Ken Salazar

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bills be printed in the Record.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I thank the chairman and the ranking member for their leadership on this issue--and for their careers of service to and sacrifice for this country.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I wish to bring up an important subject involving our soldiers in harm's way. In my State of Colorado and across the country, our fighting men and women have suffered casualties while on patrol in armored vehicles. Typically, the gunner sitting on top of the vehicle is at more risk from being hit both because he or she is visible to the enemy and because he or she is not as protected as those troops inside the armored vehicle. I recently received an e-mail from a Colorado soldier serving in Iraq. This brave young man wrote me concerning the combat death of his friend. His friend was riding in the gunner's seat when his Humvee was subjected to an improvised explosive device attack. He feels that his friend might still be alive if that Humvee had a Common Remotely Operated Weapons Station--CROWS--and he wanted me to know about it and see if anyone here in Washington could do something about it. I think we can do something about it, and with the help of my colleagues from Hawaii and Alaska, we will do something about it. The CROWS can be mounted on a variety of vehicles, including Humvees. It allows the operator to acquire and engage targets while protected inside the armored vehicle from enemy fire and IED attacks. It works with a variety of machine guns. The sensor suite allows both day and night time operation. This appropriations bill, as it stands now, allocates $75 million out of the emergency supplemental for the military to purchase CROWS. The House Defense appropriations bill provides no funding for CROWS, which is disheartening. The DOD's program manager has advised me that the Pentagon supports spending $206 million for the CROWS system over the next year. My goal is for the military to be able to purchase thousands of these systems, but at the moment our production capability is only on the order of 10 systems per month. We have to do better. I ask my colleagues, the chairman and ranking member of the Defense Subcommittee on Appropriations, for their leadership and assistance in sustaining the Senate's position when they get to conference on this matter with the House.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, what is the pending business?

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Hawaii, a great friend and truly an inspiration and hero for all of us in this Nation, for his great contribution, not only during World War II but also his continuing contribution in the Senate--likewise, to the chairman of the committee, Senator Stevens, for an equally remarkable contribution to our country during World War II, and their understanding of the importance of doing everything we can to defend our country. I thank the Chair and suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, amendment No. 1903, which I am working on with my colleagues to resolve, will provide impact aid funding to the children of the service personnel in Fort Carson, CO. It will restore $1.2 million in needed educational impact aid funding to the El Paso County School District No. 8. The money for this amendment has already been appropriated within the Department of Education budget. The El Paso School District educates the children of thousands of service men and women serving our Nation on the Fort Carson military base. Many of the loved ones of these students and staff of the El Paso County School District have been deployed to Iraq as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom. In fact, over 11,000 soldiers from Fort Carson are currently deployed in Iraq. That is one-half of Fort Carson's total force. Due to a technical error, the Department of Education has denied the school district access to a $1.2 million set-aside for that school district's program. The result is that school district may have to fire as many as 12 teachers and teachers' aides. This amendment simply permits the school to access the money already set aside for it. I recognize this is not the traditional vehicle for this fix, but, frankly, given the stakes for the school district and the fact that the education of the children of the men and women from Fort Carson who are in Iraq is at stake, I believe we owe it to the families there to fix this problem, and to do it now. I note, too, that I have discussed this issue with the HELP Committee. Chairman Enzi and Ranking Member Kennedy have graciously consented to the inclusion of this amendment on this bill. I have also been in close contact with the Armed Services Committee and with Senators--from Arizona and New Mexico--who face similar challenges. They all support this measure. I will work closely with the managers of this bill to dispose of this amendment in the most efficient way. And while I am here, Mr. President, I want to discuss four other amendments I have offered or will shortly offer to this bill. The amendments build on a good bill produced by Senators Stevens and Inouye. Amendment No. 1887 The first amendment--amendment No. 1887--would simply change the name of the so-called ``death gratuity'' to the less insulting and more appropriate name, the ``fallen hero compensation.'' The Senate has considered--and adopted--a version of this amendment before. Regrettably, it was dropped out in the conference on the fiscal year 2005 Iraq and Afghanistan emergency supplemental. I hope it stays in this time. It fixes something in current law that I consider unfair. We currently call the assistance that taxpayers make available to military survivors a death gratuity. The term gratuity means gift, and I do not believe that any of the widows, widowers, or children left behind think of that money as a gift. I refuse the term death gratuity. Senate Amendment 1887 will change the term to fallen hero compensation, a term that more appropriately describes the sacrifice of these men for their country. Amendment No. 1888 Senate amendment No. 1888, offered by Senators Reed, Lieberman and myself, mirrors an amendment Senators Chambliss, Lieberman, Reed and I offered to the Defense authorization bill. I think we have agreement to get a modified version of this amendment added to the Defense authorization. Pending a clearer picture of the fate of that bill, I intend to protect my right to offer that amendment here. This amendment will allow the Office of Special Events within the Department of Defense to provide more support to Paralympic competitions in the United States. This is a matter of basic fairness. The Pentagon currently supports Olympic and other international games. This amendment just makes it easier for the Pentagon to support such competitions. With so many of our men and women coming back from Iraq disabled, it is important we provide these Olympic opportunities. Amendment No. 1900 Senate Amendment No. 1900 requires standards and accountability for Afghan security forces trained by the United States. It passed by unanimous consent as part of the fiscal year 2005 Iraq and Afghanistan emergency supplemental, but was dropped in the conference committee--not understandably--because it was deemed unnecessary. I could not disagree more with the assessment of my esteemed colleagues in the conference committee. Press accounts in recent weeks indicate that our training efforts in Afghanistan have been even less successful than our efforts in Iraq. Earlier this month LTG David Petraus, the top American trainer in Iraq, spent 5 days in Afghanistan to prepare a confidential assessment for the Pentagon. While I have not seen the results of the assessment, I can say without question that the decision to send General Petraus to Afghanistan was not an indication that the Pentagon believes things are progressing well there. And a series of recent press stories--from Stars and Stripes to the New York Times--indicate that our soldiers deployed to Afghanistan are also concerned about the status of training there. A sergeant with the 391st Engineer Battalion was quoted by Stars and Stripes as saying, in plain and simple language, ``The Afghan National Army just isn't where it needs to be yet.'' According to the New York Times, by September, the Afghan army had grown to about 26,000 troops and the Afghan police force to more than 50,000. In contrast, the Iraqi army and special police forces have 87,300 troops, and the Iraqi police force has about 104,300 officers. The same article reports that until earlier this month, many Afghan police recruits were training with wooden rifles. That is not a misstatement. The force we expect to root out the world's worst opium production and trafficking efforts has been training--until earlier this month--with wooden rifles. Our commanding officer there, General Eikenberry, said this: ``When you're trying to put the pieces back together again, you need a lot of time and a lot of patience.'' He is, of course, right. Ensuring that patience--particularly as we consider yet another $50 billion supplemental for Iraq and Afghanistan--requires more information. We simply need more information about whether and how we are meeting our shared goal of an Afghan security force trained to a uniform standard. Some of my colleagues have suggested that there are sufficient reporting requirements in place on our efforts in Afghanistan. It is true that the Afghan Freedom and Support Act requires an update on our training effort there. But nowhere in that act or anywhere in existing reporting requirements is there a demand for clear reporting on the standards to which these forces are being trained, or any demand for clear accountability that the forces trained have met the standards we are demanding they meet. This amendment will ensure that we have the same reporting requirements for Afghanistan as we already have for Iraq. It will provide the accountability our taxpayers deserve and the success that our national security demands. My last amendment, which I will introduce later today, is the result of a letter I received from one of my constituents. He is an Army specialist and is currently deployed to Iraq. He wrote to me because one of his friends was killed by an IED while sitting in the exposed gunner's seat of a Humvee. His letter reads as follows: Two days ago a good friend of mine was killed in action when an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) detonated