Paul Sarbanes

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. I think it is a very important service the Senator is rendering in order to lay this out. Many people seem to be skipping right over this dimension, in terms of evaluating the path we should follow in dealing with the challenge we confront in the region.

Mr. SARBANES. I thank the Senator for bringing this to our attention. It is an extremely important point, and the Senator is absolutely right. It has simply been glossed over in any consideration of this matter.

Mr. SARBANES. At a minimum. Of course, that was assuming we would not have this kind of devastation out there that might be possible if the weapons of mass destruction were to be utilized.

Mr. SARBANES. Well, these are tremendous costs that are staring us in the face, are they not?

Mr. SARBANES. So the deficits projected in the President's budget, which are now going up toward the $300 billion level--and which have broken us out of the situation we were in only a couple of years ago where we were running surpluses--do not encompass potential costs of this military action in Iraq. In other words, the deficits would be significantly enhanced by whatever the amount of the cost would be; is that correct?

Mr. SARBANES. Madam President, let me say how much I appreciate the clarion call which the very distinguished Senator from West Virginia has been sounding. It is an extremely important issue--actually the No. 1 challenge facing the country. Am I correct that the budget submitted by the administration--and I know the very able Senator probably knows more about the appropriations process than any Member of this body--did not contain any money for a potential war in Iraq or for subsequent reconstruction efforts?

Mr. SARBANES. Madam President, will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. SARBANES. I thank the Senator.

Mr. SARBANES. And you have an estimate for the reconstruction that was $30 billion, roughly speaking.

Mr. SARBANES. I was listening carefully to the Senator. As I understand it--and the estimates are all over the lot--the administration represents that it could last 4 days, or it could last 4 weeks, or it could last 4 months; and you try to get them to pinpoint it, and they say: Well, who can tell what is going to happen? I gather even the Pentagon--and presumably they want to present the best light-- is estimating a $100 billion cost.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Madam President, I rise to express my support for the nomination of William H. Donaldson to be the Chairman of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. In my view, Mr. Donaldson will bring considerable relevant experience to the position of SEC Chairman. He founded and managed a major investment company, Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette, and served as Chairman and CEO of the New York Stock Exchange. He was Chairman, President and CEO of a multi-billion dollar public company, Aetena, Inc., and served as the first Dean and a Professor at the Yale School of Management. His background demonstrates that he is qualified for this position. Mr. Donaldson will face a daunting task as the new SEC Chairman. He must join with his fellow Commissioners to appoint the Chairman of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. He must address the challenge of restoring confidence to the capital markets. And I very much hope that will move immediately to implement full pay parity of salary and benefits for the SEC staff. I am pleased that, in his appearance before the Senate Banking Committee, Mr. Donaldson recognized the importance and immediate challenge of implementing the new accounting responsibility and investor protection legislation which the Congress passed last year. He testified that he ``will vigorously enforce the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the rules and regulations already put forth by the SEC.'' He said, ``I will demand accountability from all responsible parties. I will aggressively enforce civil penalties and work cooperatively with the state and federal law enforcement agencies and the President's corporate fraud task force to bring those who break the law to justice.'' He went on to pledge to call on corporate America and Wall Street to restore the principles of honesty and integrity to their proper place. Mr. Donaldson also indicated a strong concern for the welfare of the SEC employees. He pledged to address issues of staff morale and union relations at the Agency. I am hopeful that Mr. Donaldson will effectively manage the SEC and effectively enforce the Federal securities laws. I hope that he will bring about a new era of respect for the Agency and confidence in the U.S. securities markets.