in all of the United States.

Mr. SARBANES. I wanted to make that point because some are arguing that somehow we are giving over to someone else the decisionmaking authority, in case we are confronted with an imminent danger, to respond. That is not the case at all. So as we see this situation, that is not present. The question becomes how smart and how wise are we in exercising this unquestioned power, which we hold now on the international scene; is that not correct?

Mr. SARBANES. Let me ask the Senator one final question and be very clear. I take it the Senator would agree with me that none of us questions that if we were in imminent danger of being struck, we would be warranted in taking measures to protect ourselves against such dangers.

Mr. SARBANES. Will the Senator yield for a question on that point?

Mr. SARBANES. Yet Pakistan, which has been trying to work with us, has already announced that at best they will abstain at the Security Council with respect to the coming vote because it is applying such tremendous internal pressure in Pakistan that there is some danger that this Government that has been working with us may not survive and may collapse.

Mr. SARBANES. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. SARBANES. Isn't that a dramatic example of the kind of problem the Senator is talking about that is being created for us around the world?

Mr. SARBANES. Just to underscore the Senator's point about the necessity of having the cooperation of other countries to deal with the terrorism threat.

Mr. SARBANES. On the al-Qaida front, we have just captured supposedly the third ranking person in al-Qaida.

Mr. SARBANES. The Senator spoke earlier about the preemption doctrine the administration has put forward. Would the Senator agree that one of the dangers with the enunciation of that doctrine and the path the administration has now been pursuing-- which is to assert that they may take unilateral action instead of trying to work in a cooperative way through international bodies--is that it will set a precedent for other countries around the world to pursue the same course? After all, here is the predominant superpower asserting a doctrine of preemption, apparently prepared to go the unilateral path. What is then in the future to prevent some other regional power that asserts that it is confronted with some danger, from some neighbor, from pursuing the same path? Are we not in the process of setting a very dangerous precedent on the international scene in terms of maintaining international peace?

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. The Senator picked the Clinton years when his own party was in the majority.

Mr. SARBANES. What is happening here--my perception, at least--is that what the Senator is now complaining about is a tactic which was instituted by the other side of the aisle in the very recent past. Now we are being told this isn't the right way to do business. But no one on that side of the aisle said it wasn't the right way to do business only a few years ago when they were doing exactly the same thing.

Mr. SARBANES. Wouldn't that be a more pertinent chart?

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question? Does the Senator have a chart that would indicate the very same information but would take the Clinton nominees in the first 2 years when the control of the Senate was in the Senator's party?

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I am pleased to join today with Senators Warner, Lugar, Mikulski and Durbin in introducing legislation that would extend the legislative authority for the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial for an additional three years. The monument to Martin Luther King, Jr., which will be built on the Mall, will honor one of this Nation's most treasured citizens. Dr. King challenged us to live by the principles set forth at this Nation's inception, and forever changed the fabric of this country. Despite the enormous dedication of the Martin Luther King, Jr. National Memorial Project Foundation, Inc., additional time is necessary for the Foundation to erect a fitting tribute to Dr. King. The Commemorative Works Act currently requires that construction of the Memorial begin by November 2003. However, meeting the administrative procedures and fundraising requirements of the Act has been a very slow process. On November 12, 1996, legislation was enacted authorizing construction of the Memorial within a seven-year period. It then took Congress another two years to pass legislation authorizing placement of the Memorial in Area I of the Capital. Then the Foundation worked with the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission for Fine Arts for over a year to locate an appropriate site for the Memorial within Area I. As a result, the Foundation was unable to select a design for the Memorial until September 2000. This consultative process has been challenging, but it has resulted in a design for a Memorial on the Tidal Basin that will fittingly reflect the legacy of the greatest civil rights leader of our time. Initial estimates indicate that the construction costs of the Memorial alone could be as much as $60 million, and the Foundation is actively engaged in fundraising for the Memorial. However, it does not expect to have the necessary funds to receive the construction permit by the deadline of November 2003 as dictated by the Commemorative Works Act. One hundred percent of the funding must be privately financed, and the total cost of the project could near $100 million. Our legislation would give the Foundation an additional three years to raise the necessary funds to obtain the construction permit, and would ensure that work on the Memorial is completed. This extension of legislative authority has been done before for other memorials, given the length of time it usually takes to embark on a project of this magnitude, and it should be done for the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial. Dr. King serves as a reminder that change is brought about most powerfully when it is done by non-violent means. This country owes much to Dr. King, most notably his legacy of non-violent protest that has informed and influenced subsequent rights campaigns in our nation. Visitors will come to the Memorial from every part of this country and indeed the world, to be inspired anew by Dr. King's words and deeds, and the extraordinary story of his life. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to support this important legislation and grant the Foundation the additional time it needs to complete this significant monument. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the legislation be printed in the Record.

