Ted Stevens

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to thank Congress for finally raising the mandatory retirement age for commercial airline pilots from age 60 to age 65. This language was included as part of the ``Fair Treatment for Experienced Pilots Act,'' and allows our most experienced commercial pilots to continue providing safe air transportation for the Nation. The House approved the bill unanimously. Since 1960, the FAA ``Age 60 Rule'' has restricted pilots age 60 and older from serving on any commercial flight operations. Under the rule, it is estimated that our aviation system lost 50 pilots every week. Many in the aviation community, the FAA, and now Congress, have reacted to the realization that the Age 60 Rule has become outdated and discriminatory against one of Alaska's greatest resources, its experienced and seasoned pilots. As my colleagues in the Senate know, the State of Alaska depends on aviation more than any other State. In our State we find that 50 percent of the commercial pilots are over 55. The lack of highway infrastructure creates a situation where aviation serves as the traditional road system. More than 70 percent of our communities can only be reached year around by air, making aircraft essential for personal, commercial, cargo, and mail transportation to most parts of our State. Having experienced pilots to deliver goods and services to our communities is essential for Alaskans. Many of our pilots contacted me and told me how the Age 60 Rule was impacting them. In fact, on Wednesday, I met with Gary Miller, a Vietnam veteran and current FedEx pilot based in Anchorage. If Congress would not have acted on this outdated regulation, Gary would have been forced to retire in February. In addition, there are pilots like Captain Bill Green, one of Alaska's best Hercules pilots. The Hercules aircraft are used for transporting large cargo shipments. Captain Green turns 60 next April and would have been forced into retirement, despite the need for qualified, experienced pilots in Alaska. Mike Redmond, who has experience flying every type of aircraft used in Alaska--in 2 years he will be 60 years old and under the Age 60 Rule Alaskans would have lost his wealth of knowledge and experience. I have supported changing this rule for more than a decade, and I applaud the Senate's actions in finally taking hold and raising the age to 65. These pilots are our most experienced aviators and are a valuable resource to the commercial aviation industry. This action today will allow them to continue serving our Nation. It is rare that Congress passes legislation that has such an immediate personal impact on our citizens. This is a proud moment for me and for the Congress. I am proud to say the President signed this bill immediately when he received it last night. I yield the floor.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business for 5 minutes.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I believe I have 3 minutes yielded to me.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, at the beginning of this Congress I introduced a bill to achieve a 40-mile-a-gallon goal by 2020. As I have indicated before, I became engaged in the CAFE debate because I believe the only way our Nation will achieve energy independence is through a combination of initiatives. Conservation, domestic production, and the development of alternative sources of energy are all parts of the broader solution. Setting fuel economy standards is one avenue toward limiting our Nation's dependence on foreign oil and significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The Senate passed unanimously a CAFE amendment based upon the attribute concept I authored. The fuel economy provision that has been placed in the bill is a good first step toward addressing our energy crisis. I thank Senator Inouye and Senator Feinstein for their insistence that the fuel economy provision be a product of bipartisan discussions. Their commitment to instituting strong and achievable policy goals was instrumental during the negotiation process of fuel economy standards. The compromise we negotiated mandates the fuel economy of cars and trucks to be evaluated separately based upon this attribute system. The mandate ensures reasonable fuel efficiency goals for trucks and cars. In addition, the requirement will guarantee the continued availability of various sized trucks and cars in the market, which is important-- very important--to our home State of Alaska. Our bill requires annual increases to the nationwide average fleet fuel economy standards for cars and light trucks to achieve a fleetwide average standard of 35 miles per gallon by 2020. As Senator Inouye said, this will be the first statutory fuel economy increase for passenger cars since 1975. The bipartisan fuel economy provision will help save, as Senator Cantwell has indicated, a significant amount of fuel over the next decade. I thank the Senate for supporting this bipartisan measure. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a list of Senate Commerce Committee staff on the Republican side who worked on the fuel economy compromise be printed in the Record.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that this letter from CAPT Seth Chapel be read into the Congressional Record. Captain Chappell wrote this address for East Anchorage High School's Veterans Day Remembrance Ceremony. He is a 2000 East High graduate and a 2004 Graduate of the U.S. Military Academy. Captain Chappell served with the 37th Engineer Battalion, Combat, Airborne, in Afghanistan during Operation Enduring Freedom VII as a route clearance platoon leader a light equipment platoon leader.