Ken Salazar

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I want to take a moment this morning to discuss the election of Pope Benedict XVI as the leader of my church and the leader of the 1 billion Catholics in our world. I pray for him as he assumes this awesome responsibility for our church and for our world. I have also been comforted by the comments we have heard from Pope Benedict XVI. We know we face some difficult challenges in the Catholic Church in the days and years ahead. We also know we as Catholics are not united on every issue. As I said on this floor after the passing of Pope John Paul the Great, we as Catholics are both comforted by our church's teachings and challenged by its demands. That will continue to be the case. And that is as it should be. What is also true is what Pope Benedict XVI said yesterday. He said: Catholics ``look serenely at the past and do not fear the future.'' I was also touched by another thing the Pope said yesterday. In relation to John Paul the Great's efforts to reach out to other Christian faiths, Pope Benedict XVI said: I am fully determined to accept every initiative that seems opportune to promote contact and understanding. ``I am fully determined to accept every initiative that seems opportune to promote contact and understanding.'' I am praying for those kinds of efforts. I hope each of us will take a moment this Sunday, the very day of the Pope's inaugural mass, to pause and reflect on how we can best live up to this challenge from Pope Benedict XVI. Madam President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce an important piece of legislation to help our local first responders and emergency officials better prepare and respond to terrorist attacks. State and local emergency officials represent more than 95 percent of America's counterterrorism capability. They are on the front lines of the war on terror. Despite this, there is still a fundamental disconnect between what we do in Washington to help and what state and local officials actually need. Too often this happens because people in Washington are not listening to our folks back home. One familiar example is homeland security grant funding. In the years following 9/11, the Federal Government put more money into homeland security than ever before. Office of Domestic Preparedness Grants increased 2,900 percent from 2001 to 2003. The Federal Government acted quickly to get money out the door, but in too many cases, the Feds did not give States the guidance they needed to best use that money. As a result, State officials were left scratching their heads. Money was wasted and local officials did not get all the help they needed. The same is true with antiterrorism intelligence. Police and fire departments across the country are being bombarded with terrorism intelligence from more than a dozen Federal sources. State officials are getting expensive Federal security clearances so that they can review spy reports. But State and local officials are not getting the guidance they need to help them talk to each other. Police, firemen, and EMTs are the first people on site during an emergency, whether it is a terrorist attack or car accident. Our first responders must be given the information they need to safely handle any situation, the training they need to protect the public and the access to grants to purchase the proper tools to do their jobs--this legislation, if passed, will help do just that. Right now, there are surprisingly few uniform standards for non- Federal agencies to handle sensitive homeland security information. While there are detailed procedures for handling classified documents created by the FBI, CIA and other Federal agencies, there is little real world guidance for how to make decisions about how to manage information from non-Federal sources, including locally generated homeland security plans, State-level grants and intelligence gathered by local law enforcement agencies. This lack of guidance has real implications for public safety. Over the last few months, Colorado's State government has been fighting over the Secretary of State homeland security information. Currently, Colorado State law makes secret a wide swath of homeland security information, including any document sent to, from, or on behalf of the State Office of Preparedness, Security and Fire Safety. Local officials have trouble acquiring State information to help them develop antiterrorism plans, and even State legislators can't find out where homeland security money is going. State officials across the country have wasted precious resources battling over what to make public and what to keep secret. They have established a wide array of procedures for sharing sensitive information among emergency management personnel. The current system of distributing homeland security intelligence and grants funding is inefficient and has failed to ensure an adequate balance between protecting sensitive information and ensuring that first responders and the public have the information they need to keep Coloradans and Americans safe. The legislation I am introducing would take three steps to clearing up this confusion and giving States the tools they need to better prepare and respond to terrorist attacks. First, it establishes detailed best practices for State and local governments to help them determine what homeland security information should be made public, what should remain classified, and how different government entities and emergency personnel can share and use sensitive information. Second, it establishes a training program to spread these best practices among state and local officials. Third, it directs the Department of Homeland Security to provide more detailed instructions to State and local officials about how to manage information about homeland security grants that are applied for and awarded by DHS. This bill will give emergency officials across the country the tools they need so that they do not have to waste precious resources remaking the wheel on homeland security information sharing. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I would 1ike to speak a little bit about amendment No. 454, which was adopted unanimously by the Senate last night. I appreciate and thank Senators Cochran and Byrd for the time they have spent working with me on this amendment. I also note and appreciate the work of Senators McConnell and Leahy on this matter. Their staff members, Paul Grove and Tim Rieser, were very helpful. It is clear that success in Iraq and Afghanistan is dependent on how well and how fast we train security forces and police there. It is also clear that the faster and better we train these forces, the sooner our troops can come home. This amendment is designed to ensure that the training in Afghanistan--for which this bill dedicates more than $600 million, including $44.5 million which is to be available only for the establishment of a pilot program to train local Afghan police forces-- is handled well and is handled in an accountable fashion. We have seen what happens when training is rushed or when accountability is ignored. The Haitian National Police, for which we spent hundreds of millions of dollars training in the 1990s, is all but disbanded. We are all familiar with the stories of mismanagement of police training in the Balkans. And just last week, Secretary Rumsfeld took an emergency trip to Baghdad to try to salvage some of the training we have done there as Shiite political leaders threaten to purge Sunni officials from the forces. This amendment is meant to ensure that training in Afghanistan benefits from lessons learned and the mistakes of the past. It adds commonsense provisions to the $660 million appropriated for police and counternarcotics programs in Afghanistan. We need to take this step because the challenges we face in training a capable security and police force in Afghanistan are perhaps even more daunting than in Iraq. First, Afghanistan is the world's largest producer of poppy, the raw material for heroine. It produces 80 percent of the world's heroine and, according to the United Nations, is currently producing dramatically more than it did under the control of the Taliban. Keep in mind that heroine use not only fuels crime throughout Europe and in the United States, but it funds terrorist organizations and is responsible for the looming AIDS crisis throughout eastern Europe. Second, there are already several countries and organizations training forces in Afghanistan, including for the vitally important effort of counternarcotics. In fact, this difficult task of building a capable law enforcement system in that formerly ruler-less country is divided among the United States, Italy, Great Britain and several different international organizations. And third, the way the administration has structured this program lends itself to confusion and competition among American agencies. The funding in the bill goes to the Department of Defense, but much of the police training will be handled by the State Department. This amendment is an effort to make sure we can get the accountability our taxpayers deserve as well as the success that our national security demands. I recognize good training will not be easy. I also understand that in post-conflict societies, it is often difficult to find good personnel. But I also recognize that we simply have to get better at how we train other people to take over security in their own countries. The stress on our Armed Forces demands no less. The challenges facing U.S. taxpayers demand no less. And success in post-conflict societies demands no less. Before coming to the U.S. Senate, I had the honor of serving our great State of Colorado as attorney general. In that job, I made homeland security my highest priority. One of the responsibilities I had as attorney general was being chairman of the Peace Officers Standards and Training Board, POST. Given all that our police officers and their families give for us and for our State, the least I could do was to fight for additional training and support resources. In 2003, we did that, and in exchange we asked for greater accountability. We did that, too, and the result has been a better trained and more accountable police force, not to mention a safer Colorado. It has worked in Colorado and across this country. I believe with the adoption of this amendment we can start to make it happen in our police training overseas as well. Madam President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I come to this Chamber this morning to make a few comments in response to my colleagues from Minnesota, South Dakota, and Louisiana, concerning the judicial nomination process. Let me say at the outset, I believe the work of this body and this Congress should be getting about the people's business. I believe this issue concerning the filibuster rule is something that is distracting this country and this Congress from doing what we should be working on. In the Washington Post this morning, the headline story talks about the economic worries of America. The first two paragraphs of the article in the Washington Post read as follows: Inflation and interest rates are rising, stock values have plunged, a tank of gas induces sticker shock, and for nearly a year, wages have failed to keep up with the cost of living. Yet in Washington, the political class has been consumed with the death of a brain-damaged woman in Florida, the ethics of the House majority leader, and the fate of the Senate filibuster. I would submit that we as a body have a responsibility to address the issues the people of this country care about. Those issues are about passing a transportation bill for America. Those issues are about getting an energy bill passed for the people of America that helps us get rid of our overdependence on foreign oil. Those issues are about making sure we address the most crippling issue affecting America today--and that is business and people alike-- the issue of health care, which is bankrupting this country and many families throughout our States. We get into this discussion here about what is happening with respect to judges. The fact is, what the majority is attempting to do is to simply break the rules. They are simply attempting to break the rules because they have the power. Now, I live in an America that strongly supports the fact we have a power that was created by our Founding Fathers, distributed between the executive, with checks and balances, and the Congress, and different rules for the Senate. Part of that is assuring a guarantee when we make decisions for the American people, especially with respect to judges who have lifetime appointments, that we are appointing the very best people to those positions. The debate that is underway today concerning the so-called filibuster rule, from my point of view, is an effort to try to change the rules in midstream. It also is reflective of the abuse of power we see in Washington today. To be sure, when you look at the history of what has happened with judicial appointments in the last decade and a half or so, there have been 60 Democratic nominees from President Clinton who were rejected by this Senate. On the other hand, if you look at what has happened with President Bush's nominees, we have had over 96 percent of all of his appointees confirmed by the Senate. Now, under anybody's scorecard, if you get a 96-percent success rate, I think you have done pretty well. You can ask my