Gordon Smith

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to take a few moments to praise the Banking Committee for bringing the Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act of 2002 to the floor and all the hard work they have done in the past week. In the weeks before this bill came to the floor I thought that what we needed was some type of Investors' Bill of Rights. I had worked with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to come up with bipartisan goals to prevent corporate abuse and protect investors. I feel that much of the bill on the floor fulfills these goals. I feel that there are a few things that investors should see happen when we pass this bill. I believe that much of this bill will help, and in other areas we may have to work further. I believe that investors must have access to information about a company. We should ensure that every investor has access to clear and understandable information needed to judge a firm's financial performance, condition and risks. The SEC will have the power to make sure companies provide investors a true and fair picture of themselves. A company should disclose information in its control that a reasonable investor would find necessary to assess the company's value, without compromising competitive assets. I believe that investors should be able to trust the auditors. Investors rely on strong, fair and transparent auditory procedures and the concept of the Oversight Board in the Sarbanes bill is a sound one. I believe investors should be able to trust corporate CEOs. Unlike shareholders or even directors, corporate officers work full-time to promote and protect the well-being of the firm. A CEO bears responsibility for informing the firm's shareholders of its financial health. I support the concept of withholding CEO bonuses and other incentive-based forms of compensation in cases of illegal and unethical accounting. Further, I do believe that CEOs must vouch for the veracity of public disclosures including financial statements. I believe that investors should be able to trust stock analysts. Investors should be able to trust that recommendations made by analysts are not biased by promises of profit dependent on ratings. It is only common sense that there should be rules of conduct for stock analysts and that there must be disclosure requirements that might illuminate conflicts of interest. Finally, I believe that we should be able to rely on the Securities and Exchange Commission to protect investors and maintain the integrity of the securities market. Current funding is inadequate and should be increased to allow for greater oversight, ensuring investors' trust in good government. During the debate on this bill my attention has been called to the plight of public pension systems, such as Oregon's Public Employment Retirement System, known by the acronym PERS. PERS you see was invested in both Enron and WorldCom stock and has been hit hard by the debacles that occurred in each company. The PERS system lost about $46 million after Enron self-destructed and another $63 million following the WorldCom scandal. These losses occurred because false profits were inflated and corporate books were doctored. Under the PERS system, an 8 percent rate of return is guaranteed for the 290,000 Oregon active and retired members of PERS. Oregon taxpayers have to make up the difference following an ENRON debacle or WorldCom scandal, and my State's budget is not prepared for this kind of loss. While this bill goes far in creating accountability, I am interested in finding out if there is more we can do and am asking the General Accounting Office, in consultation with the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Labor, to report to Congress on the extent to which Federal securities laws have led to declines in the value of stock in publicly traded companies and in public and private pension plans. I believe this study is necessary because many public and private pension plans continue to rely on the continued stock growth in publicly traded companies, much like the PERS system. I hope this study will provide the needed information so public and private pension plans can reevaluate future investments in publicly traded companies. We cannot stand by and watch our hard working Americans ruin their pension systems while corrupt corporate executives take advantage of investors. I am proud of the work the Senate has done in the last week in creating accountability and responsibility in corporate America and look forward to working on this issue in a way that will help the investors and pensioners in the PERS system in Oregon.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy in March of last year. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. I would like to describe a terrible crime that occurred June 10, 2000, in Albuquerque, NM. A man in a minivan yelling obscenities ran down participants in a gay pride parade. One victim was hit twice in the knees and thrown off the hood. The perpetrator tried to swerve into the crowd three times before police finally pulled him out of the vehicle and arrested him. I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens, to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation and changing current law, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy in March of last year. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. I would like to describe a terrible crime that occurred in November 1998 in Providence, MA. A gay man was assaulted outside a bar. The assailants, David E. Sheldon, 19, and Taylor Grenier, 18, who used antigay slurs during the attack, were charged with a hate crime in the incident. I believe that Government's first duty is to defend its citizens, to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation and changing current law, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Madam President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy in March of last year. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. I would like to describe a terrible crime that occurred September 19, 2000 in Cambridge, MA. A Muslim student, who was wearing a praying cap, was returning to his dorm from Islamic prayer when two white men with shaved heads attacked him. The men grabbed the student from behind and punched and kicked him. One of the perpetrators used a racial epithet during the beating. The victim required medical attention and received stitches for a wound to his head. I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens, to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation and changing current law, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Madam President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy in March of last year. