Ken Salazar

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I come to the floor this evening to send Senator Ted Kennedy and Vicki and all the family my very best wishes. I am confident that with the fighting spirit that embodies who Ted Kennedy is, we will soon see him back here in this Chamber of the Senate. Over the years, as I have worked closely with Senator Kennedy on a number of different measures, I have seen his passion and ethic of service here on the floor. Over the many years I knew about Ted Kennedy, long before he ever knew who I was, he was one of those people who always inspired me to public service. I remember well his speeches from the 1960s and into the 1970s. For me as a relative newcomer to the Senate, it has been one of those very unique privileges to serve with him on a number of different matters. Part of the reason I know he will be back here working with all of us is because we have often talked about some of the difficult challenges he has faced in life. We have talked about the plane crash and how it was that he was pulled from the wreckage. While many did not expect him to survive, he did, and he has gone on to provide another 40 years of service to this great Nation and this world. It is that fighting spirit that, again, will take Senator Kennedy in a very positive way forward to continue to serve this Nation, the State of Massachusetts, and the entire world. That ethic of service in many ways is what guides most of us who are here, but certainly it is the roots of Senator Ted Kennedy. We have often talked about his relationship with the United Farm Workers of America. In the prayer which the founder of the United Farm Workers of American, Cesar Chavez, wrote, I find a lot of that prayer reflected in Senator Kennedy. I thought I would essentially read a part of that prayer. I think it is so true of Senator Kennedy, the Presiding Officer, the distinguished Senator from New Jersey, and so many others who get so much inspiration from this wonderful man, Ted Kennedy. The prayer is as follows, in part: Grant me courage to serve others; For in service there is true life. Give me honesty and patience; So that the Spirit will be alive among us. Let the Spirit flourish and grow; So that we will never tire of the struggle. Let us remember those who have died for justice; For they have given us life. Help us love even those who hate us; So we can change the world. That was written by Cesar Chavez, born in 1927, passed away in 1993. For Ted Kennedy, the closing part of that prayer, ``so we can change the world,'' I will say this to Senator Kennedy tonight from the floor of the Senate: We still have a lot of change to make in the world together. I look very much forward to the day when we see you back here among all of our colleagues, helping us move forward in a new direction to achieve that visionary change that had at its focal point the possibilities of humanity. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, earlier today, on the floor of the Senate, we heard distinguished colleagues from both sides of the aisle supporting an effort that we pass a new GI bill of rights for the 21st century. We heard the distinguished junior Senator from Virginia, Jim Webb, who with his own hand, took it upon himself to author a piece of legislation that would make sure we as a nation kept our promises to those who have served since 9/11 by providing them the kind of educational opportunity that was provided to those who served in World War II. In that effort, as I presided over this Senate floor, I heard the very eloquent comments of Senator Chuck Hagel, himself a great servant of this country and a great Senator, in support of the legislation by Senator Webb. During the same time, we heard the comments from Senator Warner, one of the most eloquent and distinguished Members to ever serve in the Senate. So I come to the floor today to once again say all of the sponsors of that legislation send a loud and unmistakable signal to everyone who has a say in this emergency supplemental that at the end of the day we must make sure this 21st century GI bill of rights is one that is included in this emergency supplemental that deals with Iraq and Afghanistan so that we, in fact, can honor our veterans who have served since 9/11. We can do no less as a nation. We can do no less when we think about the great sacrifice of the now 1.6 million men and women who served in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. When we think about those who have served, we must first stop and pay tribute and honor to those who have given their lives as the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of their country, as well as those who have been wounded and hurt in those wars. In Iraq, the current number I have as of today, 4,078 Americans have been killed in that war--a war that is now in its sixth year. When the invasion occurred, there were predictions at the top of the Pentagon that this war would, at most, take 50 American lives. Somehow now we have surpassed the 4,000 number with 4,078 of our bravest men and women who have given their lives in Iraq. It does not count the number of others who have been scarred either physically or mentally in that war as well. Those who have been wounded with physical scars, according to the current numbers we have from the Department of Defense, now exceeds 30,000 of our best. For many of us in the Senate, as we have gone to Walter Reed or to other hospitals of the Department of Defense or veterans hospitals, we see the reality of what has happened to many of those who have come back without limbs and with other kinds of injuries that will stay with them the rest of their lives. We do not have a firm count with respect to the other 1.6 million who have served there as to how many of them have suffered the mental scars of war. We know there are some estimates that it is as high as 20, 25 percent of them who will suffer from some form of post-traumatic stress syndrome. So the number we are talking about who have borne the burden of this war in Iraq, as well as the war in Afghanistan, is a number we should never forget. It is not just in Iraq but also in Afghanistan. We now have a casualty list which includes 497 Americans. We have about 2,000 who have been physically wounded and many more who suffer the mental scars of war. When I think about what we are trying to do with this 21st century GI bill of rights for those who have served since 9/11, the thing I find most objectionable is that some of those on the other side and others who would oppose this legislation say it is too costly, that we ought not to undertake it because it is too costly. In the context of what we have spent in Iraq and will be spending in Iraq, it is a very small amount of money to make sure we are taking care of our veterans once they return home. In Iraq, the total number, as of today, that has been spent on that war is $525 billion--$525 billion. Secretary Rumsfeld, at one point in time, said no way, no how will we ever spend $50 billion on this war. Yet somehow, today, some 6 years later, it is $525 billion plus that has been spent on the war. When you consider the expenditures the United States is projected to make to bring this war to conclusion, some estimates out there are $3 trillion--$3 trillion--what we are trying to do with this 21st century GI bill of rights is simply to provide an opportunity for those who have served since 9/11 to get an opportunity for an education at a cost that would be $2.5 billion to $4 billion a year. When we consider the fact we are burning $12 billion a month in Iraq today, to provide this benefit to our veterans at a cost of $2.5 billion to $4 billion a year is a very worthy investment, and in the relative context of how much is being invested in that war effort, it is a very small amount. I would hope at the end of the day it is not only 60 Senators who vote yes to include this 21st century GI bill of rights in this emergency supplemental, but that we could get a unanimous approval out of this Senate that this is the thing we should do because it is the right thing to make sure we are taking care of those who have served us since 9/11. Again, I appreciate the great leadership of our good friend, Jim Webb, who has worked so hard to bring together so many cosponsors of this legislation both here in the Senate, as well as the House of Representatives. I urge my colleagues to fully support this legislation as it moves forward. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SALAZAR

