Ken Salazar

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise also to speak in opposition this afternoon to amendment No. 657, which again my friend from Oklahoma has offered to strip out agricultural disaster emergency assistance to our farmers and ranchers across this country. I came to this Senate 2 years ago and began at that time to work with Senator Kent Conrad and Senator Byron Dorgan and a number of other Members of this Senate, both Democrats and Republicans, to try to figure out how it is we could help out those areas of our country that were facing agricultural disaster emergencies. We saw it in the places of North Dakota and South Dakota and in many States across our country, but we certainly have seen it in my State of Colorado as well. In many places in my State, across the vast eastern plains, we are now in the seventh year of what is an unprecedented drought--the seventh year of what is an unprecedented drought--including one of those years being the driest year of record in the entire history of the State of Colorado. On top of that drought, we also saw this last year in the State of Colorado, in January of this year, a blizzard that came in unexpectedly and ended up killing approximately 15 million cattle across all of the eastern plains. So today, I stand with my colleagues who say that kind of emergency and that kind of disaster requires us to act, to take some action to help those farmers and ranchers of America who are often forgotten by Washington simply because Washington can't connect to those farmers and ranchers and to those small rural communities across America. This is our opportunity to make sure we are providing the kind of emergency disaster assistance that will help these ranchers and farmers see their way through the disaster they are currently facing. If we fail to act, what will end up happening is these ranchers and farmers across rural America are going to be so hurt that many of them are going to be driven off their farms and their ranches. As I have traveled the eastern plains of my State, I have met with ranchers who have lost upwards of 50 percent of their herd. I am sure they are wondering, and we should be wondering in this body today as well, how are they going to pay off their bank note? How is it they are going to continue to provide for their livelihood? Are they going to have to sell off their farms or their ranches in order to continue? Today, we have an opportunity to stand for rural America, for the forgotten America, and to say we believe in the food security of this Nation, we believe in our rural communities and in those farmers and those ranchers who are out there struggling every day to make sure we have the food on the table that feeds this Nation. I ask my colleagues to join me and others, both Democrats and Republicans in this Chamber, in casting a ``no'' vote against amendment No. 657, which would strip the agricultural emergency disaster assistance from this legislation. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. SALAZAR. In a March 5 letter from Secretary Chertoff, he indicated the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, MN, will be designated a National Special Security Event. In a March 9 letter, Senators Allard, Coleman, Klobuchar, and myself asked for this assistance in appropriations, and it was included in there. We have to remember we are living in a post-9/11 world. We are going to have 100 Senators, 435 Members of Congress, the President of the United States, and the Vice President all in this place at that one time. It is important for us to make sure we are providing the kinds of security they need. I urge my colleagues to vote no on this amendment.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I thank my good friend, the distinguished Senator from Arizona, and I thank Senator Murray and Senator Wyden as well. I wish to make two quick points in support of the amendment Senator Wyden and our colleagues have brought to the Senate floor today. The reality of the West in America is so much of our lands are owned by the Federal Government. We have about a third of the entire State of Colorado--and it is a big State, but it is about a third of that State--that is owned by the Federal Government. In some of those counties in my State, 95 to 98 percent of the lands is owned by the Federal Government as well. So they have been dependent on payments in lieu of taxes in order for them to be able to pay the expenses of their government. Unfortunately, what has happened over many years in the past is there has not been the full funding of the Payment in Lieu of Taxes Program. The consequence of that is some of these small rural counties in my State of Colorado have not had the financial wherewithal to be able to move forward with the functioning of their government. I am hopeful the bipartisan coalition Senator Wyden has put together will help us move forward in the full funding of the bill. Secondly, I wish to make a quick comment about the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000. I fully support that part of this legislation. I know the importance of funding for those rural school districts. The rural school district I grew up in would receive about one-half of the funding that is being spent in other school districts in the metropolitan areas. What this funding will do is help equalize the amount of funding we are putting into equal education opportunity for all people, so it doesn't matter whether you come from a wealthy urban area or you come from one of the poorest, most rural, remote areas, there will be that funding assistance so everyone in America has an equal educational opportunity. Madam President, I yield the floor again, thanking my colleagues and Senator McCain for yielding to me first.