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. I would like to describe a terrible crime that occurred July 7, 2002 in St. Petersburg, FL. Sonny Gonzales and his friends were walking to their limousine after a gay pride party when an angry man approached them in a parking garage. ``The first thing out of his mouth was, `` `faggots,' '' said Gonzales. The man taunted the group, screamed obscenities, and then punched Gonzales and his friends. Gonzales suffered a head laceration. His partner, Stephen Hair, 25, suffered a skull fracture, a cracked sinus, and a broken tooth trying to defend him. Authorities arrested Devin Scott Angus, 20, in the attack. He was charged with aggravated battery with great bodily harm and battery evidencing prejudice. I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens, to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation and changing current law, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy in March of last year. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. I would like to describe a terrible crime that occurred September 12, 2001 in Huntington, NY. A man, who was drunk, tried to run over a Pakistani woman in the parking lot of a shopping mall, according to police. The man then followed the woman into the mall and threatened to kill her for ``destroying my country.'' I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens, to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation and changing current law, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy in March of last year. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. I would like to describe a terrible crime that occurred January 25 in Washington, DC. Two minors attacked two gay men leaving a gay bar in DuPont Circle. Before attacking the victims, the assailants shouted derogatory, anti-homosexual slurs at them. Local police have arrested one of the perpetrators. I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens, to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation and changing current law, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise to salute a community leader in my home State of Oregon. Today, I want to recognize the efforts of Susan Abravanel, Education Coordinator at SOLV, a non- profit organization in Oregon, in advocating for service-learning, one of the most exciting educational initiatives taking hold in our Nation today. Service-learning gives students the opportunity to learn through community service, but it is important to note that it is much more than just community service. It is a method of classroom instruction that engages a student's intellect through hands-on work outside the classroom that benefits the community at large. Research shows that students participating in service-learning make gains on achievement tests, complete their homework more often, and increase their grade point averages. In addition to producing academic gains, service-learning is also associated with both increased attendance and reduced dropout rates. It is clear to educators across the country that service-learning helps students feel more connected to their own education while strengthening their connection to their community as well. It is for all of these reasons that Susan Abravanel is working so hard to advocate for service-learning in classrooms in Oregon and across the nation. Ms. Abravanel is working closely with my office and with education leaders in Oregon to ensure that my home State remains a national leader in service-learning. Just 2 months ago, I introduced a bill with my colleague, Senator Edwards, to strengthen our Nation's commitment to service-learning. I feel confident that this bill will soon become law and that with Ms. Abravanel's continued efforts both here in Washington, DC, and at home in Oregon, students will continue to benefit from an education tied to civic engagement. Ms. Abravanel exemplifies the type of engaged citizen our schools must endeavor to produce, and her persistence will ensure that future generations of Americans will give back to their communities just as she has. I would also like to note that Susan isn't just concerned about education, her interests and efforts in Portland's Jewish community are well known and highly appreciated, she is the new President of the Oregon chapter of the American Jewish Committee. I look forward to working with Susan in her new role at the AJC and thank her for her continuing devotion to service-learning.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President I rise today to recognize some community heroes in my home State of Oregon. The Agape House, which has been serving needy families in the Hermiston area for 15 years, is one of those rare organizations that dedicates its efforts entirely to the service of others. Founded in 1987, Agape House began as a small group of volunteers providing food and clothing to approximately 100 families a month. Over the years, Agape House has been able to expand its reach, and last month was able to help 644 families in need. Food and clothing still constitute the majority of the assistance provided by Agape House's volunteers, but they are often able to help local residents with energy bills, prescription drug bills, emergency shelter, and any number of other unmet daily needs. Perhaps the most encouraging aspect of Agape House's work is that it is done by a large number of area volunteers who take turns staffing the Agape House. On any given day, six to eight volunteers work at Agape House, but they are seldom the same six to eight people who were there the day before. Not only do its many volunteers come from the community, but Agape House relies primarily on food, clothing, and financial donations from local citizens. Agape House is truly a community effort, and, for that reason, has been uniquely successful in providing assistance to the needy families of western Umatilla County. One recent and extraordinary example of Agape House's effectiveness involves a young single mother in the Hermiston area. As a young single mother with three mouths to feed, this jobless Hermiston woman relied on Agape House for many of her family's daily needs. When she was finally able to find work, she struggled to get to and from her job because she could not afford a car, and was at risk of finding herself jobless once again. Seeing her problems, Agape House stepped in and gave her a car. A car is not a typical charitable gift to a young woman in need. With her new car, this young woman flourished at her job, and Agape House, which once served this woman nearly every day, has not had a visit from her since the day she received her car. This is just one example of how Agape House goes the extra mile to help people truly become self-sufficient, which takes much more dedication than simply providing temporary relief. I think it is important to recognize organizations like Agape House here on the Senate floor. The staff and volunteers associated with Agape House are heroes to their community, and are shining examples of what can be accomplished by a generous group of civic-minded citizens. I appreciate the important work they do each and every day, and want them to know that their efforts do not go unnoticed by those outside Umatilla County.