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, today I am once again introducing legislation together with Senators Warner, Campbell, Murray, Clinton, Sessions, Hutchison and Miller which would grant a Federal Charter to the Korean War Veterans Association, Incorporated. This legislation, which has passed the Senate in the past two Congresses, recognizes and honors the 5.7 million Americans who fought and served during the Korean War for their struggles and sacrifices on behalf of freedom and the principles and ideals of our nation. For the past three years, under the direction of Public Law 105-85, we have been marking the 50th Anniversary of the events of the Korean War--beginning with the events of June 1950 when the North Korea People's Army swept across the 38th Parallel to occupy Seoul, South Korea. Members of our Armed Forces--including many from the State of Maryland--immediately answered the call of the U.N. to repel this forceful invasion. Without hesitation, these soldiers traveled to an unfamiliar corner of the world to join an unprecedented multi-national force comprised of 22 countries and risked their lives to protect freedom. The Americans who led this international effort were true patriots who fought with remarkable courage. In battles such as Pork Chop Hill, the Inchon Landing and the frozen Chosin Reservoir, which was fought in temperatures as low as fifty- seven degrees below zero, they faced some of the most brutal combat in history. This year, on July 27, we will commemorate the 50th Anniversary of the signing of the Military Armistice Agreement which officially ended armed hostilities. By the time the fighting had ended, 8,177 Americans were listed as missing or prisoners of war--some of whom are still missing--and over 36,000 Americans had died. One hundred and thirty-one Korean War Veterans were awarded the nation's highest commendation for combat bravery, the Medal of Honor. Ninety-four of these soldiers gave their lives in the process. There is an engraving on the Korean War Veterans Memorial which reflects these losses and how brutal a war this was. It reads, ``Freedom is not Free.'' Yet, as a Nation, we have done little more than establish this memorial to publicly acknowledge the bravery of those who fought in the Korean War. The Korean War has been termed by many as the ``Forgotten War.'' Freedom is not free. We owe our Korean War Veterans a debt of gratitude. Granting this Federal charter--at no cost to the government--is a small expression of appreciation that we as a Nation can offer to these men and women, one which will enable them to work as a unified front to ensure that the ``Forgotten War'' is forgotten no more. The Korean War Veterans Association was originally incorporated on June 25, 1985. Since its first annual reunion and memorial service in Arlington, Virginia, where its members decided to develop a national focus and strong commitment to service, the association has grown substantially to a membership of approximately 19,000. A Federal charter would allow the Association to continue and grow its mission and further its charitable and benevolent causes. Specifically, it will afford the Korean War Veterans' Association the same status as other major veterans organizations and allow it to participate as part of select committees with other congressionally chartered veterans and military groups. A Federal charter will also accelerate the Association's ``accreditation'' with the Department of Veterans Affairs which will enable its members to assist in processing veterans' claims. The Korean War Veterans have asked for very little in return for their service and sacrifice. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation and ask that the text of the measure be printed in the Record.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I am pleased to join today with Senators Warner, Lugar, Mikulski and Durbin in introducing legislation that would extend the legislative authority for the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial for an additional three years. The monument to Martin Luther King, Jr., which will be built on the Mall, will honor one of this Nation's most treasured citizens. Dr. King challenged us to live by the principles set forth at this Nation's inception, and forever changed the fabric of this country. Despite the enormous dedication of the Martin Luther King, Jr. National Memorial Project Foundation, Inc., additional time is necessary for the Foundation to erect a fitting tribute to Dr. King. The Commemorative Works Act currently requires that construction of the Memorial begin by November 2003. However, meeting the administrative procedures and fundraising requirements of the Act has been a very slow process. On November 12, 1996, legislation was enacted authorizing construction of the Memorial within a seven-year period. It then took Congress another two years to pass legislation authorizing placement of the Memorial in Area I of the Capital. Then the Foundation worked with the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission for Fine Arts for over a year to locate an appropriate site for the Memorial within Area I. As a result, the Foundation was unable to select a design for the Memorial until September 2000. This consultative process has been challenging, but it has resulted in a design for a Memorial on the Tidal Basin that will fittingly reflect the legacy of the greatest