Gordon Smith

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 21, 1991 in Brattleboro, VT. A lesbian woman was struck by an attacker who was heard to say ``There's another . . . queer.'' The assailant, Lauralee Akley, 19, was charged with committing a hate-motivated crime in connection with 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. Mr. President, I rise today to give tribute to some Oregon heroes. Over the past year, I have come to the Senate floor on several occasions to describe the tragic events in the Klamath Basin last year. Today, I wish to salute some of the heroes, who when watching their neighbors in need, responded with great compassion and service to their community. In April of last year, the farm economy of Klamath Falls was sent into a tailspin when the decision was made to forego water deliveries to farmers in favor of protecting threatened and endangered fishes. Almost overnight, the devastating effects of the water shut-off began to be felt. In one month's time, the number of families seeking assistance from the local food bank jumped by seven hundred. The response from the surrounding community was incredible. Farmers, car dealerships, coffee shops, gas stations, banks, schools, and countless others came together to lend their support to folks in the Klamath Basin. On June 15 of last year, Joe Gilliam, President of the Oregon Grocers Association, with the help of grocers from around the State, gathered 240,000 pounds of food. This food helped feed the community for nearly two months. In August, Oregon Senator and farmer Gary George of Pendleton, Oregon decided that he too had to do something. He set out and, with the help of Oregonians In Action, raised $30,000. Also in August, K-Dove Radio, Perry Atkinson and his son Oregon Senator Jason Atkinson, and sixty churches in the Medford area, joined together in collecting 27,000 pounds of food. They delivered it in two twenty-four-foot Ryder trucks. The examples of kindness go on and on. For as tragic as the situation last year in the Basin was, Oregonians from around the State responded with an equal level of benevolence. With the help of hundreds of community volunteers and under the direction of Niki Sampson, the Klamath Falls-Lake County Food Bank has distributed 830,000 pounds of food and non-food products. This has been a very emotional year, and as a U.S. Senator and as an Oregonian, I am very proud of how the people in my State have responded. The generosity shown by so many truly reaffirms one's faith in the goodness of people. In my mind, every single person who volunteered his or her time or resources is a hero. Today, I salute the workers, the volunteers, and all those who gave of themselves to help this community in need.

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 8, 1997 in Rock Island, IL. A gay man was attacked by two youths who used anti- gay epithets. The assailants, Nicholas S. McGonigle, 18, and Donald Thompson, 17, were charged with aggravated battery and a hate crime in connection with 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 March 28, 1994 in Smithton, PA. A gay man, Paul Edward Steckman, was beaten to death. The attacker, a minor, said that he beat Mr. Steckman for making unwanted sexual advances. 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 January 1996 in Houston, TX. A gay man was brutally murdered. The assailant, self-proclaimed white supremacist Daniel Christopher Bean, 19, was sentenced to life in prison for the murder. 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 August 18, 1994 in Indianola, OH. Four lesbians women were attacked by a female teen who, encouraged by a crowd of onlookers, yelled anti-gay epithets. The assailant, Shanika Campbell, 18, was charged with four counts of assault in connection with 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. 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 1997 in Asheville, NC. A gay man was assaulted with a deadly weapon. The assailant, Jeremi Dwayne Milling, 16, was sentenced to five years in prison for conspiracy to commit armed robbery, assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury, and attempted armed robbery. Mr. Milling said that he targeted the victim because he was gay. 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 submit an important resolution regarding the Jackson-Vanik Amendment and the Russian Federation. I am joined by my colleague Senator Clinton of New York and 26 other cosponsors in submitting this resolution. This legislation recognizes the progress made by the Russian Federation regarding religious freedom issues and the Jewish community, as well as the impact the Jackson-Vanik Amendment has had even before it was signed into law in 1975. Over one million Israelis, hundreds of thousands of Americans and countless thousands across the world are living free because of Jackson-Vanik and the American commitment it reflects to religious freedom and freedom of emigration. At the same time, countless Jews and others in Russia live in relative freedom thanks in part to the very Jackson-Vanik Amendment that U.S. and Soviet leaders once decried as a ``Cold War relic''. Rather than a relic, it is a lesson for us today. The legacy of Jackson-Vanik goes far beyond its impact on those living freer today. Jackson-Vanik has actualized the notion that human rights are not the province of any country's ``domestic internal policy''. Since the exchange of letters last November 13 between the U.S. and Russian governments, there can never again be a doubt that religious freedom has earned a prominent place on the U.S.