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

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

Mr. SALAZAR

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

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent I be authorized to speak in morning business for as much time as I might consume.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, this week is a very important week for the United States of America and for the Senate because we will begin our dialog about where we are in Iraq today and where we are going in Iraq in the future; where we are in Afghanistan today and where we are going in Afghanistan in the future. As part of this dialog we will engage in here in the Senate over the next few days, we will also engage in a major discussion about how it is that our Nation should treat those veterans from both Iraq and Afghanistan, those veterans who have served our country since our country was attacked on 9/11. It is important at the outset, as we begin this discussion, to first of all pause to remember that there has been a great deal of sacrifice on the part of Americans in terms of life and blood in both Iraq and Afghanistan. We must remember these warriors, these fighters who have been fighting for the cause of their country. We must do that every day so their contribution is never forgotten. As of today, in Iraq there have been 4,078 Americans who have given their lives carrying out the orders of their Commander in Chief. In Iraq, as of today, since the beginning of that war, there have been 30,004 members of our armed services who have been wounded in Iraq. Let me repeat that number one more time: 30,004 members of our armed services who have been wounded in Iraq. In Afghanistan, where we have now been for 7 years, fighting a just war, going after the Taliban--an effort that spearheaded and should have succeeded in going after Osama bin Laden--in Afghanistan there have been 4,097 Americans who have been killed and 1,044 who have been wounded. For these brave men and women who have served our country and who have given their lives or who have been wounded in the cause that has been assigned to them, we should dedicate the debate we will have on the floor of the Senate in the days ahead. Today, as we begin that debate, I want to speak about two things. First, with respect to Iraq, it has been my view for the last several years that we need to have a new direction in Iraq. In December of 2006, when the Iraq Study Group, headed up by Congressman Lee Hamilton and former Secretary of State James Baker, came forward with the bipartisan Iraq Study Group recommendations, they came forward with a coherent set of recommendations about how we ought to move forward in the transition of the mission in Iraq. That was more than a year and a half ago when those recommendations were coming together. Since then, some of those recommendations have been implemented, but by and large the bulk of those recommendations--in what the heart of the recommendations was really all about in the Iraq Study Group report--have not been implemented. The heart of those recommendations was, if the United States did some things right, we would be able to transition in the spring of 2008--which is right now, the spring of 2008--from a mission of combat over to a mission of support, of training the Iraqi forces, of providing protection to the American interests in Iraq, making sure we had special forces on the ground to chase al-Qaida and other terrorist elements. That is the transition of mission which was called for by the Iraq Study Group, now some time ago, where they said this transition should be completed by the spring of 2008. We are not there yet. One of the things on which we will engage in a debate on the floor this week is where we ought to go. In my view, that transition of mission is something we should require by law. We should require it because it is the only way in which ultimately we are going to be successful in Iraq. It is the only way in which the baton and mantle of responsibility which the United States of America has assumed for security in Iraq can be handed over and given to the Iraqi Government. It is time for the Iraqi Government and the Iraqi people to stand up for their own nation. The time for the United States of America to be doing it on behalf of the Iraqi people has come to an end. It will be coming to an end. I hope this debate leads us to find that new direction in Iraq in the days and weeks and months ahead. But there is another element to this debate that we will have this week, and that is how we, as a grateful nation, honor the 1.6 million veterans who have served this country since September 11, 2001, when this country was attacked. This week we will have an opportunity to stand for our veterans in a way that walks the walk, not just talks the talk about how great our veterans are-- because they are--but allows us an opportunity to send them an unmistakable signal that we, as a grateful nation, are willing and wanting to pay them for that sacrifice they have made for our country. Abraham Lincoln, in his second Inaugural Address on March 4, 1865, said the following: With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations. Today we will begin the discussion about how we move forward with what will be known in time as the 21st century GI bill of rights. It is, in our parlance, S. 22, which is a formulation of this 21st century GI bill of rights which has been put together by none other than Senator Jim Webb from Virginia, who himself has been a great contributor to so many causes for American veterans and who, through his own pen and through his own writing and his own work, has taken the lead in making sure we are providing this honor to our veterans who have served since September 11, 2001. For his work, and the work of colleagues who will join him in this effort, we need to pay him tribute for making sure he is making America walk the walk in honoring our veterans. I also wish to applaud the great leadership of Senator Hagel, who does so much to bring that voice of independence and authenticity to the floor of the Senate; to Senator John Warner, who is oftentimes the Moses, with his voice leading us out of the wilderness on tough issues here in the Senate; to Senator Lautenberg, who himself was a beneficiary of the GI bill of rights as a World War II veteran and who today speaks so eloquently on behalf of the veterans and the military policy of our country. And also to all of the other Senators, the 58 Senators who have joined us in this legislation, along with Senator Akaka, who is the chairman of our Veterans Affairs' Committee, who so often is standing to make sure we do not forget what the veterans have done here for us in America, along with Senator Inouye, Senator Stevens, and others who have been so much a part of this effort. I am pleased that the bill that was reported out of the Appropriations committee with the 2008 Supplemental Appropriations Act, includes provisions to help a new generation of veterans receive the educational benefits they have earned through their service in wartime. The 1.6 million soldiers and sailors, airmen and marines who have served in Iraq or Afghanistan over the last 7 years, often with multiple deployments which last up to not only a year but 15 months, have given more than their country could have expected of them. It is right and it is proper that their country honor them with the benefits commensurate with their service and with their sacrifice. The GI bill the Congress passed after World War II proved to be one of the greatest ideas this country has ever had. That GI bill was based on a simple but powerful premise: If you served your country in wartime, your country would pay for your education. If you served your country during wartime, your country would pay for your education--a simple but powerful premise. For the 7.8 million World War II veterans who took advantage of the GI bill, this great idea opened the doors of opportunity in civilian life. It eased the difficult transition from wartime service to peacetime employment and equipped the greatest generation--the greatest generation--with the education and skills to lead our country into an era of prosperity and into an era of growth. Over the last half century, the educational benefits we offer our veterans have evolved from the wartime service benefits of the World War II GI bill to a more limited set of educational benefits known as the Montgomery GI bill. Designed primarily for peacetime, the Montgomery GI bill helps defray the cost of tuition, but it does not cover the full cost of education. Today, almost 7 years into the war in Afghanistan and more than 5 years into the war in Iraq, the educational benefits we offer our veterans should reflect the magnitude of the sacrifices they are making on our behalf. The 21st century GI bill does this by restoring the principle of the first wartime GI bill. Under S. 22, servicemembers who have answered the call of duty since September 11 will receive an educational benefit that will cover the full cost of a 4-year public education. The benefit will be available to not only the Active-Duty component but also to members of the National Guard and Reserve, proportional to their amount of Active-Duty service since September 11, 2001. It is fitting and it is proper that they be included in this benefit. Now, in an unfathomable and incomprehensible way, to me, I know there are critics of this bill, including the President of the United States, who said that this bill is too expensive--that this bill is too expensive. To them, I say that providing our servicemembers a comprehensive educational benefit is simply a cost of war. Since 2003, we have spent over $525 billion in Iraq alone--that is $525 billion in Iraq alone. This year, we will spend nearly $150 billion in Iraq, over $12 billion a month every month. Compare that to this 21st century GI bill of rights. It will cost between $2.5 billion and $4 billion a year--$2.5 billion to $4 billion a year. Think of that. The cost of this new GI bill is about the same as a cost of conducting the war in Iraq for 10 days--for 10 days. As we have a duty to provide our men and women in uniform the equipment they need to do their jobs, so, too, we as a nation and the Senate have a duty to provide them the educational benefits that will assist their transition back to civilian life. This should not even be a close question. This should not even be a debate. In addition to all the opportunities this bill will create for America's newest veterans, this bill is a smart investment for both our military and our economy. The educational benefits under this legislation would help us rebuild our military. Over the last several years, the Army has consistently been missing its recruiting goals. As a result, the Army has relaxed its enlistment policies, lowered the standards for signing up new soldiers, and implemented a stop-loss policy to keep soldiers in beyond their contract obligation. This formula is symptomatic of a military in America which today is under severe strain. It is a formula that will, over time--and it already has--erode the quality of our armed services. The benefits under this 21st century GI bill will reverse this trend by attracting a new generation of high-quality recruits who come to the service of their country for the promise of an education in return. S. 22 is a powerful recruitment tool. It is also a very smart economic investment. Each month it seems we read a new report describing how America is falling behind in education and losing its global competitiveness. With tuition costs rising, more and more young Americans are finding college out of reach. Ask those young Americans in college today or ask their parents today about how far out of reach college has become for them. Veterans who in another era would have been able to use their Montgomery GI bill to pay for college now find their benefits have not kept pace with tuition growth. After years of service to their country and multiple deployments, college remains out of reach. By making college accessible again to those who have answered the call since September 11, we will be making one of the smartest investments we can possibly make. By giving veterans a clear path from the military to the classroom, we will be equipping them with the skills and knowledge they need to lead our world. We will be helping them fulfill their destiny as the greatest generation of their time, leaders in their community, leaders in business, and leaders for America and the world in the 21st century. I am proud of all of my colleagues who are behind this bill. I am proud of the leadership of Senator Danny Akaka, the chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee. I am proud of Senator Webb, who has led this. I am proud of Senator Hagel, whose principled voice serves our soldiers so well; Senator Warner, whose wisdom and leadership on the Armed Services Committee has been so valuable for so many years; and Senator Lautenberg and Senator Akaka, who both attended college under the GI bill in World War II. I thank each of them for their leadership. I am proud the 21st century GI bill is included in this fiscal year 2008 supplemental. I am proud we have resisted efforts to weaken the bill. I am proud we have the opportunity to honor the service of our veterans with this GI bill to better reflect their sacrifice. I yield the floor.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I rise today to honor the life of Army Sergeant Isaac Palomarez of Loveland, CO. Sergeant Palomarez was killed last Friday in Kapisa Province, Afghanistan. He and his unit were working to root out Taliban cells and insurgent networks when his patrol ran across a roadside bomb and was then attacked with grenades and small arms. Isaac Palomarez was 26 years old. Those who knew Sergeant Palomarez describe him as a gifted student, a spirited competitor and successful athlete, and a soldier committed to honoring his country and fulfilling his duty. He was an honor student at Loveland High School who excelled in math, was an avid reader of military history, and filled his free time with sports. He helped Loveland High School's football team win a State championship in 2000, using his talent, work ethic, and heart to outcompete opponents who outweighed him by 50 or a hundred pounds. After graduating from high school in 2001, Isaac took classes at Colorado State University, but was uncertain about which path to choose. In 2004, sensing a responsibility to serve his country and his community, he enlisted in the Army, following in the footsteps of his father. He was assigned to A Company, 1st Battalion, 506th Infantry Regiment, 101st Airborne Division, out of Fort Campbell, KY. Sergeant Palomarez's first deployment was to Iraq, in 2005. After a year, he returned safely, in answer to the prayers of his family and friends. Earlier this year he deployed again, this time to Afghanistan. Kapisa Province, in northwest Afghanistan, remains an outpost for Taliban and insurgent forces, and is a strategic link between the border regions and Afghanistan's capital, Kabul. Sergeant Palomarez was working with his unit and coalition forces to deny extremists a foothold in this critical area. It was a dangerous mission in an unforgiving place. Sergeant Palomarez served in the finest tradition of America's soldiers. He was professional, compassionate, and committed to his country, community, and family. Shortly before he was killed, he borrowed a cell phone from another soldier, called his mother, and wished her a happy Mother's Day in advance. It was the last time he spoke with his family--news of Isaac's death reached his family before Mother's Day arrived. The sense of duty and purpose that inspired Sergeant Palomarez's service is fundamental to our Nation's liberty and our democracy. The strength of our union stems from the willingness of American citizens to work and fight for the rights and freedoms of others, no matter the danger or the cost. This was the message that William Allen White, the famous newspaper editor, delivered to Northwestern University graduates in 1936 as the specter of fascism loomed over Europe and Asia. ``Liberty, if it shall cement man into political unity,'' said White, ``must be something more than a man's conception of his rights, much more than his desire to fight for his own rights. True liberty is founded upon a lively sense of the rights of others and a fighting conviction that the rights of others must be maintained. Only when a people have this love of liberty, this militant belief in the sacredness of another man's self- respect, do races and nations possess the catalyzer in their political and social organism which produces the chemical miracle of crystallized national unity and strength. We Americans have had it for three hundred years on this continent. It was in the blood of our fathers. It was the basis of our faith in humanity when we wrote our constitution.'' In Isaac Palomarez's honorable service we find the same love of liberty that has bound our union, generation after generation. In his courage and commitment to helping others, we are inspired to a greater faith in humanity. And in his sacrifice, we are humbled and indebted. To Sergeant Palomarez's parents, Elma and Candido, to his three older brothers, and to all his friends and family, I know no words that can assuage the pain you feel. I hope that in time your grief will give way to the pride you must feel for your son, to the joy that he stirred among those who knew him, and to the knowledge that his country will always honor his legacy. He will never be forgotten.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Parliamentary inquiry: Are we in a quorum call?