next to his Humvee. He was sitting in the gunner seat and pulling rear security. I have seen automated guns that can go on the top of these same Humvees. These guns are controlled from inside the vehicle. Why are these guns not on every Humvee? I do not have the time or the resources over here to check, but if you were to look into it I believe you would be shocked at the percentage of KIA's that were sitting in the gunner's seat of Humvees since OIF 1 in 2003. All I do know is that the four people that were inside the vehicle were physically unharmed. If the answer is money, then I would really like to know how much my friend's life was worth. Since receiving that letter I have been in close contact with the Pentagon about the technology this young specialist is referring to. The Common Remotely Operated Weapons Station, known as CROWS, can move our soldiers out of the exposed gunner's seat and inside the protective shell of an up-armored Humvee. Behind me is a picture of how the CROWS system works. The CROWS system sits on top of the Humvee, with the gunner operating the weapons system from inside. My friend's friend who was killed could have been safe because he would have been inside the protective armor of the vehicle. In a CROWS-equipped vehicle, the gunner controls a powerful weapons platform through a computer screen. The system can be mounted on a variety of platforms, and it gives a soldier the capability to acquire and engage targets while protected inside the vehicle--out of range of enemy fire or IED attacks. Right now we have a few of these systems deployed in Iraq, and I am told that our soldiers ``hot seat'' them, which means that when one of these Humvees comes back from a patrol or an escort mission, another group of soldiers takes the vehicle out again as soon as they can gas it up. According to an article I read in the American Legion magazine, CROWS gives our soldiers a powerful color daylight camera, a Generation 2 forward-looking infrared camera, and a laser range finder. According to another article, the CROWS system has 98 percent accuracy and can engage the enemy beyond 2,000 meters with one-shot, one-kill accuracy and no collateral damage. My amendment would add funding for the CROWS system in Title IX of this bill so that the Pentagon can meet its target for production and deployment of this important weapons system this year. As of June 27, there were 24 CROWS systems in Iraq. If the Pentagon meets its funding targets in this year's supplementals, we will be able to field 245 systems into Iraq this year. To meet this target, this important system needs another $28 million in the Senate bill--and another $103 million on the next supplemental in early spring. My amendment would add that additional funding so that we can meet this important target. These are five very important amendments to the Department of Defense appropriations bill. I look forward to working with my colleagues--with Senator Stevens and Senator Inouye and all my colleagues in the Senate--to move forward and ensure that we enact these amendments for the benefit of our men and women in uniform. I yield the floor. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I have an amendment at the desk, and I ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise to honor and celebrate the remarkable life and legacy of Judge Constance Baker Motley, a trailblazer for civil rights who dedicated her life to advancing the American values of justice and equality for all. Judge Motley was born and raised in New Haven, CT at a time when women and minorities were denied the right to an equal education, and employment, housing and voting rights. Despite remarkable odds, Judge Motley decided at the age of 15 that she would be an attorney. Although she was discouraged by many, Judge Motley remarked that she was ``the kind of person who would not be put down.'' Judge Motley graduated from Columbia Law School in 1946 and joined the legal staff of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc. It was there that for nearly 20 years, Judge Motley orchestrated the legal challenge to the ``separate but equal doctrine,'' culminating in the Supreme Court victory in Brown v. Board of Education that guaranteed equal educational opportunities for all Americans. In addition to the seminal decision in Brown, Judge Motley argued the 1957 school desegregation case in Little Rock, AR that led President Eisenhower to call in federal troops to protect nine black students at Central High School. During Judge Motley's tenure at the NAACP, she successfully argued numerous cases desegregating restaurants and recreational facilities in Southern cities and cases overturning the convictions of the Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth and countless others who engaged in nonviolent sit-ins and protests of discriminatory practices. In 1965, Judge Motley became the first woman to be elected president of the Borough of Manhattan where she continued to advocate for the rights of women, minorities and the poor. In 1966, President Johnson appointed Judge Motley to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. With her appointment, Judge Motley became the first African-American woman appointed to the Federal judiciary, where she served until 1986 when she assumed senior status. Judge Motley's dedication and commitment to justice and equality changed our Nation for the better and paved the way for women, minorities and the poor to enjoy the rights and privileges guaranteed by our constitution. Judge Motley stood tall in the face of great adversary for what was right. We all stand taller because of her life and because she was the kind of person who would not be put down.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to comment with respect to the Gang of 14. I join my good friend from Nebraska and my good friend from Virginia and my good friend from Arkansas here today in again reminding ourselves as a Chamber that the 14 Members of the U.S. Senate who came together came here to do good. What they decided to do and we decided to do in the formation of that agreement was to transcend partisan politics to try to find a common purpose for the benefit of this great institution, the U.S. Senate, and for the benefit of our Nation. I commend the leadership, particularly of our senior members of that group of 14 Senators, including the great Senator from West Virginia, Robert Byrd, who worked closely with the Senator from Virginia, especially on the advice and consent portions. All of the members of the group were very instrumental in putting the compromise together. I would offer two observations with respect to that process and that agreement. The first is, it is my hope, as the newest Member of the U.S. Senate, the Senator who still ranks No. 100, that this is a kind of template that can be used as our Nation faces difficult issues in the future. We were able to put aside partisan politics to get beyond the gridlock that had existed in this body for some period of time. We must be able, as a Chamber to do the same thing with respect to other very difficult issues, such as the Federal deficit or how we engage in the recovery of the gulf coast or how we deal with the issues of health care, because my involvement in this group was based on the fact that I believe it is our responsibility as leaders in our country to get about doing the people's business. What was happening was we had gotten too involved in this impasse that had been going on for a very long time. The second point I wish to make is to underscore the importance of the advice and consent provision of our Constitution. It was Senator Byrd and Senator Warner who believed it was important to include that provision as part of the agreement. It was in recognition there is a joint responsibility between the President of the United States and the Senate in the appointment and confirmation of persons to the bench that that advice and consent provision really needed to be part of that agreement. From my point of view, it is very important that advice and consent provision of the Constitution be honored because of the fact that, as we make our decisions, it is very important that these decisions, which will have a long-lasting impact on the history of America, be based on the most informed consent possible. The way you get the most informed consent possible is that there be a communication and a free flow of information between the President and the White House and the members of the Judiciary Committee and this body. So I again commend the Senators from Virginia and West Virginia for having worked so hard on that long weekend to craft language that became a keystone of this document. Finally, I would say that through this process I also became comfortable with Judge Roberts, recognizing that he is in the mainstream of political and, more importantly, legal thought of America. I think the Members who were part of this group, led by the Senator from Nebraska and the Senator from West Virginia, are also part of that mainstream of America. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues from Virginia and Arkansas and Nebraska. I yield the floor.