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I come to the floor to honor the President pro tempore, our great friend, the senior Senator from West Virginia. Senator Byrd will celebrate his 90th birthday next Tuesday. In Alaska, we call this a significant milepost. Milestones in Alaska get covered with snow too often. I remember watching from the gallery in 1959 when Senator Byrd took office. I was a member of the Eisenhower administration at the time. He had been here for nearly a decade by the time I came to the Senate in 1968. Senator Byrd and I have worked together on the Appropriations Committee now for 36 years. We have each chaired that committee and we have each had the honor of becoming the President pro tempore. He has been President pro tempore twice. Senator Byrd has been called a symbol of our history, and those of us who served with him, and continue to serve with him, rely on his knowledge of the Senate and its history and traditions. I wish I had the time to go into some of the times I have listened to Senator Byrd recite poems or history, or tell of his times of researching the history of the Roman Senate. I served as the whip here for 8 years when Senator Byrd was giving his history lessons, and it was my honor to sit here and listen to those history lessons, and I learned a great deal from him. His devotion to the Senate and to those of us who serve with him are reasons for us to call him the patriarch of the Senate family. I know of no one who has done so much to keep the spirit of the family alive in the Senate. Over the years, Senator Byrd has come to the floor many times to honor me personally and to honor my family. He comforted me here on the floor when my wife Ann passed away. He comforted me in times of sorrow; he comforted me in times of joy. He came to me on the day I first became a grandfather. And I will never forget that, because he gave a speech about the meaning of becoming a grandfather, and he told me I had my first taste of immortality because I was a grandfather. Those words have stayed with me for a long time. I now have 11 grandchildren, but I will never forget that speech about the first one. I also remember the kind remarks he has made to me on many other occasions. He came to the floor and offered congratulations of the Senate when I remarried, and he came again when Catherine and I had our first daughter, our only child, Lilly. Earlier this year, he came to the floor to congratulate Lilly on her graduation from law school. And with Lilly, I remember when she was young and a baby, and I was the whip, we had a birthday party for Lilly every year here, and Senator Byrd never missed one of those. He became Uncle Robert to Lilly. He has had a marvelous relationship with the children of Senators who have served with him. The nurturing and caring quality that Senator Byrd has brought to this Chamber for so many years reminds us we are a family. We had the sad occasion to gather with him and support him when he lost his beloved wife. But I have come here today to congratulate the Senator from West Virginia not only for his service to our Nation and to the Senate, but for his longevity. He is the only Senator who is older than I am, and I thank him for his friendship and for all he has done for me and my family personally. Catherine and I wish him a very happy birthday, and we hope the Senate will join in extending to the President pro tempore our sincere congratulations on his birthday. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I offer today a resolution recognizing Hostelling International USA for 75 years of service to intercultural understanding and to youth travel. Hostelling USA was established in 1934 to promote hostelling in the United States. Since it is founding, it has hosted over 22 million visitors in its 70 hostels across the country, including Alaska. Hostelling is a unique and affordable way travelers can see our country, while making lifelong friends and contacts. I congratulate Hostelling International USA for 75 years of service and hope my colleagues will join me in passing this resolution.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I want to state my support for the Department of Defense conference agreement that is before the Senate today. As we have done for so many years, my good friend from Hawaii, Senator Inouye, and I have worked in a bipartisan manner with our counterparts in the House to draft an agreement that meets the needs of the military. This bill balances our priorities for funding, pay, and benefits to the military and civilian personnel, maintaining force readiness in the operating accounts, and providing significant investment for the modernization of weapons systems. I strongly support the defense side of this bill. I remain deeply disturbed by what is not included in the bill. What is missing from the conference agreement is what is known as the bridge fund or supplemental appropriations to support our troops in the field. For each of the last 3 years, and in the current CR, the bridge funding for the costs of operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world have been included, until a full supplemental bill could be considered has passed the Congress in the Spring. This has been a difficult matter for us to deal with. I was unsuccessful in the defense conference in adding $70 billion as a bridge fund. As I understand it, the House has indicated they will bring forth a stand-alone bridge fund bill to be considered by the Congress as early as next week. As a matter of fact, it may be tomorrow that they take it up. I have not seen any action yet to assure that we will get a clean bridge fund bill that can be signed by the President. This bothers me considerably. The continuing resolution attached to this bill does not contain a bridge fund. As I said, every defense bill since fiscal year 2005 has included a bridge fund that funded contingency operations. Unfortunately, the absence of this bridge fund leaves the Department will be forced to divert money from their regular accounts to fund overseas operations. They will also be forced to reprogram money from the Defense bill itself in order to cover the problems of the men and women in the field. I have said I would offer a motion to invoke rule XXVIII against this bill, but upon reflection and after talking