daughters, who are stellar students in their school; getting a 96-percent grade is pretty good. That is a much higher rating for President Bush's appointees than we had for prior Presidents. So I would say this is not about these particular nominees. I have not yet taken my own position with respect to what I will do with these seven nominees. I will study their records, and I will make my decision based on those records. But, at the end of the day, this is whether we will uphold the cherished traditions of this Senate that have provided the kinds of checks and balances that have been important for this Senate to be able to function. In my view, those rules force us, as Republicans and Democrats, to come together to work through the issues that are most important for our country. I believe the way this issue has been presented to this body and to the American people has been destructive not only to this body but also destructive to the real agenda on which we as the elected representatives of the people should be working. That real agenda is about roads. It is about transportation. It is about energy. It is about health care. It is about the issues that affect every person every day. They are the kinds of issues that affect people when they get out of bed in the morning and wonder what is going to happen to their families, their children, and their parents. Those are the kinds of issues we should be working on as opposed to working on these kinds of very divisive issues.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce an important piece of legislation to help our local first responders and emergency officials better prepare and respond to terrorist attacks. State and local emergency officials represent more than 95 percent of America's counterterrorism capability. They are on the front lines of the war on terror. Despite this, there is still a fundamental disconnect between what we do in Washington to help and what state and local officials actually need. Too often this happens because people in Washington are not listening to our folks back home. One familiar example is homeland security grant funding. In the years following 9/11, the Federal Government put more money into homeland security than ever before. Office of Domestic Preparedness Grants increased 2,900 percent from 2001 to 2003. The Federal Government acted quickly to get money out the door, but in too many cases, the Feds did not give States the guidance they needed to best use that money. As a result, State officials were left scratching their heads. Money was wasted and local officials did not get all the help they needed. The same is true with antiterrorism intelligence. Police and fire departments across the country are being bombarded with terrorism intelligence from more than a dozen Federal sources. State officials are getting expensive Federal security clearances so that they can review spy reports. But State and local officials are not getting the guidance they need to help them talk to each other. Police, firemen, and EMTs are the first people on site during an emergency, whether it is a terrorist attack or car accident. Our first responders must be given the information they need to safely handle any situation, the training they need to protect the public and the access to grants to purchase the proper tools to do their jobs--this legislation, if passed, will help do just that. Right now, there are surprisingly few uniform standards for non- Federal agencies to handle sensitive homeland security information. While there are detailed procedures for handling classified documents created by the FBI, CIA and other Federal agencies, there is little real world guidance for how to make decisions about how to manage information from non-Federal sources, including locally generated homeland security plans, State-level grants and intelligence gathered by local law enforcement agencies. This lack of guidance has real implications for public safety. Over the last few months, Colorado's State government has been fighting over the Secretary of State homeland security information. Currently, Colorado State law makes secret a wide swath of homeland security information, including any document sent to, from, or on behalf of the State Office of Preparedness, Security and Fire Safety. Local officials have trouble acquiring State information to help them develop antiterrorism plans, and even State legislators can't find out where homeland security money is going. State officials across the country have wasted precious resources battling over what to make public and what to keep secret. They have established a wide array of procedures for sharing sensitive information among emergency management personnel. The current system of distributing homeland security intelligence and grants funding is inefficient and has failed to ensure an adequate balance between protecting sensitive information and ensuring that first responders and the public have the information they need to keep Coloradans and Americans safe. The legislation I am introducing would take three steps to clearing up this confusion and giving States the tools they need to better prepare and respond to terrorist attacks. First, it establishes detailed best practices for State and local governments to help them determine what homeland security information should be made public, what should remain classified, and how different government entities and emergency personnel can share and use sensitive information. Second, it establishes a training program to spread these best practices among state and local officials. Third, it directs the Department of Homeland Security to provide more detailed instructions to State and local officials about how to manage information about homeland security grants that are applied for and awarded by DHS. This bill will give emergency officials across the country the tools they need so that they do not have to waste precious resources remaking the wheel on homeland security information sharing. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President. I rise today to submit a bipartisan resolution deeming May 2005 as ``National Cystic Fibrosis Month.'' I wish more than anything that this resolution were not necessary, and that we had already cured this terrible disease. But CF continues to haunt thousands of families, and with this resolution, the Senate is saying to those families that we hear your suffering and we are going to do all we can to ensure we help stop it. I have seen many advances in medicine since my childhood on the ranch in Conejos County, CO. These advances have opened up opportunities for people living with disabilities and debilitating disease. People are living longer and healthier lives, even as they face debilitating diseases. One such disease is Cystic Fibrosis, a genetic disease that leads to life-threatening lung infections. Through advances in medication and other treatments, people with CF are living longer lives. In the 1950s, people with CF rarely lived to school age. Today, life expectancy for people with CF has reached into the thirties. That is an improvement-- and as a result people with CF get many more years to spend with their families and to follow their dreams--but it is not good enough. This resolution supports the CF Foundation's goal of increased screening of newborns for CF. The earlier the disease is detected, the more likely that treatments can extend life. It also applauds the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation's work to create and maintain communication among researchers on Cystic Fibrosis across the nation. As a result of the CF Foundation's efforts, close to 200 centers across the nation are sharing information. That research and experience can improve lives. Following the tradition of my predecessor and fellow Coloradan, Ben Nighthorse Campbell, I have submitted this resolution to send a clear signal to the country that we are dedicated to defeating this disease. The resolution has broad and deep bipartisan support, and I thank my colleagues for the dedication to health research on Cystic Fibrosis.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, before commenting on this amendment, I wish to take a minute to thank the chairman and ranking member, Senators Cochran and Byrd, for all their hard work on this important bill. I am especially appreciative of the help and support they have offered this Senator on two amendments. They and their staffs have been helpful as we try to ensure that the brave Lebanese people who stood up to their Syrian occupiers know we are here to support them. Earlier today we made a down payment on a commitment to help ensure they have the free and fair elections and strong and vibrant democracy they have earned. I want especially to thank the staffs of Senators McConnell and Leahy for the help on the Lebanon amendment. I am also hopeful that we will be able to fix something that I have considered an injustice since I came to the Senate earlier this year. The assistance we provide to military families in the event of a loss of their family member is referred to as the ``death gratuity.'' That is a misnomer, and I am hopeful that we will be able to correct that by renaming this assistance as something more fitting, namely, ``Fallen Hero Compensation.'' Regarding the amendment I have just sent to the desk, it is quite simple. It clearly states our support for the earned income tax credit, especially because this program benefits working families and a large amount of our active duty military personnel. Given that we are considering a bill that provides critical support to our troops and their families and that later this week many millions of Americans will be filing their taxes, I believe this amendment needed to be heard on this bill this week. The EITC was first enacted in 1975 to aid the working poor. According to an analysis released just this week by a highly respected, non- partisan institute in Denver, the Bell Policy Center, in the past year, more than 150,000 active military personnel nationwide qualified for the EITC. In my State of Colorado alone, over 3,000 members of the military qualified for the EITC. The EITC has long enjoyed bipartisan support because the credit is extended only to families that have work income. Most recently, under the leadership of Senator Mark Pryor, this body overwhelmingly approved the expansion of the EITC to more military families. That is as it should be . . . given all that these families give for our country, it is the least the country can do for them. Now, however, it appears that this effective program that has lifted over 2.7 million children above the poverty level is coming under attack. Recently the House of Representatives indicated that it is considering cutting the EITC in its budget reconciliation. Such cuts, if enacted by the full Congress, could lead to higher taxes for many of our military families. This is not fair and this is not right. At a time when many of our military personnel are overseas and when our national guard reserves have been called up at historic rates, we should be providing for our men and women in uniform. We should not be taking away from them and placing them at a greater financial disadvantage. I hope the Senate will be heard loudly and clearly that this is not the right thing to do. Our troops and their families deserve no less. I urge my Senate colleagues to reject any cuts to the EITC. I yield the floor.

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

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.

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

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize a model of intergovernmental cooperation from my home State of Colorado: the Denver Regional Council of Governments, known as DRCOG. DRCOG is a nonprofit, cooperative effort of the 51 county and municipal governments in the Denver metropolitan area, representing two and a half million residents, with another million expected by 2030, across eight counties: Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Broomfield, Clear Creek, Denver, Douglas, Gilpin and Jefferson. It was founded 50 years ago as the Inter-County Regional Planning Association, conceived as a place where local officials could work cooperatively to solve the region's problems. And it is a voluntary organization--the members are choosing to work together for mutual benefit. DRCOG champions efforts in a number of areas, including services for seniors, transportation and commuter solutions, public safety training and testing, where it has repeatedly benefited from the highly successful COPS Program, as well as regional growth and water quality plans. It has focused on long-term plans to solve these issues, including developing understandable, fair and objective project selection processes for regional projects eligible for Federal, State and local funds and a long-term regional growth plan. Last night was DRCOG's Annual Awards Dinner, where it will hand out a number of awards, including the John V. Christensen Memorial Award. Named after one of DRCOG's cofounders, the late John Christensen was a county commissioner for Arapahoe County and one of the Denver area's biggest proponents of cooperative problem solving for the metro area. The Christensen award will go tonight to a regionalist who has displayed outstanding commitment to working for the region's common good. Past award recipients have included Colorado State legislators, mayors, county commissioners, as well as county planners, regional leaders, and others during the award's 32-year history. DRCOG has strived to speak, as its motto says, ``With One Voice.'' Its members have eschewed partisanship and ideological bickering to focus on a single goal: Cooperative problem solving that benefits all of the people of the Denver metro area. By coming to the table with the commitment to work towards a common solution, DRCOG has exemplified what we seek in our leaders: Thoughtful consideration and deliberate action. DRCOG is exactly the kind of effort to which we all aspire, a place for ideas and insight, for working in a nonpartisan fashion across jurisdictional lines. I applaud the accomplishments and efforts of the Denver Regional Council of Governments and look forward to its continued success.