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, today I am re-introducing legislation, together with my colleague Senator Mikulski, to re-designate Catoctin Mountain Park as the Catoctin Mountain National Recreation Area. I first introduced this measure in October 2002, but unfortunately it was not acted upon during the closing days of the 107th Congress. It is my hope that the legislation will receive full and prompt consideration this year. I spoke last year about the need for this legislation and would like to underscore the principal arguments today. Catoctin Mountain Park is a hidden gem in our National Park System. Home to Camp David, the Presidential retreat, it has been aptly described as ``America's most famous unknown park.'' Comprising nearly 6000 acres of the eastern reach of the Appalachian Mountains in Maryland, the park is rich in history as well as outdoor recreation opportunities. Visitors can enjoy camping, picnicking, cross-country skiing, fishing, as well as the solitude and beauty of the woodland mountain and streams in the park. Catoctin Mountain Park had its origins during the Great Depression as one of 46 Recreational Demonstration Areas, RDA, established under the authority of the National Industrial Recovery Act. The Federal Government purchased more than 10,000 acres of mountain land that had been heavily logged and was no longer productive to demonstrate how sub-marginal land could be turned into a productive recreational area and help put people back to work. From 1936 through 1941, hundreds of workers under the Works Progress Administration and later the Civilian Conservation Corps were employed in reforestation activities and in the construction of a number of camps, roads and other facilities, including the camp now known as Camp David, and one of the earliest--if not the oldest--camp for disabled individuals. In November 1936, administrative authority for the Catoctin RDA was transferred to the National Park Service by Executive Order. In 1942, concern about President Roosevelt's health and safety led to the selection of Catoctin Mountain, and specifically Camp Hi-Catoctin as the location for the President's new retreat. Subsequently approximately 5,000 acres of the area was transferred to the State of Maryland, becoming Cunningham Falls State Park in 1954. The remaining 5,770 acres of the Catoctin Recreation Demonstration Area was renamed Catoctin Mountain Park by the Director of the National Park Service in 1954. Unfortunately, the Director failed to include the term ``National'' in the title and the park today remains one of 17 units in the entire National Park System and one of 9 units in the National Capital Region that does not have this designation. Those units include four parkways, four wild and scenic rivers, the White House and Wolf Trap Farm Park for the Performing Arts. The proximity of Catoctin Mountain Park, Camp David, and Cunningham Falls State Park, and the differences between national and state park management, has caused longstanding confusion for visitors to the area. Catoctin Mountain Park is continually misidentified by the public as containing lake and beach areas associated with Cunningham Falls State Park, being operated by the State of Maryland, or being closed to the public because of the presence of Camp David. National Park employees spend countless hours explaining, assisting and redirecting visitors to their desired destinations. My legislation would help to address this situation and clearly identify this park as a unit of the National Park System by renaming it the Catoctin Mountain National Recreation Area. The mission and characteristics of this park--which include the preservation of significant historic resources and important natural areas in locations that provide outdoor recreation for large numbers of people--make this designation appropriate. This measure would not change access requirements or current recreational uses occurring within the park. But it would assist the visiting public in distinguishing between the many units of the State and Federal systems. It will also, in my judgment, help promote tourism by enhancing public awareness of the National Park unit. The legislation is supported by the Board of County Commissioners and Tourism Council of Frederick County. I urge approval of this legislation.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, today I am re-introducing legislation, together with my colleague Senator Mikulski, to re-designate Catoctin Mountain Park as the Catoctin Mountain National Recreation Area. I first introduced this measure in October 2002, but unfortunately it was not acted upon during the closing days of the 107th Congress. It is my hope that the legislation will receive full and prompt consideration this year. I spoke last year about the need for this legislation and would like to underscore the principal arguments today. Catoctin Mountain Park is a hidden gem in our National Park System. Home to Camp David, the Presidential retreat, it has been aptly described as ``America's most famous unknown park.'' Comprising nearly 6000 acres of the eastern reach of the Appalachian Mountains in Maryland, the park is rich in history as well as outdoor recreation opportunities. Visitors can enjoy camping, picnicking, cross-country skiing, fishing, as well as the solitude and beauty of the woodland mountain and streams in the park. Catoctin Mountain Park had its origins during the Great Depression as one of 46 Recreational Demonstration Areas, RDA, established under the authority of the National Industrial Recovery