Ken Salazar

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator from California for her eloquent statement concerning Janice Rogers Brown. I rise today to state my opposition to her confirmation to serve as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. I have carefully considered her record and have unfortunately concluded that Ms. Brown is not the right choice to serve as a judge on the District of Columbia Federal court. I have had the privilege of extensive experience in judicial selection in the State of Colorado, both for the Federal and State courts. For the years when I served the Governor of Colorado as his lawyer, I administered for the Governor the process of choosing judges in Colorado. When I later served as attorney general for my State, I chose, with Governor Owens and the chief justice of Colorado, those who could select judges under Colorado's Constitution. My views on the qualifications of judges to serve on any court have been forged over years of working on judicial selections. Among the most important characteristics we rightly demand of our Federal judges are that they have an open mind, are free from bias, and a temperament that does not inflame passions. Janice Rogers Brown, in my view, fails these tests. First, I do not think Ms. Brown will be fair in the ways a Federal judge must be fair. I have come to believe Ms. Brown is driven ideologically and that she will prejudge some of the most important legal cases and issues that come before a Federal appellate court. I base my conclusions on her written record and on her own statements. When any person has a case to bring before a Federal judge on any issue, that person has a right to insist that the judge will listen carefully to all the arguments on the facts and the law with an especially fair and open mind that considers carefully all the points made on every subject, pro or con. This right to absolute fairness by a Federal tribunal is a bedrock of our constitutional judicial system. It is just commonsense, and it is an idea that is very well understood by everyone in this Nation. There is another simple way to say this. No one wants to walk into court before a case is heard and know already how the judge is going to rule. Yet this is exactly the problem with Janice Rogers Brown. She is so driven by her ideology on issues such as the proper role of the Government and administrative agencies--or the role of ideas of private property that separates constitutional and unconstitutional government regulation--that it is very obvious how Ms. Brown is going to rule on these matters, even before she hears a case. There are many quotes from Ms. Brown that illustrate this point. A good example is from a speech to the Federalist Society on April 20, 2000, where she said: Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible. These are extreme views, to say the least. Second, Ms. Brown is an activist judge. From my review of her record, I believe she will use the court as a vehicle to forward her own personal view of the law in society. She has done it consistently in the past. I believe that is the role of a legislator, not the role of a judge. I believe that kind of judicial activism is absolutely wrong in our courts, no matter what ideology it spawns from. Third, I believe Janice Rogers Brown does not have the right temperament to be a judge on the Federal appellate bench. When a person accepts the solemn mantle of the robes and the duties of the judiciary, I believe she must agree by temperament to place her own personal legal and social views in the background. She must accept that while a judge, though she can have her own personal views, she must not cause people to perceive her as unfair, if she is as strident about those views as she has been demonstrated by her record. Again, Janice Rogers Brown does not meet the test of the temperament of someone to be on the Circuit Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. I believe litigants and others who watch the judiciary are correct to perceive that Janice Rogers Brown may not treat them fairly as she considers a particular case against the backdrop of her own personal views that are obviously so strongly felt. I also believe Ms. Brown is nominated to serve on the wrong court. She is nominated to serve on the appellate court where her ideology can do the most damage to our Federal and State governments. The Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is our Nation's most prestigious court of appeals with regard to all matters dealing with Government. Through venue provisions found throughout the Federal statutes, Congress often and intentionally chooses this court exclusively to hear matters concerning Government agencies. These are legal matters that go to the very heart of how our Government operates through our administrative agencies, agencies that affect the lives of our citizens every day all across our country. The District of Columbia court is our Nation's expert court in administrative law. While that is an abstract legal concept, it is also a very important matter to all ordinary citizens in Colorado and across the Nation. Yet Janice Rogers Brown is absolutely hostile to our Government and to administrative agencies and to their essential work. Janice Rogers Brown is the wrong person to elevate to this important Federal appellate court. It is for these reasons that I will vote to oppose the nomination of Janice Rogers Brown to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. I also want to add another quick point. As I have listened to the debate here on the floor of the Senate today, there has been some sentiment expressed that perhaps the opposition of some of my colleagues in the Democratic caucus has to do with her background, with the fact that she is African American. I will tell you, from the work of my colleagues on this side of the aisle, they have been champions of opportunity for all people, they believe we live in America, that we should be talking about uniting our country and not dividing our country, and yet it is a nomination of Janice Rogers Brown, with her views of activism in the Federal court, which they have called appropriately into question and which some of my colleagues on the other side have now been saying somehow has the Democratic caucus as being anti-African American. There could be nothing further from the truth. The opposition that has been voiced against Janice Rogers Brown has nothing to do with her personal ethnicity. It has to do with the fact that the conclusions that have been reached based on a review of her record indicate that she will inject her own personal views as an activist judge into the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Therefore, I again reiterate my position that I will vote against her confirmation, and I urge my colleagues in the Senate to do the same. I yield the floor. (At the request of Mr. Reid, the following statement was ordered to be printed in the Record.)