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I ask that a letter, sent today, to the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Harvey Pitt, from Senator Breaux and myself be printed in the Record. The letter follows: U.S. Senate, Washington, DC, June 28, 2002. Hon. Harvey L. Pitt, Chairman, Securities and Exchange Commission, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Pitt: We are writing out of deep concern regarding recent reports about a variety of abuses in corporate accounting scandals by companies and corporate executives. In particular, the accounting practices at WorldCom that led to an error of more than $3.5 billion is unforgivable and inexcusable. We are pleased to have taken steps to investigate several recent disturbing disclosures and encourage you to pursue initiatives to improve corporate responsibility and shareholder protections. We fear that these reports of corporate fraud may just be the tip of the iceberg, and the need to improve accountability in America's public companies is imminent. American business is built upon an integrity and trust in business relationships that bolster our currency and provide a shining face of transparency that supports western values and spreads capitalism and corporate responsibility across the globe. We can't emphasize how important it is for you to continue to work to improve corporate disclosure, make corporate officers more accountable and develop a stronger, more independent audit system. American businesses must be trustworthy, transparent and able to withstand the light of any audit. We look forward to working with you and the Securities and Exchange Commission as you fully investigate the companies and individuals who abuse the system and prosecute them to the full extent of the law. Your role is crucial as we work to restore confidence in American business and restore integrity and trust in our stock market. Sincerely, Gordon H. Smith, John Breaux, U.S. Senate.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy in March of last year. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. I would like to describe a terrible crime that occurred September 12, 2001, in Boston, MA. Three teenagers, claiming they wanted to ``get back at Arabs,'' threw three Molotov cocktails onto a convenience store the day after the September 11 terrorist attacks. The teenagers thought that the store was owned by an Arab. The owner of the store, Aswin Patel, an Indian man, escaped unharmed. The three perpetrators face Federal hate crimes charges and have been charged with assault with intent to murder and arson. I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens, to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation and changing current law, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I would like to tell the Senator exactly what the 939th will do in Arizona. They will train. They will look for opportunities to help in a civic way to be relevant to the people of Arizona and to rescue them because they want to be ready for combat situations. So they are going to look for opportunities to save the lives of Arizonians. God bless them in that effort. What is the Defense budget? Probably $300 billion which we are going to vote for, and we are talking about $4.8 million. I think what is really lost in my friends' comments is the role of the National Guard and the national defense. It is growing. It is not declining. National Guard people are looking all the time to do the same thing as the Air Force's 939th unit. To suggest that somehow the Oregon National Guard is irrelevant to the national defense is just demonstrably false. As we speak, there are many Oregon National Guard units in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan. They are deployed. I think the National Guard's role is growing. It is not diminishing. To have these kinds of capacities, which many other States have, in Oregon is entirely reasonable, and it is entirely fair. I don't begrudge the Air Force moving the 939 to Arizona. I am not sure I am very comfortable hearing that out of $300 billion, the Air Force can't allow $4.8 million for the State of Oregon when Oregonians are taxpayers too. We contribute to the national defense, and we get less in defense dollars than probably any State in America. Is that right? I say it is wrong. I say we ought to get some help here today on the floor of the Senate.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. I thank my colleague for being a partner in this cause to preserve in the Pacific Northwest a search and rescue capability. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce an amendment with Senator Wyden to preserve a truly invaluable search and rescue capability in the Pacific Northwest. On May 30, all eyes in Oregon and across the nation watched as brave Oregonians put themselves in harms way to rescue climbers on Mt. Hood. The rescuers included members of the Oregon National Guard, the Portland Mountain Rescue, and the Air Force Reserve 939th Air Rescue Wing, whose members have been lauded for scores of rescues on Mt. Hood and the Oregon Coast, not to mention rescues in our neighboring state of Washington. In fact this rescue wing volunteers for these types of rescues. Recently, nine climbers were swept into a 20-foot deep crevasse on Mt. Hood. Tragically, three of the climbers did not survive, but the skills of the rescuers ensured that others would survive. This rescue highlighted the skills of the Rescue Wing and the importance Oregonians place on the Wing's capabilities in the region. While adverse wind conditions most likely sent one of the helicopters into an inevitable crash, the highly skilled pilot of the 939th ensured that the crew survived and