to the people in the administration, the intention is to allow that this Defense bill to be passed because there are overwhelming problems in the Defense Department itself. So contrary to my own deep thoughts about the lack of the bridge fund, I think, considering the matter of all of those people who serve us, it is essential we get the Defense bill itself passed. It will give us the basic funds to continue the ongoing operations for a limited period of time. It bothers me that without the bridge fund--the Congress has failed to recognize the overall process of supporting our deployed forces and replacing worn equipment. These effort are at risk for being delayed, when this bridge fund is not provided. The current CR, which contains funding for our deployed forces, runs out on the 16th of this month. I say to the Senate, it is a great risk we are taking, a great risk not to fund the people who are serving valiantly overseas. These people ought to be the first under consideration. Unfortunately, we are presented with a dichotomy of protecting the whole of the Department of Defense and getting the bill to the President to be signed, as opposed to having the additional moneys necessary to continue to support those overseas. In the past 3 years, as I said, we have included a bridge fund. Without this funding, the Department of Defense will now have to divert money, reprogram money from this bill we are going to pass, to fund overseas operations. Those operations cost about approximately $13 billion a month. That is money that is necessary to keep the people who are in the field now, sustain the rotation of those forces, and ensure that they have the equipment that they need. A significant portion of that money is dedicated to the troops and their families as they come home. It costs much more to bring a soldier or Marine back and put that person back into their unit and take care of all the medical problems associated with returning personnel as it does to send someone over. The difficulty is without a bridge fund those people are going to be the first ones harmed. We still have time. This is the point just made to me--we still have time before November 16 to pass a clean bridge fund, one without bells and whistles, one without political concepts in it, one without telling the President to end a war he can't end. I do hope the Senate understands we should not have a political dispute bar us from supporting those people who have volunteered. This is a total volunteer military. They have depended upon us to support them. We have until November 16 to do what we should do, and that is pass a bridge bill. I do hope the House will keep its word to us and send us a bridge bill. No matter what happens between the White House and the Congress and the parties within the Congress, we should not lose sight of the fact that those people have volunteered to serve this country, they are there, some of them are coming back, and others are going over to take their place until this issue is settled. I, for one, hope it is settled as soon as possible, but I do not believe we can solve the problem by denying the Department the money it needs to support those in the field. We have men and women in uniform in 146 countries today. It is not just Iraq and Afghanistan. These servicemembers are still chasing terrorists around the world. I think we send the wrong message to the deployed troops who have volunteered for duty if we neglect them. This will be the first time we have done that. By not raising the point of order I am relying upon what I believe is a commitment of the House to send us a bridge bill, a bridge bill that can be passed and signed by the President by the 16th, by the time the current CR expires. I do not believe we can ignore our commitments to our forces overseas, and I do hope the Senate will join us in agreeing to pass a bridge bill that is not political. I know my friend, and I disagreed on the basic concept of entering this war. But after the troops were there, we have set aside any political differences and decided our job was to make sure the volunteers who commit themselves, commit their lives and put them at stake, are going to get what they need so long as the Commander in Chief orders them to do what he has the power to do under the Constitution, and that is to represent this country in events taking place in Iraq, Afghanistan, and throughout the world. These are very complicated times. We are reading what is going on in Pakistan, which impacts our operations in Afghanistan. When we were there the last time I was there, the one thing they wanted was support for helicopters and equipment to assist in the war on terrorism. I remind my colleagues there is more than $11 billion in this package for mine resistance, ambush protected, or MRAP vehicles. Senator Inouye and I totally support that concept. But force protection for the troops goes far beyond the vehicles in which they ride. It includes everything from body armor to helmets, to ballistic eye protection, aircraft survivability equipment, to improved sensors, communications for better situational awareness--all of that should be in the bridge fund that is not here. I am disturbed with myself, as a matter of fact, to a certain extent, that I am not going to raise that point of order. But you have to weigh this, now, as to what is in the best interests of the people in uniform. We are not saying today there is not going to be a bridge fund. We are saying we will pass this bill now, but we are committing ourselves--I am committing myself to do everything possible to get a bridge fund passed by November 16. We do not want to send the wrong message to our people deployed. The interesting thing about it--I have spent the last few evenings, quite late into the morning, watching this marvelous public television series called ``The War.'' That was our war, Senator Inouye's war, and my war. As a matter of fact, Senator Inouye has a dramatic presentation in that series, and I applaud him for that. But