Act. The Federal Government purchased more than 10,000 acres of mountain land that had been heavily logged and was no longer productive to demonstrate how sub-marginal land could be turned into a productive recreational area and help put people back to work. From 1936 through 1941, hundreds of workers under the Works Progress Administration and later the Civilian Conservation Corps were employed in reforestation activities and in the construction of a number of camps, roads and other facilities, including the camp now known as Camp David, and one of the earliest--if not the oldest--camp for disabled individuals. In November 1936, administrative authority for the Catoctin RDA was transferred to the National Park Service by Executive Order. In 1942, concern about President Roosevelt's health and safety led to the selection of Catoctin Mountain, and specifically Camp Hi-Catoctin as the location for the President's new retreat. Subsequently approximately 5,000 acres of the area was transferred to the State of Maryland, becoming Cunningham Falls State Park in 1954. The remaining 5,770 acres of the Catoctin Recreation Demonstration Area was renamed Catoctin Mountain Park by the Director of the National Park Service in 1954. Unfortunately, the Director failed to include the term ``National'' in the title and the park today remains one of 17 units in the entire National Park System and one of 9 units in the National Capital Region that does not have this designation. Those units include four parkways, four wild and scenic rivers, the White House and Wolf Trap Farm Park for the Performing Arts. The proximity of Catoctin Mountain Park, Camp David, and Cunningham Falls State Park, and the differences between national and state park management, has caused longstanding confusion for visitors to the area. Catoctin Mountain Park is continually misidentified by the public as containing lake and beach areas associated with Cunningham Falls State Park, being operated by the State of Maryland, or being closed to the public because of the presence of Camp David. National Park employees spend countless hours explaining, assisting and redirecting visitors to their desired destinations. My legislation would help to address this situation and clearly identify this park as a unit of the National Park System by renaming it the Catoctin Mountain National Recreation Area. The mission and characteristics of this park--which include the preservation of significant historic resources and important natural areas in locations that provide outdoor recreation for large numbers of people--make this designation appropriate. This measure would not change access requirements or current recreational uses occurring within the park. But it would assist the visiting public in distinguishing between the many units of the State and Federal systems. It will also, in my judgment, help promote tourism by enhancing public awareness of the National Park unit. The legislation is supported by the Board of County Commissioners and Tourism Council of Frederick County. I urge approval of this legislation.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, we are deeply saddened by Saturday's loss of seven astronauts as they returned from a 16-day voyage aboard the space shuttle Columbia. The tragic loss of the crew of mission STS- 107 touches not only all Americans, but also many members of our larger, global community. As we honor the courageous men and women of the Columbia and mourn their loss, our thoughts and prayers are with their families and loved ones. The seven men and women aboard the Columbia were truly a select group of explorers. They represented the vast range and distinction of our nation's skills and achievements; all had extensive training in various fields of scientific inquiry. At the same time, they represented America's finest aspirations. Diverse in their origins, they shared a dream of space travel, and they lived and worked together in a common spirit of cooperation, curiosity, and courage. Michael Anderson, Columbia's payload commander, spoke for all the crew when he said the following, in an interview appearing in the Baltimore Sun this past Sunday: I take the risk because I think what we're doing is really important. For me, it's the fact that what I'm doing can have great consequences and great benefits for everyone, for mankind. Research was the primary mission of STS-107. The Columbia carried 32 payloads with material for 59 separate investigations. Among these payloads were student experiments from Australia, China, Israel, Japan, Liechtenstein, and the United States. State-of-the-art communications equipment allowed earthbound researchers and the global public to witness experiments as they were being performed. To make the most of their 16 short days in space, the seven astronauts worked in two shifts, around the clock. We have suffered the grievous loss of our astronauts. But the astronauts completed much of their mission. We can honor the crew of mission STS-107, Colonel Rick D. Husband, Commander William McCool, Lieutenant Colonel Michael P. Anderson, Captain David M. Brown, Dr. Kalpana Chawla, Commander Laurel Blair Salton Clark, and Colonel Ilan Ramon, by rededicating ourselves anew to the mission they so vigorously embraced. We must have a prompt and thorough account of the events that brought down the Columbia, but we must not let our great sense of loss deter us from continuing their work. For more than forty years, the space program has played a vital role in our broader national research efforts. Our space explorations have led to scores of new discoveries, which have given us not only better insights into the universe but also a better understanding of the earth, and of life here on earth. We will remain forever grateful to the crew of the Columbia for the legacy they have left us, and the example they set.