that all on the ground were unharmed. Just one week prior, the 939th rescued a sick climber from Mt. Hood's Sandy Glacier. I believe this rescue highlights the Wing's capabilities: Late in the evening, the 304th Rescue Squadron used its night vision capabilities to spot the climber at an elevation of 8,750 feet. The Pave Hawk, equipped with a hoist, lowered down Steve Rollins of Portland Mountain Rescue onto the Glacier to assess the climber. After being secured to the hoist, the climber and rescuer were raised into the helicopter and transported to safety. Mr. President, Oregonians were devastated to hear of Air Force plans to take away the 939th Search and Rescue Wing out of the state. Oregonians realize that the 939th's mission is to rescue our brave men in combat. In fact, we believe that the members of the 939th are among the very best trained in the nation. We know this because we know the Oregon terrain and we have witnessed first-hand their skill under most challenging conditions. My original amendment with Senator Wyden would have prohibited the use of funds to take this search and rescue unit away from the Pacific Northwest. Senator Wyden and I understand the committee members have a problem with this amendment and we therefore introduced another amendment that would not interfere with the Air Force's force structure. The managers have told Senator Wyden and me that they would support this compromise: it authorizes a total of $4.8 million for the Oregon National Guard to be able to perform this mission. I appreciate the assistance from Senators Warner, Levin, Lott and Stevens, and look forward to working with them on this important issue. Mr. President, let me close by illustrating why this is so important to me and all Oregonians. The pioneer spirit of the Oregon Trail did not end with the settlement of the valleys of Oregon. That spirit and bravery is very much still alive in my state. But Oregonians cannot go any further west. They can only go up--into the skies and into the mountains. It is there that the modern-day pioneers meet with both triumph and tragedy, and their lessons are learned. The lessons of last week on Mt. Hood are harsh one that remind us of human frailty and the unbending forces of nature. Not unlike the tragic events of the last year, what I saw in the recovery on Mt. Hood also illustrates the bravery and compassion inherent in us all, and I want that spirit to continue in Oregon. Mr. President, this is the spirit that is the bedrock of America's Armed Forces. It is clear to met that removing the 939th from Oregon would truly be a tragedy without a lesson. Again, on May 30, Oregonians became aware of a unit called the 939th. Prior to that, very few Oregonians would have any idea it was there, even though throughout the year, every year, the 939th has saved people trapped in natural disasters or engaged in recreational activities or sometimes just going about their business. Truly, what they saw on May 30 was a tragedy that unfolded on national television when nine hikers climbing Mount Hood lost footing, fell into a crevice in which a number of them were killed. Many different units, from police, the Oregon National Guard, and the Air Force 939th search and rescue, came to their rescue. They volunteered to do this. The 939th is always training to be prepared to help in military situations. They say these real-life situations are truly the best training they can have. In the course of training, they have saved countless human lives. About a year ago, Senator Wyden and I were informed that the Air Force was to move the 939th from Oregon. I am not one to interfere with basing decisions of the Air Force. When this happened, it was clear to every Oregonian that we needed them. So Senator Wyden and I tried to make the case a few weeks ago that they ought to stay. Senator McCain of Arizona pointed out we should not be telling the Air Force where to base their people. I think he has a good point. Senator Wyden and I are offering a compromise to say, fine, let us have the upgrades in the helicopters. Let us have the personnel for the Oregon National Guard. By the way, these upgrades have been made available in most of the 50 States, but not Oregon. All we are saying is we need some military component in the Pacific Northwest. The 939th is going to Arizona. I do not begrudge that to my colleagues from Arizona. I love Arizona and I love my colleagues. My Udall ancestry is all from there and I want Arizonans to have all the search and rescue capability they need. But, doggone it, why take it from Oregon and say you cannot have any comparable replacement? We are talking peanuts here when it comes to issues of life and death. So I plead with my colleagues to allow this authorization because the whole country had the case made for them on national TV when they saw this rescue effort tragically end in a crash but with no additional loss of human life. I wish the 939th well as they go to Arizona. This $4.8 million that it takes to upgrade these helicopters and to provide some personnel is precious little to ask in an authorization as gargantuan as this. So I appeal to the hearts and the feelings of all 50 States. Don't leave the Pacific Northwest without this capacity. I have the privilege of sitting in Mark Hatfield's seat. Mark Hatfield, for reasons of personal conscience, was not a big advocate of military expenditure. The military money went in other places. He brought other kinds of expenditures to Oregon, I grant you. But what little we have probably puts Oregon the 50th of 50 States in receiving military appropriations. I say $4.8 million is not too much to ask. I yield the floor and ask for the consideration and votes of colleagues on both sides of the aisle.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. All the helicopters you just named--all those helicopters--we are just asking them to get the upgrade. Other States have received them. We have not.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. They do volunteer. That is what they do in Oregon.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. I say to my friend--and I really mean that--you made my point. They will be focused on military missions. They will volunteer for these real-life rescue missions. They will save people in the desert.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Will my colleague yield?