the difference between that war and this war, these conflicts in which we are involved now, is overwhelming. I remember leaving Miami and calling my aunt and uncle, with whom I lived, then when I came back from China, calling them from Hawaii, almost 2 years later. There was no communication--no phones, no e- mails, no messages. Once in a while, about twice a month maybe, a letter or a package. This is a different concept. These people overseas can hear us now. They are going to get e-mails today saying the Senate did not pass that bridge bill. They are watching us--and they should. They have every right to watch us, and their families do too. I think to do anything less than passing this bridge bill before we go home for Thanksgiving--to me, it would be irresponsible. We have to keep our commitment to these people. The $70 billion that is available to the Department of Defense under the current CR, it ought to remain available to them until we pass the main supplemental, which the Congress will take up sometime in March or April. I do hope the Senate will understand what we are doing. We have a bill today, which includes the Continuing Resolution, that has a great many provisions in it that we didn't have much to do with here in the Senate. The Senate is on warning that it could well become surplusage in the processes of the Congress if we let this happen again. These items were entered into the conference report entirely separate from the defense bill that is before us tonight. Rule XXVIII is supposed to bar that. The exigencies of the situation now are such that we must let the Defense bill go to the President in order to achieve our goal of supporting the activities of the Department of Defense. It is with reluctance I urge my colleagues to support this bill, send it to the President for his signature--which I am assured will happen. If we don't stand up as a Senate and support our troops, we will be neglecting our duty. We have duties here too. We support the Constitution, and the Constitution gives the President of the United States power to send troops overseas whether we like it or not. As a matter of fact, we passed the resolution to make sure the President had that power and then asked him to do it. So under these circumstances, we should not neglect those people who are overseas, who are wearing our uniform and putting their lives at risk on a daily basis. I do hope the Senate will take notice that we cannot let this become a common practice, we cannot neglect our job in terms of having the Congress consider the things we believe are absolutely necessary for our country. The only reason I do not do it now is this gap between now and a week from now on November 16. We have the time to pass a bridge bill. We have the time to authorize the money that is needed to support these people during our absence on what we call the Thanksgiving recess. I hope and I pray to God we will do it. We must do it. It is on that basis that I do not raise a point of order.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Foreign Aid Lessons for Domestic Economic Assistance Act of 2007 to bring a fresh approach to the vexing problem of stimulating Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian and Lower-48 Indian Tribe economies to bring jobs, hope and investment to these impoverished peoples. Despite modest improvements in the economic and social well-being of Alaska's native people, they continue to have extremely high rates of unemployment and poverty, poor health, substandard housing, and the related ills of alcohol and drug abuse. Only 11 percent of American Indians and Alaska Natives hold a bachelor's degree compared to 24 percent of the total population. The poverty rate in 1999 was 25.7 percent for the American Indian and Alaska Native population, compared to 12.4 percent of the total population. Weak economies also contribute to poor health in native communities: American Indian and Alaska Natives suffer from significantly higher mortality rates compared to the general population. The death rate for American Indians and Alaska Natives for tuberculosis is 600 percent higher, 510 percent higher for alcoholism, 229 percent higher for motor vehicle crashes, 189 percent higher for diabetes, 61 percent higher for homicide and 62 percent higher for suicide. American Indian and Alaska Native infants die at a rate of 8.5 per every 1,000 live births, compared to 6.8 per 1,000 for all U.S. races. Housing statistics are no better--12 percent of American Indian and Alaska Native homes lack safe and adequate water supply and waste disposal facilities compared to one percent of the U.S. general population. This is the profile of native communities in Alaska, and in the lower-48 states as well, despite a vibrant cultural legacy and abundant natural resources on and under their lands and in their waters. Many native communities have marketable timber, huge reserves of coal, natural gas, oil, fish and shellfish and other natural amenities. At the same time, native economies are hobbled by geographic remoteness, distance from markets and population centers, poor physical infrastructure, and a lack of governmental transparency, contributing to stagnating Native American economies. Because native economies are often plagued by the same challenges as the economies of the developing world, native economies are likely to benefit from the application of proven models employed in international development efforts, most notably the Millenium Challenge Act of 2003. This initiative aims to foster those policies that are known to be effective and in the process, reduce poverty and promote sustainable economic growth in the host country. Typically, the activities that are assisted are related to agriculture, irrigation, and related land practices; physical infrastructure development to facilitate marketing of goods and services; and a variety of health care programs. Similarly, the objectives of the legislation I am introducing today are just as straightforward: enhancing the long-term job creation and revenue generation potential of Native economies by creating investment-favorable climates and increasing Native productivity. The Foreign Aid Lessons for Domestic Economic Assistance Act would also authorize administering federal economic development assistance in a novel manner to promote economic growth, eliminate poverty, and strengthen good governance, entrepreneurship, and investment in native communities. A corollary, but equally important, objective is to improve the effectiveness of existing Federal economic development assistance by encouraging the integration and coordination of such assistance to benefit Native economies. Accordingly, this legislation requires that any assistance provided must be coordinated with other Federal economic development assistance programs for Native Americans. A critical component of the Foreign Aid Lessons for Domestic Economic Assistance Demonstration is in its demand for accountability in the performance of the Compact terms and use of financial resources. This legislation requires that eligible entities submit to the Secretary of Commerce written reports on an annual basis detailing activities undertaken and progress made through assistance from this program. Mr. President, I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this legislation.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Foreign Aid Lessons for Domestic Economic Assistance Act of 2007 to bring a fresh approach to the vexing problem of stimulating Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian and Lower-48 Indian Tribe economies to bring jobs, hope and investment to these impoverished peoples. Despite modest improvements in the economic and social well-being of Alaska's native people, they continue to have extremely high rates of unemployment and poverty, poor health, substandard housing, and the related ills of alcohol and drug abuse. Only 11 percent of American Indians and Alaska Natives hold a bachelor's degree compared to 24 percent of the total population. The poverty rate in 1999 was 25.7 percent for the American Indian and Alaska Native population, compared to 12.4 percent of the total population. Weak economies also contribute to poor health in native communities: American Indian and Alaska Natives suffer from significantly higher mortality rates compared to the general population. The death rate for American Indians and Alaska Natives for tuberculosis is 600 percent higher, 510 percent higher for alcoholism, 229 percent higher for motor vehicle crashes, 189 percent higher for diabetes, 61 percent higher for homicide and 62 percent higher for suicide. American Indian and Alaska Native infants die at a rate of 8.5 per every 1,000 live births, compared to 6.8 per 1,000 for all U.S. races. Housing statistics are no better--12 percent of American Indian and Alaska Native homes lack safe and adequate water supply and waste disposal facilities compared to one percent of the U.S. general population. This is the profile of native communities in Alaska, and in the lower-48 states as well, despite a vibrant cultural legacy and abundant natural resources on and under their lands and in their waters. Many native communities have marketable timber, huge reserves of coal, natural gas, oil, fish and shellfish and other natural amenities. At the same time, native economies are hobbled by geographic remoteness, distance from markets and population centers, poor physical infrastructure, and a lack of governmental transparency, contributing to stagnating Native American economies. Because native economies are often plagued by the same challenges as the economies of the developing world, native economies are likely to benefit from the application of proven models employed in international development efforts, most notably the Millenium Challenge Act of 2003. This initiative aims to foster those policies that are known to be effective and in the process, reduce poverty and promote sustainable economic growth in the host country. Typically, the activities that are assisted are related to agriculture, irrigation, and related land practices; physical infrastructure development to facilitate marketing of goods and services; and a variety of health care programs. Similarly, the objectives of the legislation I am introducing today are just as straightforward: enhancing the long-term job creation and revenue generation potential of Native economies by creating investment-favorable climates and increasing Native productivity. The Foreign Aid Lessons for Domestic Economic Assistance Act would also authorize administering federal economic development assistance in a novel manner to promote economic growth, eliminate poverty, and strengthen good governance, entrepreneurship, and investment in native communities. A corollary, but equally important, objective is to improve the effectiveness of existing Federal economic development assistance by encouraging the integration and coordination of such assistance to benefit Native economies. Accordingly, this legislation requires that any assistance provided must be coordinated with other Federal economic development assistance programs for Native Americans. A critical component of the Foreign Aid Lessons for Domestic Economic Assistance Demonstration is in its demand for accountability in the performance of the Compact terms and use of financial resources. This legislation requires that eligible entities submit to the Secretary of Commerce written reports on an annual basis detailing activities undertaken and progress made through assistance from this program. Mr. President, I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this legislation.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. STEVENS. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. STEVENS. I yield back the time.