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I thank my wonderful friend from Vermont for his great leadership in the Senate Judiciary Committee, along with Senator Specter. I rise today concerning the nomination of Judge John Roberts to be Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. I have interviewed and recommended the appointment of many men and women who serve as State and Federal judges in my home State of Colorado. I am no stranger to analyzing the record of a candidate for the judiciary. I am no stranger to evaluating the character and temperament of people to serve in these positions. Yet I know this confirmation vote is special. It is one of the most significant votes that I will cast during my tenure as a Senator. I know this vote is likely to endure the rest of my life and the lives of those who serve in this Chamber. The decisions of the Supreme Court significantly affect the everyday lives of the people in my State and all the people who live throughout our great Nation. The Chief Justice is first among equals among the nine Justices who make these decisions. The Chief Justice's ability to run the Court's conferences and to assign opinions gives the Chief Justice important influence on the directions taken by the Court. The Chief Justice molds and defines the cohesiveness of the Court in the sense that he or she can lead efforts to reduce separate and complicated opinions and to make the opinions of the Court clear and understandable to all. This is an especially important influence to reduce confusion in the law. Finally, the Chief Justice sits at the very pinnacle of our Federal judicial branch. The Chief Justice leads the judges and the rest of the 21,000 employees of the Federal court system. The Chief Justice is responsible for making sure the Federal courts run effectively and efficiently. The administrative responsibilities of the Chief Justice are important for another reason. The Chief Justice can lead the judicial branch to become a place of inclusion, a place where women are as welcome as men, and where people work together who are black, brown, yellow, white, and every other color of human skin. The Chief Justice can make the judicial branch a shining example of diversity and inclusiveness. This is not an abstraction. When people of any background come to the Court they should be looking in the mirror. The faces of the Court should be the same as the faces of those who come before the Court. In my view, this is an essential aspect of justice. I commend the Senate Judiciary Committee for its fair, serious, and dignified hearings on the Roberts nomination. Chairman Specter, Ranking Member Leahy, and all members of the committee have earned our gratitude. They have performed a very valuable service for our country. These Senators gave us a wonderful example worthy of repetition in the Senate of how the Senate should operate in the interest of our Nation. They did their work with courtesy, civility, and in the spirit of the parties working together in good faith to discuss their differing views. Our Nation is better for their efforts. I also want to take a minute to thank Democratic Leader Reid. I have been surprised and taken aback by the attacks on him from some people in this debate. To read the musings of Washington insiders, Senator Reid is somehow guilty of not uniting Democrats, and at the same time not being too beholden to Democratic interest groups. As is the usual case in the debates in Washington, the truth can be found elsewhere. Senator Reid made very clear to this Senator and to the entire caucus that this is a vote of conscience. To suggest otherwise is unfair and dishonest. Our leader, a man of unshakable faith and conviction, helped ensure that this Senate lived up to its constitutional obligation of advice and consent. I want to speak briefly about the history of America and our Constitution concerning equality under the law and the key role of the U.S. Supreme Court. The history of equal protection is a reminder of the most painful and at the same time the most promising moments of our Supreme Court and our Nation. We must not forget that history and its lessons, for to do so would undo our progress as a nation. In retracing our history, the inevitable conclusion is that we have made major progress over four centuries. That history includes 250 years of slavery in this country, 100 years of legal segregation of the races, and the struggle in the new and recent times to achieve another age and celebrate the age of diversity. We must look back at that history so that we do not forget its painful lessons. We must never forget that for the first 250 years of this country, after the European settlers reached the shores of Mexico and New England, the relationship between groups was characterized by slavery and the subjugation of one group for the benefit of another. In Mexico and in the Southwest, the Spanish enslaved Native Americans. In the East and the South, the Americans brought Blacks from Africa and treated them as property. In the Dred Scott decision in 1857, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a terrible moment for our Nation, reasoned that Blacks were inferior to Whites and therefore the system of slavery was somehow justified. At that point, the U.S. Supreme Court was endorsing the untenable proposition that one person could own another person as property simply because of their race. But the march toward freedom and equality would not be stopped by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Dred Scott decision. The Civil War ensued. Let us never forget that the Civil War became the bloodiest war in American history, with over 500,000 Americans killed in battle. In the end, the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments to the U.S. Constitution ended the system of slavery and ushered in a new era of equal protection under the laws. Yet even with the end of slavery and the civil rights amendments to the Constitution, equal protection under the laws for the next 100 years would still require the segregation of the races. The law of the land in many States and cities required the separation of the races in schools, theaters, restaurants, and public accommodations. It was not until 1954 that the U.S. Supreme Court marked the end of legal segregation by the Government in its historic decision of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education. In that decision, Chief Justice Warren, writing for a unanimous Supreme Court, stated that in the field of public education the doctrine of separate but equal has no place. The Brown decision marked an historic milestone for the U.S. Supreme Court and our Nation about the relationships between groups. Over the next decade, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down laws that required segregation on golf courses, parks, theaters, swimming pools, and numerous other facilities. These changes were met with intense controversy, marked by marches, protests, riots, and assassinations. Because of the leadership of Dr. Martin Luther King, Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, Robert Kennedy, and thousands of civil rights activists, Congress ushered in the sweeping civil rights reforms of the 1960s. We, as an American society, began to understand that the doctrine of separate but equal truly had no place in America and that the age of diversity truly was upon us. But the age of diversity has been marked by significant and continuing tension. A part of that debate was put to rest only recently with the majority opinion authored by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor in the University of Michigan Law School case. There, Justice O'Connor said: Today, we hold that the Law School has a compelling interest in attaining a diverse student body. Justice O'Connor continued: The Law School's claim of a compelling interest is further bolstered by its amici, who point to the educational benefits that flow from student body diversity. She explained further: These benefits are not theoretical but real, as major American businesses have made clear that the skills needed in today's increasingly global marketplace can only be developed through exposure to widely diverse people, cultures, ideas and viewpoints. What is more, high-ranking retired officers and civilian leaders of the U.S. military assert that, and she quotes: [B]ased on [their] decades of experience, a highly qualified, racially diverse officer corps . . . is essential to the military's ability to fulfill its principal mission to provide national security. She continued: . . . To fulfill its mission, the military must be selective in admissions for training and education for the officer corps, and it must train and educate a highly qualified, racially diverse officer corps in a racially diverse setting. We agree that [i]t requires only a small step from this analysis to conclude that our country's other most selective institutions must remain both diverse and selective. I believe Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was a beacon of wisdom at this moment in our Nation's history. We know we have had beacons of wisdom in our past to help guide us in our future. I am hopeful that Judge Roberts will be that kind of Chief Justice. In 1896, Justice Harlan was a beacon of wisdom when he dissented in Plessy v. Ferguson against his colleagues on the U.S. Supreme Court when they decided to sanction the right to segregation under the law. Then Justice Harlan stated in his dissent: The destinies of the races, in this country, are indissolubly linked together and the interests of both require that the common government law shall not permit the seeds of race hate to be planted under the sanction of law. I do not know exactly how judge Roberts will provide us with that beacon of wisdom for the 21st century, but the doctrine of inclusion is somehow at the heart of the answer, and I expect and implore Judge Roberts to follow that doctrine. That doctrine means that we should be inclusive of all, and that doctrine means that there is something wrong when we look around and we see no diversity in the people who surround us, and that doctrine means that the motto on our American coins, ``E Pluribus Unum,'' can only be achieved if we include all those who make the many of us into one nation. My criteria for the confirmation of judges remain the same as they have been. I reviewed Judge Roberts' record for fairness, impartiality, and a proven record for upholding the law. I have given this difficult decision the careful deliberation it deserves. I have reviewed his writings. I have read his cases. I have reviewed his testimony to the Judiciary Committee. I have met twice with Judge Roberts, the second time last Friday, asking him pointed and specific questions to gauge the measure of the man. I am grateful for his courtesy and appreciative of his time. I concluded that a vote to confirm Judge Roberts as the next Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court is the appropriate vote to cast. Judge Roberts' intellect is unquestioned. His technical legal skills are unquestioned. He is a lawyer that other lawyers respect, those who have worked with him as well as those who have worked against him. Judge Roberts has convinced me that he understands the constitutional need for judicial independence. He believes in the bedrock principle that decisions of the Supreme Court must be carefully based upon the facts of the case and the law. He believes that all cases must be decided on their specific merits by a judge with an open and fair mind. These concepts lie at the heart of our judicial system. They differentiate the courts from other institutions of government. They are critical to our freedom. I am favorably impressed by Judge Roberts' statement to do his best to heal the gaping fractures in the opinions of the Supreme Court in recent years. When the Court issues three or five or nine opinions