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, let me continue with respect to the comments I was making concerning the issue of energy. If you think about the 1970s and the 1980s, it was the economy that was at the root of what we were trying to do to develop solar energy and wind energy and looking at biofuels and the like. A lot has changed in those times. There is tremendous interest and a tremendous amount of energy being spent in each of our committees here in the Senate and the House of Representatives and in the White House and the Department of Energy on a clean energy future for America. Some people will ask the question today: Well, is this another short- lived agenda in the same way it was in the 1970s and the 1980s? When you look at the charts and you see what we were investing in clean energy technology back in the 1970s and 1980s, it was significantly higher than what we are investing in the 1980s and the 1990s and the early 2000s. I submit that things have changed because the drivers today are not only the economic drivers of our time. Today when we look at the energy issues we face in our world, it is not just about the volatility of the energy markets we see around the world and here in the United States, there are two other drivers that are equally as important. The first of those drivers has to be our national security. When you think about the fact that today we are importing about 60 percent of our oil from foreign countries, in the next 10 to 15 years, if projections continue the way they are, and growth continues the way it is expected to continue, we will be importing 70 percent of our oil from foreign countries. If that occurs, then we will continue to compromise the foreign policy, the national security of this Nation in a manner none of us should ever allow to happen. In fact, it would be a dereliction of duty for this Congress, for the Senate, and for this country to allow that to happen. In the latest skirmish with Israel and Lebanon, one has to ask the question about where that money was coming from that was funding the militia group of Hezbollah in its firing of nearly 10,000 rockets into the northern city of Haifa in northern Israel. One has to ask that question, where was the money coming from that would fund the 10,000 members of that militia group called Hezbollah in Lebanon and other places around the world? Well, we do not need to look very far for the answer to that question. You and I know--you as the Presiding Officer are well aware of the security interests here in our country--very well that the money creating and funding the terrorist groups in places such as Lebanon is coming from oil. It is coming from oil we are paying $60 and $70 a barrel for today. So the very national security of our country requires us, it demands of us, and we can do no less than to move forward with an agenda that grasps the imperative of energy independence in our world. That energy independence will come about with great opportunities as we look at a clean energy future for America. We will be able to derive jobs and create the kind of national economic security we need in the United States of America. The final driver is the issue of global warming. The debate is about whether global warming is an issue that needs to be confronted in the United States of America, the debate that was being held several years ago. But I would imagine most people in the United States of America today are saying it is important for us to confront this issue. In fact, as we are opening this day in the Senate, Senator Bingaman and Senator Domenici are holding a hearing with members of the European Union on the issue of global warming. Things have changed. Things have changed from the 1970s and the 1980s and the 1990s when America slept, and the only factor that was driving us to energy independence was the volatility of the markets. Today the driver is national security. We cannot afford to compromise our national security by continuing to be overdependent, by continuing our current addiction to foreign oil. We cannot afford to ignore the issue of global warming that threatens the future of civilization. How we approach those issues and how we develop solutions that bring us to a positive movement forward is very important. The issue of energy is one that can bring America together. To be sure, the last 6 years have seen a divided America on many issues, including Iraq. Energy can bring together Democrats and Republicans, progressives and conservatives, much as the Energy Futures Coalition has done in working with all of us. We crafted legislation that we call Set America Free. It is my hope that by the time the Senate finishes for the year or before we begin the August recess, we will have legislation that is bipartisan in nature, that will move us forward with a new energy future for America. That energy future will be one that is bound by a vision of a clean energy future that includes renewable energies, new technologies, and that goes after the low- hanging fruit of energy efficiency and addresses the issue of global warming. I ask unanimous consent that a portion of a speech I gave at an energy summit in Colorado be printed in the Record.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I come to the Senate floor to speak about the issue of energy and the importance of this Senate and this Congress and this country moving forward with an authentic picture with respect to energy independence for our country. When I get up in the morning and think about the major issues that are facing our country, there are three issues which always come to mind. The first is what is happening in Iraq and around the world and how we restore America's greatness and how we put Humpty Dumpty together again with respect to making sure America's greatness which we have enjoyed for the last two centuries is something we enjoy in the 21st century and beyond. Second are the difficult and important domestic issues which we are attempting to confront today--the issue of health care and how we move forward to create a system of health insurance and health care availability for all the people of America, an issue which continues