civil rights leader of our time. Initial estimates indicate that the construction costs of the Memorial alone could be as much as $60 million, and the Foundation is actively engaged in fundraising for the Memorial. However, it does not expect to have the necessary funds to receive the construction permit by the deadline of November 2003 as dictated by the Commemorative Works Act. One hundred percent of the funding must be privately financed, and the total cost of the project could near $100 million. Our legislation would give the Foundation an additional three years to raise the necessary funds to obtain the construction permit, and would ensure that work on the Memorial is completed. This extension of legislative authority has been done before for other memorials, given the length of time it usually takes to embark on a project of this magnitude, and it should be done for the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial. Dr. King serves as a reminder that change is brought about most powerfully when it is done by non-violent means. This country owes much to Dr. King, most notably his legacy of non-violent protest that has informed and influenced subsequent rights campaigns in our nation. Visitors will come to the Memorial from every part of this country and indeed the world, to be inspired anew by Dr. King's words and deeds, and the extraordinary story of his life. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to support this important legislation and grant the Foundation the additional time it needs to complete this significant monument. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the legislation be printed in the Record.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, today I am once again introducing legislation together with Senators Warner, Campbell, Murray, Clinton, Sessions, Hutchison and Miller which would grant a Federal Charter to the Korean War Veterans Association, Incorporated. This legislation, which has passed the Senate in the past two Congresses, recognizes and honors the 5.7 million Americans who fought and served during the Korean War for their struggles and sacrifices on behalf of freedom and the principles and ideals of our nation. For the past three years, under the direction of Public Law 105-85, we have been marking the 50th Anniversary of the events of the Korean War--beginning with the events of June 1950 when the North Korea People's Army swept across the 38th Parallel to occupy Seoul, South Korea. Members of our Armed Forces--including many from the State of Maryland--immediately answered the call of the U.N. to repel this forceful invasion. Without hesitation, these soldiers traveled to an unfamiliar corner of the world to join an unprecedented multi-national force comprised of 22 countries and risked their lives to protect freedom. The Americans who led this international effort were true patriots who fought with remarkable courage. In battles such as Pork Chop Hill, the Inchon Landing and the frozen Chosin Reservoir, which was fought in temperatures as low as fifty- seven degrees below zero, they faced some of the most brutal combat in history. This year, on July 27, we will commemorate the 50th Anniversary of the signing of the Military Armistice Agreement which officially ended armed hostilities. By the time the fighting had ended, 8,177 Americans were listed as missing or prisoners of war--some of whom are still missing--and over 36,000 Americans had died. One hundred and thirty-one Korean War Veterans were awarded the nation's highest commendation for combat bravery, the Medal of Honor. Ninety-four of these soldiers gave their lives in the process. There is an engraving on the Korean War Veterans Memorial which reflects these losses and how brutal a war this was. It reads, ``Freedom is not Free.'' Yet, as a Nation, we have done little more than establish this memorial to publicly acknowledge the bravery of those who fought in the Korean War. The Korean War has been termed by many as the ``Forgotten War.'' Freedom is not free. We owe our Korean War Veterans a debt of gratitude. Granting this Federal charter--at no cost to the government--is a small expression of appreciation that we as a Nation can offer to these men and women, one which will enable them to work as a unified front to ensure that the ``Forgotten War'' is forgotten no more. The Korean War Veterans Association was originally incorporated on June 25, 1985. Since its first annual reunion and memorial service in Arlington, Virginia, where its members decided to develop a national focus and strong commitment to service, the association has grown substantially to a membership of approximately 19,000. A Federal charter would allow the Association to continue and grow its mission and further its charitable and benevolent causes. Specifically, it will afford the Korean War Veterans' Association the same status as other major veterans organizations and allow it to participate as part of select committees with other congressionally chartered veterans and military groups. A Federal charter will also accelerate the Association's ``accreditation'' with the Department of Veterans Affairs which will enable its members to assist in processing veterans' claims. The Korean War Veterans have asked for very little in return for their service and sacrifice. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation and ask that the text of the measure be printed in the Record.