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I thank the great and wonderful Senator from Delaware for yielding me the time. I rise to speak briefly about the bipartisan action taken by the Senate yesterday when it confirmed the nomination of Paul Crotty to be U.S. district judge for the southern district of New York. I commend my colleagues for their willingness to put aside their partisan differences and to make sure that the judicial confirmation process worked in the case of Judge Crotty. I commend them for acting so obviously for the good of the American people. Even more importantly, it is my hope that this example will prove to be an enduring one for all of us as we move forward with the subject of judicial nominations in the future. Our duty to evaluate Presidential judicial nominations and to confirm or reject nominees is a particularly solemn obligation under our Constitution. Our 871 article III Federal judges hold positions of great respect and great power. They put criminals in jail. They decide our most important private disputes and they explain what our laws mean. Our constitutional duty to evaluate judicial nominees is doubly important because judges are appointed for life. If we make a mistake, our country is stuck with a bad judge for years and sometimes decades. On March 1, 2005, I sent a letter to President George Bush concerning judicial nominations. I respectfully suggested to the President that there are many well-qualified candidates to serve on the Federal bench, men and women who unquestionably would gain the consensus and approval of this body. The fact that the Senate reached consensus on 205 of the President's 215 judicial nominations over the past 4 years demonstrates the willingness, indeed the strong desire, of the majority and minority in the Senate to achieve this consensus. Let me repeat that statistic one more time: 205 of the 215 nominations of President Bush have been confirmed by this body. That is a 95-percent confirmation approval rating. When there is that kind of approval of the President's nominees, this body is doing its job and not being, as some people have suggested, an obstructionist body. Judge Crotty is an example of the way judicial nominations should be pursued in order to be successful under our Constitution. His nomination resulted first from consultations and then from an agreement among Senator Schumer, Governor Pataki of New York, and the White House. That kind of collaborative consensus approach to making sure there are no problems with the confirmation of judges who are nominated by the White House is exactly what ought to be pursued in other judicial vacancies that occur in our country. Partisanship in this particular appointment played no role whatsoever, and it should play no role. Judge Crotty was a consensus choice, a nominee without extreme ideologies or any troubling factors in his background. Judge Crotty's qualifications to sit in judgment of others were apparent to all Senators, Democrats and Republicans alike. Our duty runs to all the people of our Nation, whether they are Republicans, Democrats, Independents, or something else. At the end of the day, I plead with my colleagues in this Chamber, which has been so much a part of our constitutional history, to avoid moving forward with the so-called nuclear option that has the potential of shutting down the work of this body on behalf of the people of the United States. At the end of the day, I suggest to the President of the United States and to our leadership in this body that there are issues which are of much greater importance for all of us to work on on behalf of the people. The people's work should be about having a national and homeland security program that works to protect our homeland and protect our Nation. The people's business should be about making sure that we pass energy legislation that addresses our overdependence on foreign oil today. The people's business should be about how we deal with the problem of health care which is strangling so many Americans and so many businesses across our country. There are so many issues that are important to take care of the people's business that we ought not allow ourselves to get into the distractive avenue of dealing with the controversial issue of the few judges who historically have been rejected by the Senate. I suggest to all of my colleagues that it is important we move forward in the collaborative, cooperative approach that was taken in the nomination and in the confirmation of Judge Crotty to be a Federal district judge for the State of New York. I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. I ask unanimous consent further reading be dispensed with.

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I rise in support of this amendment to document the importance of making sure we have the right standards and certifications with respect to training law enforcement and security officers on missions around the world. I speak to this amendment based on my experience as Colorado attorney general where I sat as chairman of the peace officers standards and training board for a period of 6 years. Working with my colleagues in law enforcement, we developed a set of standards that made sure the people we were recruiting into our police forces in the State of Colorado were people who had been checked for criminal backgrounds and would be able to serve. We also developed a set of standards with respect to the training of these law enforcement officers. This amendment creates those same standards and background checks with respect to people being recruited into security forces to help with our efforts around the world. I understand the amendment I have offered will be considered by Senator Lugar and others as we return to the Senate. I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SALAZAR. I send an amendment to the desk.