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I rise today to join with Marylanders and all Americans in celebrating the anniversary of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, FMLA. The FMLA was passed 10 years ago today on February 5, 1993. It addressed one of the most pressing issues of the time: how to help parents and other family members balance the demands of work and family. Balancing these demands has always been difficult, but the last few decades have seen an increase in working mothers, single parents and working families who are caring for elderly relatives. Trying to cope with the dual burdens of work and family left many families and individuals unable to meet all the demands placed on them. The FMLA was designed to help ease the burden on many of these families. The FMLA requires private employers with at least 50 employees, and public employers, to give unpaid leave to employees who meet the eligibility requirements for such leave. To be eligible, the FMLA requires that employees have worked for the employer for at least 12 months, and have worked a minimum of 1,250 hours. The employee, if eligible, is entitled to up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave per 12-month period. FMLA leave can be taken to care for the ``serious health condition'' of the employee, a child of the employee or a parent of the employee, or for an employee to care for a newborn, newly adopted child or newly placed foster child. Employees are not required to take the leave in one block, and are entitled to receive health benefits during their FMLA leave. In 2001 the Department of Labor commissioned a report to study the impact of the FMLA. The report found that almost 62 percent of public and private employees are covered by the FMLA. The benefits of the FMLA have thus been applied to the majority of American workers, a significant accomplishment. In addition, the FMLA seems to be working. A significant majority of employers report that the FMLA has no effect on their company's performance: 76.5 percent of employers say that the FMLA has no effect on productivity, 87.6 percent say that the FMLA has no effect on profitability, and 87.7 percent report that the FMLA has no effect on their company's growth. A majority of employers also report that the FMLA has little to no effect on the individual employee's performance. And most of the 23.8 million employees who used FMLA leave in 1999-2000 reported that their experience was positive. Beyond these raw numbers, the FMLA has had a profound effect on the lives of many American workers. Working mothers and fathers are able to take time to care for their sick children, sons and daughters are able to care for aging parents, and new mothers and fathers are able to spend precious time bonding with their newborns or newly adopted babies during the first weeks of life. The FMLA does not force workers to choose between family and work. No amount of statistics can quantify the value of the days and hours family members get to spend helping one another during these crucial times. But we should look at ways to make this very successful program available to more American workers and bring the benefits of this important legislation to more who need it. To this end, I am a cosponsor of a bill that would provide wage replacement for eligible individuals who have taken FMLA leave for the birth or adoption of a son or daughter or other family care giving needs. The bill would also amend the FMLA to extend coverage to employees at worksites of at least 25 employees, a decrease from the current 50-employee requirement. And the bill would entitle employees who must address the effects of domestic violence to take FMLA leave. I urge my colleagues to work with me to ensure the passage and enactment of this important legislation. On the 10th anniversary of the FMLA legislation, let us remember the success of this program, and let us also focus on ways in which we can make improvements to the program so that it can benefit all American workers.