-Russian bilateral agenda. The achievements of President Bush and his administration in this regard have carried out the spirit of previous administrations. In addition to recent letters from President Bush to the Congressional leadership, the President wrote last November 19 to Harold Paul Luks, Chairman of NCSJ: ``The Jewish community has helped write a proud chapter in the history of American foreign relations, but the work is not complete. We need your continued advocacy and support, and my Administration looks forward to working closely with you on these challenges.'' Clearly, Senate and citizen involvement is not an impediment to U.S. foreign policy. As the President's letter underscores, such activism is an underpinning of our approach to foreign governments. While this Resolution takes no position on ``graduating'' Russia from Jackson- Vanik, the test should not be the total elimination of xenophobia or the completion of democratic civil society. Never before has religious activity in Russia been so varied and widespread. And yet the threats to freedom of religion remain. We now have many channels for addressing our deep concerns. If the legislation to graduate Russia does incorporate these channels and the commitments of the Russian and U.S. governments, then future leaders of Russia will know the context in which the United States Congress has considered the extension of Normal Trade Relations. And if our colleagues join in support of this Resolution, regardless of their position on Russia's graduation, then the sense of the Senate will be an explicit part of the permanent record of this process. The legacy of Jackson-Vanik vis-a-vis Russia is a proud one, and one that can best be sealed through appropriate legislation and through messages such as the resolution we introduce today. I want to thank the 28 cosponsors of this resolution and ask that all my colleagues join me on this important legislation.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I wish 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 27, 1993 in Atlanta, GA. A gay man was abducted, beaten, robbed and thrown out of a moving car. The four assailants used anti-gay slurs while beating the victim. 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 am pleased to again join my colleague Senator Boxer in introducing important tuberculosis control legislation today on the floor of the Senate. Today we are introducing The International Tuberculosis Control Act--this important legislation is designed to address the growing international problem of tuberculosis, (TB). We are introducing this legislation to coincide with World Tuberculosis Day, this Sunday, March 24. World TB Day is an occasion for countries around the world to raise awareness about the threat to the world's health caused by tuberculosis. As many of us know TB is a global health crisis. Over two million people will die from TB this year, and it is the leading killer of young women and of people with AIDS worldwide. Further, TB anywhere is a threat everywhere in our highly mobile world. The Center for Disease Control CDC reports that in the year 2000, nearly 50 percent of all TB cases in the US occurred in foreign-born persons. We will not be safe from TB until we control the disease globally. TB and HIV form a deadly co-epidemic. TB is responsible for more than 40 percent of all AIDS deaths worldwide. An HIV-positive person is 30 times more likely to develop active tuberculosis and become infectious to others. Many countries in sub-Saharan Africa have seen TB rates increase 4-fold due to the HIV-TB co-epidemic, decimating a whole generation of adults in many communities. In Eastern Europe and Asia, TB infection is widespread and HIV rates are rising rapidly. These areas are poised to see the TB-HIV co-epidemic explode. TB also flourishes in and causes poverty. About 98 percent of the annual deaths from TB are in poor countries. Those who fall ill are often their family's primary breadwinner. When that person cannot work, children must often leave school to work or care for a sick relative. The World Health Organization reported in 2000 that 75 percent of TB patients are men and women between the ages of 15-54, the most economically productive years of life. Stopping TB will help fight poverty. I strongly believe we must act to control TB now or pay later. Rising drug resistance is a time bomb that could make TB virtually uncontrollable. Multi-drug resistant TB is far more dangerous and difficult to treat, can cost up to $1 million per patient to cure, and kills over half of its victims, even in the U.S. There is a plan for controlling TB. The new, internationally agreed- upon ``Global Plan to Stop TB'' provides a much-needed roadmap. It describes the resources needed, country-by-country, to meet international TB control targets by 2005. Complementary National TB control plans exist for nearly all of the 22 