Mr. SALAZAR. Thank you very much, Mr. President and Mr. Chairman. Thank you so much. Let me first say thank you to all of the people who have worked on this legislation in this body. Tonight is a night to celebrate what can be done when people come together and work for a common effort. To the chairman of the Agriculture Committee, the distinguished Presiding Officer, I will only say it is his patience which is the kind of patience of Job which has gotten us here tonight on the evening before we pass the conference report on the farm bill and get it moved forward to finality. It takes someone such as the Senator from Iowa who is the only U.S. Senator who still lives in the same house that he was born in, who really understands what it is like to be a salt-of-the-earth farmer and rancher, to move forward with the kind of patience and leadership to finally be at the point where we are going to get this historic farm bill across the finish line. So I wish to thank him, as well as Ranking Member Chambliss for his leadership. This has been a work long in progress. I remember some 3 years ago beginning some of the first conversations about the rewrite of the farm bill. I fondly remember the chairman of the Agriculture Committee, Senator Harkin, coming to the State of Colorado to hold the very first hearing on this farm bill which is here before us tonight. For that, the producers, the nutrition programs, the hunger programs, the farmers and ranchers of the State of Colorado and of this Nation will always be grateful. I also wish to say thank you to Senator Baucus and to Senator Grassley, the chairman and ranking member of the Finance Committee. I have the privilege of sitting on both the Finance Committee and the Energy Committee. At the end of the day, how both committees were able to work together to develop a package that is one that we will be rightfully proud of is in part a great tribute to both Chairman Baucus, as well as Senator Grassley, for their work. I also wish to thank Senator Conrad for his leadership in understanding the numbers. He is in a unique situation as the chairman of the Budget Committee and is the one who understands the Federal budget perhaps better than anybody else in this entire Chamber. I wish to thank also the others who served on the conference committee and who labored so hard to get this bill across the finish line, and to my colleagues on the Finance Committee, as well as on the Agriculture Committee, for all of their great work. Across the hallway, on the other side of this Capitol, I wish to thank Chairman Peterson of the House Agriculture Committee and Chairman Rangel for his hard work as well, and Congressman Salazar, a member of the Agriculture Committee, one of the salt-of-the-earth, true farmers still here in Washington, DC, who still wears the calluses on his hands from the work that he does on tractors and out in the fields. I thank him for his leadership. Finally, in terms of thanking leadership, it is important for us also to recognize that we would not be here were it not for Senator Harry Reid, our majority leader, because it was through his efforts that he steadfastly continued to push for us to get a final farm bill. His multiple meetings with Speaker Pelosi and with the leadership in the Senate in the committees to try to get us across the finish line is something we must honor and we must pay tribute to because without his leadership, we would not be here tonight. I also wish to briefly say thank you to my wonderful staff and to the producers of the State of Colorado, to Grant Leslie, my legislative director, Brendan McGuire, to Tommy Olsen, and to all of my State staff and Washington staff who worked so hard on this bill. I strongly support this farm bill conference report and I wish to thank everyone who has worked on this bill. It is a bill which is bipartisan, forward-thinking, a balanced package, and it is one which I think will pass overwhelmingly tomorrow. There is a lot riding on this farm bill. This is a bill that helps families put healthy and safe food on their tables. It helps kids get fresh fruits and vegetables for their lunches. It helps protect our land and our water. It helps us build a clean energy economy so vital to the national security of America and of the 21st century. Nowhere, however, is the farm bill more important, of course, than on farms and ranches in small towns and rural communities all across our Nation. Today, more than half of the counties in America are designated as rural counties. Mr. President, 44 of the 64 counties in my State of Colorado are defined as rural counties. For the last 8 years, many of these counties which are home to 50 million Americans have, in my view, been largely ignored by Washington, DC--ignored in its policies and ignored in its priorities. This farm bill sets us on the right track and in a new direction. We can see the effects of Washington's neglect in places such as my native Conejos County, one of the poorest counties in the entire United States of America where almost a quarter of the residents today still live below the poverty line. You can also see the difficulty in rural America on many of the Main Streets across the country, including Main Street of Brush, CO, where you can drive down Main Street and probably half of the businesses and stores have been closed down. The population in all of those counties across all of the eastern plains of my State has been declining. The truth is, the rural communities across our country are struggling. Median income in rural counties is around $11,000 less than the national median--$11,000 less than the national median. So country cousins and city cousins, when they compare their average per capita income, they know if you happen to live in that part of the country, you are going to end up making about $11,000 less than if you happen to live in the city. Jobs in many rural areas across America are disappearing. Hospitals and health clinics are closing. Schools have declining enrollments, and young people everywhere across rural America have to leave to find opportunities elsewhere. It is an exodus that takes place from rural America into urban America day after day, year after year, decade after decade. Of the 1,729 rural counties in the Nation, 865--that is about half of those counties--lost population between 2000 and 2005. This map shows all of those red counties which have been losing population between those years, and it is those counties in all of America that we try to address to provide a new direction, a new hope, a new opportunity and optimism for rural America in this farm bill. In my view, rural America has been forgotten for far too long, and passing this farm bill is of the utmost urgency. This legislation will help bring new life, new energy, and new opportunities for farmers and ranchers and for small town populations all across America. As a reminder of the importance of our farms and ranches in rural communities for our food supply in our society, I have for a long time since my days as attorney general in Colorado had a sign on my desk that says: ``No Farms, No Food.'' Today, I have that sign on my desk in Washington, DC. I think it is always important for all of us to understand the importance of agriculture and the food security of this Nation to take every opportunity to remind the world and to remind our fellow 300 million American citizens that our food security ought never to be taken for granted. Tonight, this legislation, which has been led by Chairman Harkin, is making that statement across America: No Farms, No Food. I will tell my colleagues that anyone who goes without food for a day or two will recognize how important our farms are to America's food security. Unfortunately, I don't think the President of the United States has understood what is at stake. I hope he doesn't veto this bill. He has said multiple times that he will, even though his administration has had ample opportunity and has been at the table of negotiations and dialogue on the farm bill for many years now. So I am hopeful at the end of the day, this President, who at least in pictures is from Crawford, TX, would understand what those rural communities--including the community of Crawford, TX, and the communities across all of rural Texas--that signing this farm bill is an important way for him to stand and say rural America is, in fact, important. I am proud of this bill before us. The farm bill will spur the clean energy revolution that is already underway on our farms and fields across America. It will help us reach the goal of producing 25 percent of our energy from renewable resources by the year 2025. There was a provision that was included in the 2007 Energy bill which we passed out of this Senate and signed by the President which Senator Grassley and myself worked on during that Energy bill. This farm bill will stimulate rural development because in a number of different ways it will provide the stimulus needed for rural development to move forward, but in particular broadband, which is really needed in the 21st century for rural America to advance, is included and addressed in this bill in a major way. This farm bill--thank you, Mr. Chairman of the Agriculture Committee--is also the strongest conservation farm bill in the history of the United States of America. It will help in an unparalleled way, unprecedented way to protect our lands, our water, and our air for future generations to come. This farm bill also makes significant major investments in nutrition. Some of these changes are long overdue, including the changes to the food stamps program. This bill will help make sure we have healthy and safe food on dinner tables all across our country. Finally, this bill will bring a better balance and certainty to agricultural markets, while closing loopholes and carrying out needed reforms for our farm programs. Through a set of smart investments, this bill will help America build a clean energy economy that has its roots in America's farms and fields. I predict that in the decade ahead, we will see rural America and agriculture start to bloom and flower as it embraces the new energy frontier. With the $1 billion in the farm bill devoted to energy programs and an additional $403 billion in tax incentives for the production of renewable energy, farmers will be able to apply for grants to develop biorefineries and improve the handling, harvest, transport, and storage of feedstocks for biofuels. This bill includes tax credits for small wind turbines and cellulosic biofuel production, and it stimulates research into the methods and technologies that will allow the most productive lands in the world to provide more and more of our energy. On rural development, this farm bill lays the infrastructure to rural broadband and micro business loans, for accelerating economic development in rural areas. The bill includes $150 million for important rural development initiatives, including the $15 million for the Micro Enterprise Loan Program, a provision I was honored to work on with Senator Ben Nelson from Nebraska. The program will also provide technical assistance and small grants and loans to beginning rural entrepreneurs. The micro loans will provide incentives for beginning entrepreneurs to open their businesses in rural communities, thereby creating jobs and increasing the rate of rural migration. According to the Leeds School of Business at the University of Colorado, microenterprises account for about 30 percent of the jobs in 37 of the State's mostly rural counties. These types of important programs are essential to economic development. In my view, this is the strongest conservation bill in the history of farm bills, building on the 2002 farm bill by investing an additional $4.4 billion in conservation programs. Non-Federal agricultural and forest lands occupy 1.4 billion acres here in the mainland of America. That is about 70 percent of the land in the lower 48 States. We all consume the air, the water, and open space, and enjoy them all, so it makes sense that the farm bill should provide some incentive for farmers and ranchers to deliver these public goods, along with all the other products they grow. That is why the farm bill increases spending on conservation programs by $7.9 billion, including increasing funding to important programs such as the one developed by the chairman of the Agriculture Committee, the Environmental Quality Incentive Program, EQIP, increasing the amount by $3.4 billion. It provides $1.3 billion to the Wetland Reserve Program and extends the Conservation Reserve Program by 32 million acres to be enrolled in the program from 2010 to 2012, all of which have been very successful programs in the State of Colorado. This is a picture of an EQIP conservation innovation grant at work in my State of Colorado. These farmers from the Saint Vrain and Boulder Creek watersheds are learning new practices that reduce tillage and increase yields from those farmlands. At the end of the day, these farmers went home with new ways to boost their bottom line, while reducing erosion. These programs