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my Maryland constituents and millions of Americans in celebrating African-American History Month this February. Dr. Carter Godwin Woodson founded the Association for the Study of Negro Life and History in 1915. Shortly after its creation, the Association began a campaign to establish Negro History Week to highlight the many accomplishments of African Americans. Dr. Woodson achieved this goal in 1926, and the second week of February was chosen to recognize the contributions of African Americans to American society. In 1976, this week of observance was expanded to a month and became African-American History Month. This month of observance is a time to recognize a crucial part of our diversity: the vast history and legacy that African Americans have contributed to the founding and building of our Nation. While we have much to celebrate in the achievements of many African Americans and the great strides this country has made towards true equality, there is also much work to be done. Each year, the Association for the Study of African American Life and History, ASALH, designates a theme for the Black History Month observance, and this year it is ``The Souls of Black Folk: Centennial Reflections.'' This year's theme focuses on the past contributions of African Americans and the many significant ways in which African Americans have made our Nation better. At the beginning of the last century, our Nation was a vastly different place than it is today. The country was divided along racial lines and racism was accepted and institutionalized. African Americans were not allowed to vote, and the opportunities available to African Americans were few. Today, thanks to the visions of a few and the sacrifices of many, that situation has changed. Much of the last century was filled with hardship for African Americans. Despite this, African Americans made great strides in many areas and participated in every sector of our society. Throughout the past 100 years, African Americans have made remarkable contributions to our society as mathematicians, scientists, novelists, poets, politicians, and members of the armed services. Regrettably, just this year we lost two Marylanders who contributed much to African-American and American history in the last century, Du Burns and Bea Gaddy. Du Burns was the first African-American mayor of Baltimore. He brought the city together and although he ultimately became mayor, he never forgot his humble beginnings, including a job as a locker room attendant at Dunbar High School. Bea Gaddy was an advocate for the homeless and a Baltimore City Council member who devoted her life to feeding hungry Baltimoreans and making Baltimore a better place to live. We will forever remember the sacrifices and achievements of these two remarkable people. No discussion of the last century in the lives of African Americans could be complete without a tribute to Martin Luther King, Jr., whose birthday we recently celebrated. His teachings and the example of his life offer much for us to be hopeful about in the coming century. We must look to his words and deeds to remind ourselves of his great vision and must never forget the profound change he helped bring about in this country. His teachings transcend race, and we have much to learn from him about humanity as we confront the challenges of the new century. And the challenges are many. We must continue to work to eliminate racism and inequality, and we must work to combat intolerance, not just in our own country, but throughout the world. Last year, the theme of African-American History Month posed the question, Is Racism Dead? Unfortunately, the answer is still no. There is much that we in Congress can do to continue to meet the challenges of inequality in our country. We can help the parents of working families by raising the minimum wage. We have already passed the Leave No Child Behind education reform bill that will provide new standards for schools and teachers and will help make quality education available to all Americans. We have passed an election reform bill to ensure that all voters are properly registered and every vote is counted. We must now fully fund these initiatives that have successfully passed Congress. And we need to make health care available and affordable for African Americans and all Americans. Through the lessons and struggles of the last century and the trying first few years of this century, Americans have shown the world how people of all races, colors, religions and nationalities create the fabric of our Nation, a fabric that is richer because of our differences. This month, we honor the special contribution African Americans have made to that fabric. Through African-American History Month, we celebrate how far this country has come and remind ourselves of how far we have to go.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Madam President, I just want to say to the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts, in this chart about the President breaking his promise to the Nation's children about No Child Left Behind, and the budget, which fails to fund the No Child Left Behind legislation, that is being done in order to have a tax cut that will assure that no millionaire is left behind. That is exactly what has happened. The President's commitment, with respect to budget priorities, is to give this huge tax break on dividends so that no millionaire will be left behind. Meanwhile, we are leaving behind tens of thousands of schoolchildren all across America. I thank the Senator.

Mr. SARBANES. May I have 30 seconds?