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise to commend the efforts of our Nation's civic, business and faith leaders to call attention to the increasing number of Americans who are unable to put food on their tables. Today, on National Hunger Awareness Day, I am proud to join with communities in every region of my State that are taking on the charge to end hunger in the United States. Growing up in Colorado's San Luis Valley, one of the poorest regions in the country, my family did not have electricity or running water in our home. But our family farm ensured that my brothers and sisters and I never went to bed hungry or arrived at school on an empty stomach. My classmates were not always as fortunate. Sadly, not much has changed since my youth. Currently, in Conejos County, where my family's farm is located, one in four residents are living in poverty. That is twice the national average, and three times our State poverty rate. And increasingly, the stories behind these numbers are of working poor households who struggle to pay their mortgages, escalating electricity bills and fuel costs. In Colorado Springs, the Care and Share Food Bank estimated that close to 50 percent of the households receiving their emergency food assistance last year had at least one working parent. More and more, these families need to turn to their local food bank or church pantry in the very same communities where food is harvested; serving as a sad reminder that there is much more work to be done. When speaking with hunger relief organizations throughout Colorado, they express concern when forced to turn families away, and the number of people they cannot help continues to grow. For example, the Marian House, which is operated by Catholic Charities of Colorado Springs, serves approximately 600 meals. Over the past several years, they have seen the daily number of people coming into food banks nearly double. Unfortunately, their stories of growing demands reflect the problems facing much of the rural West. In fact, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 16 percent of households in this region did not know where their next meal would come from--that is the highest rate of so-called ``food insecurity'' in any region of the country. In the face of these staggering statistics, Coloradans are doing their part to eliminate hunger. Whether it is organizing a food drive in their school or office, volunteering at a soup kitchen, or donating to their local food bank, they are answering the call to reduce the number of hungry Americans. In Denver, where poverty is also on the rise, groups like the Food Bank of the Rockies have stepped up their food distribution. In 2004, hard-working, committed workers and volunteers distributed over 16 million pounds of food and essential household items, more than ever before. However, today is a special day, where national, regional and local organizations collectively are raising awareness of hunger in America. I am particularly proud that National Hunger Awareness Day events have been organized in communities throughout Colorado, including Colorado Springs, Denver, Fort Collins, Grand Junction, Greeley, and Hot Sulphur Springs. I applaud Coloradans involved in these activities, and all those participating in the day's related events. I look forward to working with the Senate Hunger Caucus and the Senate Agriculture Committee in the movement to end hunger.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to take a moment to remember one of our fallen heroes, a young man from my home State and my native San Luis Valley, SPC Travis Anderson. Specialist Anderson was killed in Iraq on May 13, 2005. He was 28 years old and a native of Hooper, CO, a small town of 123 not much different from where I grew up in the San Luis Valley. A terrorist car bomb struck his HumVee, killing him and wounding several fellow soldiers in the vehicle with him. All of us were fortunate to be blessed by his life and we are all saddened by his loss. He exemplified courage, discipline and patriotism, some of the finest qualities that we prize in Colorado and across this Nation. Specialist Anderson--``Loopie'' to his family and friends and ``Cowboy'' to his fellow soldiers in Bravo Company, 3rd Infantry Division--was the kind of man that makes all of Colorado proud. His family and friends remember that Travis was a rambunctious youngster. He went on to work as a farmer and ranch hand in Montana and Nevada. He worked hard to earn his high school diploma and even defeated the hantavirus, which at one point reduced him to a mere 100 pounds. But after those horrible hours on 9/11, Specialist Anderson heard a higher calling, one above his own self interest, and he enlisted in the Army at 26. In the Army, he flourished into a man of discipline and initiative. He had the admiration and respect of his fellow soldiers and superiors. ``Sometimes I wish we had a whole platoon of him,'' said SSG Jeremy Schultz, who served with Specialist Anderson in Iraq. Don't we all; don't we all. Specialist Anderson of the Army's 2nd Battalion, 7th Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division was training with the Special Forces when he was killed earlier this month. He was awarded the Bronze Star posthumously. He came from humble beginnings and aspired to quiet greatness with an even greater heart. President John F. Kennedy once said, ``Every area of trouble gives out a ray of hope, and the one unchangeable certainty is that nothing is certain or unchangeable.'' SPC Travis Anderson exemplified this in his mission of service to his nation. He will be missed by all those around him and he and his family will remain in our prayers. And to his family and friends, I say, on behalf of a grateful nation: thank you for sharing Travis with us.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today in recognition of one of our great national treasures. Next week, while the Senate is in recess, we will celebrate 100 years of the San Juan National Forest in my great State of Colorado. The people of southwestern Colorado will be celebrating this anniversary, as they should. I rise to underscore that I believe all Americans should celebrate this important milestone. The San Juan National Forest was created 100 years ago on June 3, 1905, through Presidential proclamation by President Theodore Roosevelt. When you see it, you know why President Roosevelt set aside this remarkable place. It is located in southwestern Colorado on the western slope of the Continental Divide in one of America's most magnificent landscapes. The San Juan covers nearly 2 million acres, in an area more than 120 miles wide and 60 miles long. This unique scene includes alpine lakes, canyons, rapids, waterfalls, historic mines, and broad variations in elevation including mountain peaks of over 14,000 feet high. Not only is it beautiful, but its rich history is deeply intertwined with the history of this great country. The San Juan was originally the homeland of the Ute Indians as well as an area that was frequented by the Navajo and Apache Tribes as well. Many pioneers who were looking for routes to the West traveled through the San Juan. Some of these individuals remained there establishing mining sites which contributed to development and a growing community. The San Juan National Forest benefits the communities of southwestern Colorado through the supply of timber, minerals, oil and gas, grazing pastures, recreation, clean water and air and other natural resources. All of these amenities offered by the San Juan National Forest are important to the quality of life and economic well being of southwestern Coloradans; this has been the case for the past 100 years, it is the case today, and hopefully will be true for the next 100 years. I urge all citizens of Colorado and our Nation to join in the centennial celebration of the San Juan National Forest through the many activities scheduled for June 1-4, 2005, to celebrate this special place and show appreciation for our national forests. Finally, this year also marks the centennial of the U.S. Forest Service, the Federal agency which manages the San Juan and 154 other National Forests across our country. I want to thank the dedicated men and women of our Forest Service for their extraordinary work and continued commitment to our precious lands.