Robert Torricelli

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, the coming days will be historic for a large number of small businesses that make up the luxury ground transportation industry. After much hard work from several members of the New Jersey Delegation and hundreds of constituents in New Jersey and around the country, the President will sign H.R. 2546, The Real Interstate Driver Equity Act. This Act will bring tremendous relief to those operators of the luxury ground transportation industry conducting interstate business. Four years ago, two of my constituents Don Kensey of Au Premiere Limousine of Bellmawr, and James Moseley of James Limousine of Cherry Hill, approached my good friend Congressman Rob Andrews concerning the problem limousine operators in New Jersey were having with local jurisdictions in other States seizing and fining properly authorized vehicles upon picking up their clients to return them to New Jersey. Joining with many other limousine businesses in New Jersey and the National Limousine Association, our constituents organized a national grassroots campaign in the 106th Congress to educate the House and Senate. Today, the Congress is aware of the hardships faced by these small business owners across the country. Because such a substantial portion of their service does not occur in a single State, limousine and other prearranged ground transportation service providers are frequently assessed registration and licensing fees by these other States. Enforcement of these requirements, which includes vehicle impoundment and heavy fines, has caused tremendous hardship to drivers and owners of these businesses, over 80% of which are one-to-three car operators grossing less than $500,000 a year. I would note that these problems are especially hard on small businesses in New Jersey, which borders on two States with large cities and airports. Indeed, I was shocked to hear that in one particularly egregious instance, the CEO of McGraw Hill Publishing was forced out of his limousine, which was seized in another State and told to find another way home. That was when Senator Corzine and myself, along with Congressman Andrews decided to take action. The Real Interstate Driver Equity Act simply prohibits States other than a home licensing State from enacting or enforcing a law requiring a fee or some other payment requirement on vehicles that provide prearranged transportation service. States and localities can no longer restrict limousine or sedan services if the service is registered with the Department of Transportation as an interstate carrier; the company meets all of the requirements of the State in which it is domiciled or do business; and the limousine or sedan service is engaged in providing pre-arranged transportation from one state to another, including round trips. This Congress, through the hard work of our constituents, has finally remedied this inequity in our interstate commerce law. There were several other members who were instrumental in passing this legislation. I would like to thank Congressmen Roy Blunt and Rob Andrews, who took the lead on H.R. 2546 in the House of Representatives and helped ensure its passage last year. In April of this year, with the assistance of my colleagues Senator Hollings and Senator McCain, the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee passed H.R. 2546 unanimously. I am also most grateful to Senator Reid, Senator Bond, and Senator Corzine for their able assistance in passing this important small business legislation.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, the coming days will be historic for a large number of small businesses that make up the luxury ground transportation industry. After much hard work from several members of the New Jersey Delegation and hundreds of constituents in New Jersey and around the country, the President will sign H.R. 2546, The Real Interstate Driver Equity Act. This Act will bring tremendous relief to those operators of the luxury ground transportation industry conducting interstate business. Four years ago, two of my constituents Don Kensey of Au Premiere Limousine of Bellmawr, and James Moseley of James Limousine of Cherry Hill, approached my good friend Congressman Rob Andrews concerning the problem limousine operators in New Jersey were having with local jurisdictions in other States seizing and fining properly authorized vehicles upon picking up their clients to return them to New Jersey. Joining with many other limousine businesses in New Jersey and the National Limousine Association, our constituents organized a national grassroots campaign in the 106th Congress to educate the House and Senate. Today, the Congress is aware of the hardships faced by these small business owners across the country. Because such a substantial portion of their service does not occur in a single State, limousine and other prearranged ground transportation service providers are frequently assessed registration and licensing fees by these other States. Enforcement of these requirements, which includes vehicle impoundment and heavy fines, has caused tremendous hardship to drivers and owners of these businesses, over 80% of which are one-to-three car operators grossing less than $500,000 a year. I would note that these problems are especially hard on small businesses in New Jersey, which borders on two States with large cities and airports. Indeed, I was shocked to hear that in one particularly egregious instance, the CEO of McGraw Hill Publishing was forced out of his limousine, which was seized in another State and told to find another way home. That was when Senator Corzine and myself, along with Congressman Andrews decided to take action. The Real Interstate Driver Equity Act simply prohibits States other than a home licensing State from enacting or enforcing a law requiring a fee or some other payment requirement on vehicles that provide prearranged transportation service. States and localities can no longer restrict limousine or sedan services if the service is registered with the Department of Transportation as an interstate carrier; the company meets all of the requirements of the State in which it is domiciled or do business; and the limousine or sedan service is engaged in providing pre-arranged transportation from one state to another, including round trips. This Congress, through the hard work of our constituents, has finally remedied this inequity in our interstate commerce law. There were several other members who were instrumental in passing this legislation. I would like to thank Congressmen Roy Blunt and Rob Andrews, who took the lead on H.R. 2546 in the House of Representatives and helped ensure its passage last year. In April of this year, with the assistance of my colleagues Senator Hollings and Senator McCain, the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee passed H.R. 2546 unanimously. I am also most grateful to Senator Reid, Senator Bond, and Senator Corzine for their able assistance in passing this important small business legislation.