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy in March of last year. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. I would like to describe a terrible crime that occurred in August 2001 in Monmouth County, NJ. Seven people assaulted a 23-year-old learning disabled man with hearing and speech impediments. The victim was lured to a party, bound, and physically and verbally assaulted for three hours. Later, he was taken to a wooded area where the torture continued until he was able to escape. The perpetrators were sentenced on multiple counts in connection with the incident, including aggravated assault and harassment by bias intimidation. I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens, to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation and changing current law, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to call attention to an editorial in today's Washington Post. Anti-Defamation League Director Abe Forman has written an excellent piece on the recent wave of anti-Semitism in Europe. The Anti-Defamation League today released a telling survey on anti-Semitic attitudes in America and abroad and the results are nothing less than chilling. I would call on all my colleagues to take a look at this important survey and recommit ourselves to stopping all prejudice--particularly anti-Semitism both here and in Europe. I ask to have today's editorial by Abe Foxman printed in the Record. The editorial follows: Europe's Anti-Israel Excuse (By Abraham H. Foxman--Thursday, June 27, 2002) Throughout history a constant barometer for judging the level of hate and exclusion vs. the level of freedom and democracy in any society has been anti-Semitism--how a country treats its Jewish citizens. Jews have been persecuted and delegitimized throughout history because of their perceived differences. Any society that can understand and accept Jews is typically more democratic, more open and accepting of ``the other.'' The predictor has held true throughout the ages. During the Holocaust, Jews and other minorities of Europe were dispatched to the camps and, ultimately, their deaths in an environment rife with anti-Semitism. Nearly 60 years later in a modern, democratic Europe that presumably had shed itself of the legacy of that era, Jews have again come under attack. During the past year and a half a troubling epidemic of anti-Jewish hatred, not isolated to any one country or community, has produced a climate of intimidation and fear in the Jewish communities of Europe. Never, as a Holocaust survivor, did I believe we would witness another eruption of anti-Semitism of such magnitude, in Europe of all places. But the resiliency of anti-Semitism is unparalleled. It rears its ugly head in far-flung places, like Malaysia and Japan, where there are no Jews. The Anti-Defamation League has been taking the pulse of anti-Semitism in America for more than 40 years. Never did I expect that we would have to do the same in Europe, given the history and our expectation that European anti-Semitism, while not eradicated, would be so marginal and so rejected that it would not be a major concern. What we found in the countries we surveyed--Britain, France, Germany, Belgium, and Denmark--was shocking and disturbing. Classical anti-Semitism, coupled with a new form fueled by anti-Israel sentiment, has become a potent and dangerous mix in countries with enormous Muslim and Arab populations. More than 1 million Jews live in these five nations, and their communities are under siege. Who would have believed that we would see the burning of synagogues and attacks on Jewish students, rabbis, Jewish institutions and Jewish-owned property? While European leaders have attempted to explain away these attacks as a fleeting response to events in the Middle East and not the harbinger of a more insidious and deeply ingrained hatred, the attitudes of average Europeans paint a far different picture. Among the 2,500 people polled in late May and early June as part of our survey, 45 percent admitted to their perception that Jews are more loyal to Israel than their own country, while 30 percent agreed with the statement that Jews have too much power in the business world. Perhaps most telling, 62 percent said they believe the outbreak of anti-Semitic violence in Europe is the result of anti-Israel sentiment, not anti-Jewish feeling. The contrariness of their own attitudes suggest that Europeans are loath to admit that hatred of Jews is making a comeback. This view may make Europeans more comfortable in the face of what is happening in their countries, by suggesting that this time around, Jews are not the innocent victims but are themselves the victimizers in the Middle East. But the incredibly biased reaction against Israel seen in the poll-- despite the fact that Israel under former prime minister Ehud Barak offered the Palestinians an independent state, and despite the fact that Palestinians have carried out a sustained campaign of terrorism against Israeli civilians--speaks to a repressed hostility to Jews that may not be socially acceptable in post-Holocaust Europe. Still, even with such constraints, some 30 percent of Europeans are not averse to expressing their anti-Semitic beliefs openly and directly. Meanwhile, the Europeans have been tepid in their support for the U.S. war on terrorism and especially the Bush administration's efforts to broker an end to Israeli- Palestinian bloodshed. The Europeans seek to appease Saddam Hussein and other threats to the Western world while blaming Israel, not the Palestinian Authority, for the crisis. All while they minimize the extent of anti-Semitism in Europe and fail to immediately condemn horrific acts of harassment and vandalism. The message to Europe's burgeoning immigrant population is that there is a certain level of acceptance for intolerance. It is time for Europe to assume responsibility for a situation of its own making. The combination of significant, openly expressed anti-Jewish bias together with irrational anti-Israel opinions creates a climate of great concern for the Jews of Europe. It is not surprising that in such an atmosphere Muslim residents feel free to attack Jewish students and religious institutions not because they are Israelis but because they are Jews. And it is not surprising that some European officials have begun telling Jewish leaders to advise their numbers to avoid public displays of Jewishness, instead of promising to protect their Jewish communities. European leaders and officials must see what is going on for what it is--outright anti-Semitism--and condemn the revival of this ancient hatred that had its greatest manifestations on the same continent. They must acknowledge that the anti-Israel vilification across Western Europe is unacceptable. The recent comparisons of Israelis to Nazis, to Jews as the executors of ``massacres'' and even as the killers of Christ--these do not fall into the category of legitimate criticism of a sovereign state. They create the very climate that questions the future of Jewish life in Europe.