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, this Monday is Memorial Day. It is a day that is important to countless families across this nation, including my own. It is a time of remembrance for those heroes who have fallen serving our country and thanking those who were blessed to return home to their families and loved ones. That we as a Nation take the time to thank our veterans is important. It is a simple, gracious act that we all too often fail to do. Our cities and towns, across Colorado and this Nation, have given up their young men and women without protest, men and women humbly accepting a calling greater than themselves. In many ways, this is what makes our nation so great. We are a nation of individuals that can put ourselves aside for the common good. We can come together and deliberate and differ, as we do here in the Senate. But we are appreciative of the gift of freedom we all share, and the price that our veterans and fallen heroes have paid on our behalf for our freedom. Earlier this week, I was fortunate to work with a pair of bona fide war heroes as we sought to preserve 200 years of Senate tradition. In my 5 short months here, I have come to admire Senator John McCain and Senator Daniel Inouye, two men I am honored to call my friends. They served bravely and with distinction, and have set an example for all of us to follow each day. I thank them for their sacrifice, their leadership and their continuing commitment to this Nation. We owe them, and all of our veterans and members of the Armed Services, a debt which can never be truly repaid. In 1865 in his second inaugural address, President Lincoln elaborated on the respect we have for those who served and the sacrifices made by the few for the many: With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan--to do all which may achieve and cherish a just, and a lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations. We are fortunate that they, and so many of our veterans, are still here--husbands and wives, fathers and sons, mothers and daughters, brothers, sisters and cousins. Too many of them, however, have been taken from us all too soon. One of those no longer with us is my father, Henry. My father served with honor and distinction in World War II and always took great pride in his service. When he passed away in 2001 after a long battle with Alzheimer's, his final request to my brother John was that he be buried in his uniform. We proudly honored this request, and afterwards I was struck by the importance of it to him. My father had been many things--a thoughtful son, a loving husband, an attentive father. But most important to him was his service to his Nation which he called home and which had given him so much. In 1962, GEN Douglas MacArthur gave the commencement address at West Point. He reflected on his time in the Army and on the nature of the ultimate action of any soldier--sacrificing his or her life for our Nation. MacArthur said: The soldier, above all other men, is required to practice the greatest act of religious training--sacrifice. In battle and in the face of danger and death, he discloses those divine attributes which his Maker gave when He created man in His own image. No physical courage and no brute instinct can take the place of the Divine help which alone can sustain him. However horrible the incidents of war may be, the soldier who is called upon to offer and to give his life for his country is the noblest development of mankind. In many ways, it saddens us to know this fact. Each and every American looks forward to the day when none are called upon to make such a sacrifice. Over the past year, hundreds of Americans made that sacrifice for us while in service to our Nation, including 14 with Colorado roots: Shawn Atkins, of Parker; Dana Wilson, of Fountain; Douglas Bascom, of Colorado Springs; Theodore Holder, of Littleton; Michael Shackleford, of Grand Junction; Gregory Rund, of Littleton; George Geer, of Cortez; Lizbeth Robles, of Colorado Springs; Steven Bayow, of Colorado Springs; Derrick Lutters, of Burlington; Travis Anderson, of Hooper, in my native San Luis Valley in southern Colorado; and Charles Wilkerson, of Colorado Springs; along with Paul Christopher Alaniz and Landon Giles, whose families live in Colorado today. Each of them served with honor and distinction and we are all forever grateful for the sacrifice each of them made on behalf of all of us. Their names will not be forgotten, and our prayers will remain with their loved ones. One of our greatest Supreme Court Justices and a Civil War veteran, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., used to spend his Memorial Days just a few miles from where we stand now, in Arlington National Cemetery. He would walk among the gravesites, reflecting on the sacrifices of so many, including the countless, nameless souls who laid beneath. Justice Holmes once observed: At the grave of a hero we end, not with sorrow at the inevitable loss, but with the contagion of his courage. . . . Heroism is not in the deed itself, but in the courage to act. We have heroes because they chose to act, to step forward in the call to action. In this Senate, we are blessed with a history of service to our Nation. Outside of this building, however, is where true heroes of our military reside: men and women in uniform, our veterans who have stood watch before them, and those who have laid down their lives so that we can have freedom. I encourage everyone over this weekend to take time out from the parades and barbecues and family gatherings to thank our veterans and service members. They stand ready to defend the freedoms we take for granted, without seeking thanks or praise. This heroic act deserves our thanks, for it is by grace that they keep us safe. In the Book of Matthew we are taught: ``Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.'' Through their service and sacrifice, they have earned that distinction. May God bless our service members and our veterans. May the families of those who have given their lives for our freedom know the depth of our appreciation. And may we never forget the importance of their sacrifice to our work here in the U.S. Senate. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Thank you, Mr. President. I am pleased to be on the Senate floor today to talk about this long overdue Transportation reauthorization bill. We need to pass this bill, and we need to pass it this year. We have not had a transportation bill in more than 2 years for America. The delay has caused the State departments of transportation across America and in Colorado to operate under a series of short-term extensions. That is unacceptable while we deal with the major issues that are facing the country, including the issue of transportation. The delay in the passage of the new transportation bill has cost the country about 100,000 jobs and created real uncertainty for States that are trying to make construction decisions at a time when they are also trying to recover from a devastating fiscal crisis. The passage of a new transportation bill is central. In fact, there is nothing like the passage of a new transportation bill to create those jobs and provide the much needed funding to jump-start the economic picture in Colorado and in many other places across our country. In fact, it is exactly the kind of business the American people expect us to be conducting. This important legislation will create thousands of jobs in Colorado as well as across the country and support important transportation infrastructure needs on roads in our cities, in rural areas, on our transit systems, and our bridges. The legislation will also lay the groundwork to provide important high-priority projects across my State. These are essential projects that will simply not get completed without the passage of this legislation. This legislation will reinvigorate our economy and make our Nation stronger. The first step toward this goal was with our vote to increase the funding level to $295 billion. I highly commend my colleagues, Senator Grassley and Senator Baucus, for working to increase funding without adding to the national deficit. This additional funding will give an increase to my State of Colorado of about $156 million more than we receive under current law and about $26 million more than the House-passed transportation bill. That is $26 million more a year than the House-passed transportation bill. Here is what this additional $26 million will do for my State of Colorado. It will allow the Colorado Department of Transportation to invest in important projects across our State such as our new transit initiative, TREX, as well as investments in U.S. Highway 160, Interstate 70, and Interstate 25. This is what the $26 million increase will not do, however. It doesn't add to our Nation's deficit. The additional funding is completely paid for. These are the types of choices I am proud to make for Colorado, and these are the choices we should all be making for America. In Colorado, 30 percent of our major roads are congested, 43 percent of our roads are in poor or mediocre condition, and almost 20 percent of our bridges are structurally deficient. We need this increase in transportation dollars, and I will continue to work with my colleagues to ensure that the highest level of funding for our transportation infrastructure is maintained. Nonetheless, as many other States here, Colorado is a donor State. That is Washington-speak about those States that put more money into the highway user trust fund than what we get back. There is a real issue of fairness I would like my colleagues to take a hard look at over the years ahead, fairness for the people of Colorado and all of the other States who pay the same gas tax as the rest of the country every time they fill up at the gas pump, and then at the end of the day we don't get back the same return when the Federal Government returns that money to the States. In Colorado today, for every dollar a Coloradan puts into the highway trust fund, our State receives about 90 cents back. Under the Senate proposal, in 2009, Colorado will receive 92 cents back. That is a move in the right direction, but that is still much less than what is equitable for Colorado and other donor States. We need to pass this bill, and while the proposal being considered in the Senate certainly is a step in the right direction, it does not provide the level of investment that would address Colorado's growing transportation needs as well as the needs of donor States. To correct this unfairness, we need to take some important steps. First, I am proud to support the increase in the overall funding of this bill without adding to the deficit. As I have said, this is a first step in the right direction. Secondly, we have to make sure we protect that increase in conference with the House. The President has indicated he will veto this larger investment, leaving Colorado with a level of funding that will not support the needs of our State. We must convince the President not to veto this additional money. Keep in mind the rising cost of steel and oil have also driven up the cost of construction, and the President's own Department of Transportation said the country needs a level of funding $100 billion more than the President has said he supports. The third step we need to take is to correct the unfair formula that disadvantages States such as ours. I hope my colleagues will help us continue to look for ways to provide adequate investment that will give donor States such as Colorado the rate of return we need and deserve. Having a first-class transportation system is critical to the Nation and to Colorado. I look forward to the passage of this very important bill. I will continue to work to see that the most basic level of infrastructure funding is not only maintained but improved so we can have safe roadways and robust economic development throughout the State. Finally, let me say this is the kind of legislation the Senate should be working on. Because at the end of the day, this is about doing the work the people of America care about. They want us to work on their behalf every day. I yield the floor.

Mr. SALAZAR

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

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, it is with tremendous sadness that I rise today to commemorate the life and work of Detective Donald ``Donnie'' Young of the Denver Police Department. In the early morning hours of Sunday, May 8, Detective Young tragically lost his life while working off-duty as a security guard at a private party in Denver. Today, I join the people of Denver and my home State of Colorado in mourning the loss of a dedicated public servant, and a devoted husband and father. Detective Young is remembered by his family, friends, and colleagues as a man who was always willing to help others in need, whether by hopping out of his truck on a broken foot to help a stranded driver out of a snowdrift, lightening the mood with his unique sense of humor, or working overtime to help protect women from the threat of domestic violence, Donnie never failed to embody the selflessness and compassion so common among his 850,000 brothers and sisters serving as law enforcement officers in this country today. It will come as no surprise to those men and women and anyone familiar with their line of work that Donnie was also exceedingly modest; it is consequently left to the rest of us to give the many awards and honors he received over the course of his 12-year career in law enforcement the attention they deserve. In recognition of the bravery and dedication he displayed on countless occasions, Detective Young received three of the Denver Police Department's four most prestigious awards, including the medal of honor for his role in the 1994 rescue of two kidnapping victims. Yesterday, more than 20,000 people gathered in our Nation's capital to formally honor and remember Detective Young and other law enforcement officers recently injured or slain in the line of duty. This day was marked in part by a Senate resolution I had the privilege of cosponsoring that recognizes May 15, 2005, as Peace Officers Memorial Day, in honor of Federal, State, and local officers killed or disabled while working to protect the public. Having served as Attorney General for the State of Colorado, I know first-hand the sacrifices our men and women in law enforcement make on a daily basis, and I am deeply proud to have had the honor of serving in the same family as Detective Young and others like him. Today, I join my former brothers and sisters in the law enforcement community--in Colorado and across the Nation--in grieving the loss of a passionate and capable public servant, Detective Donald ``Donnie'' Young. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I thank Chairman Cochran for his leadership on this important bill for our country, as well as ranking member Byrd. I rise in support of H.R. 1268. I support it because it is a symbol of our compact with our troops and their families. I support it because it sends a signal of hope to other emerging democracies. And I support it despite some baffling decisions taken in the conference committee to strike key proposals to support our troops and their families. Insurgent attacks in Iraq are on the rise. There were 45 per day in March, 60 per day in April, and the rate of attacks this month is topping that number. While down from the highs of the preelection violence, this spike does not suggest a weakened or retreating insurgency. Instead, it suggests a greater urgency is needed for even greater support for our troops. Last month the Washington Post quoted an unnamed American official in our embassy in Baghdad as saying: My strong sense is that a lot of political momentum that was generated out of the successful election, which was sort of like a punch in the gut to the insurgents, has worn off. In Colorado, we have seen Army units mobilizing for their second and third tours in Iraq; this nearly 2 years after we were assured that the mission there had been accomplished. So it is time that we get this assistance to our troops and to their families. This bill includes $75.9 billion for the Department of Defense and an additional $450 million for increased border security. Those efforts cannot wait any longer. After having been needlessly delayed by the inclusion of extraneous provisions in the House of Representatives, we need to put these investments to work. We also need to put the resources to work that are called for in this legislation beyond Iraq. That is why it is so important that the conference committee include the $5 million downpayment on America's investment in a strong and independent and democratic Lebanon, free from interference from Syria. We all remember the courageous protests in the streets of Beirut earlier this year. Yet despite this brave show of support for freedom, the President's supplemental included no funding for strengthening democracy in Lebanon. That would have been a missed opportunity, and I am delighted that the conference committee kept this funding in the conference report. At the same time, we need to ensure that the enormous investment our taxpayers are making in this bill is invested carefully. We were all painfully familiar with the reports from Iraq of security personnel that received training only to turn and run when confronted with insurgents, or even the instances where personnel we paid to train turned their weapons on our own troops. That is why I am so pleased the conference report includes the amendment I included during our debate in the Senate regarding the hundreds of millions of dollars we are investing in Afghan security forces. Like our successful efforts to invest increased resources in Colorado police officers when I served as Colorado State attorney general, my amendment simply says that we are prepared to pay to train Afghan forces, provided they are prepared to accept greater accountability and standards of excellence. That is the least the American people should expect, and I commend the conference committee for adopting that amendment. I also want to comment on inadequacies that I see in the conference report. As a new Member of the Senate, I have to express my surprise at the partisan nature of the conference committee report itself. This is a shame because the rest of the country does not see supporting our troops as a partisan issue. It seems to me that in a time of war, we can do better than a conference committee that meets purely on partisan lines, better than a conference committee that cuts out proposals that passed this Chamber with overwhelming majorities, and better than a conference committee that inserts a proposal to overturn decades of American asylum policy, a policy that protects the world's most vulnerable people, even though a Senate committee has never reviewed that policy. The conference report provides an increase in the fallen hero compensation to $100,000 for all combat-related deaths, similar to language proposed in the Senate committee. Regrettably, it omits the Kerry amendment, which I cosponsored and which was adopted by an overwhelming bipartisan majority of this body, that would have assured that all the families in the military who have died since 9/11 would be eligible to receive $100,000 in fallen hero compensation. Similarly, just as insurgent attacks began to spike, this conference report also omits much of the additional funding for up-armored humvees, overwhelmingly passed in the form of an amendment sponsored by Senator Bayh. As we see more and more reservists and guards men and women deployed to Iraq, the conference report omits protections for these patriots and their families. The amendment would have ensured that Federal employees who have been activated in the Guard or Reserves do not suffer any loss in salary as a result of their willingness to take on this patriotic assignment. I do not understand why the conference deleted the payment protections afforded these families by the Durbin amendment. While the conference committee could not protect these important provisions for our troops and their families, somehow this conference, led by Members of the House of Representatives, did find time to include within this wartime supplemental a huge proposal that has never received a hearing in the Senate. I will say this about the so-called REAL ID Act included in this bill: It does nothing to address the calls of many Coloradans for serious border strengthening. It will not reduce the flow of undocumented immigrants who come to the United States. Instead, it will heap an unfunded mandate on the States, passing onto the States our duty to protect our borders. At the same time, it denies protection to refugees who come to this country seeking freedom from religious and political persecution. Let's be clear what those protections are for. They are for the world's most vulnerable people who come to this country seeking freedom and safety from persecution. They include Christians fleeing persecution in Egypt, democracy activists fleeing violence in West Africa, and women fleeing abuse in Somalia. While the issue of immigration is an issue that necessarily deserves attention in our Nation's Capitol today, this is not the way to go. Mr. President, it is time that we get the funding contemplated in this legislation to our troops. It has been delayed long enough. I intend to vote for it, and I hope my colleagues will do the same. I yield the floor.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendments be set aside.