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to bring to the attention of the Senate the outstanding efforts and contributions of the New Jersey Task Force One Urban Search and Rescue Team. On September 11, 2001 at approximately 9:00 a.m. New Jersey Task Force One was activated and deployed to the World Trade Center Attack. Requested by New York City's Office of Emergency Management, New Jersey Task Force One had an advance team in New York City by 11:15 a.m. The team's entire equipment cache, along with 140 members was set up at the Jacob Javits Center by 2:00 p.m. that same day. They deployed search assets to search for survivors during the afternoon and evening of the 11th and for the next 10 days, they worked continuously as part of the urban search and rescue effort. In a short period of time, New Jersey Task Force One became an integral part of the rescue efforts. The team was integrated into the FEMA Urban Search and Rescue System and was included in the FEMA Urban Search and Rescue Action Planning. The well-equipped New Jersey Task Force One had the ability to lend critical equipment to some of the responding FEMA teams and developed an excellent working relationship with many of these teams. Structural engineers and planners from New Jersey Task Force One were used by the FEMA Incident Support Team to brief the incoming FEMA teams as they rotated into New York City. FEMA gave an operational performance evaluation to New Jersey Task Force One for their participation related to the World Trade Center Operations. New Jersey Task Force One was rated as superior in six out of nine categories. Those categories included attitude, initiative, consideration for personnel welfare, obtain necessary equipment and supplies, physical ability for the job, and safety. With valor and honor, the members of New Jersey Task Force One have proven themselves as one of the finest Urban Search and Rescue teams in the country. It is for these reasons that my colleague, Senator Corzine and I introduced S. 2618 to designate New Jersey Task Force One as the 29th National Urban and Search Rescue Team. New Jersey Task Force One was formed in 1997 and they have used the FEMA Urban Search and Rescue guidelines in its development. The team is organized under the New Jersey State Police Office of Emergency Management Domestic Preparedness and Hazardous Material Planning and Emergency Response Unit. The State provides an annual budget of $1.5 million to support New Jersey Task Force One. The team consists of 180 members from over one hundred different fire, police and EMS agencies throughout the State. Over the past few years, New Jersey Task Force One has purchased the necessary cache of equipment, based on the FEMA equipment list, and has trained its members to FEMA Urban Search and Rescue Standards. New Jersey Task Force One is in the process of purchasing weapons of mass destruction response equipment. The 180 courageous men and women of New Jersey Task Force One have dedicated their lives to saving others. They have proven themselves to be highly qualified to join FEMA's Urban Search and Rescue System. I strongly believe that New Jersey Task Force One would enhance FEMA's Urban Search and Rescue program. I urge the FEMA Director to include New Jersey Task Force One as the 29th FEMA Urban Search and Rescue team.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Madam President, on September 12, 2001, I came to the floor of the Senate to suggest to my colleagues that the magnitude of what had happened to the United States of America in the terrorist attack required an independent analysis and establishment of a national commission of inquiry. I am proud to have led this effort, but it was not either my creation or principally my idea. In New Jersey, a week after the terror of September 11, I began to hear from the widows and the families--simple Americans who believe in their country, pay their taxes, and felt secure behind our borders, recognizing that the United States is the most awesome military power ever assembled on the face of the earth. Intelligence and law enforcement services are larger here than in every other nation combined. Just 24 hours before, 19 men with $250,000 had delivered the most devastating attack on these United States in our history. Their inquiry of me as their Senator was simply: What do we tell our children? What are we to believe about our country and our Government that we were unable to defend our most vulnerable citizens; that thousands had been left dead and thousands were orphaned and lives will never be the same again? I did not have any answers to their questions, so I brought their questions to my colleagues. It has been a long struggle to bring this commission to this point. I am more grateful than I can explain that Senator Lieberman and Senator McCain have taken this effort to the point of legislation and possible adoption. No one seeks to cast blame. No one seeks to unfairly lay responsibility upon those who may not deserve it. But something is wrong--370 days have passed, after thousands of lives were lost in a complete and total breakdown of the security of the United States of America, and I am unaware that one individual has been transferred, demoted, held responsible, fired, noted, or criticized. It cannot be that the security of the United States was breached, thousands of lives were lost, and every agency performed perfectly, everybody did their job, all 1 million Federal employees performed as expected. Madam President, I cannot give that explanation to the hundreds of widows or orphans and parents and brothers and sisters in the State of New Jersey who have survived and dealt with the unimaginable. I do not simply hope that this commission is adopted, but that, on a bipartisan basis, Members of this Senate send an unequivocal message that this Government is accountable, its agencies are accountable, and the American people will get answers. It is not that I have come to the floor with a suggestion that is somehow a compromise with our tradition or unusual in our practice. This commission will respond, exactly as every other generation