to confront us. Third, the issue of energy and how we look forward. The issue of energy is something many of us in this Chamber and in the House of Representatives and the White House today will continue to work on, which is so important to all of us. With respect to Iraq, we will be facing that issue here in the weeks and months ahead. I believe strongly there is unity in the United States of America in terms of our support for our troops. I believe there is a long-term desire for us to make sure what we do is establish stability in the Middle East. I believe all of us want to make sure we are doing everything we can do to support our troops. Nonetheless, the debate will occur here on this floor this week and beyond. It is an important debate. It is a debate that involves perhaps the most important issue of our time. That is the issue of war and peace and the debate that is certainly appropriate to be held on the floor of the Senate. With respect to health care, I am pleased with the efforts the Senate Finance Committee and the HELP Committee are undertaking, with the leadership of Senator Baucus and Senator Kennedy and others, as we try to address the issue of health care. This year for sure we will move forward with a program that hopefully will expand the coverage of health insurance to the children of America. We think about 9 million children in this country today who have no health insurance. The expansion of the SCHIP program is something that is very important for all of these children across our many States who today do not have health insurance. But the other issue, the energy issue, is one which is winding its way through our various committees in the Senate today. In the Agriculture Committee, under the leadership of Senator Tom Harkin, we currently are looking at title 9 of the farm bill. We will have a robust law that will move us forward with a new agenda with respect to agriculture and energy. In the Senate Energy Committee, under the leadership of Senators Bingaman and Domenici, we are working on several bills that will help us move forward toward energy independence. In the Senate Finance Committee, under the leadership of Senator Baucus and Senator Grassley, we have numerous initiatives on the table that will create incentives for us to have the kind of biofuels, solar energy, and the other kinds of energy that will create the new environment for us to be successful in a program on energy independence. For me, when I think about energy, I see the dawning of a new age for my State of Colorado and also for America. It is a dawning of an age for America which we ought to embrace with vigor. It is the dawning of the age of a clean energy future for the United States of America. One year ago in my State I hosted the first Colorado Renewable Energy Summit. At the summit, there were more than 500 of us brought together to talk about our national energy policy and the energy opportunities we face in my State. We put renewable energy in the headlines for Colorado, and we have kept energy at the top of Colorado's agenda for the past year. This last Saturday, 2 days ago, on March 24, 2007, we again summoned the people of Colorado and we had over 1,000 people who attended a summit at the Colorado Convention Center. We were joined in that summit by my colleague Senator Wayne Allard, by Colorado Governor Ritter, the mayor, six Members of the U.S. House of Representatives, the president of the Colorado Senate, the speaker of the Colorado House of Representatives and, as I said, more than 1,000 people in my State who were interested in renewable energy and energy efficiency, not only for our State but for the entire country. Because of the work we have taken on in the last year in Colorado, today we have a Colorado Renewable Energy collaboration. That laboratory is an incredible association with the National Renewable Energy Lab, the Colorado School of Mines, Colorado State University, and the University of Colorado at Boulder. Even though the ink is not yet dry on the formation of the collaboration, these four great research institutions have already launched a world-class research program. It is called the Colorado Center for Bioresearch and Biofuels. Colorado's private sector is moving forward, too, on a variety of different fronts. First, with respect to wind, Colorado has added over 60 megawatts of wind generation in the last 4 years. But consider what is on the agenda for 2007. In 2007, my State of Colorado will add another 775 megawatts. That is more than tripling the State's production of wind generation. That is an equivalent of the generation we get from approximately two full-fledged powerplants. Beyond wind, we have embraced solar. Since the passage of a citizens' initiative in Colorado 2 years ago, Colorado's solar industries have seen a growth of 40 percent every year. The State's first commercial solar electricity project will be constructed in my native San Luis Valley in 2007. We moved from wind to solar to biodiesel. In 2004, there was no biodiesel produced in the State of Colorado. Today we have three plants in my State that are producing more than 30 million gallons a year, and a fourth plant is ready to start operations in the production of biodiesel. We go beyond biodiesel to ethanol. Two years ago we had no ethanol plants in the State of Colorado. Today we have three ethanol plants that are producing 90 million gallons of ethanol, and we have a fourth plant that will come on line in 2007, adding 50 million more gallons per year, and several other plants that are in the planning stages. That is not all. In my State of Colorado, we have moved forward with wind energy companies, with solar, photovoltaic designers, and manufacturers who are opening facilities in places such as Larimer County. Cellulosic ethanol companies, which are engaged in research and development, inform us within 2 years they will be at a point where cellulosic ethanol will be available in the commercial markets. We