work. The EQIP program works. We know that we, as a nation, will benefit from them. On nutrition, sometimes people forget that the largest investments in this farm bill don't actually go to the commodity programs or the energy programs or to any of the other titles of the farm bill; they go for nutrition. Nutrition programs receive two-thirds of the funding of this bill. This farm bill does some wonderful additional things for nutrition and for hunger, including the more than $10 billion for nutrition programs that will reduce hunger and provide kids with healthy meals. That is $10 billion above what had been provided before. That is a significant investment in nutrition. I am particularly proud we are able to expand the chairman's Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program in all 50 States, including my State of Colorado. That means that in my State--my small State of Colorado-- 80,000 Colorado kids are going to get fresh fruits and vegetables in their school lunches. This will reduce childhood obesity, increase productivity in school, and it will teach the habits of a healthy lifestyle. In food production, there are benefits to rural development, energy production, but this farm bill also ensures continued production of safe, healthy food right here at home. Growing up on our ranch and farm in the San Luis Valley in southern Colorado taught me how tough it is to make a living off the land. You work sun up to sundown all year. You cannot take Sundays off. It is a 7-day-a-week job--most of the time 365 days a year. You try to raise a good crop or a healthy herd, and then without anything you can do to prevent it, a disaster comes, something such as disease, drought, hail, or flooding, which can wipe it all away. I still remember when hailstorms would hit our farm. My mother would take and pour a salt cross outside of our house in the hope that somehow the hail would forego destroying our wheat and our alfalfa and other crops, because that was our only way of subsisting. We have gone beyond the cross here, although we all have faith. We have moved forward with the creation of a disaster program that, hopefully, will help us address the issue of disaster in rural America. I know the time is late. I want to make a quick comment about some of the reform efforts about which some have criticized this farm bill, including the White House. I think those criticisms are wrongly placed. I think there may be additional reform we can do and may do at another time with the farm bill. But it is important to note we have included reform in this farm bill. This farm bill requires direct attribution of payments to individuals, rather than ``entities'' so that there is 100 percent transparency about who is receiving farm program payments. The bill eliminates the three-entity rule and also includes a provision that I helped with to eliminate the ``cowboy starter kits,'' which will prevent the distribution of commodity support payments for land that has been subdivided for houses or transferred to nonagricultural uses. This is an important fix. I conclude by saying that those of us who have had the privilege of being a part of rural America can appreciate how important agriculture in our rural communities is to our country. That is why I am hopeful the President's threat to veto the bill will be reconsidered. The farm bill is not only about farms, it is about our future. It is about the entrepreneur who wants to build a biofuels plant in eastern Colorado; it is about the third grader who, for the first time, will get fresh fruits and vegetables for lunch; it is about the mother who wants us to reduce our dependence upon foreign oil so her children do not have to fight a war far away in the Middle East. It is about all of us who want to make sure we have a strong and secure America. We have a lot at stake in the passage of this farm bill. I urge my Democratic and Republican colleagues to join us and send a strong statement about the importance of rural America, our food security, and our energy security in an overwhelming vote on the conference report tomorrow. On my part, I will be very proud to take this farm bill back to the State of Colorado and go throughout the great State of Colorado and meet with those who care about rural America and the food security of this country, and who care so much about nutrition, and to talk to them about how it is that after 2\1/2\ years of hard labor, we have finally gotten to the end of the journey and we have a farm bill of which we can all rightfully be proud. I thank the Presiding Officer and I thank the chairman of the Agriculture Committee. I yield the floor.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the life of a soldier whose work defusing bombs and traps in Iraq and Afghanistan saved countless American, Iraqi, and Afghani lives. Army SFC Lawrence Ezell, of Fountain, CO--a hero by all standards--was killed on April 30 when a roadside bomb detonated near his unit. Assigned to the 62nd Ordnance Company, 71st Ordnance Group, out of Fort Carson, Sergeant Ezell was 30 years old. I know of no words that can properly honor Lawrence Ezell's sacrifice or measure the depth of his courage. Serving in an ordnance company requires a fortitude, a strength of mind, and a professionalism that few possess and even fewer are brave enough to summon for the task. It is a job with no room for error and no respite from danger. It demands a steady hand. It requires even steadier wits. Sergeant First Class Ezell performed his job day in and day out in the most dangerous places in the world. In 2003 and 2004, he was in Iraq. In 2005 and 2006, he was in Afghanistan. And this time he was back in Baghdad, trying to bring a measure of calm to its violent streets. We cannot know how many American servicemembers are alive today thanks to Sergeant Ezell's work, or how many Iraqi or Afghani citizens were saved from a devastating blast. We do know, however, how talented Sergeant Ezell was, and what a gifted leader he proved to be. He was highly decorated for his service. His awards included the Bronze Star, the Army Commendation Medal, the Army Achievement Medal, and the Senior Explosive Ordnance Disposal Badge. He was the type of soldier who has earned the admiration and praise of our Nation, generation after generation. He was the type of soldier who Douglas MacArthur hailed in a 1962 address to cadets at West Point. The type of soldier who ``prays for peace, for he must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war.'' The type of soldier who typifies the creed of ``duty, honor, and country.'' ``In twenty campaigns,'' General MacArthur told the cadets, ``on a hundred battlefields, around a thousand campfires, I have witnessed that enduring fortitude, that patriotic self-abnegation, and that invincible determination which have carved his statue in the hearts of his people. From one end of the world to the other, he has drained deep the chalice of courage.'' Sergeant Ezell's chalice of courage must have been bottomless. There is no other way to explain how a man can rise each morning, thousands of miles from his family, step into streets torn by sectarian strife, and put his life on the line to defuse bombs, day after day. He was a peacemaker in a land of great turmoil. To Sergeant Ezell's wife Christina, his parents Rebecca and Lawrence, and all his family and friends, our thoughts and prayers are with you. Sergeant Ezell's humbling service was beyond anything a nation can expect from its citizens. You can be certain that his country will never forget him, and never cease to honor his sacrifice.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I wish to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the signing of the North American Aerospace Defense Command Agreement between the United States and Canada. For Colorado, the home to the headquarters of the North American Aerospace Defense Command, NORAD, this is a proud and joyous 50th anniversary. Since the May 12, 1958, signing of the first NORAD agreement, NORAD has been a model for international cooperation in defense planning, execution, training, information management, and technological innovation. For half a century, the command has helped detect, deter, and defend against threats to the North American Continent. Today, we honor this legacy of success, but we also look ahead to the next half century of this partnership, so that NORAD can continue to provide for the security of our continent and our homeland. Over the last 3 years, I have visited frequently with the commanders of NORAD and U.S. Northern Command in Colorado Springs. I am humbled by the work that the men and women of NORAD do day-in and day-out to carry out their mission. At all hours, NORAD executes its missions of aerospace warning, aerospace control, and maritime warning. If any aircraft, missiles, or space vehicles pose a threat to the North American Continent, NORAD provides accurate, unambiguous, and timely warning. The command works closely with its homeland defense, security, and law enforcement partners to prevent air attacks, to safeguard the sovereign airspaces of the United States and Canada, and to provide a capability to respond to unknown, unwanted, and unauthorized air activity approaching and operating within North American airspace. At sea, NORAD provides binational warning of any maritime threat that may be approaching the continent. Over the last half century, NORAD has been a mechanism for collaboration between the United States and Canada in the interest of security. NORAD exercises command and control of military forces of both countries, so that we can respond to threats efficiently and jointly. NORAD has also allowed a growing level of information and intelligence sharing between the Canadian and American militaries, intelligence services, and other agencies and organizations. This is absolutely vital to our efforts to confront and defeat the threats of the 21st century. NORAD brings together not only the Active-Duty components of the U.S. and Canadian militaries but also the capabilities of our nations' Reserve components and national, provincial, state, local, and tribal organizations. The product of NORAD's efforts is the broad, binational, multiagency cooperation that has been, and will continue to be, fundamental to our national defense. Mr. President, today's milestone is an opportunity to reflect on the rewards of the NORAD partnership. These rewards are measured by the security of our citizens but also by the strength of the relationship between our two countries. NORAD's 50-year legacy of cooperation has helped build respect, trust, and confidence between Canadians and Americans. It is a relationship that is longstanding, stable, mutually beneficial, and absolutely essential in today's security environment, where the threats and challenges we face are always evolving. We must always remember, though, that the success of NORAD is a product of the men and women who make it work. To the Americans and Canadians who have stood shoulder to shoulder in the command over the past 50 years, I say thank you. We are proud of your professionalism, your commitment to your mission, and your tireless service to our countries. Congratulations on the 50th anniversary of NORAD, and congratulations on a job well done.