high-burden TB countries. The world must invest less than $1 billion in additional funds per year to control TB, about what New York City spent to control an outbreak of drug-resistant TB in the early 1990s! And I believe that $200 million is a reasonable US share of the $1 billion needed globally to control this killer. We have the tools to stop TB. ``The Global Plan to Stop TB'' is built around expanding access to DOTS treatment worldwide, a proven, and very cost-effective treatment system that uses just $10 worth of drugs to cure a patient in 6 months. Currently just one in four of those who needs DOTS have access to it. Another tool for fighting TB is the new Global TB Drug Facility, which can provide the steady supply of affordable drugs needed to cure patients and prevent the further spread of drug-resistance. My colleague, Barbara Boxer, and I have been leading the way (along with Foreign Operations Chairman Patrick Leahy and Ranking Senator Mitch McConnell) in increasing US funding for international TB control, from virtually zero in 1997 to $75 million in 2002. The President's 2003 Budget proposes to cut TB funding by one-third, but I feel that we must do more in this area, not less. Just $200 million annually from the U.S. would save tens of thousands of lives around the world and would protect US citizens from TB and from the growing threat of drug- resistant TB. Investing in TB control is not only the right thing to do; it is a wise U.S. investment.

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 February 2, 1998, in Corvallis, OR. A gay high school student was beaten by three youths who used anti-gay epithets. Robert P. Huffaker and Michael B. Nash, both 16, and Cyle A. Schroeder, 15, were charged with third- degree assault and first-degree intimidation in connection with 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. Mr. President, I am pleased to again join my colleague Senator Boxer in introducing important tuberculosis control legislation today on the floor of the Senate. Today we are introducing The International Tuberculosis Control Act--this important legislation is designed to address the growing international problem of tuberculosis, (TB). We are introducing this legislation to coincide with World Tuberculosis Day, this Sunday, March 24. World TB Day is an occasion for countries around the world to raise awareness about the threat to the world's health caused by tuberculosis. As many of us know TB is a global health crisis. Over two million people will die from TB this year, and it is the leading killer of young women and of people with AIDS worldwide. Further, TB anywhere is a threat everywhere in our highly mobile world. The Center for Disease Control CDC reports that in the year 2000, nearly 50 percent of all TB cases in the US occurred in foreign-born persons. We will not be safe from TB until we control the disease globally. TB and HIV form a deadly co-epidemic. TB is responsible for more than 40 percent of all AIDS deaths worldwide. An HIV-positive person is 30 times more likely to develop active tuberculosis and become infectious to others. Many countries in sub-Saharan Africa have seen TB rates increase 4-fold due to the HIV-TB co-epidemic, decimating a whole generation of adults in many communities. In Eastern Europe and Asia, TB infection is widespread and HIV rates are rising rapidly. These areas are poised to see the TB-HIV co-epidemic explode. TB also flourishes in and causes poverty. About 98 percent of the annual deaths from TB are in poor countries. Those who fall ill are often their family's primary breadwinner. When that person cannot work, children must often leave school to work or care for a sick relative. The World Health Organization reported in 2000 that 75 percent of TB patients are men and women between the ages of 15-54, the most economically productive years of life. Stopping TB will help fight poverty. I strongly believe we must act to control TB now or pay later. Rising drug resistance is a time bomb that could make TB virtually uncontrollable. Multi-drug resistant TB is far more dangerous and difficult to treat, can cost up to $1 million per patient to cure, and kills over half of its victims, even in the U.S. There is a plan for controlling TB. The new, internationally agreed- upon ``Global Plan to Stop TB'' provides a much-needed roadmap. It describes the resources needed, country-by-country, to meet international TB control targets by 2005. Complementary National TB control plans exist for nearly all of the 22 high-burden TB countries. The world must invest less than $1 billion in additional funds per year to control TB, about what New York City spent to control an outbreak of drug-resistant TB in the early 1990s! And I believe that $200 million is a reasonable US share of the $1 billion needed globally to control this killer. We have the tools to stop TB. ``The Global Plan to Stop TB'' is built around expanding access to DOTS treatment worldwide, a proven, and very cost-effective treatment system that uses just $10 worth of drugs to cure a patient in 6 months. Currently just one in four of those who needs DOTS have access to it. Another tool for fighting TB is the new Global TB Drug Facility, which can provide the steady supply of affordable drugs needed to cure patients and prevent the further spread of drug-resistance. My colleague, Barbara Boxer, and I have been leading the way (along with Foreign Operations Chairman Patrick Leahy and Ranking Senator Mitch McConnell) in increasing US funding for international TB control, from virtually zero in 1997 to $75 million in 2002. The President's 2003 Budget proposes to cut TB funding by one-third, but I feel that we must do more in this area, not less. Just $200 million annually from the U.S. would save tens of thousands of lives around the world and would protect US citizens from TB and from the growing threat of drug- resistant TB. Investing in TB control is not only the right thing to do; it is a wise U.S. investment.