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I rise today in support of an amendment offered by Senator Mikulski regarding the use of quotas in contracting out Government jobs. The administration has put forth proposals requiring that a specified number of jobs usually performed by Federal employees be contracted out to private companies each year. Senator Mikulski's amendment would prevent any of the funding in the omnibus appropriations bill to be used in the enforcement of these quotas. The administration states that this is an issue of efficiency. I disagree. There is no evidence that contracting out Federal Government jobs saves the Government time or money. In fact, the opposite is often true, the Federal Government is overcharged for less efficient work by private companies, work that could be done more efficiently and more effectively by Federal employees. Too often, jobs are simply contracted out without a proper public-private competition, and without continued monitoring of whether any cost savings actually results. Furthermore, by requiring that a set number of Federal jobs be contracted out each year, the jobs may be contracted out without any regard to cost savings. In addition, national security is now of vital importance to our Nation. We must take a close look at the implications of contracting out to ensure that our national interests are being protected. We need Federal employees to do these jobs, jobs that are not suited to the private sector. Indeed, Federal employees are now screening baggage at our Nation's airports, one of the most vital roles in this unprecedented time. Requiring that a certain number of Federal jobs be contracted out each year could result in the contracting out of jobs vital to our national security. I firmly believe that the United States Government should not contract out jobs merely for the sake of ``reducing'' the Federal workforce. Nor should we show a preference to contract employees over our dedicated public servants who have demonstrated such determination and commitment in this difficult time. I urge my colleagues to support Senator Mikulski's amendment and oppose the use of quotas in the contracting out of jobs already ably performed by our Federal employees.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, the purpose of this amendment is to ensure the integrity of a shoreline protection system that was constructed by the Army Corps of Engineers in 1985 at Tall Times, MD to mitigate the erosion induced by the Herring Creek entrance jetties. The Herring Creek Navigation Project, located on the left bank of the Potomac River in St. Mary's County, MD, was constructed in 1960 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to maintain a navigable channel at the inlet. Although the jetties functioned as designed, they blocked the natural drift of sand along the shoreline and caused significant erosion in the area downstream of the project. To correct this erosion problem, in 1985 the Corps of Engineers implemented a mitigation project under the authority of section 111 of the River and Harbors Act of 1968. The modification consisted of construction of 250 feet of beach fill and 2,187 linear feet of stone revetment, and upgrading 350 linear feet of existing revetment along the Tall Timbers waterfront, south of the project inlet. The revetment was constructed essentially on top of an existing wooden bulkhead built by St. Mary's County in 1950. Herein lies the problem: the wooden bulkhead is failing in sections, causing huge sinkholes on private property, and undermining the integrity of the revetment. Although the Local Cooperation Agreement specified that the Army Corps of Engineers was responsible for maintaining the revetment, it did not specify who would be responsible for maintaining the bulkhead. St. Mary's County and local residents assert that this is a Corps responsibility. The Corps asserts that it does not have the authority to repair the bulkhead. The amendment that Senator Mikulski and I are offering would clarify the responsibilities of the Army Corps of Engineers to provide maintenance of the project. It should be pointed out that, should the entire bulkhead fail, the revetment will also fail and the Corps would be responsible for replacing the entire revetment at a cost of well over $1 million. This is an instance where an ounce of prevention now will prevent a pound of federal expenditures later. I urge adoption of the amendment. amendment no. 59

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, the purpose of this amendment is to redirect funding that was made available in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century for the construction of a pedestrian and bicycle bridge across the Susquehanna between Havre de Grace and Perryville, MD to a related project. During a tour of Havre de Grace and Perryville in April 1998, the mayors of the two towns and members of the Lower Susquehanna Heritage Greenway Committee, briefed me on the Heritage Greenway plan and expressed a hope that the two towns would one day be connected by a pedestrian/bicycle bridge. There are three bridges spanning the Susquehanna River at U.S. Route 1, I-95 and U.S. Route 40, but for safety reasons Maryland State Highway Administration policy prohibits pedestrian/bike traffic on these bridges. The Lower Susquehanna Greenway Resource Report dated January, 1994 identified the need to link greenway trails along the river in Harford and Cecil Counties via a river crossing and identified a potential crossing site which would utilize the old Route 40 piers that parallel the existing Amtrak bridge. In order to help facilitate construction of a pedestrian and bicycle bridge at this site, Senator Mikulski and I succeeded in getting a provision included in TEA-21 which provided $1.25 million for this project. Using a portion of the funds, the State Highway Administration conducted an engineering analysis of the existing piers and determined that the piers could not support such a bridge without significant and costly structural and other improvements. Since that time the Susquehanna Heritage Greenway Committee has been examining other options, including a ferry boat and a pedestrian/bicycle bridge crossing further upstream. My amendment would give the committee additional flexibility to undertake these potential crossing alternatives and related Lower Susquehanna Heritage Greenway projects. I urge adoption of the amendment.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of the amendment offered by the Senator from South Dakota to address the critical needs of our Nation's family farmers affected by natural disaster. Over the past 2 years, farmers throughout the Nation have been devastated by periods of prolonged drought and other natural disasters. Last year, in my own State of Maryland, the drought was among the most destructive in our history. Over the summer, as I traveled through the rural areas of my State, I saw firsthand the damage that had been done. The fields were dry and the crops withered. According to the Department of Agriculture, corn production was down 42 percent from 2001 and both the corn crop and yield were the smallest in 14 years. Similarly, soybean production was down 46 percent from the previous year and the crop and yield were the worst in 15 years. At the urging of the Maryland Congressional Delegation, the Secretary of Agriculture declared 21 of the State's 23 counties primary natural disaster areas. And, as a result, farmers in the disaster areas and the two contiguous counties became eligible for emergency loans. Unfortunately, for many farmers, taking on additional loans is just not possible. The Daschle amendment will provide meaningful disaster relief to those farmers in Maryland and throughout the Nation. The amendment, similar to one that passed the Senate with my support and that of 78 of my colleagues in the last Congress, provides approximately $6 billion in direct emergency disaster assistance to producers who have been directly impacted by drought or natural disaster. This amendment has the support of more than 40 farm, ranch, and rural organizations, including the American Farm Bureau Federation and the National Farmers Union. In my view, this amendment will provide our farmers with a much needed safety net, one not included in the recently passed farm bill, that will allow them to maintain their livelihoods and their lands. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting its passage.