have hybrid vehicle manufacturers who are doing the technology development and research in my State, hybrid and plug-in vehicle battery manufacturers, engine efficiency research companies, such as German manufacturers in El Paso County and Colorado Springs. There is a whole lot more that is happening with respect to clean renewable energy in my State of Colorado. We have a long road ahead of us, but we have found our stride and we know the destination. We want America to be the world's center for renewable energy research, for development and for production. I want my State to play a significant role as we embrace that agenda. Let's be clear about what is happening with respect to energy in the United States of America. Some of us need to remind ourselves it was not so long ago when President Nixon and then President Carter later on said we needed to embrace a new ethic of energy independence. This was in the 1970s, some 35, 40, 45 years ago when we were talking about the importance of energy independence, frankly, because of the economics that were driving it at the time. There was great concern with respect to the formation of OPEC and with respect to the volatility of markets that could disrupt the American economy. We see what happened in response to the leadership in the 1970s where there were great investments made in technologies that would look at alternative fuels that would power our homes and cars in this country. But the driver of economics went away when the price of oil dropped to around $20, $21, $22, $23 per barrel. Over this last year, we saw the price of oil get up to $60 and $70 per barrel, and we saw the price of a gallon come up to $3 a gallon, in some places more than $3.50, $3.60 a gallon, the price of diesel following the same path. It became apparent at the time the economic driver was not the only significant driver here. Mr. President, may I inquire as to the amount of time we have in morning business?

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, so I am clear on my time, I have about 7 minutes in morning business allocated to me under the current order?

Mr. SALAZAR. May I inquire of my friend from West Virginia as to whether he planned on using any of the time in morning business.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise to discuss the budget resolution that is currently before the Senate today. This is my third year in the Senate, and this is the third budget resolution I have had the opportunity to consider. But this is the first time I can say I am proud of the resolution before us. It is long overdue. We have not had a budget for 2 years, and we are still operating under the budget resolution passed in 2005. The circumstances surrounding the budget are not ideal. Our fiscal situation in this country has deteriorated significantly year after year over the past 6 years. We know we cannot fully fund every good program, and we are still facing deficits even as we move closer and closer to the demographic tidal wave that will soon overtake the Social Security and Medicare Programs. But, to their immense credit--to the immense credit of the chairman of the Budget Committee, Senator Conrad--they have crafted a very good, strong budget resolution. The budget resolution before us provides a blueprint that will enable us to fund our most important Federal programs, provide new tax relief and extend expiring tax provisions, and bring the budget into balance within 5 years. It will do all that without raising taxes. Still, one of the most important parts of this budget is not a program or a tax cut; it is a simple principle: If you want to take money out of the budget, either by increasing funding for Federal programs or by cutting taxes, you have to pay for it. You have to pay for it--it is a simple principle but a very important principle that will assure we restore fiscal discipline to the Congress. This pay-go provision is one I have long supported and one I am very proud to support with Senator Conrad and other Members of this body. The budget resolution would create a 60-vote point of order against any new spending for tax cuts that are not fully paid for--that are not fully paid for. The simple rule is essential if we are to exercise the fiscal restraint that will be necessary to restore sanity to the budgetary process and to set our Nation's fiscal circumstances back on the right path. I believe this budget strikes the right balance for America--between the fiscal restraint that is embodied in pay-go and the need to fund our Government and between the need to keep taxes on middle-class families low and the importance of facing up to our looming budgetary challenges from a position of fiscal strength. This budget accomplishes those important goals. On the spending side, I am particularly pleased the budget resolution provides adequate funding for a wide range of programs that are important to the people of America and to the people of Colorado. Some of those priorities include children's health, education, veterans health, and law enforcement. These issues have never been more important to America than they are today. On children's health, an estimated 9 million children in America do not have health insurance today. This is a staggering statistic: 9 million children in America are without health insurance. They do not have health insurance; therefore, they do not have access to quality health care. These children will be denied the opportunities of learning, to grow up in stable family environments, and to become productive members of our communities. On education, America is quickly losing ground to other nations in this global economy. The Federal Government must help local schools provide students with the skills they need to compete on a national and international basis. On veterans health, we are all familiar with the consequences of the failure to provide our veterans with the quality care the Nation owes them. We currently have over 630,000 veterans of