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, today is Alaska Day, the day 140 years ago when our territory was officially transferred from Russia to the United States. That was the beginning of a long road towards the American dream for our State. What was once called ``Seward's folly'' has become one of our Nation's great assets. Alaska has more than made good on Seward's initial investment. The Federal Government has collected enough revenue from the development of our resources to repay this investment hundreds and hundreds of times over. Over the years, Alaskans have worked hard to realize our land's vast potential. And, while much remains to be done, we have much to celebrate. We are working towards creating a climate for investment, attracting capital to develop and market our valuable natural resources. As our state grows, we are working to ensure that all Alaskans enjoy the benefits of a strong and vibrant economy. Through programs such as the Denali Commission, we are building modern water and sewer facilities, health care centers and providing education and job opportunities to Alaskans in the far corners of our state. Though many challenges lay ahead, today, we can look on our accomplishments and know that together we can continue making progress on the road to the American Dream.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, today, I ask the Senate to salute the men and women of the 3rd Battalion, 297th Infantry Regiment of the Alaska Army National Guard. This unit just returned from the Middle East for demobilization. Within days, the Alaska Army Guard members will start their return journey back to Alaska. Today, they will be honored at a ``welcome home'' ceremony at Camp Shelby in Mississippi. I had hoped to be with them today, but due to the votes in the Senate and the committee assignments, I have remained here in Washington, DC. The 3rd Battalion served with distinction in both Kuwait and Iraq over the past year. When this unit was mobilized in 2006, it represented the largest mobilization of the Alaska National Guard since World War II. These Guard members represent 81 communities in our State, including many Alaska Native villages. Before their deployment last October, Senator Murkowski and I met with this battalion in Camp Shelby. It was an exciting day as members of the units successfully completed their predeployment training. I was impressed with their high morale and dedication to our country. Most of the members of the Alaskan Guard left behind families and jobs in Alaska to be part of this mission. Their departure caused hardship for their families and communities, especially in their small villages. But they were steadfast in their commitment to the mission and to our country. The dedication of the 3rd Battalion reminds us that in our Nation's darkest moments--when freedom has been on the line--our citizen soldiers have answered the call to serve. Their duties and traditions are deeply rooted in our country's history. During the Civil War and World War II, it was our citizen soldier who tipped the balance and ensured our victory. Members of the 3rd Battalion have carried forward this proud tradition. Their dedication to serve reflects the bravery and courage of those who came before them. Many of them are descendants of those who served with COL Muktuk Marston and other Eskimo Scouts in the Tundra Army during World War II. During that war in which I served, their predecessors defended our freedom in Alaska and around the world. I remember well the heroism of the National Guardsmen I served with in World War II. They, too, and these people now, have earned also the honor of being called the ``Greatest Generation.'' There are few of us left who lived through the dark history of World War II, but as I reflect on their service, I appreciate their bravery, commitment, and dedication. The men and women in uniform today are truly our newest ``Greatest Generation.'' We are comrades in the deepest sense of the word, and we should salute their service. As citizen soldiers, they are a force not only on the battlefield but also a force in their communities. They are the link between the standing military units they serve and the people they protect. They also answer the call in national disasters. In recent months, their mission was critical to the overall success of our operations in the Middle East and Iraq, and all Alaskans, especially those in their communities, are proud of their service. On a day when we honor the 3rd Battalion, I believe we should also take a moment to reflect on those we have lost. Tragically, two Alaska Army Guard soldiers were killed and two were gravely injured in a training accident near Camp Shelby last year. We still mourn their deaths and send our deepest condolences to their families and friends. We should ask God to bless them and God to bless the brave men and women, such as the Army National Guard, who volunteer to defend our great country. The thoughts and prayers of Alaskans, and I think of a grateful Nation, are with all of them. I yield the floor.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. STEVENS. Reserving the right to object, and I do not object, will the Senators tell us some timeframe?

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

Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that amendment No. 3144 be withdrawn.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I thought we were going to have a package of these amendments. I will not object, but I do think it should have been in a package. I hope we get a package here so we do not do them one by one. I do not object.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, the new Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike G. Mullen, has made a statement to our American soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines and their families. I was privileged to get a copy of this, and I think it is the type of letter every Member of the Senate should be allowed to read. So I ask unanimous consent it be printed in the Record.

Mr. STEVENS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

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