in a single case, it is a recipe for confusion and uncertainty for judges, lawyers, and litigants. This is bad for the law. I believe Judge Roberts has a clear understanding of the jolts to the system that disrupt the country when the Court overturns settled law, and he is equally understanding and determined to avoid these jolts. I lived through that type of difficult and expensive disruption as Colorado attorney general, when the Supreme Court changed long-settled expectations about sentencing by judges in criminal cases. The criminal justice system in Colorado and across the Nation was thrown into turmoil. It still has not recovered. I believe Judge Roberts has an understanding of the Supreme Court's role to guide the lower courts, lawyers, and litigants, with clear and understandable direction. I have been particularly interested in Judge Roberts' views on diversity and inclusion of all people, women as well as men, in our country. I have lived my life by the bedrock principle that people of all backgrounds and both genders should be included in all aspects of our society. This is very important to me. So I have asked Judge Roberts directly and personally about his commitment to diversity and inclusiveness in our country. He has assured me of his commitment to this principle. Finally, Judge Roberts passes a simple test that I will apply to judicial candidates for as long as I am a Senator. I do not believe he is an ideologue. He is not the kind of judge--like some--for whom anyone can predict the outcome of a case before the case is briefed and argued. The ideologue's approach to the law makes a mockery of judicial independence, and it is the opposite of being openminded and fair. In conclusion, I have reached my decision to vote for Judge Roberts based upon his word that, first, he will stand up and fight for an independent judiciary and defend the judiciary from unwarranted attacks on its independence; second, he will not roll back the clock of progress for civil rights and recognizes that the equal protection provided under the Constitution extends to all Americans, including women and racial and ethnic minorities; third, he will respect the rule of law and the precedents of the U.S. Supreme Court, including the most important decisions of the last century; fourth, he understands the importance of the freedom of religion and religious pluralism as a cornerstone of a free America; and five, he will work to create a Federal judicial system that embraces diversity and has a face that reflects the diverse population of America. I will vote to confirm Judge Roberts to be the Chief Justice of the United States. I wish Judge Roberts the very best as he assumes his new responsibilities on behalf of our Nation. I yield the floor to my wonderful and good friend from the State of Connecticut.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise to discuss two amendments to the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill. My first amendment No. 1867, is an attempt to avoid the budget fiasco we faced earlier this year. We are working on an appropriations bill for a Department of Veterans Affairs that is under a cloud. The VA is under a cloud because earlier this year, it announced a $1.27 billion budget deficit. This news came as a surprise to millions of veterans across the country and was completely unexpected by Members of Congress. In fact, the news of this gigantic shortfall came, not from an official announcement, but by accident, during a routine budget meeting with congressional staffers. This was a billion-dollar blindside that never should have happened, and that should never happen again. I commend Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison and Diane Feinstein as well as Senators Craig and Akaka for their leadership in speeding additional funding to fill the gap this year. I also commend them for their great work in this appropriations bill and in their subcommittee report to make sure that this kind of budget fiasco does not happen again. Specifically the requirement in this bill that VA make quarterly budget reports to Congress makes good sense. My amendment would build on that obligation and require the VA to notify Congress immediately, if at any point in the year, they discover that the Department may face a budget shortfall totaling 2 percent or more of the VA's discretionary budget. It also would require VA to come up with a plan to improve its actuarial and long-term budget planning. This amendment just makes common sense. Throughout the year, the VA is constantly receiving new data on enrollment, utilization, and medical costs. The VA knew for some time that it faced higher than expected enrollment of returning Iraq veterans. The VA was shifting money between administrative accounts to cover the gap well before they let Congressional appropriators and authorizers know. The earlier that Congress finds out about a problem, the more we can be partners in finding a solution. Senators Akaka, Durbin, and I have asked GAO to investigate the VA's budget and actuarial process. My first amendment also would require the VA to do its own internal review and come up with a plan to improve the budget process to compliment this investigation. My second amendment, No. 1868, would address a problem that was brought to my attention during a field hearing I held in Colorado on rural veterans issues in August. Veterans in rural areas are in poorer health than their urban counterparts. A 2004 study found that rural veterans scored worse than urban veterans both in overall health and mental health. Because of the distance and difficulties in obtaining care, many rural veterans put off preventive as well as necessary treatment, which results in poorer health and ultimately increased health costs. Almost every Senator in this body has heard similar stories, but I will tell one. Veterans in northwestern Colorado who have to drive as many as 360 miles round trip through winding mountain roads to reach the VA Medical Center in Grand Junction. This is a grueling trip that takes an economic and physical toll on our veterans and leads many to not seek care. Community-based outpatient clinics can be the most cost-effective way to reach veterans and ensure they get the ongoing primary healthcare they need to stay healthy, and ward off expensive complications that come from lack of early treatment. Despite this, the VA's prioritization methodology used to identify new clinic locations hurts rural veterans disproportionately. Because of its emphasis on reaching the largest number of veterans in a cost-effective way, the VA's clinic planning process is geared to urban and suburban areas, where there are the largest numbers of veterans. The Capital Asset Realignment for Enhanced Services, CARES, Commission asked VA to address this issue, and the VA has taken some important steps forward. However, at my hearing, VA officials told me that current policies still heavily favor urban areas, and were precluding the building of additional rural clinics. In too many rural corners of this country, there are isolated pockets of veterans who do not have enough access to VA care. I believe that we need additional outpatient clinics in rural America. For too long, tight budgets and bad priorities have slowed the building of new clinics across the country. My amendment would take a small step to giving the VA the authority to expand access to health care in rural areas. I yield the floor. Amendment No. 1867

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I rise to speak about the fiscal year 2006 Agriculture appropriations bill. I want to begin by thanking Chairman Bennett and Ranking Member Kohl for their hard work on this important bill. They were given a tough assignment-- to meet the needs of our rural communities in the context of a very tough budget picture. They have done a good job. I have several amendments to this bill, and I know we have reached an agreement on two of them. I thank my colleagues and their staffs, Galen Fountain and Fitz Elder for their help. I will discuss those amendments shortly. I have spoken in this Chamber before about the forgotten America and, once again, I stand here today to speak about my concern that we are not doing everything we can on behalf of those farmers, ranchers and agri-businesses which continue to play a vital role in our Nation's rural communities. I am concerned about these communities. Too often, Washington leaves those communities to wither on the vine. The administration has proposed reductions in farm commodity programs, crop insurance, food assistance, rural development and conservation. Just yesterday, the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced that Hurricane Katrina caused an estimated $900 million in farm losses, however according to reports, this estimate did not include long-term infrastructure losses such as damaged barns, machinery, and fuel shortages. The bill before us takes steps to send a message to rural America that we are not forgetting that vital part of our country. It invests 3 percent more than the House-passed bill. It adds back many of the important investments that the President proposed cutting in his budget earlier this year. There are also important investments for Colorado. Specifically, Colorado State University in Fort Collins will receive $1.9 million in important agriculture research programming. Colorado will see nearly $32 million in agricultural research and conservation projects, including $15 million in investment to fight noxious weeds and funding for resource conservation and development councils. I think we can do more, and we must do more, because it is not just Washington that forgets rural America. Consider this. Earlier today, I got on the World Wide Web and googled gas prices on Google News. Sixty- four pages came back with stories on the gas prices that are hurting this country. But through tens of pages of stories, I did not see a single story on the impact of high gas on farmers and ranchers. I did see stories on: rising gas prices hurting commuters; rising gas prices hurting SUV drivers; rising gas prices hurting local governments; rising gas prices hurting lottery sales; rising gas prices hurting pizza delivery prices; rising gas prices hurting golf travel plans; and rising gas prices hurting leaf watchers. I have no doubt these high prices are hurting families in each of these situations. But I also know that now, today, this week, in the height of harvest time, no one is hurt by gas prices more than farmers and ranchers. Here is