Mr. SALAZAR. I thank the distinguished Senator from Virginia. I say this to my distinguished friend from Missouri: I believe the needs of rural America, especially with respect to transportation, are important. I believe having legislation here that would change the percentage allocation by 5 percent, so we could have the rural bridges of our country have more resources to be able to get the job done, is something that is very important. I accept his offer to work with him, and look forward to seeing how we can address the needs of rural America with respect to the rural bridges we have across our country. I yield the floor.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, before discussing my amendment, allow me to commend the work of Senator Jeffords and Senator Inhofe and their staffs for their work on this very important bill for the people of America. It is good work, and it is about the people's business. This is a vitally important bill on a vitally important topic. Without their efforts, we would not be where we are today. I look forward to the day when we can have a transportation bill passed that we can send to the President for his signature, hopefully very soon. I also wish to say that I am glad we are taking this bill up at this time because the last Congress was not able to get it through. We are hopeful this time around that we will be able to succeed. This is an issue which I believe is at the top of the concerns of people throughout the country. In my travels throughout the State of Colorado, county commissioners, mayors, and local people tell me time and time again that moving forward with the reauthorization of the Transportation Act is something we should do and we should do as soon as possible. The amendment that I have proposed addresses a problem that faces many of our States across our country, particularly those States that have many miles of rural roads and bridges. Ensuring that rural areas receive adequate funding to fix the increasing number of structurally deficient bridges in rural America is a priority. I know it is a challenge in Oklahoma, and I know it is a challenge in Vermont. In my State of Colorado, 17 percent of our bridges are in disrepair, and many of those bridges are in parts of rural Colorado. Currently, the Federal Bridge Program apportions funds to States for the replacement and fixing of bridges, and for over 25 years the program has directed a minimum of 15 percent of those Federal funds to be used on bridges on those State and local roads that do not receive any Federal aid. We call these bridges off-system bridges. We need to increase the percentage from 15 percent to 20 percent. It is imperative when addressing the needs of transportation infrastructure in Colorado and across America that we ensure there is adequate funding to address the needs of rural America. Let us make clear the scope of this problem. In this country, there are 307,000 on- system bridges; 23 percent of those bridges are structurally deficient or functionally obsolete--23 percent of those bridges are in bad shape. There are 286,000 off-system bridges. Of those 286,000 off-system bridges, 30 percent are deficient and in need of repair. And consider this, across this great country of America, over 80 percent of bridges are found on non-Federal-aid highways. We must ensure that these bridges in rural communities have the kind of repair to ensure the safety and quality of life for the residents of those communities. The House version of this Transportation bill has increased the level of funding out of this fund to 20 percent. I agree with the House of Representatives, and I believe along with the National League of Cities, the National Association of Counties, the American Public Works Association, and the National Association of County Engineers that we should do the same thing, and my amendment will do that. Our roads, our bridges, our transit system, our rail lines, and our ports need assistance to ensure that our Nation has a first-class infrastructure needed to reinvigorate our economy and to make our country strong and competitive. Senator Inhofe, Senator Jeffords, and their staffs have worked to ensure that we have a comprehensive bill that addresses these needs. This small fix improves this bill, and I hope my colleagues will join me in ensuring it passes the Senate and gets to the President. I will take just a second to address an amendment that we will be voting on shortly, and that is the amendment offered by my colleague from Missouri, which would essentially take away the 2 percent that has been allocated in the portion of these funds to deal with the problem of storm water discharge. That is an issue which is a reality that faces communities across our country. We have 5,000 communities that will be affected if, in fact, that 2- percent allocation is stripped from this particular legislation. It is important for us to make sure that we are protecting the environment, but it is also important for us to make sure we are supporting the local and State governments that will benefit from the money that is currently included in our version of the bill. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote against the amendment that has been offered by our good friend from Missouri. Keeping this provision that we are talking about in this bill is important to the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators, the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, the Association of State Floodplain Managers, the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies, and others. I yield the floor.

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, amendment No. 581, and I ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. SALAZAR. If the distinguished Senator from Virginia would give me 30 seconds, I will make my point.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. About 10 minutes.

Mr. SALAZAR. Will the Senator from North Dakota yield for a question?

Mr. SALAZAR. The Senator describes this mountain of debt that we are piling up in this Nation and the trillions of dollars never before done in the country in the way that is happening today and has been happening over the last several years and will happen under this budget. That mountain of red debt is debt that every citizen is going to be responsible for in just the way the Senator described and debt we are going to pass on to our children and a mortgage that we are going to create for our children. When I hear people such as Warren Buffett talk about this mountain of debt and what it means to this country, I am concerned about what it means with respect to the future strong economy of our country and what it means in terms of the ownership of this debt by foreign countries. Would the Senator from North Dakota, who has studied these issues and is distinguished on the budget of this country, please let the American people know what it is that this budget means for the future of America if we continue to pile up this debt at this unprecedented pace?