Mr. SARBANES. Madam President, I point out that taxes have been paid into the unemployment insurance trust fund for the purpose of paying unemployment insurance in an economic downturn. That fund has close to $25 billion in it. About $7 billion was used in the last legislation we passed. The purpose of paying that money in good times is to be able to pay it out in bad times. I support this amendment.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in strong support of Senator Reed's amendment, which would ensure that the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) is funded at an amount close to the level authorized by the Senate for the current fiscal year. As he traveled through colder climate areas in the Northeast and Midwest in 2000, President Bush campaigned on a promise to fully fund this vital program, which assists senior citizens and low-income households with their basic home heating costs. Regrettably, the President decided to retreat from this commitment, proposing $1.4 billion for LIHEAP in his fiscal year 2003 budget--a $300 million cut from the previous year's funding level for the program. Meanwhile, plunging temperatures and rising heating costs are putting some of the most vulnerable Americans at risk this winter. Indeed, only a fraction of those eligible to receive LIHEAP assistance will actually benefit from the program at current funding levels. Furthermore, heating bills are significantly higher than they were at this point last year. According to the Energy Information Administration, which released its monthly short-term outlook on January 8th, the price of natural gas has risen 34 percent compared to last winter's costs. Heating oil prices have increased a remarkable 43 percent. Senator Reed's amendment would increase LIHEAP funding for the current fiscal year to a level close to the Senate-authorized amount of $2 billion by transferring the funds already appropriated by Congress in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2001--but not spent by the President--to the omnibus appropriations bill now pending before the Senate. This important amendment will ensure that the administration does not deny these funds to the scores of households who desperately need this assistance to simply keep warm this winter. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Reed amendment.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to talk about the HUD/VA appropriations bill contained in the omnibus package currently under consideration by the Senate. I want to commend Senators Mikulski and Bond for recognizing the importance of providing Americans with the opportunity to live in decent, safe, and affordable housing. However, despite their efforts, housing programs suffer from a lack of adequate funding in this bill. The Appropriations Committee faced tough choices in revising their fiscal year 2003 bills, due to the decision to cut domestic programs substantially across the board. Senate appropriations were forced to cut almost $10 billion from their earlier spending decisions for fiscal year 2003. More than $1 billion of this cut comes from critical housing programs. While the Senate bill before us today is far superior to the House appropriations bill, it does not provide adequate resources. Now is not the time to cut $1 billion from the social safety net. Over 100,000 people lost their jobs last month, and unemployment continues to be high. Working families deserve our support, and instead of providing it to them, we continue to cut programs that help people provide for their families. While the administration is asking us to provide a tax cut of $674 billion, primarily for the wealthiest Americans, over $1 billion in funding is being cut from programs that help low-income families afford housing. The problem of affordable housing has become a crisis for many working families all across America. According to a recent study, 14 percent of families pay over half of their income in rent or live in substandard housing. The significant gap between the wages of low- income workers and housing costs makes evident that housing assistance is necessary for many working families. On average, a family in this country needs to earn almost $15 an hour to afford a modest two-bedroom apartment. This is almost three times the minimum wage. When millions of American families are unable to afford decent and safe housing, the consequences are serious and far-reaching. When children do not have stable home environments, their health suffers as does their educational attainment. In addition, housing assistance can help people transition from welfare to work. Recent studies have found that people leaving welfare who receive housing assistance retain employment for longer