what I am hearing from my State. During harvest, agricultural producers are some of the largest fuel consumers in the U.S. and producers are facing enormous fuel costs. In Grand Junction, CO, diesel prices are as high as $3.16. I have heard from one Colorado farmer in Kit Carson County who has estimated that in order to harvest this year, he will need an additional $46,000 to cover fuel costs alone. I have also heard from another farmer in northeastern Colorado who, in order to cover the increasing price of fuel, has applied for additional loans at this bank only to be turned down because he is already overextended with existing loans. That is why I am so pleased this bill now includes my amendment to require the Secretary of Agriculture to work with the Secretary of Energy to produce a comprehensive report on the impact of high gas prices on our farmers, ranchers and rural communities across the country. That data is the first step toward a comprehensive solution to helping these communities address these terrible prices. I am also pleased the bill now includes my amendment to call the Secretary's attention to an issue that is plaguing Colorado and the West. I know that the chairman is acutely aware of this problem, and thank him and his staff for their support. The Forest Service reports that during 2004, a total of 7 million trees covering over 1.5 million acres, were killed by several different types of bark beetles throughout the State of Colorado. Severely impacted counties in my State include: Grand, Jackson, Routt, Summit, Eagle, Park, Chaffee, Pitkin, Saguache, Gunnison, Hinsdale, San Miguel, Ouray, Delta, Montrose, Mesa, and Garfield. Awareness of the bark beetle infestation has grown with the increasing visual impact of the large stands of dead trees visible from I-70 and Colorado's resort communities. These infestations will leave millions of acres of Colorado forests at risk of a catastrophic fire. Regrettably, in the face of this challenge, the Secretary of Agriculture continues to underplay the importance of Forest Service funding. I am thankful that my colleagues on the Interior appropriations subcommittee have done what they can in this budget environment to increase funding to fight pine beetles. But we can do better. Consider this: total USFS funding down 11 percent from last year; forest health management funding is flat; fiscal year 2006 wildland fire management appropriated additional $25 million for forest health activities on Federal and State land, $15 M and $10 M, respectively). That is why it is so important that we send this message to the Secretary today. He needs to help us be able to do more to fight this scourge. And this amendment today is the first step in that effort. I will spend this upcoming weekend with my mother, on our family ranch in the San Luis Valley and will lend a helping hand to the potato harvest on the farm. The people of that valley--like the people of rural communities across this great country--may not get the chance to ever come to Washington to see the work we do. Nonetheless, I hope, that our work makes it to them, so that they can be assured that we have not forgotten them.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to honor Simon Wiesenthal, a remarkable man, a Holocaust survivor, who dedicated his life to the pursuit of justice and worked to prevent anti-Semitism and prejudice of all kinds. After surviving imprisonment at five German concentration camps and escaping death several times, Mr. Wiesenthal continued to remember the 6 million people who lost their lives during the Holocaust by working to bring over 1,100 war criminals to justice. He pursued justice, not revenge. He demanded public trials, not secret executions. He made sure society would remember those crimes against humanity so that future purveyors of ethnic cleansing would know that they could never escape retribution. Mr. Wiesenthal earned the respect of those throughout the world, having many honors and awards bestowed upon him. He received decorations from the Austrian and French resistance movements, the Dutch Freedom Medal, the Luxembourg Freedom Medal, the United Nations League for the Help of Refugees Award, the French Legion of Honor and the U.S. Congressional Gold Medal which was presented to him by President James Carter in 1980. Mr. Wiesenthal never questioned giving up his prewar trade of architecture. In a New York Times article in 1964, Mr. Wiesenthal described attending Sabbath services with a fellow camp survivor who had become a wealthy jeweler. The man asked why Wiesenthal had not resumed architecture--his prewar trade--for it would have made him rich. ``You're a religious man,'' Wiesenthal told his friend. ``You believe in God and life after death. I also believe.'' ``When we come to the other world and meet the millions of Jews who died in the camps and they ask us, `What have you done?' there will be many answers. You will say, `I became a jeweler.' Another will say, `I smuggled coffee and American cigarettes.' Another will say, `I built houses.' ``But I will say, `I didn't forget you.''' Thank you Mr. Wiesenthal for leaving an indelible mark on society. We owe you a debt of gratitude, and we will never forget you.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise to remember and celebrate the incredible life and legacy of Sandra Feldman, a past president of the American Federation of Teachers, who passed away on Monday at the age of 66 after a long battle with breast cancer. Ms. Feldman was truly a trailblazer for education. She dedicated her life to enhancing educational opportunities for our youth, to bettering the lives of educators and to fighting for civil rights for workers, women and minorities. Feldman grew up poor in Brooklyn, NY. She credited the public schools and libraries for ``creating her future'' and instilling in her a love of education. She spent her entire life enriching the lives of others. In the 1960s, she fought for civil rights, participating in the Freedom Rides and the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. She later became a leader in the protection of various workers' rights movements in New York, including representation of nurses and teachers. In 1997, Feldman became the president of the American Federation of Teachers, one of the largest unions representing our teachers in this country, with 1.3 million members, including 4,800 in Colorado, As president of the American Federation of Teachers, Ms. Feldman advocated for early childhood education, greater investment in public education and greater emphasis on high standards and accountability. Feldman was nationally recognized as a champion of universal preschool for young children, extended kindergarten for disadvantaged youngsters, and redesigning schools to promote academic achievement. Many of Feldman's proposals, which were implemented on the State and Federal level, positively changed the lives of youth. I commend and honor the life of Sandra Feldman, who stood and fought for civil rights, workers' rights, and education. She was the epitome of a public servant and we are all better because of her life. Sandra Feldman will be missed.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I thank the chair and the ranking member for their leadership on this legislation, and look forward to working with both of them on promoting and improving science education in our country. aeronautics funding

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I am deeply concerned about the status of science education funding in the Commerce, Justice, and Science appropriations bill. I commend Chairman Shelby and Ranking Member Mikulski of the Commerce, Justice, and Science Appropriations Subcommittee for their hard work on this bill. With full recognition of the challenging task they have faced in ensuring adequate funding for so many needed projects, I am compelled to take a moment to address a growing crisis in America. The educational programs for the STEM disciplines--science, technology, engineering, and mathematics--are essential for America's future competitiveness and are severely underfunded. As a result, America's STEM education is falling behind. United States international test scores in science and mathematics remain unacceptably low. At the same time, countries in Europe and Asia are investing crucial resources into their own research and education infrastructure to ensure future world market success. These factors combine to make American businesses look to move overseas for high-tech workers, outsourcing our jobs and our competitiveness. This problem is multi-faceted. We have to provide today's teachers with the skills and materials they need to teach these disciplines well. We have to attract new teachers to the field--the teachers of tomorrow. We have to research ways to teach science and math to find out how this material is best learned and how interest in these fields is best promoted. It is in the best interest of our Nation to address each of these issues and it will require a greater investment on the part of our Federal Government. Unfortunately, in too many ways, we seem to be pointed in exactly the wrong direction. I find it especially troubling that the National Science Foundation's Education and Human Resources Directorate has seen significant setbacks in the fiscal year 2006 proposed budget. The Math and Science Partnership Program, which awards competitive grants to build a bridge between higher education and K-12 math, science, and engineering educators has achieved excellent results and has endeavored to improve learning in mathematics and science for all K-12 students. For fiscal year 2006, we are seeing this highly successful program slowly phased out of NSF. I would like to thank the chairman and ranking member of the committee for providing an additional $4 million above the request by the President, but also note that in the past 2 years more than half of the funding for this program has been cut, from $139 million 2004 to the $64 million proposed in this bill for fiscal year 2006. Furthermore, the Research, Evaluation, and Communication, REC, division, which works to increase the number of students obtaining college degrees in STEM and to support educational research projects on college degree attainment in STEM, has also been cut. Results from REC research areas such as physics education have led to teaching methods that more than double the information learned and retained by our college students when compared with traditional methods. But REC has been cut from $60 million in 2005 to a mere $33.8 million in this proposal. These are just a few examples, but it is not the entire story. Taken as a whole these cuts are extremely troubling because they will have long-lasting impacts. I ask that both the chairman and the ranking member of the Commerce, Justice and Science Appropriations Committee work to protect and increase STEM education funding in conference. This is not a partisan issue. It is the future of our country and the success of our children that concerns me, and, I trust, concerns my colleagues as well.