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, thank you for the debate we are having on the floor of the Senate this evening. I rise in opposition to the conference report on the budget resolution. This budget keeps mountains of debt on our children and fails to fund the priorities of our Nation from veterans to children, law enforcement, and rural America. It is a bad budget. The first problem is that this budget heaps more debt on our children and grandchildren than ever before. Counting what the President wants to borrow to privatize Social Security, this budget will add an additional $600 billion in debt each year for the next 5 years. That is irresponsible. That will amount to over $3 trillion in additional debt--debt which is more and more funded by foreign central banks. This mountain of red ink ought to alarm the Nation. It has alarmed Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, who has been warning us to do something about it, and other great Americans like Warren Buffet. We also know that this budget turns our priorities upside down. We ought to fulfill our commitment to the men and women who have laid their lives on the line for this country. Yet this budget shortchanges our veterans by at least $1.6 billion. The paltry increase in the veterans health care budget in this conference report will not even cover the cost of inflation. The VA says that increases in its payroll and prescription drug inflation alone will cost $1.4 billion. VA's costs are sure to rise higher than that due to the increasing number of injured and disabled veterans returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan and other increasing pressures on the system. At a time when we ought to be standing up for the men and women who wear the uniform for our country, we are retreating from this Nation's basic commitment to our soldiers and to our veterans. The budget does nothing to rescind the ban on new priority 8 veterans enrolling in the system. Since January 2003, when the VA announced suspension of enrollment of new priority 8 veterans, more than 192,000 veterans across this country--that is 192,000 veterans across this country--and 2,000 veterans in my State of Colorado have sought assistance from the VA and they have been turned away. That is absolutely unacceptable and un-American. We ought to remember the forgotten America. We ought to remember rural America. The budget before us cuts $3 billion from agriculture. That is not remembering the forgotten America. A coalition of Republicans and Democrats added back funding for payment in lieu of taxes programs here in the Senate just a few weeks ago. That was an important amendment to the budget reconciliation measure. Rural counties across the West rely on PILT funding from any number of local priorities, from schools to roads. The budget this Senate is now considering tells mayors and county commissioners across this country that we cannot afford to invest in them and to invest in America's rural communities. For all of us who are from the West, who live in States that have so many acres that are owned by the Federal Government, this is something that should alarm each and every one of us from the West. We ought to fund public security. Yet this budget accepts the President's priority for law enforcement and homeland security, and in so doing, the Nation and Colorado will suffer. The COPS Program has helped put over 1,200 additional officers on the streets in Colorado and, yes, we have done a good job in fighting crime. Yet the COPS Program, as presented in this budget, will not allow the hiring of single additional school resource officer in our State or in the Nation. By reducing the funding for the COPS Methamphetamine Enforcement and Clean-up Program by 62 percent, this budget would cripple efforts by law enforcement agencies in Colorado to combat meth production and distribution and to remove and dispose of hazardous materials at clandestine methamphetamine labs around our State and around our country. This budget calls for $215 million, or a 30-percent cut, to the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program. In 2004, the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program provided 54 grants in my own State of Colorado, totaling $4.6 million. That program assists rural, urban, and suburban fire departments to increase their effectiveness in firefighting operations, firefighter health and safety programs, new fire apparatus, emergency medical service programs, and fire prevention and safety programs in local departments. Like the President's proposed budget, this budget calls for the complete elimination of funding for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program which last year consolidated the old Law Enforcement Block Grant Program and the Byrne Formula Program. Funding under this program has been available for law enforcement programs, prosecution and court programs, prevention and education programs, corrections and community corrections programs, drug treatment programs, and finally, planning, evaluation, and technology improvement programs. This funding has gone a long way toward strengthening the criminal justice system at the State and local levels, but it will be no more. With regard to these important programs, the effects of this budget on my State are clear. In fiscal year 2004, Colorado received $7.4 million in Byrne grant funding. This budget for fiscal year 2006 eliminates that funding. Colorado received over $1 million in funding under the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Program in fiscal year 2004. Several cities received tens of thousands of dollars in needed assistance, including cities such as Denver, Colorado Springs, and Aurora, and 20 other localities in the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice received grants from this program. Colorado cities now will receive nothing under these programs. We ought not to forget 9/11 and the heroic efforts of the men and women in law enforcement and first responders who responded on that day. Standing with our President and standing with law enforcement around this Nation, we ought to be investing in those personnel who are at the front line of defense for our homeland security. Finally, we ought to fund health care and education. This budget directs the Senate and House to save $32 million from Medicaid and student loans. I am proud, in my family, each of my brothers and sisters are first-generation college graduates. That is part of the American dream that was made a reality for me. That education has been a success for my family, as it has been a success for generations around America. We got that education because our parents and our faith instilled in us the value of books and ideas. We also got that education because we were able to rely on Federal assistance to go to college. The price of college increases each year at rates well above inflation. Even so, this budget cuts funding for higher education for the first time in 20 years. I repeat, this budget cuts funding for education for higher education for the first time in 20 years. Budgets are difficult. Every family in this country knows that. Every family makes its choices on how to invest its resources. Growing up as I did, I understand we cannot have everything we want. In fact, there are too many families in this country that struggle simply for survival every day. Spending is not restrained in this document. In fact, it has increased and with it so will the deficits. Most importantly, budgets are also a statement of what we believe and what we value. Why is it that in each and every case in this budget the needy lose and the most powerful win? Why is it that the neediest among us are not rewarded but punished? Why is it that every tough decision is taken not in this document but forced onto our children and onto their children? I can only think of one word to accurately describe the set of priorities outlined in this document. It is wrong, and I will vote against it. I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I am proud to be an original cosponsor of a resolution currently before the Senate commemorating law enforcement officers slain in the line of duty. Every day, men and women all across our nation put their lives on the line to protect our citizens, our families, and our communities. Having served as Attorney General for the State of Colorado, I know first hand how dedicated our law enforcement professionals are, and I strongly