and make more than those who do not receive such assistance. Unfortunately, this bill does not do enough to ensure that working and elderly families in this country can afford safe and decent housing. Just last week, HUD announced that housing authorities around the country will be facing drastic cuts in their operating funding. These cuts are due to HUD's error in estimating public housing needs. Because of HUD's mistake, there was a $250 million shortfall in the operating fund in fiscal year 2002. Upon learning of this shortfall, HUD indicated that it would seek additional funding from Congress. Unfortunately, HUD never asked for these funds. Instead, HUD will use fiscal year 2003 funds; to make up for the shortfall. This means that we are starting out with a $250 million cut in the program this year. This cut will leave housing authorities with no choice but to scale back their programs, lay off staff and put off needed repairs. HUD should request, and we should provide additional funding to make sure that families in public housing are adequately housed. In addition, HUD must provide as much funding as possible to PHAs under the current budget situation. Housing authorities are currently receiving only 70 percent of their funding. This is an unnecessary and irresponsible cut. Even assuming a loss of $250 million from fiscal year 2003 funds, HUD should be able to provide at least 90 percent of operating costs to public house authorities. If HUD intends to fund public housing at higher levels later in the year, as they have announced, they should do so now, thereby helping PHAs avoid unnecessarily cutting off assistance to needy families. In addition to under-funding the public housing operating account, the HUD appropriations bill cuts $160 million from the Public Housing Capital Fund, which is used to repair and modernize public housing. Over 1.5 million families reside in public housing, housing that is generally safe and decent. However, this older housing stock is in need of constant maintenance. Capital needs in public housing grow by $2.3 billion every year, and the backlog of needed capital repairs is over $20 billion. If we do not adequately fund the Public Housing Capital Fund, this backlog will continue to grow, threatening the homes of 1.5 million American families and the Federal Government's substantial investment in this housing. While I strongly oppose the cuts in the public housing program, there are some important provisions contained in this bill that I wholeheartedly support. This bill fixes a serious problem created by the House Committee and ensures that Section 8 housing vouchers, a critical housing resource, are not lost. The House appropriations bill, H.R. 5605, will result in the immediate loss of over 125,000 vouchers and will lead to the continued loss of housing vouchers over time. Though the bill before us today cuts funding from the voucher program, it does so in a way that guarantees that all vouchers in use will be funded, and ensures that housing authorities can serve as many families as possible with the vouchers they are allocated. This is an important provision, and I want to commend Senators Bond and Mikulski for including this in the HUD/VA appropriations bill. I am also pleased that the Senate retains $100 million in interest reduction payments for housing uses. Unfortunately, the House bill complies with the administration's request to rescind this $100 million which should be used to rehabilitate affordable housing. Given the great need for housing around the country, it is remarkable that we would rescind funding which could be used to increase housing opportunities. The Senate bill rightly requires that HUD use these funds to modernize affordable housing. Unfortunately, HUD has refused to take any action to use these IRP funds for their intended purpose, and I urge HUD to quickly comply with congressional intent and distribute these needed dollars. Affordable, stable housing is the bedrock of stable, vibrant communities. Unfortunately, too many Americans find themselves in precarious housing situations in neighborhoods of despair. The continued cuts to housing programs supported by the current administration will hurt the millions of Americans who live in public housing or received housing vouchers, and the millions more Americans who are in need of housing assistance. These cuts will be felt all around the country. I hope that the administration will recognize this and the growing housing needs around the country and I urge them to fully fund Federal housing programs in the fiscal year 2004 budget. I am also hopeful that the Senate bill, which ensures the viability of the housing voucher program, prevails at conference with the House. democracy programs