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, today I salute a community leader in my home State of Oregon. I want to recognize the efforts of Susan Abravanel, Education Coordinator at SOLV, a nonprofit organization in Oregon, in advocating for service-learning, one of the most exciting educational initiatives taking hold in our Nation today. Service-learning gives students the opportunity to learn through community service, but it is important to note that it is much more than just community service. It is a method of classroom instruction that engages a student's intellect through hands-on work outside the classroom that benefits the community at large. Research shows that students participating in service-learning make gains on achievement tests, complete their homework more often, and increase their grade point averages. In addition to producing academic gains, service-learning is also associated with both increased attendance and reduced dropout rates. It is clear to educators across the country that service-learning helps students feel more connected to their own education while strengthening their connection to their community as well. It is for all of these reasons that Susan Abravanel is working so hard to advocate for service-learning in classrooms in Oregon and across the nation. Ms. Abravanel is working closely with my office and with education leaders in Oregon to ensure that my home state remains a national leader in service-learning. Just 2 months ago, I introduced a bill with my colleague, Senator Edwards, to strengthen our Nation's commitment to service-learning. I feel confident that this bill will soon become law and that with Ms. Abravanel's continued efforts both here in Washington, DC and at home in Oregon, students will continue to benefit from an education tied to civic engagement. Ms. Abravanel exemplifies the type of engaged citizen our schools must endeavor to produce, and her persistence will ensure that future generations of Americans will give back to their communities just as she has. I would also like to note that Susan isn't just concerned about education, her interests and efforts in Portland's Jewish community are well known and highly appreciated, she is the new President of the Oregon chapter of the American Jewish Committee. I look forward to working with Susan in her new role at the AJC and thank her for her continuing devotion to service-learning.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy in March of last year. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. I would like to describe a terrible crime that occurred July 4, 2000 in Casper, WY. A man was arrested on charges of firing shots at a group of people watching a Fourth of July fireworks display in what police described as a hate crime. Johnny Lee Hodge, who is white, was being held on $100,000 bond after firing a shotgun at least three times at several black men and pointing a gun at the head of a teenage Indian girl, authorities said. Hodge made racial slurs before shooting at the group. I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens, to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation and changing current law, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I would like to thank my colleague from Montana for his leadership on the issue of the uninsured, and rise today in support of the Baucus-Smith Health Insurance Access Act. This bill will go a long way toward mending some of the holes in our nation's health care safety net. And make no mistake, the safety net is torn. Currently 40 million Americans, that's one in six,--live, work, and go to school among us without health insurance. That means that nationally, 17 percent of Americans do not have any health insurance. They are our friends, our neighbors, our children, our parents. And the problem is getting worse, not better. In 2001, two million Americans lost their health insurance, that's the largest one year increase in almost a decade. Many, more than 35 million of these uninsured Americans, are in low- income working families. Many people who work in small businesses are not offered health insurance, and those who are often cannot afford the skyrocketing premiums. This is particularly true if an individual or a member of their family happen to have some kind of pre-existing or chronic condition that can make a simple policy totally unaffordable. Even relatively healthy Americans find that when they get older, they may be unable to afford health care premiums after they retire, but before they become eligible for Medicare. Some people say that insurance is irrelevant, that the uninsured can still get good care at public clinics and in emergency rooms. While it is true that public clinics do provide high quality care to millions of Americans, this is not the same as having health insurance with a regular source of care. Not having a regular source of care leads to needless delays in seeking care. According to a recent report by the Institute of Medicine, an estimated 18,000 people die every year because they don't have health insurance, and don't get the care they need in a timely fashion. Eighteen thousand deaths a year. Millions more people suffer unnecessarily due to delays in care. Millions of Americans are falling through the cracks in our health care system, and it is our moral obligation to help them get the care they need by providing access to affordable health insurance. The Health Insurance Access Act of 2002 provides a number of solutions to the growing crisis of the uninsured. It helps small businesses, which are often unable to offer affordable health insurance to their employees. Under this legislation, small businesses would get a significant tax break to subsidize their purchase of health insurance. The tax break is indexed to the size of a business, so the smallest employers get the most help if they choose to offer their employees health insurance. This is important because smaller businesses are much less likely to offer their employees health coverage. In order to avoid punishing small employers who are already doing the right thing, our tax credit is available to all qualified small employers, regardless of whether they currently offer health insurance to their employees. Another problem small businesses face in purchasing health insurance for their employees is