both Iraq and Afghanistan. We owe it to them as a nation to ensure they receive the best care our Government can provide because that is what we promised to each and every one of them and their families. On law enforcement, we all know how important it is for our citizens to feel safe and to be secure in the fact their Government is doing everything it can to protect them in their homes and in their communities. That means more effective Federal homeland security programs, and it means more police officers in our neighborhoods. The budget resolution before us gives these and a range of other critical national priorities the full support they deserve. For example, this budget provides $552 million for the COPS Program. The COPS Program itself has helped put 1,300 police officers on the streets in communities of my State of Colorado. This budget provides $43.1 billion for veterans programs, including veterans health--with a $3.5 billion increase over the President's budget request. This budget provides $9.2 billion in discretionary education spending above the President's budget request. This budget provides $50 billion for the State Children's Health Insurance Program, SCHIP. That is 10 times what the President has proposed, and it starts us effectively down the road of making sure all the children of America, in fact, have health insurance. This budget protects our communities and our cities and our counties by making sure the community development block grants, which are so important, are provided $3.8 billion. This represents a very significant increase over the President's budget request, which slashed the community development block grants. This budget provides $1.6 billion for the Department of Energy account that, among other things, will fund the National Renewable Energy Lab at a level $385 million above what the President requested. The budget also provides a $15 billion increase for agricultural funding between 2008 and 2012 to give our farmers and our ranchers in the forgotten part of America--our rural communities--the assistance they need to remain vibrant. The budget also rejects the President's proposed cuts to the Payment In Lieu of Taxes Program, the PILT Program, restoring PILT funding to fiscal year 2006 levels. On the revenue side, this budget sets the stage for meaningful middle-class tax relief and for aggressive action to close the tax gap. As a new member of the Senate Finance Committee, I will do my part to help make the chairman's goals a reality. For example, I strongly support the chairman's decision to include 2 years of AMT relief for middle-class households. That is 1 more year than was set forth in the President's budget request. This will ensure that 20 million--20 million--middle-class taxpayers are not unfairly subjected to the AMT for the next 2 years. I am also especially encouraged that Chairman Conrad has made a point to emphasize the need to go after corporate tax shelters and offshore tax havens as a way of reducing the tax gap. It is simply not fair to ask hard-working, middle-class Americans to pay their fair share in taxes while we allow large corporations to consistently abuse the Tax Code for their own profit. I commend Chairman Conrad and the members of the Budget Committee for their vigilance in this arena. Finally, I believe the budget's deficit-neutral reserve fund for tax relief provides an excellent mechanism for extending several critical tax credits and deductions that will expire in coming years in a fiscally responsible way. The renewable energy production tax credits are an example of that in an amendment we just successfully adopted. At the end of the day, in 2012, this budget will be balanced. A dramatic reversal of our fiscal fortunes will occur because of the resolution that is before us today. We need a responsible budget blueprint for Congress, and we need it now. This resolution provides that blueprint, and I am proud to stand behind it. I will vote for it. I urge my colleagues to also support it. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Retirement and Aging be authorized to hold a hearing on Alzheimer's research during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 20, 2007 at 10 a.m. in SH-216.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on National Parks be authorized to hold a hearing during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 20, 2007, at 2:30 p.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on the following bills: S. 126, to modify the boundary of Mesa Verde National Park, and for other purposes; S. 257, to direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study to determine the feasibility of establishing the Columbia-Pacific National Heritage Area in the States of Washington and Oregon, and for other purposes; S. 289, to establish the Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area, and for other purposes; S. 443, to establish the Sangre de Cristo National Heritage Area in the State of Colorado, and for other purposes; S. 444, to establish the South Park National Heritage Area in the State of Colorado, and for other purposes; S. 500 and H.R. 512, to establish the Commission to Study the Potential Creation of the National Museum of the American Latino, to develop a plan of action for the establishment and maintenance of a National Museum of the American Latino in Washington, DC, and for other purposes; S. 637, to direct the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and feasibility of establishing the Chattahoochee Trace National Heritage Corridor in Alabama and Georgia, and for other purposes; S. 817, to amend the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996 to provide additional authorizations for certain National Heritage Areas, and for other purposes; and S. Con. Res. 6, Expressing the sense of Congress that the National Museum of Wildlife Art, located in Jackson, Wyoming, should be designated as the ``National Museum of Wildlife Art of the United States.''