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the life of Marine Sgt Glen Martinez and to share my deep sadness at the loss of one of our Nation's finest young men. Sergeant Martinez was on his second tour in Iraq, working to restore peace and security to Al Anbar province, when a roadside bomb tore through his vehicle, killing him and three other marines. He was 31 years old.7 Our thoughts and prayers are with Sergeant Martinez's wife Melissa, his parents Ron and Carol, his sister Lori, and her children Alexis and Spencer, his grandparents Isaac and Viola Martinez and Willard and Norma Martin, and all his friends and family. My heart also goes out to the community of Monte Vista, CO, a small town in the San Luis Valley not far from my family's ranch. The close-knit community, where everyone is a neighbor, has lost a favorite son. There was nothing, it seemed, that Glen Martinez couldn't do. In high school, he was a top student, a gifted musician, and a star athlete. He was the quarterback of the Monte Vista football team, competed for the State championship in wrestling, and led his baseball team. With college scholarship offers to choose from in all three sports, Glen accepted an academic and baseball scholarship at Ottawa University in Ottawa, KS. He graduated with a degree in mathematics in 2000, but continued his studies at Westwood College and then at the University of Colorado, in Boulder, where he took up a master's program in land surveying. At each step, Glen earned honors, awards, and the admiration of those he met. He is remembered for his contagious smile, boundless energy, and a heart committed to service. In 2004, while living in Boulder, Glen determined he had an obligation to serve his country, and that he could contribute most by enlisting in the Marines. By donning the uniform, he joined a proud family tradition of service and followed in the footsteps of both his grandfathers, who served in World War II, and his father Ron, who was in the Air Force during the Vietnam war. In the Marines, Glen quickly became a leader among those he served. He was a member of Combat Logistics Battalion-1, Combat Logistics Regiment-1, 1st Marine Logistics Group, out of Camp Pendleton. He rose rapidly to the rank of sergeant and, as with everything he did, earned recognition and awards for the quality of his service. He served with his wife Sgt Melissa Martinez, whom he met while training at Camp Pendleton. When Glen was killed, they were both in Al Anbar province, as part of an effort to keep the lid on the violence that once made the area among the most dangerous in Iraq. It is hard to measure all that inspired Sergeant Martinez's service. He had a deep-rooted pride for his country and his community. He sensed an obligation to offer his talents to a cause greater than his own. And he was determined to rise to every challenge presented. He shared what so many of our nation's great servicemembers and great leaders share--the sense, as President Woodrow Wilson described it, that ``the fortunes of a nation are confided to us.'' As World War I raged in Europe, President Wilson told the 1916 class at Annapolis that meeting this ``special obligation'' is perilous and difficult, but it also carries the highest reward: the honor and affection of their fellow citizens. ``You are going to live your lives under the most stimulating compulsion that any man can feel,'' President Wilson told the graduates, ``the sense, not of private duty merely, but of public duty also. And then if you perform that duty, there is a reward awaiting you which is superior to any other reward in the world. That is the affectionate remembrance of your fellow men--their honor, their affection. No man could wish for more than that or find anything higher than that to strive for. . . . I wish you Godspeed, and remind you that yours is the honor of the United States.'' Sergeant Martinez answered the call of his country with the dignity and honor President Woodrow Wilson extolled. Loved and respected by those with whom he served, his optimism and leadership could lift and inspire even in the most difficult circumstances. He was an irrepressible spirit and an extraordinary professional. Sgt Glen Martinez's achievements in life are matched only by the depth of his sacrifice--and the void he leaves behind. To Glen's family and friends, I know no words that can ease the pain you feel. I hope that in time you will find consolation in your pride in Glen's service and in the knowledge that his country and his community are eternally grateful for all that he gave. He has honored the United States, and the United States will always honor him. Specialist Ronald J. Tucker Mr. President, I also rise today to honor the life and service of Army Specialist Ronald J. Tucker, of Fountain, CO. Specialist Tucker was killed in Baghdad last week, at the age of 21, when a bomb exploded near his patrol. He was assigned to 1st Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment, 4th Infantry Division, out of Fort Hood, TX. Specialist Tucker grew up in the Pikes Peak region of Colorado and was a graduate of Fountain-Fort Carson High School. He was a hard- working, smart, good-humored young man with hopes of serving his country. In school, he devoted himself to his studies, but shared laughs and jokes with friends and teachers. Ronald joined the Army just a few days after his 2005 graduation from high school. He trained to be a mortarman and, in 2006, was assigned to Fort Hood. He deployed earlier this year and was serving as an indirect fire infantryman in a unit that was working to calm the violence that has escalated in Baghdad over the last several weeks. Specialist Tucker worked tirelessly, courageously, and professionally to help bring calm to streets teeming with ethnic violence and to allow the Iraqi people to hope again. Specialist Tucker followed in the footsteps of so many American soldiers who have honored their country with their service, and who General Douglas MacArthur regaled in a 1962 address to West Point soldiers for their selfless sacrifices and for their unflinching devotion to the protection of our Nation. ``Duty, honor, country,'' MacArthur told the young soldiers, ``Those three hallowed words reverently dictate what you ought to be, what you can be, what you will be.'' These three words have been the creed of generation after generation of American soldiers. They help us understand the courage and fortitude of men like Ronald Tucker, who deployed thousands of miles from his family, lived in constant peril, and shouldered the responsibility for keeping other soldiers safe while securing a brighter future for Iraqi citizens. Duty, honor, country. ``The code which those words perpetuate,'' said General MacArthur, ``embraces the highest moral law and will stand the test of any ethics or philosophies ever promulgated for the things that are right and its restraints are from the things that are wrong. The soldier, above all other men, is required to practice the greatest act of religious training--sacrifice . . . However hard the incidents of war may be, the soldier who is called upon to offer and to give his life for his country is the noblest development of mankind.'' Specialist Ronald Tucker embodied this creed: He donned the soldier's uniform at his first opportunity, he bravely entered the battlefield, and he offered and gave his life in service to his country. His is a debt we cannot repay. To Ronald's mother Susan, his stepfather David, and to all his family and friends, I know no words that can ease the pain you are feeling. I hope that in time, however, the joy Ronald brought to all who knew him and your pride in his service will provide comfort and consolation. His country will always honor his sacrifice.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the service and sacrifice of Marine 1Lt Matthew Vandergrift, of Littleton, CO. Lieutenant Vandergrift was assigned to 2nd Battalion, 10th Marine Regiment, 2nd Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force, out of Camp Lajeune, NC. He was recently killed in Basra, Iraq, by a bomb that exploded near his humvee. He was 28 years old. Those who knew Matthew Vandergrift describe him as a true patriot, committed to his country, his family, his friends, and to helping those around him. He was full of energy and laughter, and was always looking for the next adventure. Matthew grew up in Austin, TX, and attended Texas A&M University, where he graduated with honors in 2005. He was a member of the Corps of Cadets and Naval ROTC at Texas A&M, majored in international business, and had a 4.0 grade point average. When he became a marine in 2005, Matthew joined a proud family tradition of military service. His father was a major in the Marine Corps, his younger brother Barrett is an Air Force helicopter pilot, and his great uncle was GEN Alexander Vandergrift, a World War II Medal of Honor recipient and the 18th Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps. When he was killed, Lieutenant Vandergrift was in the middle of a year-long deployment that began last August. Tasked with helping train Iraqi security forces, his team of four marines lived and patrolled together with 50 Iraqis. They were performing sweeps in Basra in an attempt to calm violence, root out pockets of insurgents, and stand up an Iraqi unit that could take charge of the security responsibilities in the area. It was a dangerous mission in one of the most dangerous places in Iraq. But it was also a vital mission, and one that demanded the smarts, courage, and character for which Lieutenant Vandegrift was known. Each of our men and women in uniform is a patriot--they stand up at the call of their country and assume the task of service. But Matthew Vandergrift was also a patriot in a broader sense. Frances Wright, one of America's most famous lecturers, reminds us that patriotism is not simply one's love and dedication to country. Patriotism, she observes, is a virtue that characterizes an individual's commitment to the public good, to the preference of the interests of the many to the interests of the few, and to the love of liberty. ``A patriot,'' she told an Indiana crowd on July 4, 1828, ``is a useful member of society, capable of enlarging all minds and bettering all hearts with which he comes in contact; a useful member of the human family, capable of establishing fundamental principles and of merging his own interests, those of his associates, and those of his nation in the interests of the human race.'' We cannot count the hearts that Lieutenant Vandergrift touched nor the lives he bettered--that knowledge rests in the memories of those who knew him and served with him--but we may hope to emulate his model of patriotism. It is no easy task. It is rare that a man puts himself on the line for his country and for those with whom he served with such courage, with such heart, and with such a smile, as Matthew. Lieutenant Matthew Vandergrift's stature in life is matched only by the depth of his sacrifice--and the void he leaves behind. To Matthew's family, I know no words that can ease the pain of losing a son or a brother. I hope that in time you will find consolation in the pride you must feel for Matthew's service and for the joy he brought to all who knew him. He was a patriot and a hero. His country will always honor his sacrifice.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the life of Army Corporal Benjamin Brosh, of the 2nd Battalion, 327th Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division, out of Fort Campbell, KY. Corporal Brosh was killed last week in Balad, Iraq, when a car packed with explosives detonated near his position at Forward Operating Base Anaconda. He was 22 years old. Corporal Brosh has roots in Mississippi and Colorado, where his mother still lives and where he loved to ski. Those who knew him remember his energy, sense of humor, his love for his family, and his commitment to the Army and to the soldiers with whom he served. He entered the Army in 2006, shortly after experiencing and enduring the devastation that Hurricane Katrina wrought on his community. The storm stirred Benjamin to understand his gift for helping others in times of need. Although the storm had badly damaged his own crabbing business, which he had built out of his childhood love for fishing, Benjamin spent the days and weeks after the storm helping his family and friends dig out from the wreckage. ``He just worked like a Trojan, and didn't want anything from it,'' recalls a family friend whose home Benjamin cleared of mud and debris. He carried his dreams of helping others into the Army and then to Iraq, where, amid the violence of firefights and roadside bombs, he remained focused on doing what he could to help ordinary Iraqis rebuild their lives. Benjamin's father recalls how much he enjoyed delivering soccer balls to Iraqi children and then challenging them to a pickup game. In a war zone wrought with confusion and tragedy it is hard to imagine a gesture of humanity more powerful than that of an American soldier joining with Iraqi kids in a soccer match. Corporal Brosh's passion for assisting others was matched only by his commitment to protecting the soldier next to him. He was a pillar of his unit, sustaining his fellow soldiers with his good spirits, optimism, and courage. He dispensed advice and encouragement and, ultimately, offered his life to protect his unit. The words we offer to honor Corporal Brosh cannot begin to describe the heroism of his daily work or the depth of his character and convictions. From his memory, though, we draw a model for service and duty to which we can all aspire. At a 1963 gathering remembering the life of the poet Robert Frost, President John F. Kennedy reminded the crowd that, ``A nation reveals itself not only by the men it produces, but also by the men it honors, the men it remembers.'' Our Nation tends to recognize those men and women of wide acclaim, with whose accomplishments we are already familiar. This, however, is a time of heroes. Over a million and a half Americans have left their families for deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. Benjamin Brosh, a young man who learned his power to help others in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, gave even more than most. He lent his character, he lent his optimism, and he lent his life to his country. If a nation, as President Kennedy suggests, reveals itself by the citizens it produces, then Corporal Brosh is America at our finest. He is a patriot and a hero. To Benjamin Brosh's parents, James and Barbara, and to all his friends and family, our thoughts and prayers are with you. I hope that, in time, your grief will be assuaged by the pride you must feel in Benjamin's service and by the honor he bestowed upon his country. This Nation will never forget him. Sergeant David ``DJ'' Stelmat