Mr. SALAZAR. I ask unanimous consent to lay aside the pending amendment.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise this morning, just having returned to Washington from Colorado, to share a few comments about the Holy Father, Pope John Paul II. My family's faith tradition--like yours, Mr. President--since time immemorial has been Roman Catholic. In Pope John Paul II, we witnessed a great spiritual leader, a conscience and a statesman. Pope John Paul II exemplified the values and teachings of Jesus Christ in his humility, service to others, and in his struggle to have the world recognize the dignity of every human being. John Paul II lived the creed of Jesus Christ as set forth in the Book of Matthew, Chapter 23, Verses 11-12, where Jesus, speaking to the crowds and his disciples, said: The more lowly your service to others, the greater you are. To be the greatest, be a servant. But those who think themselves great shall be disappointed and humbled; and those who humble themselves shall be exalted. More than 26 years ago, in the eighth round of voting, Karol Wojtyla was elected to head the Roman Catholic Church. His predecessor, Pope John Paul I, had died after only 32 days as Pope. The selection of the charismatic Polish cardinal--the first non-Italian pope in 455 years-- surprised many people both inside and outside the Catholic Church. In the quarter-century since then, Pope John Paul II continued to surprise--and challenge--not only members of my church but, indeed, the entire world to recognize and celebrate the dignity of each and every person. But that was not all ``the Pilgrim Pope'' revolutionized. Where previous pontiffs had often seemed distant from their flocks, Pope John Paul II traveled to more nations and spoke to more people--often times in their language--than any other pontiff in the history of the Roman Catholic Church. His first trip abroad as pontiff was to a region in crisis. Latin America, home of half the world's Roman Catholics, was ravaged not just by poverty and hunger but by violence and civil war that claimed tens of thousands of innocent lives. His next trip was to his homeland, Poland, a land that been subjugated for decades, first by Nazism, then by communism. One journalist wrote that the pope's visit to Poland ``helped bring about such profound, irreversible changes that Poland then became a country which was clearly ceasing to be a communist country.'' John Paul also visited America during the first year of his Papacy, attracting huge crowds wherever he went. In my home State of Colorado, 1993, he came to Denver, bringing a message of substance and hope to the young people of the world. I remember that visit fondly--and recall my father's excitement after he reached over a fence to touch the Pope. This pope is recognized--and rightly so--as a sort of patron saint for the Solidarity movement in Poland and a catalyst for the demise of communism in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. But that was only part of this pope's message. He has also warned repeatedly about the shortcomings of capitalism. He reminded us all that we have an obligation to help the poor and the oppressed. In 1998, he traveled to Cuba, strengthening a Church that is doing more and more to help that country's forgotten, and breathing life into an opposition movement that surprised the world--and that country's backward regime--with a grassroots call for reform. In 1999, he again visited the US, reminding us of our duty to not forget the poor and oppressed and continuing his special outreach to America's young people and challenging them to fight for a better America and a better world. And in 2000, a visibly frail Pope visited the Holy Land to mark the Millennium and in an attempt to bring Jews, Christians and Muslims together. Both Jews and Muslims and Christians welcomed him--and recognized and celebrated his visit--and applauded of optimism his words and hope. His efforts to heal the rift between the Vatican and Jews had to be colored by his own experience with the brutality of anti-Semitism that he had witnessed. In September 1939, he saw his university in Krakow shut down and eventually saw several of his friends and classmates sent to Auschwitz after the Nazis invaded Poland. His efforts at healing historical rifts continued, evidenced by meetings with the Archbishop of Canterbury, the highest ranking official in the Episcopal Church. Many wished he could have done more on these hurtful rifts, but no one doubted that he began to confront these challenges like no Pope has ever done in the history of our Church. For these nearly 27 years, the Pilgrim Pope John Paul II--an accomplished poet, an intellectual and a mystic in that fine Catholic tradition--was hailed as a visionary and attacked as a relic. Within the Church itself--as in the scores of countries he visited--he was criticized by critics on both the left and the right. That is because in the Church and on each of his many trips, he brought not only comfort and hope--hope for peace in Latin America, freedom in Eastern Europe, reconciliation in the Middle East, and improvement in America-- but he also brought discomfort and challenges for all of us to do better. In 2003, the Vatican had this to say about the role of the Church in public life, The Church does not wish to exercise political power or to eliminate the freedom of opinion of Catholics regarding contingent questions. Instead, it intends--as is its proper function--to instruct and illuminate the consciences of the faithful, particularly those involved in political life, so that their actions may always serve the integral promotion of the human person and the common good. None of us lived up to the challenges and prescriptions the Pope mapped out in 27 years in a perfect way. We could not because Pope John Paul II challenged all of us to do more, to be better. Physically, the frail, stooped Pope we saw in the last weeks bore little resemblance to the athletic 58-year-old who ascended the throne of Peter nearly 27 years ago. But inwardly, he remained deeply consistent--challenging us to uphold the dignity of each and every person--and illuminated and instructed, as well as challenged and surprised the entire world. We will miss Pope John Paul II, but his vibrant legacy lives on in each of us and in the lessons and challenges he placed before us. I thank the President and yield the floor.