finding an affordable policy with real benefits for their employees. By definition, small businesses are too small to provide a stable risk pool. This drives up the cost of premiums. The Baucus-Smith Health Insurance Access Act of 2002 offers employers some relief to this problem by providing funding for purchasing alliances, which lower premiums by sharing risk. This will provide new, more affordable options for millions of Americans, who have until now had limited health insurance choices. Our bill also provides grants to states to help fund high risk pools for people who have very limited health insurance options. It seems ironic to me that many of the people who need health insurance most, people with an expensive medical condition--are often unable to obtain insurance. For many people who have extensive health care needs and medical expenses, obtaining coverage in the individual insurance market is not a viable option. If they can find a policy to cover their illness-- often they cannot--they may not be able to afford the premium. However, in many cases, many of these individuals may not be able to buy health insurance at any cost, because insurers often turn down high risk individuals for coverage because of an existing or previous illness. High-risk insurance pools attempt to fill this gap in the insurance market. Oregon has had a high risk insurance pool for people who were unable to obtain health insurance because of health conditions for the past 15 years. Since its inception, more than 24,000 Oregonians have bought health care coverage through this high risk insurance pool, 24,000 people who would otherwise have had no health care coverage. Operating a high risk pool in Oregon has had its costs, costs which are increasing every year. Our legislation will help States assist people who are trying to do the right thing afford health insurance coverage that would otherwise be out of reach. While much of the policy discussion about the uninsured focuses on children, low income parents are substantially more likely than their children to be uninsured. The Health Insurance Access Act of 2002 would also allow states to offer Medicaid and SCHIP benefits to parents of low income eligible children. Encouraging States to offer Medicaid or SCHIP coverage to parents will significantly expand access to care for low income parents, and their children, because parents are more likely to enroll their kids in Medicaid or SCHIP when the family is eligible, rather than just certain family members. Finally, the Health Insurance Access Act of 2002 would address another hole in the insurance market: the near elderly. The near elderly, Americans aged 62-64, often do not have employer sponsored health insurance, because they have retired from the labor force, but are not yet eligible for Medicare. At the same time, insurance coverage is particularly critical for near-elderly Americans, as the risk of serious illness rises with age, and the prevalence of chronic disease is higher among this population. In addition, because many of the near-elderly have pre-existing conditions, private insurers often deny them coverage or charge unaffordable premiums. Allowing all Americans aged 62-64 to buy into the Medicare program would create a strong risk pool that would stabilize premiums, making them affordable to many who would otherwise have been unable to afford coverage. Researchers estimate that almost 40% of eligible Americans 62-64 would buy into Medicare if allowed to do so. The number of uninsured people in America is an outrage. If 18,000 Americans died in terrorist incidents each year, there would be widespread outrage. Yet, tens of thousands of uninsured Americans are at risk of dying each year from cancers diagnosed too late, or stroke from uncontrolled high blood pressure. These can be slow, painful deaths. They are preventable deaths. We can help prevent these deaths. We should help prevent these deaths. I urge you to join me and my colleague from Montana to support the Health Insurance Access Act of 2002. This legislation will touch millions of lives by making quality, affordable health insurance accessible to individuals and families who are living at risk. It is the right thing to do. It is the right time to do it.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I would like to thank my colleague from Montana for his leadership on the issue of the uninsured, and rise today in support of the Baucus-Smith Health Insurance Access Act. This bill will go a long way toward mending some of the holes in our nation's health care safety net. And make no mistake, the safety net is torn. Currently 40 million Americans, that's one in six,--live, work, and go to school among us without health insurance. That means that nationally, 17 percent of Americans do not have any health insurance. They are our friends, our neighbors, our children, our parents. And the problem is getting worse, not better. In 2001, two million Americans lost their health insurance, that's the largest one year increase in almost a decade. Many, more than 35 million of these uninsured Americans, are in low- income working families. Many people who work in small businesses are not offered health insurance, and those who are often cannot afford the skyrocketing premiums. This is particularly true if an individual or a member of their family happen to have some kind of pre-existing or chronic condition that can make a simple policy totally unaffordable. Even relatively healthy Americans find that when they get older, they may be unable to afford health care premiums after they retire, but before they become eligible for Medicare. Some people say that insurance is irrelevant, that the uninsured can still get good care at public clinics and in emergency rooms. While it is true that public clinics do provide high quality care to millions of Americans, this is not the same as having health insurance with a regular source of care. Not having a regular source of care leads to needless delays in seeking care. According to a recent report by the Institute of Medicine, an estimated 18,000 people die every year because they don't have health insurance, and don't get the care they need in a timely fashion. Eighteen thousand deaths a year. Millions more people suffer unnecessarily due to delays in care. Millions of Americans are falling through the cracks in our health care system, and it is our moral obligation to help them get the care they need by providing access to affordable health insurance. The Health Insurance Access Act of 2002 provides a number of solutions to the growing crisis of