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights be authorized to meet on Tuesday, March 20, 2006, at 2:15 p.m., to conduct a hearing on ``The OX-Sirius Merger: Monopoly or Competition from New Technologies'' in room 226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. Witness List: Mel Karmazin, Chief Executive Officer, Sirius Satellite Radio, New York, NY; Mary Quass, President and CEO, NRG Media, LLC, Cedar Rapids, IA; David Balto, Attorney at Law, Law Office of David Balto, Washington, DC; and Gigi B. Sohn, President, Public Knowledge, Washington, DC.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on March 20, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. to hold a closed hearing.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations be authorized to meet on Tuesday, March 20, 2007, at 2:30 p.m., for a hearing entitled ``Medicare Doctors Who Cheat on Their Taxes and What Should Be Done About It.''

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on ``Combating War Profiteering: Are We Doing Enough to Investigate and Prosecute Contracting Fraud and Abuse in Iraq?'' on Tuesday, March 20, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. in Dirksen Senate Office Building Room 226. Witness List The Honorable Stuart W. Bowen, Jr., Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, Arlington, VA; Thomas F. Gimble, Acting Inspector General, U.S. Department of Defense, Arlington, VA; Barry Sabin, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 20, 2007, at 10 a.m. to hold a hearing on Chad.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session on Tuesday, March 20, 2007, at 10 a.m., in 215 Dirksen Senate Office Building, to hear testimony on ``Realizing a Competitive Education: Identifying Needs, Partnerships and Resources.''

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to hold a hearing during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 20, 2007, at 10 a.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the hearing is to consider the nomination of Stephen Jeffrey Isakowitz, of Virginia, to be Chief Financial Officer of the Department of Energy.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to hold a hearing during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 20, 2007, at 2:30 p.m., in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building. The purpose of this hearing is to discuss innovation in energy technology.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to hold a hearing during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 20, 2007, at 10 a.m., in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building. The purpose of this hearing is to promote travel to America, and to examine economic and security concerns.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 20, 2007, at 9:30 a.m., in open session to receive testimony on the Air Force in review of the defense authorization request for fiscal year 2008 and the future years defense program.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I wish to take a moment of the Senate's time to remember a Coloradan who was lost to us in Iraq last week. Marine Corps SSgt Dustin Michael Gould--7th Engineer Support Battalion, 1st Marine Logistics Group, I Marine Expeditionary Force--was in his fourth tour in Iraq when he was taken from this life, at the age of 28. Sergeant Gould was a unique man, with a unique job in Iraq: he was an explosives ordnance demolition technician--a marine who disarmed bombs. In a country whose fabric is strained almost daily with bomb attacks, Sergeant Gould was there to help prevent them, literally working to defuse violence that threatened his fellow marines and Iraqis alike. Dustin Gould grew up in several towns in Colorado and attended Berthoud High School in Longmont, which he graduated in 1997. He chose to serve his Nation in the Marine Corps because of their elite status. During his service to this Nation, the Marine Corps estimates that Staff Sergeant Gould neutralized more than a million pounds of explosives, explosives that could have killed untold numbers of marines. Every time Dustin Gould went to work, he saved lives. That, truly, is the definition of heroism. With all of this talk of military service, we should not lose sight of the man. Dustin Gould loved the outdoors and spent his spare time as a young man there with his father. He was respectful and thoughtful, a natural leader who never hesitated to lend a hand to a friend in need. GEN Douglas MacArthur once said, ``The soldier, above all other people, prays for peace, for he must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war.'' Dustin's father David said that Dustin did not relish conflict but was serving his Nation because a higher calling, protecting our freedom and way of life, compelled him to act. He did not seek praise or recognition but instead accomplished his job with humility and courage and in doing so helped others do the same. In the midst of America's Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln wrote to the mother of a Union soldier, ``I pray that our Heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished memory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride that must be yours, to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of Freedom.'' We pray now for Dustin, for his wife Elizabeth, and for his whole family. The wounds they suffer from the loss of Dustin are deep and painful, and we as a Nation honor their and Dustin's humbling sacrifice by never forgetting this fine young man. Specialist Blake Harris Mr. President, I ask the Senate to turn its attention to the loss of a Coloradan in Iraq, Army SPC Blake Harris, of Pueblo, CO. SPC Harris was in the Army's 1st Squadron, 12th Cavalry Regiment, 3rd Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division. He was only 22 years old, and will be laid to rest later this week. Pueblo, CO, is known as the ``Home of Heroes.'' Pueblo hosts National Medal of Honor Day and has had as many as four living Medal of Honor recipients living in the community. In 1953, President Eisenhower joked to recipient Raymond G. ``Jerry'' Murphy, ``What is it . . . Something in the water out there in Pueblo? All you guys turn out to be heroes.'' President Eisenhower was not far off. There is something special in Pueblo--the brave sons and daughters, like Blake Harris, that have answered the call to service for this Nation and those that have given up their lives for the cause of freedom. They are heroes. Unfortunately, we cannot bring back the heroes like Blake Harris. And, like so many of our Nation's soldiers that have made this ultimate sacrifice, Blake Harris was man of great courage and character who had his entire life ahead of him. Blake met his wife Joanna at South High School, and while Blake was in Iraq they kept in contact every day. He graduated from South High in 2002 after spending 3 years in ROTC , and he followed in his father's footsteps by enlisting in the Army. He was in his second tour in Iraq and was stationed in Baghdad. Specialist Harris loved his job and was looking to become a career soldier, a man who dedicated his life to the service of his country. After the assassination of American civil rights pioneer the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Senator Robert Kennedy reflected upon the words of the Greek poet Aeschylus: ``Even in our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart, until, in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God.'' To his wife Joanna and their son Jonah and Blake's parents John and Deborah, the prayers of our entire Nation are with you, today and always. Each and every American is humbled by the sacrifice made by Blake. He served with honor and distinction, and I hope that the pride in his service and memories you carry with you will help ease the grief you feel at his loss.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes as in morning business.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 2:15 p.m. today, the Senate proceed to the consideration of calendar No. 82, S. Con. Res. 21, the concurrent budget resolution.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I am very proud to have supported the Preserving United States Attorney Independence Act we just passed in the Senate. This bill will go a long way toward restoring the independence of Federal prosecutors--an independence which has, unfortunately, been chipped away at in recent months and years. I have been disappointed to watch the drama unfolding over the past few weeks regarding the politicization of our justice system. Every day, as the Judiciary Committee continues its investigation, we see more revelations of how the Department of Justice may have allowed portions of the U.S. attorney corps to become a vehicle for political patronage--this despite the fact that U.S. attorneys are among the most powerful public officials in our country, making virtually unreviewable decisions about life and death, about punishment and leniency. They make these kinds of decisions every single day all across this country. The U.S. attorneys must be individuals who have integrity. They must be above reproach. They must be free from any kind of partisan political interference. I am disappointed the Department of Justice may have blurred the line between the representation of President Bush as a client and the representation of the people of the United States. I understand that distinction very well, having served both as chief counsel to the Governor of my State as well as attorney general for the State of Colorado. Those are two very different positions. One requires--in the case of chief counsel to the Governor or chief counsel to the President--a lawyer-client relationship. The other--Attorney General-- requires the representation of the people whom you represent. In the case of a State attorney general, you are the representative of the people of that State. In the case of the U.S. Attorney General, you are the representative of the people of the United States of America. If Attorney General Gonzales has, indeed, crossed this line, then in my view he has forfeited his right to lead the Department of Justice. On January 