Mr. SALAZAR

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

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about an exemplary American and passionate champion of human and civil rights, Cesar Estrada Chavez, and to introduce legislation that takes an important first step in memorializing his tremendous contributions to our country. Together with Senator John McCain, I will introduce the Cesar Estrada Chavez Study Act. This bill will direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study of sites associated with the life of Cesar Chavez and will lay the necessary groundwork for the preservation of these sites as national historic landmarks. In the 108th Congress, Senator McCain and Representative Hilda Solis sponsored similar legislation in the House of Representatives, and I am pleased to join their efforts. Like many great American heroes, Cesar Chavez came from humble roots, but his strength of character led him to achieve great things. Chavez was born on March 31, 1927 in Yuma, AZ, where he spent his early years on his family's farm. At age 10, his family lost their farm in a bank foreclosure, forcing them to join the thousands of farm workers that wandered the Southwest to find work. They worked in fields and vineyards, harvesting the fresh fruits and vegetables that people throughout the world enjoyed unaware of the daily hardships endured by farm workers. Cesar Chavez experienced these hardships and witnessed first hand the injustices in farm worker life. He became determined to bring dignity to farm workers and in 1962, he founded the National Farmworkers Association, which would later become the United Farmworkers of America (UFW). Through the UFW, Chavez called attention to the terrible working and living conditions of America's farm workers. Most importantly, he organized thousands of migrant farm workers to fight for fair wages, health care coverage, pension benefits, livable housing, and respect. Like Cesar Chavez, I am the son of farmers. Everyday, I am reminded of my family's tradition of working the land by the sign on my desk that reads ``No Farms, No Food.'' And without farm workers, who would harvest the fruits and vegetables we all enjoy? Cesar Chavez understood this--he championed the rights of these forgotten Americans and helped shine a light of their plight. He once remarked, ``It is my deepest belief that only by giving our lives do we find life.'' He gave his life to ensure farm workers, and all workers, were afforded the rights and dignity they deserved. For these reasons and many more, I proudly join my colleague from Arizona in introducing significant legislation that will honor Cesar Chavez. It is my hope that Congress can work together to quickly pass this important bill that honor the places of Chavez' life and allow his legacy to inspire and serve as an example for our future leaders.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about an exemplary American and passionate champion of human and civil rights, Cesar Estrada Chavez, and to introduce legislation that takes an important first step in memorializing his tremendous contributions to our country. Together with Senator John McCain, I will introduce the Cesar Estrada Chavez Study Act. This bill will direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study of sites associated with the life of Cesar Chavez and will lay the necessary groundwork for the preservation of these sites as national historic landmarks. In the 108th Congress, Senator McCain and Representative Hilda Solis sponsored similar legislation in the House of Representatives, and I am pleased to join their efforts. Like many great American heroes, Cesar Chavez came from humble roots, but his strength of character led him to achieve great things. Chavez was born on March 31, 1927 in Yuma, AZ, where he spent his early years on his family's farm. At age 10, his family lost their farm in a bank foreclosure, forcing them to join the thousands of farm workers that wandered the Southwest to find work. They worked in fields and vineyards, harvesting the fresh fruits and vegetables that people throughout the world enjoyed unaware of the daily hardships endured by farm workers. Cesar Chavez experienced these hardships and witnessed first hand the injustices in farm worker life. He became determined to bring dignity to farm workers and in 1962, he founded the National Farmworkers Association, which would later become the United Farmworkers of America (UFW). Through the UFW, Chavez called attention to the terrible working and living conditions of America's farm workers. Most importantly, he organized thousands of migrant farm workers to fight for fair wages, health care coverage, pension benefits, livable housing, and respect. Like Cesar Chavez, I am the son of farmers. Everyday, I am reminded of my family's tradition of working the land by the sign on my desk that reads ``No Farms, No Food.'' And without farm workers, who would harvest the fruits and vegetables we all enjoy? Cesar Chavez understood this--he championed the rights of these forgotten Americans and helped shine a light of their plight. He once remarked, ``It is my deepest belief that only by giving our lives do we find life.'' He gave his life to ensure farm workers, and all workers, were afforded the rights and dignity they deserved. For these reasons and many more, I proudly join my colleague from Arizona in introducing significant legislation that will honor Cesar Chavez. It is my hope that Congress can work together to quickly pass this important bill that honor the places of Chavez' life and allow his legacy to inspire and serve as an example for our future leaders.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. I yield the floor.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise tonight at this late date to talk about forgotten America, the rural parts of our United States, and to address the issues of education and health care in rural America. Let me say I want to extend my appreciation and thanks to Senator Conrad and Senator Collins for their work on these issues in the past. I look forward to having their support as we move forward with these amendments. My amendment will increase funding for the Rural Education Achievement Program, a program that came about through bipartisan efforts that recognize that our rural schools need our help. REAP provides supplemental funding for rural school districts which face significant challenges. Let me just say that as we look at the issue of education in rural communities and we look at the issue of health care in rural communities, we have to understand that there is a part of the United States of America that has been forgotten, frankly, under both Republican and Democratic administrations. Across the country, some 3,000 counties continue to wither on the vine, where the people who live in those counties, who are mostly agriculturally dependent, do not have the infrastructure or the capacity to address the real needs that are affecting them every day. Those include the issues of education and the issues of health care. I come from what is one of the poorest counties in America, the County of Conejos. That county has been the poorest county in the United States