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise to note the retirement of a Colorado leader: Ken Bueche, executive director of the Colorado Municipal League. On September 30, Ken Bueche is retiring as executive director of the Colorado Municipal League, a statewide association of 265 member cities and towns. Ken Bueche earned his undergraduate degree from Colorado State University and his J.D. and Masters in Public Administration from the University of Colorado. In 1963, Ken came to CML as a law clerk and by 1974 rose to become the league's executive director, a position he has held now for more than 30 years. He has been a long-time believer that local governments are closest to the people and often produce the best solutions for local challenges. He has helped lead the way for Colorado municipalities to streamline local tax collections, shore up their pension funds for first responders, and in 1982 launched a feasibility study that led, in 1982, to the establishment of a self-insurance pool that saves tax dollars and provides affordable insurance for cities, towns and special districts. Ken was the first recipient of the Leo C. Riethmayer Public Administrator of the Year Award from the University of Colorado. He has served on the Board of Directors of the National League of Cities and is considered one of the deans of the State municipal league executive directors corps. Ken and his wife, Bernice, have five children and four grandchildren. Finally, after more than 30 years of diligent service to the people of Colorado, touching virtually every one of their lives, he will be able to delve back into the joys of his family. I wish him all the best in his future, for he has given Colorado's cities and towns his very best for over three decades. He has been lauded as ``a quiet Colorado legend,'' and he will be missed by all those who have worked alongside him.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, at the outset, let me praise my colleague from North Dakota for his wisdom and his leadership in addressing an issue this Nation has forgotten for too long a time; that is, the notion of fiscal responsibility and the fact that the United States of America today finds itself in a fiscal ditch. How we address the fiscal challenges of our future will largely depend on his leadership and the leadership of our colleagues in the Senate to make sure the legacy we pass on to our children is not a legacy of debt that will hang around their necks for generations to come. I appreciate the leadership of Senator Conrad from North Dakota. Last week I stood before the Senate and said that Congress needed to take a three-pronged approach to responding to the devastation brought to this Nation by Hurricane Katrina. That three-pronged response, from my perspective, required us to do as much as we could to save lives and make sure we were responsive to the victims of Hurricane Katrina; second, we needed to move forward with a Gulf Coast recovery plan to help that part of our Nation recover; and finally, we needed to move forward to address the lessons to be learned from this horrific devastation of a great part of our Nation. On the first step, this Congress has taken steps in rushing billions of dollars in emergency funding to the Gulf Coast. That funding should help the victims of Katrina begin their long road to recovery. On the second step, it is my hope that Congress and the President of the United States will move forward and embrace a Gulf Coast recovery plan. As the minority leader has stated over the last several days, we need to have a mini-Marshall Plan that runs the program which will invest billions and billions of dollars in an effort to try to recover the 90,000 square miles of land that were devastated by Hurricane Katrina. I commend my colleagues from Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and throughout the country. They have been working on developing a plan. They are showing true leadership and taking the primary role in getting assistance to their States. I am working with them and sharing my ideas with them. I believe a Gulf Coast recovery plan should, in fact, be created and announced soon. That Gulf Coast recovery should require a plan to be developed for the reconstruction of the Gulf Coast. It should identify the costs that will be associated with the implementation of that plan, and it should oversee its successful implementation. Finally and very important, that plan should minimize the corruption and waste that might occur where there are billions upon billions of dollars that are being spent in this recovery effort where much of that money is being allocated through noncompetitive bids. Third, I strongly believe it is important for us as a United States of America to move forward to learn the lessons from this devastation. The independent commission that has been proposed by my colleagues in this body should, in fact, be embraced by the President of the United States and this Nation. When we look at what happened with respect to the devastation from Hurricane Katrina, it is clear to me, as a person who for much of the last decade of my life served as attorney general of the great State of Colorado, that our Nation and our Government failed to protect the lives of people, to protect people and their families, and to protect their property. It is elemental with any kind of emergency preparedness effort that we must be ready for any emergency that occurs. We must respond to an emergency that occurs, and we must recover from that emergency. It is beyond dispute that this Nation failed with respect to the effort to be ready to address the issues of Hurricane Katrina, and once Hurricane Katrina made landfall we failed again to provide the kind of response that our National Government should have in fact responded. We need to have this investigation occur so that we can learn the truth and learn the lessons. We need to know why, when the Governor of Louisiana declared a disaster emergency on Friday the 26th of August, it took up to 3 days until President Bush declared the area a disaster area. Why did it take 3 days for that to occur? Why did it take 4 days for the Department of Homeland Security to declare Katrina an incident of national significance--4 days for the Department of Homeland Security to declare Katrina an incident of national significance--5 days before National Guard troops arrived in significant numbers, and 6 days before FEMA took over the evacuation of New Orleans? These are important questions we need to ask. We need to have some answers to these questions. The resignation of FEMA Director Michael Brown is a step in the right direction. I also applaud President Bush for taking personal responsibility for the Federal Government's failure in this arena. Congress now needs to move forward with a full bipartisan investigation into what went wrong. We did it when the 9/11 Commission was created in this Congress and in this Senate. The results of that Commission are now being implemented. We hope the administration and the majority leadership in the Senate will change their minds and support legislation to create an independent Katrina commission. Over the last week, we have seen the terrible toll of the worst natural disaster in our Nation's history. The images of devastation and human loss will haunt all of us, and the emerging statistics of the scope of this disaster are overwhelming and continue to date. One million people have been displaced from their homes. I sometimes think about the town that was nearest to the ranch where I grew up. The place matters in perspective. My town had 1,000 people and probably about 400 residences within that town. We are talking about 1 million--one-fourth the population of the State of Colorado--displaced from their homes because of Hurricane Katrina. More than 500 people have been confirmed dead, and we yet are counting additional casualties and will not know the final number perhaps for weeks. With the more than 200 people who died in Mississippi, the more than 200 people who died in Louisiana, or the people who died in Alabama and Florida--the fact is that their deaths should not be deaths in vain; that we should learn from the hurt of this Nation, from their loss of life. Eighty percent of New Orleans is still underwater today, and much of the Gulf Coast is in tatters. The recovery pricetag--who knows what that may be. Many people are saying the ultimate pricetag for both the response and the recovery will exceed $200 billion. Yet spread among this despair and destruction we have seen many instances of the greatness of heroism examples of Americans. The great State of Colorado is no exception. Colorado's emergency workers are on the ground on the Gulf Coast participating in the rescue and cleanup efforts and assisting evacuees. Just this week, two firefighters from Centennial, CO, helped rescue a family of four still stuck in their home in New Orleans. Coloradans, like Americans throughout the Nation, have donated tons of supplies, millions of dollars, and thousands of volunteer hours to Katrina relief. Coloradans by themselves have already given more than $6 million to the American Red Cross. That is a spirit of generosity and a spirit of community that is fundamental to this Nation. Colorado has already accepted 1,000 evacuees to the Denver area. To prepare for their arrival, volunteers scrapped Labor Day plans and scrambled to clean and outfit the old Lowry Air Force Base barracks. Since the evacuees arrived, volunteers helped serve food, pass out donated clothes, and drive evacuees around to complete chores. These examples give us great hope and resolve to begin the long process of rebuilding the millions of broken lives and hearts on the Gulf Coast. The American people and their generosity and bravery are the strongest tools we have to help our countrymen and women recover from Hurricane Katrina. To that end, I will today introduce a piece of legislation to nurture that American spirit of generosity and enable more