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 26, 1992 in St. George, NY. Two men yelling anti-gay slurs held a gay man and beat him. One of the assailants, Seth Melendez, 21, of New Brighton, was charged in connection with 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. 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 February 8, 2002, in Missoula, MT. A lesbian couple and their 22-month-old son were victims of an arson attack. An intruder broke into their home, poured accelerant throughout, and set it on fire while the victims slept. The attack came 4 days after the couple received statewide publicity for suing their employer for same-sex domestic partner benefits. 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. I thank the Chair. (The remarks of Mr. Smith are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to respond to the urgent needs of small businesses in my home State of Oregon. Oregon small businesses are in need of help as the state's economy deals with poor growth and high unemployment. In an effort to boost both small business and the Oregon economy I am proud to introduce legislation with Senator Collins that will provide tax relief for small firms, the section 179 small business expensing bill. Economic recovery must include job creation. In Oregon most new jobs are created by the State's 270,000 small businesses. Small businesses have a broad impact on Oregon's economy and are essential to its well- being. Oregon ranks third in the Nation in small businesses per capita. Oregonians are independent and creative and much of this creativity goes into the wide diversity of small businesses that exist in my State. Therefore it is imperative that we bolster and strengthen the small business community in Oregon. One critical way in which we can help small firms is by raising the threshold for expensing equipment purchases. Currently, companies may expense equipment purchases up to $24,000 of the cost of equipment and depreciate the remainder. This legislation will increase the amount small businesses can expense per purchase to $40,000 and increase the total investment from the current $200,000 to $325,000 annually. This limit of $325,000 on total purchases of equipment in a single year applies to the smallest of companies. Only the smallest of firms that are struggling to stay afloat and seek to grow by buying equipment would be able to take advantage of this expensing. This would provide a greatly needed boost to small businesses in Oregon, allowing them to move forward on job hiring and capital investment plans that they have had to put aside during the downturn of recent days. This legislation is strongly supported by the National Federation of Independent Businesses and I would like to enter into the Record a letter from Dan Danner expressing the importance of this increase to small businesses. I believe these changes will ease the record-keeping burden of depreciating such equipment and fill free up capital that can be used to create and sustain new jobs, expand current small businesses, and encourage the creation of new businesses as well. All of these economic actions will boost the Oregon economy at a time it is still sorely needed. Businesses will use the extra money to purchase new equipment, which will help an economic expansion. Creating new jobs for Oregonians who were laid off last year lessens the burden on the State economy and puts unemployed Oregonians back to work. In conclusion, I would like you to know that this critical legislation that would boost small businesses in Oregon was initially part of the economic stimulus legislation that the Senate passed overwhelmingly in January. I call on all of my colleagues to support this legislation and swiftly give small businesses across the Nation and in my State this important boost. I ask unanimous consent that the letter to which I referred previously be printed in the Record.