for a number of different years, so I know firsthand the kinds of challenges that are faced by communities like those communities in Conejos County. Across rural America, no matter where you go, no matter what State you are in, you are going to find these kinds of counties. The two areas we address here with the amendment are education and health care. First of all, with respect to rural education, a few facts about our rural school districts. Our school districts in rural America account for about one-half of the school districts in our Nation. Rural school districts tend to be the poorest in the Nation. They average less than 40 percent of the per pupil spending in our urban school districts. Rural school districts have less access to technology, computers, and the Internet than their urban counterparts and, thus, are at risk of being left behind in our global economy. Rural school districts tend to have higher dropout rates than their urban counterparts. Rural schoolteachers tend to make an average of 15 percent less than urban schoolteachers. Despite decreased pay, rural schoolteachers teach more subjects than their urban counterparts, and rural school districts face significant problems with teacher retention and face serious problems in meeting the Federal Government's definition of ``highly qualified'' under the No Child Left Behind Act. Those of us who have traveled throughout this country, who have been in many of these rural school districts, know that educational opportunity being brought about for the students in rural schools is very different from that in urban schools. We know that in rural schools they do not have the teachers or the kinds of facilities--the computer technology, the swimming pools, the other parts of the physical facilities--that you find in the wealthier urban settings. So this amendment is a simple statement about the investment needed to help us have the kind of educational opportunity for the children of America who live in the rural parts of our country that have become the forgotten America. My amendment also addresses the issue of rural health care, restoring funding for the Rural Health Outreach Program, and increases funding for the State Offices of Rural Health Program. These are two programs that are helping us address the health care issues that are faced in rural America. These programs enable the communities to partner with universities, with private practitioners, with hospitals and medical providers to make sure we address rural health care in the way that it is lacking in rural communities. Let me say a word about the circumstance relating to rural health care. In Colorado, in many of my counties, there is only one nurse practitioner for the entire county. On the western part of our State, in Grand Junction, CO, veterans wait up to 5 months in order to see a doctor. In Colorado, 756,000 of our citizens are uninsured, and a good majority of them live in rural areas. When they get sick, they either cannot afford to see a doctor or there is a shortage of physicians for them to see. Rural Coloradians tend to have more health care problems so that the lack of health care is life threatening. We know health care access in our rural communities is in crisis. A few facts bear this out. Forty-five million Americans have no health insurance at all, but 10.2 million of those 45 million Americans live in rural America; 10.2 million of those 45 million Americans live in rural America. Americans living in rural communities face some of the greatest challenges in obtaining and keeping health insurance. There are many communities across my State--and I am sure across America--where families in rural communities simply cannot get health insurance, and when they get health insurance they have to pay anywhere from $1,000 to $2,000 a month just to keep that health insurance. Rural residents are more likely to be covered by Medicaid than their urban counterparts. Residents in rural communities have less access to medical services because there is such a critical shortage of doctors in rural communities across our country. My amendment will restore some of that funding so that our communities in forgotten America can continue to develop innovative programs to increase access to healthcare. Let me conclude by saying this is a simple step to help us put the spotlight on the problems that are faced by rural America today. This is not a Republican or a Democratic issue. This is an issue where Democrats and Republicans should stand up and say that we value education in our rural communities and in our rural schools, that we understand the major problems of healthcare that are faced in our rural communities, and that we will stand up to make sure that we are addressing those issues of healthcare in rural America. I ask unanimous consent that Senator Conrad be added as a cosponsor.

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

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 215, which I filed earlier this evening.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise in support of amendment No. 149 by Senators Akaka and Murray and to praise them for their years of work on veterans issues. This is a needed amendment because the budget resolution, as written, will break our promises to America's veterans. The budget resolution closely tracks an administration request that will do little to meet growing costs and will force the VA to continue to ration care. I am angry that thousands of veterans are being turned away from the VA. This represents a fundamental breach of trust with our fighting men and women. Since January 2003 when the VA announced suspension of enrollment of new Priority 8 veterans, 192,000 veterans across the country and 2,000 Colorado veterans have sought VA care and been turned away. The administration's new budget hopes to kick 1.1 million more so-called low-priority veterans out of the system next year with draconian cuts in service and increased fees. The administration's budget also would kick thousands of veterans out of nursing homes. It would limit the VA's per diem reimbursement to State VA nursing homes to priority ones, twos, and threes. These heartless cuts could kick 80 percent of State nursing home residents out onto the street. Last week, I met with the administrator of a State nursing home in Walsenburg, CO. She told me that these cuts would force her to kick out 93 of her 100 residents. State administrators tell me that these cuts could force the entire system to go under. These are our most vulnerable veterans, who often have no place else to go. Another problem is waiting periods. Administrative backlogs at the VA have been reduced, but there are still 321,000 veterans waiting for disability and pension claims to be processed. At the VA clinic in Grand Junction, there is a 400-person waiting list. That is a 4 to 5- month wait. Just last week I asked Secretary Nicholson to explain to me why numerous Coloradans are waiting months to get their GI bill benefits, forcing them to miss tuition deadlines. This budget agreement will do little to cut these administrative backlogs. Senator Akaka's amendment would go a long way to restoring needed funding and I urge my colleagues to support it.