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the 50th anniversary of the establishment of the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District. In the post-World War II era, communities large and small in the United States envisioned a period of growth and prosperity. Enthusiasm in the Arkansas Valley of Colorado was also high, but one limitation loomed large: the water needed to build and sustain that growth was simply not available. The regional water users' group decided to pursue a bold vision: the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, a complex diversion, storage, and delivery system, would move water from the western slope of the Rockies to the growing population on the eastern slope. The project itself is as complex as the politics of water in the West. It features both western slope and eastern slope facilities, some of them at elevations above 14,000 feet, and multiple dams, reservoirs, tunnels, and conduits. Fifty years ago today, on April 29, 1958, a Pueblo, CO, district court established under the provisions of Colorado law the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District. This administrative organization embodied the goals of the regional water users' group, which had proven adept at promoting the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project through the memorable and highly visible sale of small golden frying pans. The original supporters of the Fryingpan-Arkansas, many of whom eventually served as board members of the district, were committed to seeing its promise made true. Their stalwart efforts led to the authorization of the Fryingpan-Arkansas in 1962, and the Southeastern District has been managing the project continuously since that time. They fought year after year to see this multipurpose project appropriated and constructed. Their success brought the additional water that the valley and its people had hoped for, and many of them lived to see it provide benefits to the Arkansas Valley. President John F. Kennedy's visit to Pueblo in 1962 to commemorate the start of construction of Pueblo Dam, the largest component of the Fry-Ark Project, remains one of the most memorable events in the history of southern Colorado. Those of us in the West know that the development and responsible management of water is critical to people, to agriculture, to business and to the future. The Southeastern District has worked day in and day out for over five decades to ensure that the project's purpose is fulfilled. They work tirelessly in partnership with the people of the Arkansas Valley, with their Federal partner, the Bureau of Reclamation, and adroitly navigate the rules and regulations of Colorado water law to serve the people who depend on this water. I commend the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District for its diligence, and I commend the many distinguished people of the Arkansas Valley who have guided the district during its first 50 years as members of its board of directors. They established a tradition of vision, leadership, and distinction that will serve the people of southeastern Colorado well into their next 50 years.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I wish to honor the 30th anniversary of the Seniors' Resource Center, SRC, in Jefferson County, CO. For three decades, the SRC has delivered critical services to the aging and disabled communities in the Denver metropolitan area through a variety of innovative programs. I salute Jon Zabawa, president and CEO of SRC, his staff, and the many volunteers who have made the Center what it is today. From its inception as an extension of the Jefferson County Retired and Senior Volunteer Program, tasked with providing transportation assistance to the elderly, SRC has consistently received awards and acknowledgements for its terrific services. The National Council on Aging has named SRC one of its five Best Practices Organizations. The National Senior Citizen Education and Research Center has recognized SRC for ``outstanding performance in the Senior Aide Program and in enrollment, budget management, and placement.'' In 2002, SRC was the Colorado Association of Transit Agencies' Mid Transportation System of the Year. In 2004, they were the winners of the Community Transportation Association of America and the Beverly Foundation's ``Search for Innovation in Senior Transportation Award.'' Most recently, the center won the first-ever Non-Profit of the Year Award from the West Chamber of Commerce. Over the last 30 years, SRC has worked to steadily improve and expand its programs. The organization has grown beyond Jefferson County to 10 other metropolitan counties. Today, more than 100,000 Colorado citizens have access to SRC's services, including adult day and respite services, in-home care, transportation, care management, referrals to community partners, and job training programs. In the year 2010, there will be more than 770,000 seniors age 60 and over in Colorado, making organizations such as the SRC even more vital to the health of our communities. I am very proud of SRC's work, and I look forward to several more decades of their service to the community.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I wish today to strongly support the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which would clarify the laws against pay discrimination. I would like to thank Senator Kennedy, chairman of the Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions Committee, for his leadership on the bill. He has been a tireless champion for civil rights and I applaud his work. Mr. President, we as Americans are bound by a powerful idea--a revolutionary idea--that our nation is a work in progress. It is an idea etched in the words of the Constitution: ``to form a more perfect union.'' It is an idea that has inspired some of our Nation's greatest achievements--abolishing slavery, banning segregation, and expanding voting rights. It is an idea that brings the best out of our public service. This week in the Senate we have an opportunity to take another important step along our path of progress--to make our union more perfect. It is no secret that pay gaps exist in our country. Gender, race, national origin, age, disability, or religion should not have any effect on a worker's pay. But, sadly, they do. Nationally, women earn 77 cents for every dollar that men earn. In Colorado, women earn 79 cents for every dollar that men earn. The inequities are even clearer when you break the numbers in Colorado down by ethnicity. On average, African-American women earn 61.2 percent of what White men earn. Asian- American women earn 68.4 percent; Hispanic women earn 52.4 percent; and Native American/Alaskan Native women only earn 54.7 percent of what White men earn. These pay disparities persist partly because women still occupy fewer high-paying jobs than men. But they also persist because of continued pay discrimination in the workplace. We have laws on the books to make pay discrimination illegal, but those laws can be improved. Lilly Ledbetter's case is a classic, and tragic, example. Ms. Ledbetter worked for the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company in Gadsden, AL, for 19 years. She was a manager, a position predominately occupied by men at the company. After early retirement, Ms. Ledbetter learned, from an anonymous note, that male managers at the company were making 20 to 40 percent more than she was making in the same job. So Ms. Ledbetter took Goodyear to court. The jury found that the company violated her rights under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. They awarded her back pay and damages. The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, however, reversed the district court decision. They said that Ms. Ledbetter filed her case too late. They said she needed to file her complaint within 180 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred. Rightly, Ms. Ledbetter appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. In its 5- to-4 decision, the Supreme Court held that the 180-day statute of limitations begins when the original discriminatory act occurs. Whether the worker even knew that the discriminatory decision was made is of no consequence. Whether they were discriminated against for 1 or 20 years is also insignificant under the Court's majority decision. It is critical to understand the profound impact of the Court's decision. If an employee cannot challenge a discriminatory paycheck beyond the 180 days that the employer made the discriminatory decision, companies that discriminate cannot be held accountable for their actions. Six months after a discriminatory action, the bad actor is in the clear. This was certainly not the intent of Congress when it enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In her dissenting opinion, Justice Ginsburg raised a good question and a matter of common sense. How was Ms. Ledbetter supposed to know, and therefore complain, when she was first given a lower raise than her male counterparts? Goodyear, like many employers, kept salaries and raises confidential. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act would correct this injustice. The bill would amend title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other civil rights laws to make clear that the 180-day statute of limitations on a pay discrimination claim, based on gender, race, national origin, religion, age or disability, would restart every time an employee receives any wages or benefits affected by the discriminatory act. This was the law of the land for decades, with the exception of three States, until the U.S. Supreme Court decision, Ledbetter v. Goodyear. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act should receive the unanimous support of this body. We should all agree on the principle of `equal pay for equal work.' We should all agree that pay discrimination has no place in a 21st century America. And we should all agree that when there is a clear problem with the existing law, we should correct it. We have come a long way over the last 2\1/2\ centuries toward opening the doors of opportunity to every American. But ours is a nation still in progress, and our Union can still be perfected. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. SALAZAR