the uninsured. It helps small businesses, which are often unable to offer affordable health insurance to their employees. Under this legislation, small businesses would get a significant tax break to subsidize their purchase of health insurance. The tax break is indexed to the size of a business, so the smallest employers get the most help if they choose to offer their employees health insurance. This is important because smaller businesses are much less likely to offer their employees health coverage. In order to avoid punishing small employers who are already doing the right thing, our tax credit is available to all qualified small employers, regardless of whether they currently offer health insurance to their employees. Another problem small businesses face in purchasing health insurance for their employees is finding an affordable policy with real benefits for their employees. By definition, small businesses are too small to provide a stable risk pool. This drives up the cost of premiums. The Baucus-Smith Health Insurance Access Act of 2002 offers employers some relief to this problem by providing funding for purchasing alliances, which lower premiums by sharing risk. This will provide new, more affordable options for millions of Americans, who have until now had limited health insurance choices. Our bill also provides grants to states to help fund high risk pools for people who have very limited health insurance options. It seems ironic to me that many of the people who need health insurance most, people with an expensive medical condition--are often unable to obtain insurance. For many people who have extensive health care needs and medical expenses, obtaining coverage in the individual insurance market is not a viable option. If they can find a policy to cover their illness-- often they cannot--they may not be able to afford the premium. However, in many cases, many of these individuals may not be able to buy health insurance at any cost, because insurers often turn down high risk individuals for coverage because of an existing or previous illness. High-risk insurance pools attempt to fill this gap in the insurance market. Oregon has had a high risk insurance pool for people who were unable to obtain health insurance because of health conditions for the past 15 years. Since its inception, more than 24,000 Oregonians have bought health care coverage through this high risk insurance pool, 24,000 people who would otherwise have had no health care coverage. Operating a high risk pool in Oregon has had its costs, costs which are increasing every year. Our legislation will help States assist people who are trying to do the right thing afford health insurance coverage that would otherwise be out of reach. While much of the policy discussion about the uninsured focuses on children, low income parents are substantially more likely than their children to be uninsured. The Health Insurance Access Act of 2002 would also allow states to offer Medicaid and SCHIP benefits to parents of low income eligible children. Encouraging States to offer Medicaid or SCHIP coverage to parents will significantly expand access to care for low income parents, and their children, because parents are more likely to enroll their kids in Medicaid or SCHIP when the family is eligible, rather than just certain family members. Finally, the Health Insurance Access Act of 2002 would address another hole in the insurance market: the near elderly. The near elderly, Americans aged 62-64, often do not have employer sponsored health insurance, because they have retired from the labor force, but are not yet eligible for Medicare. At the same time, insurance coverage is particularly critical for near-elderly Americans, as the risk of serious illness rises with age, and the prevalence of chronic disease is higher among this population. In addition, because many of the near-elderly have pre-existing conditions, private insurers often deny them coverage or charge unaffordable premiums. Allowing all Americans aged 62-64 to buy into the Medicare program would create a strong risk pool that would stabilize premiums, making them affordable to many who would otherwise have been unable to afford coverage. Researchers estimate that almost 40% of eligible Americans 62-64 would buy into Medicare if allowed to do so. The number of uninsured people in America is an outrage. If 18,000 Americans died in terrorist incidents each year, there would be widespread outrage. Yet, tens of thousands of uninsured Americans are at risk of dying each year from cancers diagnosed too late, or stroke from uncontrolled high blood pressure. These can be slow, painful deaths. They are preventable deaths. We can help prevent these deaths. We should help prevent these deaths. I urge you to join me and my colleague from Montana to support the Health Insurance Access Act of 2002. This legislation will touch millions of lives by making quality, affordable health insurance accessible to individuals and families who are living at risk. It is the right thing to do. It is the right time to do it.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Madam President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy in March of last year. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. I would like to describe a terrible crime that occurred September 17, 2001 in Evanston, IL. Mustapha Zemkour, a Chicago taxi driver and student, was injured when two men--including a Cook County corrections officer--chased him on motorcycles, then hit him in the face and yelled, ``This is what you get, you mass murderer!'' The perpetrators ``apparently assumed he was of Arab descent'' police said. The two men were charged with aggravated battery and a hate crime in the attack. I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens, to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation and changing current law, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Madam President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy in March of last year. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. I would like to describe a terrible crime that occurred June 11, 2000 in New York, NY. Four Hasidic Jewish men were stabbed on the Coney Island boardwalk after a confrontation with a group of Latino men. Police said that anti-Semitic slurs were used during the attack, and were investigating the incident as a possible bias crime. I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens, to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation and changing current law, we can change hearts and minds as well.