Americans to contribute to the hurricane effort. The first thing the legislation I will introduce will do is help folks who have generously taken in hurricane survivors into their homes, and to be able to do so in a manner that provides them a tax benefit. According to the Department of Homeland Security, 248,000-plus evacuees are staying at 774 shelters across the country. This figure underscores the fact that more than 700,000 evacuees are staying elsewhere. An estimated hundreds of thousands of hurricane victims are staying in private homes. In Colorado, at least 600 hurricane victims are staying in private homes. They are staying with family and friends, and sometimes even with strangers. Right now, a person who writes a check to the Red Cross can get a tax deduction. But people who open up their homes to victims, feed them and help them, do not get a similar tax deduction. That generosity should not be penalized in any way. My bill would offer a tax credit of a simple $20 per day to help Good Samaritans cover the cost of feeding and keeping evacuees in their homes. That is $20 a day to help Good Samaritans cover the cost of feeding and keeping evacuees in their homes. Households that take in an evacuee would be able to claim up to $900 in tax relief. Households that take in more than one hurricane victim would be eligible for up to $2,000 in tax relief. And low-income families who have no tax liability would be able to receive up to $500 in a refundable tax credit to help take care of hurricane victims. This assistance wouldn't cover all the costs of lending a helping hand, but it would recognize the sacrifice and generosity of folks who open their homes and hearts to Katrina survivors, and they should be applauded by our Nation. The second thing my bill would do is to raise the limit of charitable contributions for Katrina relief. Right now, the amount of tax deduction an individual can get for charitable contributions is limited to 50 percent of the person's adjusted gross income. My bill would lift the limit for 4 years to allow individuals who can give more to do so. Americans are aching to help, and this provision would allow them to do just that, and even more. Senators Grassley, Baucus, chairman and ranking members of the Finance Committee, have developed a package of tax incentives to help victims of Hurricane Katrina. I applaud them for their efforts. Their bill also touches on these two issues of offering assistance to households who house victims and extend caps on charitable giving. I commend them for tackling the issue, and I am glad to work with them to include these provisions. My bill is slightly different in that it offers good neighbors a more generous tax credit as opposed to a tax deduction, and lowers the barriers to low-income families to get help. We have many challenges ahead, but because we have witnessed the bravery, generosity, and ingenuity of the American people, I am confident that the gulf coast's best days are still ahead. I will introduce my bill later today. I urge my colleagues to support the bill and take a small step to nurture and encourage the best part of the American spirit and American generosity. The Pledge of Allegiance

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to address the Senate as in morning business.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I also wanted to take a minute to address an issue concerning a decision that was handed down by a Federal district judge concerning the Pledge of Allegiance--a decision of the district court judge in San Francisco in which he determined that it was unconstitutional for the public schools to recite the Pledge of Allegiance in the classroom because of the reference it makes to ``one nation under God.'' He declared that decision to be one that was founded on his view that such a requirement in our public schools was unconstitutional and in violation of the first amendment. I disagree with the finding of the district court judge. Last year, as attorney general for Colorado, I joined many of my colleagues, both Democrat and Republican, in making an argument to the U.S. Supreme Court and to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that, in fact, it was constitutional for us to allow our children to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, and to use the term ``under God'' in that recitation in our schools. I believe the Ninth Circuit decision back in 2002 was wrong, and I believe the district court judge's decision today is also wrong. I will later today write a letter to Attorney General Gonzales asking him to participate in behalf of the United States in the appeal of the Federal district court judge's decision, again to the Ninth Circuit, and hopefully up to the U.S. Supreme Court so that we can get a final determination on this issue concerning the Pledge of Allegiance and how it is recited in our public schools. In my own reading of the Constitution, and joined by most of my colleagues on both the Democratic and the Republican sides of the aisle during the time that I was attorney general, it was our conclusion that, in fact, the Pledge of Allegiance could be recited and that the reference ``one nation under God'' was, in fact, in keeping with the constitutional requirements of the first amendment. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise in strong support of the amendment offered by Senator Lincoln to ensure that victims of this terrible hurricane have access to the health care their situation demands today. This is the least we can do, and I urge Senators to support her amendment. I was moved to hear the words of Senator Landrieu this morning. She has been a tireless warrior for her State throughout her career, and I commend her for her work and her efforts over the last tragic days she has been through in Louisiana. To her and to my other colleagues, to Senator Lott, Senator Cochran, Senator Vitter, Senator Sessions, and Senator Shelby, I simply say we should do everything in our power as a Senate to help the victims of this terrible storm and to help rebuild their States, cities, and communities. Let me say, too, that I am proud of Coloradans and their response to this disaster. In the 10 days since the devastating storm hit the shores off the gulf coast, people of our State have stepped up to help the victims. Experts from the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention laboratory in Fort Collins will be dispatched to the region soon. Disease trackers from Fort Collins likely will be sent to the gulf coast to help contain the spread of the West Nile virus and the spread of other mosquito-borne illnesses in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. The U.S. Northern Command at Peterson Air Force Base, which is charged with defending against military attacks within our borders, is now charged with mobilizing military resources for the Hurricane Katrina disaster. The U.S. Joint Operations Center in Colorado Springs has nearly 1,000 people on 24-hour duty to facilitate Federal Emergency Management Agency requests. I am proud of the men and women in uniform who today are helping our country within our borders. Nearly 800 Colorado National Guard men and women are deployed to that region today. Churches in Denver and throughout the State of Colorado are mobilizing to help with relief efforts, whether that means collecting donations, physically traveling to the devastated communities, or taking in displaced refugees. The University of Colorado has started a streamlined admissions process for students temporarily displaced by Hurricane Katrina. Colorado State University has taken similar steps. The American Red Cross Mile High Chapter, which houses the Nation's second largest disaster response phone operation and which for a time was handling one-third of the calls pouring into the Red Cross national headquarters in Washington, DC, has done a tremendous job, and in the immediate aftermath of the storm more than 800 Coloradans volunteered to receive training and field phone calls and take donations for the Red Cross. My wife Hope and my daughter Melinda and I visited the Denver operation last week and helped man the phones. I could not have been more proud of our State and its people. I am sure the experience of Colorado is an experience that has gone across all of our 50 States of our great Nation. I remember Sunday, August 28, very well. The country held its collective breath as we awaited landfall of Hurricane Katrina. In my faith, we celebrate Feast Days of Saints, symbols of the kinds of lives Catholics aspire to lead. Sunday, August 28, was the Feast Day of Saint Augustine, an intellectual giant in our church who became so only after battling great personal challenges in his own personal life. Augustine had an important piece of advice for all of us that is applicable today. He said: Pray, as though everything depended on God. Work as though everything depended on you. One look at the devastation in the gulf coast--the destruction wrought in Biloxi, MS, the obliteration of towns all along the Mississippi coast, and the suffering in New Orleans and across Louisiana--and none of us could have imagined that kind of devastation could ever occur here in our homeland. We cannot help but feel that the reconstruction of this wonderful part of our country will depend not only on our human powers but also on the supernatural powers that will guide us. But seeing the suffering on the faces of our fellow countrymen, women, and children, you cannot feel anything but to be ready to work as if the end of their suffering depends on our work. In point of fact, those suffering people depend on us to end their suffering, and we owe it to them to work as though everything depends on us. I submit that a basic function of the Federal Government is to respond to a national disaster such as Katrina which has devastated 90,000 square miles of America. We can and we must do everything we can. I submit we should take on our challenge in three critical ways. First, we must provide immediate humanitarian assistance. Second, the President should lead a Marshall- like plan to reconstruct the gulf coast region. Third, we must learn the lessons from the Katrina disaster so we can prevent these kinds of disasters from happening elsewhere in our great Nation. Let me review each of those points. First, by providing immediate humanitarian aid and assistance to the victims of this terrible disaster, we should be doing what is our duty as a nation. Last week, Congress provide FEMA $10.5 billion in emergency