28, 2005, I received a letter from Attorney General Gonzales as part of his confirmation process in this U.S. Senate. In that letter he reflected upon his understanding of the independence of the Office of the Attorney General. I quote in part from that letter where he says the following: If confirmed, I will lead the Department of Justice and act on behalf of agencies and officials of the United States. Nevertheless, my highest and most solemn obligation will be to represent the interests of the People. I know that you understand this solemn duty well from your prior service as Chief Counsel to the Governor and as Colorado Attorney General. I would hope as the Senate Judiciary Committee moves forward in examining the facts related to the allegations that have been raised, the Judiciary Committee makes sure those facts are evaluated against the standard of independence which is at the core of the Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney General. If, in fact, this standard has been violated, then it is my view that Attorney General Gonzales should, in fact, resign. In the meantime, the Senate has a responsibility to ensure that Federal prosecutors are indeed independent of partisan politics, and the bill we passed today is a good first step. But I believe we must do more. Later this week, I will introduce a bill which I believe will take us another important step toward restoring the independence of Federal prosecutors. I am hopeful it will be legislation that will have broad bipartisan support. My bill would simply make it a crime to coerce or to pressure or to attempt to influence a U.S. attorney's decision whether to commence the investigation or prosecution of a person based on that person's race, religion, sex, national origin, political activity, or political beliefs. The U.S. Attorneys Manual itself, which is given to every U.S. attorney as they come into office, already prohibits any Federal prosecutor from taking action against a person for any of those reasons. My bill would make sure that standard of the United States Attorneys Manual is included in the law of the United States. It would also extend the prohibitions that are set forth in that manual to individuals who try to influence or manipulate Federal prosecutors. Some may ask, why is this bill necessary? In my view, the bill is necessary because over the past few weeks we have seen evidence that the White House has politicized the appointment and termination of U.S. attorneys. We have also had concerns raised that individuals have tried to inject politics into the administration of justice. I do not need to rehash the particulars of this controversy right now, but suffice it to say many Senators on both sides of the aisle are concerned that the independence of our Federal prosecutors has, in fact, been threatened. Fixing the process for appointment of interim prosecutors is an important first step, no doubt. But that alone will not prevent individuals--whether from the Department of Justice or anywhere else--from attempting to influence the decisionmaking process of U.S. attorneys in an inappropriate manner. That is what my bill is designed to prevent. In 1938, almost 70 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court set forth, in what I believe is seminal language, a standard of conduct that should govern the actions and decisions of U.S. attorneys. In that decision, the U.S. Supreme Court said the following: The United States Attorney is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty ``but of a sovereignty''-- whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer. ``guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer.'' He may prosecute with earnestness and vigor--indeed, he should do so. But, while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one. I believe these words the U.S. Supreme Court said in 1938 are equally as applicable today; that is, we are a nation of laws and we must understand that no person is above or below the law. If we are going to be a nation of laws, we must make sure those individuals in whom we repose the authority to prosecute and to enforce the laws of the United States do so in an appropriate way that meets the standards that were set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1938, and also which meets the standards that are set forth in the manual that governs the conduct of the U.S. attorneys. For many of us who have watched what has happened in Iraq and other places around the world, what we see is a failure of nations to develop a rule of law. That is what sets America apart from many of these other countries that so struggle to create a safe and secure society: they do not have the rule of law which is so important to us in this country. Therefore, I believe the legislation I will be introducing will make sure that the Department of Justice and the U.S. attorneys within the Department of Justice are always in a position to uphold the rule of law for our Nation and make sure that their ability and their decisions are not compromised by any political influence. Mr. President, I yield the floor.