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to respond to the urgent needs of small businesses in my home State of Oregon. Oregon small businesses are in need of help as the state's economy deals with poor growth and high unemployment. In an effort to boost both small business and the Oregon economy I am proud to introduce legislation with Senator Collins that will provide tax relief for small firms, the section 179 small business expensing bill. Economic recovery must include job creation. In Oregon most new jobs are created by the State's 270,000 small businesses. Small businesses have a broad impact on Oregon's economy and are essential to its well- being. Oregon ranks third in the Nation in small businesses per capita. Oregonians are independent and creative and much of this creativity goes into the wide diversity of small businesses that exist in my State. Therefore it is imperative that we bolster and strengthen the small business community in Oregon. One critical way in which we can help small firms is by raising the threshold for expensing equipment purchases. Currently, companies may expense equipment purchases up to $24,000 of the cost of equipment and depreciate the remainder. This legislation will increase the amount small businesses can expense per purchase to $40,000 and increase the total investment from the current $200,000 to $325,000 annually. This limit of $325,000 on total purchases of equipment in a single year applies to the smallest of companies. Only the smallest of firms that are struggling to stay afloat and seek to grow by buying equipment would be able to take advantage of this expensing. This would provide a greatly needed boost to small businesses in Oregon, allowing them to move forward on job hiring and capital investment plans that they have had to put aside during the downturn of recent days. This legislation is strongly supported by the National Federation of Independent Businesses and I would like to enter into the Record a letter from Dan Danner expressing the importance of this increase to small businesses. I believe these changes will ease the record-keeping burden of depreciating such equipment and fill free up capital that can be used to create and sustain new jobs, expand current small businesses, and encourage the creation of new businesses as well. All of these economic actions will boost the Oregon economy at a time it is still sorely needed. Businesses will use the extra money to purchase new equipment, which will help an economic expansion. Creating new jobs for Oregonians who were laid off last year lessens the burden on the State economy and puts unemployed Oregonians back to work. In conclusion, I would like you to know that this critical legislation that would boost small businesses in Oregon was initially part of the economic stimulus legislation that the Senate passed overwhelmingly in January. I call on all of my colleagues to support this legislation and swiftly give small businesses across the Nation and in my State this important boost. I ask unanimous consent that the letter to which I referred previously be printed in the Record.

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 1991 in Longview, WA. A gay man was beaten by two attackers. The assailants, Mark H. Granger, 27, and Michael J. Watts, 39, were charged with first degree assault in connection with 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. 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 1994 in Sioux City, IA. Two gay men were attacked when two intruders broke into their residence. The assailants, Anthony L. Smith, 17, and Henry White, 18, were charged with first-degree burglary and second- degree criminal mischief under the State hate crime statute. 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, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. I note a few of the words in particular. He expressed to Senator Daschle a concern that this legislation would ``have a negative impact on Canadian-U.S. electricity trade.'' I can say in the California debacle last year, but for Canadian power, it would have been far worse than it ended up being. Anything we are doing that could disrupt the trade we have with Canada on energy would be a step back, not a step forward. That is why the Canadian Government has notified the Senate leadership that the amendment offered by the Senator from Wyoming is the right thing to do. The underlying proposal is the wrong thing to do in terms of our relationship with Canada. I urge support for the Thomas amendment. It is the amendment we passed in the Senate in the 106th Congress. We ought to pass it again in the 107th Congress as part of this important energy regulation. I yield the floor.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I thank our chairman for his statement. I rise, though, in opposition to his view, and I support the view of the Senator of Wyoming and his amendment. I happen to be a cosponsor of it. I think for people looking in, the C-SPAN junkies like ourselves, may wonder what all the charts and all the maps and all the rhetoric might boil down to. In my view, it really boils down to this: Should all power over power be vested within the beltway or should we trust regional organizations that know their areas, that know their systems, to manage these systems? That, in my view, is what this debate is all about. It is very important. There are great implications for how we reliably transmit energy and keep the lights on in the regions of this country. This amendment would ensure that a self-regulating organization would be given the authority to establish and enforce reliability standards. This amendment is supported by the Western Governors' Association, the American Public Power Association, and most of the transmitting utilities of the West. For those in the West who lived through