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

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I come to the floor this afternoon to speak again on behalf of S. 1315, the Veterans' Benefits Enhancement Act. At the outset, I wish to commend Senator Akaka for his leadership in the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, as well as the ranking member, Senator Burr, for having brought together a package, which is a good one, which is now on the floor of the Senate. I hope our colleagues come together tomorrow to pass this important legislation for the veterans of America. The bill expands eligibility for traumatic injury insurance; extends eligibility for specially adapted housing benefits for veterans with severe burns; increases benefits for veterans pursuing apprenticeships or on-job training programs; and a whole host of other benefits that are needed for the veterans of America. It is especially crucial at this time because of the fact that we have so many returning veterans from Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. This is legislation that will help not only those veterans but the 25 million veterans we have here in America. I am proud to be a cosponsor of this legislation. I urge my colleagues to fully support it. The issue of debate, which has, frankly, kept this legislation from receiving a unanimous consent vote in the Senate has been the issue of the treatment for veterans benefits of the Filipino warriors from World War II. I wish to remind our colleagues there were 470,000 Filipino veterans that volunteered and served to preserve the freedoms of the world during World War II; that approximately 200,000 of them were with the Philippine Commonwealth Army, with the Philippine Army Air Corps, and the Philippine Army Offshore Patrol. Today, there are about 18,000 of those warriors who now live in the United States of America. In my view, we cannot forget the sacrifices these Filipino warriors made as they fought side by side with American troops in World War II. They constituted the vast majority of the 80,000 soldiers who defended the Bataan Peninsula during the Japanese invasion. They constituted the vast majority of the soldiers who were forced on the Bataan Death March. The provisions in this legislation that deal with the benefits for Filipino veterans--and most of them are in their late seventies and eighties--are provisions we should support in the Senate. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the order from President Franklin Roosevelt, dated July 26, 1941, concerning his order placing the Philippine Army under the control of the United States Department of Defense.

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, in that statement and order by President Roosevelt, this is what he said, on July 26, 1941: Under and by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution of the United States, [by the corresponding laws concerning the Constitution] . . . of the Commonwealth of the Philippines, and as Commander in Chief of the Army and the Navy of the United States, I hereby call and order into the service of the Armed Forces of the United States for the period of the existing emergency, and place under the command of a General Officer, United States Army . . . all of the organized military forces of the Government of the Commonwealth of the Philippines . . . This order shall take effect with relation to all units and personnel of the organized military forces of the Government of the Commonwealth of the Philippines. . . . By this order, President Roosevelt harnessed the men and women of the Philippines, who served in the Armed Forces and helped our forces during that great conflict, to be part of our warrior force that defended and preserved the freedoms of America during that great world war. So I honor and I appreciate the leadership of Senator Akaka and Senator Inouye and Senator Stevens, who have come to the floor and have spoken, from their unique historical perspective, about this being a matter of justice for the Filipino veterans who so helped secure the place of America across the world as a beacon of hope and freedom for generations to come. I think we, as a Senate body, can do no less than to honor the sacrifice of these great veterans--part of the greatest generation--by making sure we adopt the provisions of this bill as they have been presented by Senator Akaka in his bill.

Mr. SALAZAR

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

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be listed as a cosponsor of S. 1315.