funding. Today, we anticipate we will provide another $51.8 billion for this national disaster. Passing these appropriations will help the victims of Hurricane Katrina, and it is the right thing to do. I am proud we are taking these steps. At the same time, the Federal Government can and should do more. That is why I commend Senators Reid and Landrieu for introducing the Katrina Emergency Relief Plan earlier today. I am proud to cosponsor that legislation, and I urge my colleagues to join us in immediately passing this much needed relief for the victims. We can take that first step now by passing Senator Lincoln's proposed amendment. The people of our great Nation have the right to expect and deserve the best emergency and disaster response services in the world. It is the responsibility of the Federal Government to protect its citizens, and in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina much more needs to be done to live up to that responsibility. The Katrina Emergency Relief Plan is the right first step. I also will continue to press for additional immediate relief, including: first, an emergency appropriation for CDC, for disease surveillance and mitigation; second, immediate assistance to States for those universities and school districts, such as those in Colorado, that take on displaced students from Katrina-affected elementary, middle, high schools, and university settings; third, an expansion of the cap on the amount of charitable donations that can be claimed for tax purposes when those donations are given for Hurricane Katrina responses; fourth, a fix in the Tax Code to permit the expenses associated with the provision of room and board to victims of Hurricane Katrina to be tax deductible; and, finally, exempting the victims of Hurricane Katrina from the means test under the new bankruptcy law due to take effect on October 17 of this year. Second, we must respond to this disaster by creating a Marshall plan for reconstruction of the gulf coast. From jazz to William Faulkner, these affected States have given much to our country and to our history. As such, I cannot imagine that anyone would not consider investing the resources necessary to rebuild this vital part of our great country. We owe it to our fellow countrymen and people on the gulf coast. This will require a recovery and reconstruction effort on the scale of the Marshall plan that rebuilt Europe after World War II. Not unlike post-World War II Europe, the Gulf States are now facing unprecedented damages which require immediate action. Entire towns in Mississippi were destroyed and it will take months to make New Orleans and other communities in Louisiana habitable again. Such a plan should include the creation of a small and effective Cabinet member-chaired task force--that the President would appoint-- with State and local participation, and that task force would have a singular focus on this challenge. The task force should develop a plan for reconstruction, identify the costs associated with that plan, and oversee its successful implementation. In addition, I recommend getting our hands around the pain at the pump created by the record high gas prices, and the impact they are having on our country, including consumers, farmers, ranchers, and businesses. A first step in that effort is for the Department of Justice to provide assistance, both technical and financial, to State attorneys general to fight price gouging and contractor fraud, and freeze any requirements for small businesses and farmers affected by Katrina to service Small Business Administration and USDA loans or any other Federal Government-provided loans until the affected areas can be reconstructed. If we are to have a Marshall plan, we also will need to have a leader of the caliber of General George C. Marshall. That is why I repeat today my request to the President that he seek the resignation of Michael Brown, the FEMA Director, and replace him with a leader who has the experience and expertise to meet the challenges of the greatest natural disaster in our country's history. Thirdly, we must expeditiously determine what happened in response to this disaster and how we should reform FEMA and our Federal agencies to ensure that this slow response does not happen again. I have already joined my colleagues in calling for an independent commission to investigate the Federal response to Hurricane Katrina and how we can be better prepared for future cataclysmic events. This effort can be helpful, and, as was the case in the wake of the terrible 9/11 terrorist attacks, we can, in fact, do something to learn the lessons we must learn. But what we do not need is a partisan investigation that produces predetermined results. Remember the history of the 9/11 Commission, the most bipartisan and successful commission in a long time. It was only against the backdrop of opposition from the White House and after months of calls from the families of the victims of 9/11 that the commission was created, and, once created, that commission did its job. I hope we can avoid the partisan wrangling this time around and get a commission that gets right to work on this very important effort. I will also propose legislation to improve training for evacuation and relocation in reaction to natural or manmade disasters. We often cannot predict when natural disasters will strike, but we must begin preparation for future incidents without further delay. I hope, too, that the conferees on the Homeland Security will keep in that conference report my amendment to require a national survey of first responders. I recently conducted such a survey of Colorado's first responders and was appalled at the result which demonstrated how unprepared our first responders are in dealing with these kinds of disasters. Given what we have seen in the last 10 days--where the Federal Government's response has without question failed--we need to hear directly from the police, firefighters, and others how we can improve our response. In closing, I am reminded of another saying by Saint Augustine. He asked: What does love look like? It has the hands to help others. It has the feet to hasten to the poor and the needy. It has eyes to see misery and want. It has the ears to hear the sighs and sorrows of men. That is what love looks like. The victims of this terrible tragedy love this country, but this country has let them down. It is now time for this Senate, this Congress, and this President, who runs the executive branch, to get to work to rectify that letdown. We are this great country's hands, and we can do more to help those victims. We are this great country's feet, and we can do more to carry assistance to those victims. We are this great country's eyes, and we must see what they are suffering through. We are this great country's ears, and we cannot turn a deaf ear to the pleas from the gulf coast. We can do better, and I look forward to working with all of my colleagues to ensure that we do. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to a piece of a landmark civil rights legislation on the occasion of its 40th Anniversary: the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Before the passage of the Voting Rights Act, African Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, and others were routinely prevented from voting. The various tactics used to impede and discourage people from registering to vote or turning out on election day ranged from literacy tests, poll taxes, and language barriers, to overt voter intimidation and harassment. On August 6, 1965, when President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act of 1965, America took a critical step forward in its quest for inclusiveness. Just a year earlier, President Johnson had signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, proclaiming that in America, We believe that all men are created equal, yet many are denied equal treatment. We believe that all men have certain unalienable rights, yet many Americans do not enjoy those rights. We believe that all men are entitled to the blessings of liberty, yet millions are being deprived of those blessings, not because of their own failures, but because of color of the skin. President Johnson knew then what we still recognize today. The enactment of both of these critical pieces of legislation was only one step in our country's journey to become an inclusive America where all its citizens enjoy the rights and protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. When he recalled this day, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. wisely pointed out that ``the bill that lay on the polished mahogany desk was born in violence in Selma, AL, where a stubborn sheriff had stumbled against the future.'' Dr. King was, of course, referring to ``Bloody Sunday,'' the March 7, 1965, incident where more than 500 non-violent civil rights marchers attempting a 54-mile march to the state capital to call for voting rights were confronted by an aggressive assault by authorities. In our country's history, we have stumbled, but great leaders such as Dr. King, and countless others who toiled and gave their lives, made certain that we got back up and continued on our path toward progress. On the dawn of its 40th anniversary, Congress is preparing for the reauthorization of key provisions in the Voting Rights Act that will expire in 2007. I hope that the Senate can rise above the partisanship that often plagues this body to renew the promise of inclusiveness that the Voting Rights Act has sought to achieve since its inception. In the past, we have been able to accomplish this and the results have been truly extraordinary. Since the passage of the Voting Rights Act, the doors to opportunity for political participation by previously disenfranchised groups have swung open. Their voices have been heard and counted. The result has been an America where the number of black elected officials nationwide has risen from 300 in 1964 to more than 9,000 today. In addition, there are over 5,000 Latinos who now hold public office, and there are still hundreds more Asian Americans and Native Americans serving as elected officials. However, in order to continue to make progress, Congress will need to reauthorize and maintain its enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. Today, as we work to promote democracy in Iraq and other regions of the world, I wish to honor the legacy of this milestone in our own Nation's democracy and to thank all those who have been a part of the civil rights movements. I thank the President and yield the floor.