believe that one of our Government's most important priorities is supporting these men and women--not only by providing them with the resources they need to get the job done, but by publicly recognizing the truly unparalleled work they do each and every day. While we frequently commend law enforcement officers for their willingness to put their lives on the line for the safety and security of our citizens, and while we are right to do so, it is still unfathomable when one of these men and women does make the ultimate sacrifice. It is unfathomable that those who volunteer for such noble work, as well as the families who support them, should pay such a price. Next week, I will be attending a law enforcement memorial event in Colorado. Like the resolution my colleagues and I are submitting today, this annual event commemorates those law enforcement officers slain in the line of duty. This year, we will remember the lives and work of two Colorado law enforcement officers killed in the past year: Deputy Travis Sass of the Larimer County Sheriff's Office, and Deputy William Truesdale of the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office. In memorializing Deputy Sass, Deputy Truesdale, and others like them across the country, we should remember them not for the tragic way they died, but for the noble way they lived--risking their own lives to protect others. That is why the resolution my colleagues and I are submitting today is so important. As difficult as it is to accept that their lives have been lost, it is imperative that we always remember the contributions they made, and that our dedicated men and women in law enforcement continue to make each and every day.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I today honor a great American, a great Coloradan, and a great Puebloan. Alcario Vigil was born and raised in the San Luis Valley in Colorado and on April 1st turned 100 years old. His life has been rich with accomplishments and extraordinary devotion to his family, his friends, and his community. Known as ``Cowboy,'' Alcario Vigil grew up in Lobatos, CO, just down the road from the Salazar family ranch in the San Luis Valley. Like most of his neighbors, he was brought up in a poor family and eventually took over responsibility for his parents' ranch with his wife Sophia. Together, the Vigil family survived the hardships of the Great Depression and raised eight children on the Lobatos family ranch, where they prospered and strengthened Colorado and this country. Throughout his life, Alcario has been respected as an outstanding community servant, a devoted husband, and a loving father. He has a remarkable record serving as a Penitente for more than 70 years. He has passed those values to his descendents, some of whom are now seventh- generation Coloradans. Although ``Cowboy'' lost his devoted wife Sofia in 1994, and his son Jose just 2 years ago, Alcario remains strong and healthy in his Pueblo home. Even at 100 years, he works the ranch's irrigation ditches in the summer months and enjoys visits from his family and friends. The Pueblo County Commission recently declared April 1, 2005, to be ``Alcario (Cowboy) Vigil Day.'' Given all he has done and all he has seen, I think every day ought to be Alcario ``Cowboy'' Vigil Day.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the resolution that nationally recognizes the critical role the kindergarten year plays in the lives of our Nation's children. This resolution designates April 21, 2005 as National Kindergarten Recognition Day. I have chosen this day because exactly 168 years ago the first kindergarten classroom was opened. In 1837, many believed that young children did not have the ability to focus or to develop cognitive and emotional skills. However, Fredrich Froebel, a German school teacher and private tutor, held a different opinion and opened the first kindergarten classroom with the goal of shaping young children in a nurturing, educational, and protected environment. Since then, Mr. Froebel's idea has been confirmed time and again by research--early years are learning years and kindergarten has a long history of enhancing children's cognitive, physical, and social development. In the United States, kindergarten was first introduced to American communities in 1856. Now, close to four million children participate in kindergarten programs throughout the country. With attention now focused on increasing access to high-quality child care and pre-school programs, kindergarten is frequently overlooked. While I support both of these laudable goals, I believe we cannot ignore the impact of the kindergarten year on the development of our Nation's children. And as policy makers, we must ensure that the kindergarten programs are using developmentally, culturally, and linguistically appropriate curricula and have teachers who have specialized knowledge and skills to address their unique needs. On a personal note, I fondly remember my kindergarten year with my teacher, Mrs. Espinoza, who encouraged my curiosity and creativity. As a parent, I recall taking my daughters to their first day of kindergarten--they came home excited to tell my wife and me what they learned and to showcase their art and science projects in our home. Kindergarten prepared my girls for their later school success and cultivated their life-long love of learning. I will be just as proud to see my daughter Melinda graduate from high school next month as I was the day of her first school graduation, her kindergarten graduation. It is a pleasure to introduce this resolution that honors kindergarten. It is my hope that we can use this day now, and in the future, to call attention to kindergarten and to discuss ways in which we can improve kindergarten classrooms throughout the Nation.

Mr. SALAZAR

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

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise in support of Ambassador John Negroponte's nomination to be the first Director of National Intelligence. I am pleased President Bush filled this critical position, and pleased that the Senate Intelligence Committee moved with such dispatch to move him through the process. The Director of National Intelligence will be one of the most difficult jobs in Washington. The director will have to integrate information from 15 Federal agencies involved in gathering anti-terrorism information. To break down the boundaries that fracture our intelligence community, Negroponte will have to draw on more than 40 years' experience in the Foreign Service. He served as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations from 2001 until last June, when he became the first U.S. ambassador to Iraq since the 1991 Gulf War. He served in the U.S. Embassy in Vietnam from 1964 to 1968 and has been ambassador to Mexico, the Philippines and Honduras. Mr. Negroponte is going to have to take advantage of his closeness with President Bush to overcome some of the institutional inertia within the intelligence community. However, Negroponte cannot allow that closeness to be a double-edged sword. The DNI needs to be an independent voice. He needs to be able to withstand pressure from the President and report threats to American security as they are, not as others want them to be. I hope that Ambassador Negroponte will make it a priority to improve the flow of accurate, timely and actionable intelligence to state and local security officials. Right now, local officials--our front line in the battle for homeland security--are getting intelligence from a dozen Federal terrorism watch lists. They get conflicting or incomplete data or information that has no impact on them. They don't have the resources and expertise to process intelligence, form a complete picture of the threats they face, and what steps they can take. We need to move away from a ``need-to-know'' intelligence culture to a ``need-to-share'' one. State and local emergency officials represent more than 800,000 sworn law enforment officers and 95 percent of America's counter-terrorism capability. They are on the front lines of the war on terror and they need better information in order to protect us. I recognize that will be difficult to do, and I also recognize that the solutions to this problem will require new thinking. But after serving with Colorado's police officers for 6 years as Attorney General, I also know that the current system of information and intelligence sharing is absolutely insufficient. We can do better--and we must do better.