the blackout of August 10, 1996, the need for an enforcement mechanism for transmission reliability standards is clear. That blackout, which literally stretched from Texas to Portland to Los Angeles, was the result of a series of seemingly independent events that sent the western transmission system cascading into a blackout. The ensuing blackout covered parts of seven Western States and caused severe economic disruption on the west coast. The event caused the Western Systems Coordinating Council to reevaluate its notification procedures. Such an event has not been repeated since. The only thing that regional transmission reliability organizations lack is an enforcement mechanism. That is what we provide in this amendment. To date, we have relied upon voluntary compliance by transmitting utilities to keep the lights on. While such voluntary compliance has been largely successful, there are growing concerns that such voluntary means may not work in a deregulated wholesale electricity market. Frankly, if we are going to move away from a voluntary system, I would much rather give the enforcement authority envisioned under this bill to established regional organizations that are well respected and know the intricacies of the systems which they regulate. This approach is embodied in the amendment before the Senate today. I thank Senator Thomas for offering this commonsense solution to transmission reliability. Our chairman's approach, again, moves all enforcement authority to Washington, DC, under FERC's jurisdiction. We do not need to vest this authority with FERC, which has no history on this issue and, in my view, no technical expertise on standards for transmission systems. The amendment before the Senate mirrors in spirit, if not in detail, the reliability legislation which was reported out of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in the 106th Congress and was passed by the full Senate. I introduced this legislation at the beginning of this Congress, and I urge my colleagues to follow the action of this body in the last Congress. We do not need to change that. What was offered then, what is offered today, is the right fix for transmission reliability. In conclusion, I reference a letter by the Canadian Ambassador to Senator Daschle dated March 13, 2002. I ask unanimous consent the letter be printed in the Record.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to give tribute to some of the health care heroes in my home State of Oregon. During a recent visit to the Volunteers in Medicine Clinic in Eugene, OR, I was tremendously impressed by the strong public service ethic of the professionals who deliver high quality health care to their uninsured clients. In 1999, a concerned group of citizens in Eugene, OR, convened to study the extent of the health insurance problem in Lane County. It found that 28,000 of their friends and neighbors in the county were uninsured. Of these, almost half were working families or low-income people. As a result of that study, the Volunteers in Medicine Clinic came about. Under the executive director and board chair, Sister Monica Heeran, the mission of the clinic is to meet the health and wellness needs of the working poor by providing free medical care. The Volunteers in Medicine model relies on practicing and retired medical professionals to serve individuals and families who have limited access to health care, typically the working poor. Over 300 health care professionals have generously given their time for this worthy cause that has helped hundreds of families secure a medical home. One of the volunteers at the Volunteers in Medicine Clinic is Dr. John Haughom, vice chair of the Board and volunteer physician. He told me about a woman he had seen recently at the clinic, Mrs. Gonzalez, who had presented with a large mass under her right jaw. It had been growing for some time, but she had not sought medical care because she knew she could not afford it. Dr. Haughom diagnosed Mrs. Gonzalez with non-Hodgkins lymphoma and was able to arrange for the best possible treatment for her advanced condition. As she was treated, Dr. Haughom continued to visit her at her workplace. He clearly shared her joy when she told him that a surgeon had been able to remove the entire tumor, and that her recovery is expected to be complete. I also heard from a patient who had gone to the Volunteers in Medicine Clinic with what he thought was a case of acid reflux-- heartburn. In addition to being given medication to control the symptoms, the patient was referred to a cardiologist, who advised the patient to get an angiogram. It turned out that the underlying condition was no less than five clogged arteries, and the patient was scheduled for open-heart surgery the following day, which saved his life. In both these cases, the high-quality care by dedicated medical professionals clearly saved the lives of these patients. In my mind, every single person who volunteers his or her time at the Volunteers in Medicine Clinic is a true health care hero. It is truly inspiring to see what can happen when people share a vision and work to make life better for thousands one patient at a time. Today, I salute the work and workers of the Volunteers in Medicine Clinic, true heroes for Oregon.