Mr. SALAZAR. I come to the floor this evening to speak on behalf of the Veterans' Benefits Enhancement Act embodied in S. 1315. This legislation passed the Veterans' Affairs Committee in August of 2007. I know the work that goes on in that committee because I served on that committee with Senator Akaka and many Members. It is an important tradition that committee has worked in a bipartisan spirit to make sure the United States honors the debt we owe to our veterans, some 25 million veterans in America and 1.4 million, 1.5 million veterans of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. It is through that committee that legislation emerges to make sure the promise this Nation makes to its veterans is a promise we keep. In my view, the fact that so much time has passed since S. 1315 came out of the Veterans' Affairs Committee in August 2007 until we have it today on the floor is, frankly, inexcusable. At the end of the day, the committee worked to put together legislation to better serve the Nation's veterans. The legislation before us does some very important things. It expands eligibility for traumatic injury insurance. That is very important, especially today when we see the kind of trauma and injuries our veterans are facing coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan. We have now over 30,000 veterans who have been grievously wounded in that war. I know most of my colleagues have been to Walter Reed or to veterans hospitals where they have seen the kind of wounds our veterans are experiencing because of explosions of IEDs and other kinds of attacks made on our troops. The expansion of traumatic injury insurance is important for our men and women who serve. The bill also extends the eligibility for specially adapted housing units to veterans with severe burns. I know in my visits to those who have been wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan, I have seen many who are in burn units who have suffered the scars of this war. This benefit for housing units that are specially adapted for those who are suffering burn injuries is a very important provision in this legislation that will be part of our efforts to make sure we are providing support to our veterans who have served. This legislation is also important because it increases benefits for veterans pursuing apprenticeships or on-the-job training programs. Across the country and in my State of Colorado, we know there are many veterans who are unemployed. In fact, in most States, about half of the homeless population comes from the veterans ranks. So providing on-the- job training opportunity for these veterans is important. This legislation does that. For all of the good things this legislation does, we could have taken it through this Chamber, through the House of Representatives, and to the President's desk, and we could have had that legislation already in law. We could have the framework of a law now honoring the veterans of America in the way they should be honored. Yet because of one provision of this legislation, it has been held up not 1 month, 2 months, but since August of 2007, to the point where today it is already April of 2008, and we are on the floor of the Senate trying to break a filibuster over legislation that is supposed to provide a benefit to our veterans in important ways. The provision which some on the other side have objected to--not all of them but some of them--has to do with the treatment of Filipino veterans during World War II. I join, proudly, my colleagues--Senator Inouye and Senator Stevens--in support of the legislation that would restore the benefits to Filipino veterans by granting them full veterans' status for the sacrifices they made during World War II. Over the last half century, the treatment of Filipino World War II veterans, in my view, has been a stain on our national honor. The Philippines became a possession of the United States in 1898, when it was ceded by Spain following the Spanish-American War. During that time period, and for the following 60-some years, the United States essentially controlled the territory and the people of the Philippines. It was in 1934, then, that the Congress enacted the Philippine Independence Act. That provided a 10-year timeframe for the independence of the Philippines. But it was during that 10-year timeframe, when the Philippines essentially were in a commonwealth status relationship to the United States of America, that the clouds of war and the horrific war of World War II beset the entire globe. Between 1934 and 1946, the United States retained powers over the Philippines, including the right as a government to call the military forces organized by the Commonwealth Government into the services of the Armed Forces of the United States. On July 26, 1941, President Franklin Roosevelt issued a military order calling on the Commonwealth Army of the Philippines to serve with the Armed Forces of the United States in the Far East. The Filipinos who served were entitled to full veterans' benefits by reason of their service under the command of our Armed Forces. Of the 470,000--that is 470,000; that is nearly half a million-- Filipino veterans who volunteered, approximately 200,000 served in the Philippine Commonwealth Army, the Philippine Army Air Corps, and the Philippine Army Offshore Patrol--all under the command of the United States of America and our military. We, I believe, in America cannot forget the sacrifice of our Filipino friends who fought side by side with American soldiers in World War II. They constituted the vast majority of the 80,000 soldiers who defended the Bataan Peninsula against the Japanese invasion. They constituted the vast majority--the vast majority--of the soldiers who were forced on the Bataan Death March. They fought side by side with American soldiers to defend Corregidor in 1942. They fought as guerrillas after the Japanese captured the Philippines. They worked behind enemy lines to provide intelligence to the American Army. More than half the battalion that was tasked with providing intelligence from the occupied Philippines later received the Bronze Star for their heroic service. When President Roosevelt signed a bill for the Filipinos to enlist in the U.S. Army, the Army stood up two entirely new regiments--the 1st and 2nd Filipino Infantry Regiments. The 1st and 2nd Filipino Infantry Regiments participated in the bloody combat and mop-up operations at New Guinea, Leyte, Samar, Luzon, and other major battles in the Philippines. Members of the 1st Regiment were also attached to the U.S. 6th Army, and they were working often behind enemy lines to help free the Allied prisoners from the death camps in 1945. In my view, the Filipinos who served in World War II were entitled to full veterans' benefits by reason of their service with our Armed Forces. Despite all their sacrifices--despite all their sacrifices-- after the war was over, after the Philippines gained officially their independence, the Congress passed the Rescissions Act of 1946, now codified in our U.S. law. The 1946 act precluded most of the Filipino World War II veterans from receiving veterans' benefits that were available to them prior to 1946 and that are available to all other veterans of our Armed Forces today regardless of race, national origin or citizenship status. S. 1315, today, would restore veterans status to those World War II heroes and, in particular, it would provide pension benefits to aid Filipino veterans residing in the Philippines during their twilight years. The pension benefits under S. 1315 would amount to less than one- third--to less than one-third--of the basic pension amount provided to veterans living in the United States of America today. The average income of persons residing in the Philippines, however, is considerably lower than their counterparts in the United States. So the pension benefits under S. 1315 would provide a decent standard of living to these veterans. Our Nation cannot abandon those who have served under our flag and who have served under our command. We must rally in support of these proven friends of America and act to redeem our Nation's debt in honor of their service. I urge my colleagues to support S. 1315 in its entirety, and to support granting the benefits that the Filipino veterans from World War II, in my view, have earned.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the life of Major Mark E. Rosenberg--a father, a husband, and a soldier. Major Rosenberg was on his second tour in Iraq when a bomb exploded near the Humvee that was carrying him through the streets of Baghdad. The explosion tore through his vehicle, killing him. He was 32 years old. Major Rosenberg was assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 29th Field Artillery Regiment, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, out of Fort Carson. The 3rd Brigade Combat team has lost 32 soldiers in Iraq, nine since deploying in November. Major Rosenberg was the 236th Fort Carson soldier killed in Iraq. Words cannot begin to measure the magnitude of Major Rosenberg's sacrifice, or the void left by his loss. Those who knew Mark remember him as a dedicated and dutiful soldier full of jokes and smiles. ``He was the life of the party,'' his sister recalls. ``Everybody wants to be around him.'' By all accounts, he was an extraordinary husband to his wife, Julie, and father to his two young sons, Joshua and Maxwell. Major Rosenberg was planning to come home on leave in June to celebrate Maxwell's second birthday. Mark entered the Army in the footsteps of his father, Burton Rosenberg. He graduated from the New Mexico Military Institute in 1996 and received his commission shortly thereafter. He spent a year in Korea in 2001-2002 and a year in Iraq in 2004-2005. For his honorable service, he earned the Army Commendation Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the Global War on Terror Service Medal, and the Humanitarian Service Ribbon. Mark's second deployment, which began last November, was scheduled for 15 months. His unit was tasked with training the Iraqi military, a job in which Major Rosenberg was committed to making a difference. He carried the spirit of a peacemaker and understood the humanitarian mission that a soldier could fulfill. Major Rosenberg was the type of `great man' who the activist and humanitarian Jane Addams described in a 1903 address to the Union League Club in Chicago. In the remarks she offered in honor of George Washington's birthday, Addams argued that ``when we come to the study of great men it is easy to think only of their great deeds, and not to think enough of their spirit. What is a great man who has made his mark upon history? Every time, if we think far enough, he is a man who has looked through the confusion of the moment and has seen the moral issue involved; he is a man who has refused to have his sense of justice distorted; he has listened to his conscience until conscience becomes a trumpet call to like-minded men, so that they gather about him and together, with mutual purpose and mutual aid, they make a new period in history.'' Major Rosenberg, as Jane Addams describes, was able to see through the ``confusion of the moment'' and understand the moral dimensions of his work. He was able to inspire and lead his soldiers, and the Iraqis whom he was training, with his vision and his heart. He worked in one of the most dangerous places in the world, yet was able to lift those around him with his spirit and his optimism. Hope is at a premium in Iraq, and he will be sorely missed. It is at home, of course, that Major Rosenberg's absence is most strongly felt. To Julie, Joshua, and Maxwell, to his mother Sheila, to his sister Lori, and to all his family and friends, our thoughts are with you. I know of no words that can assuage the grief and pain you feel. I pray that you will find some consolation in knowing that Mark will never be forgotten and that his country will always honor his sacrifice. He was among the noblest of our citizens--a great man committed to justice, humanity, and duty. May his legacy lift us all.