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 21, 1997 in Lansing, MI. Two gay men were attacked with blow darts. The assailants, who targeted the victims because of their sexual orientation, were arrested in connection with 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, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, as a member of the Senate High Tech Task Force, HTTF, I am proud to speak about the importance of the hi-tech sector, a sector of our economy that has in the past been such an effective engine of growth in my State of Oregon. And it is this engine of growth that needs strengthening in order to help the Oregon economy grow. I am so pleased that the President signed into law last weekend an economic stimulus package that included both an extension of unemployment benefits and the bonus depreciation changes that I and other members of the Task Force worked so hard to pass in the Senate. Oregon, as many of you know, had an unemployment rate of 8 percent in January, well above the national average. The stimulus package included a much-needed unemployment benefit extension, one that Oregon had already qualified for because of its high unemployment rate. But this stimulus package also included real economic stimulus that I believe will boost the Oregon economy. Both this year and last I have had the privilege of introducing bonus depreciation amendments to various economic stimulus bills in an attempt to actually stimulate business investment. I did this because the current Tax Code penalized businesses, especially the hi-tech sector, by forcing them to choose between either retaining outdated equipment to fully recover their costs or foregoing full recovery in order to stay abreast of the latest development in the hi-tech fields. Businessmen, farmers, the hi-tech industry all benefit from accelerated depreciation, and the impact on this Nation's economy will provide greater opportunities for jobs in my home State of Oregon where the hi-tech sector is so critical to economic recovery. Now we must take the next step in bolstering the hi-tech community by making permanent the R&D tax credit. The R&D tax credit encourages investment in basic research that over the long term can lead to the development of new, cheaper, and better technology products and services. Research and development is essential for long-term economic growth. Innovations in science and technology have fueled the massive economic expansion we witnessed over the course of the 20th century. These advancement have improved the standard of living for nearly every American. Simply put, the research tax credit is an investment in economic growth, new jobs, and important new products and processes. The R&D credit must be made permanent: This credit was originally enacted in 1981, and has been temporarily extended many times. Permanent extension of long overdue. Because this vital credit isn't permanent, it offers business less value than it should. Business, unlike Congress, must plan and budget in a multiyear process. Scientific enterprise does not fit neatly into calender or fiscal years. Research and development projects typically take a number of years, and may even last longer than a decade. As our business leaders plan these projects, they need to know whether or not they can count on this tax credit. Current uncertainty surrounding the credit has induced businesses to allocate significantly less to research than they otherwise would if they knew the tax credit would be available in future years. This uncertainty undermines the entire purpose of the credit. Investment in R&D is important because it spurs innovation and economic growth: Information technology was responsible for more than one-third of real economic growth in the late 1990s. Information technology industries account for more than $500 billion of the annual U.S. economy. R&D is widely seen as a cornerstone of technological innovations, which in turn serves as a primary engine of long-term economic growth. This tax credit will result in higher wages. Findings from a study conducted by Coopers & Lybrand show that workers in every State will benefit from higher wages if the research credit is made permanent. Payroll increases as a result of gains in productivity stemming from the credit have been estimated to exceed $60 billion over the next 12 years. Furthermore, greater productivity from additional research and development will increase overall economic growth in every State in the Union. Research and development is essential for long-term economic growth. The tax credit is cost-effective: The R&D tax credit appears to be a cost-effective policy instrument for increasing business R&D investment. Some recent studies suggest that one dollar of the credit's revenue cost leads to a one dollar increase in business R&D spending. Bonus depreciation and the R&D tax credit are but two of many issues that interest both the hi-tech sector and this Senator. While I am proud of the achievement with the bonus depreciation I will continue to work with hi-tech companies on the R&D tax credit and many other issues to keep our economy running strong, across this Nation and especially in my State of Oregon.