of Americans has responded in every other crisis of similar or lesser proportions. This Congress demanded an answer from a commission about the reasons of the causes of the Civil War. They were still collecting bodies in the North Atlantic and this Senate went to New York and met in midtown Manhattan to get answers for how the Titanic could have sunk. The Depression was still ongoing when we demanded a commission for its reasons. And 11 days after Pearl Harbor, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, before the U.S. even counterattacked, wanted the American people to know how their Armed Forces had let them down. He would not allow American sons and daughters to die in a war until their parents knew what happened to our military, our preparedness, so their parents would know that their lives were in good hands. Lyndon Johnson did no less after the Kennedy assassination, and President Reagan did no less after the Challenger accident. None of these reports were perfect. It was always a painful experience. None of us ever want to admit that anyone in our Government, anyone in the service of our country did not perform perfectly. The truth is that terrible things happen even when people do perform well, and that may be the conclusion of this commission, as it has been with others. I don't know. But the truth is, no Member of the Senate knows either. Unless this commission is established, we will never know. The simple truth is the Senate might reject this commission, the President may fail to sign it, or the House of Representatives may fail to adopt it. But that does not mean that there will not be a commission. Sometimes justice is so overwhelming, a cause so obvious and powerful that you can delay it, but you cannot stop it. Defeat this commission today and it will be voted on next year or the next year--even if it is 10 years, even if it is 20 years. No event of this magnitude can happen in a country, inflicting this much pain, this much change in a society, without the accountability of its Government. Either the widows and the widowers and the parents of these victims will get this commission or their children will. Either the Members of the Senate will establish this commission or our successors will. But make no mistake about it, there will be answers. Something very wrong happened. Somebody has to provide answers. First, we were told that a commission was impossible because it would interfere with the war in Afghanistan. What an extraordinary notion: A nation with a $2 trillion budget, a quarter of a billion people, a million men under arms and confronting al-Qaida in Afghanistan prohibited us from using resources or personnel to conduct an investigation--an extraordinary notion, considering that Franklin Delano Roosevelt was willing to undertake an investigation while fighting the Germans and the Japanese with sufficient resources. Then we were told this was better done in the Intelligence Committee--possibly a good explanation if the only issues of failures were in the intelligence community. What about immigration? How about the FAA? How about law enforcement? How about the coordination of policies to save the lives of those firefighters or police officers? How about 100 other Government agencies? This may be a CIA issue, but it is not only a CIA issue. Still the belief was this could be done in the Intelligence Committee. Only now the bipartisan leadership of the Intelligence Committee, Senator Shelby and Senator Graham, report to us that they cannot get cooperation from the necessary Government agencies to even conduct their limited review in this narrow focus. How dare they. How dare anyone withhold information or cooperation from this Senate or the families of the victims who have demanded answers? How dare anyone. Are there those in this Government who believe their principal loyalty is to their agency, the reputation of their bureau, someone in the bureaucracy rather than the people of the United States of America? Does it mean so much to be an agent of the CIA, an employee of the FBI, or the National Security Agency? Is that so important that you would withhold information from the American people in a search for justice for the United States of America? I have served in institutions, and I believe in institutional loyalty, but that means nothing compared to loyalty to the United States of America. Yet we have the spectacle of the bipartisan leadership of our Intelligence Committee claiming they cannot get cooperation from the bureaucracy itself. There are issues so large in this debate that they can only be settled by an overwhelming vote for this commission. It is about the accountability of the Government itself to the people. It is about many things, but most fundamentally it is that: Can the people of the country hold their Government and its agencies accountable? I do not know. For one of the first times in my life, I am not sure the bureaucracy or its components in the intelligence or law enforcement agencies genuinely can be monitored and controlled by the Congress of the United States. But we are going to find out because that is what this commission is about, more than anything else. One year has passed. Billions of dollars have now been appropriated to deal with terrorism and homeland security. The Congress has been asked for the most sweeping reorganization of the Government in American history. There is not a Member of this Senate who in good conscience either cast these votes or can cast votes in the future without knowing the results of this inquiry. Spend $10 billion, $20 billion, $30 billion. On what basis is the money spent? Is there a Member of the Senate who knows which agencies failed, which should be improved, which should be expanded, which should be curtailed, what new activities would make a difference? What is the sum of our knowledge of what happened on September 11? I do not know. More importantly, neither do the other 99 Members of the Senate, and they will never know until we know what happened, why, who failed and who succeeded, who met their responsibilities, and who did not. Does this reorganization, the underlying legislation before the Senate, make sense for the country? Mr. President, I am going to be asked to vote upon that issue and, in good conscience, I cannot tell you. On what basis is this reorganization done? Because we have learned which agencies did not perform? It is no different than the financial recommendations. There is not a Member of the Senate who knows which agencies were not in control, which were, which met their responsibilities, how a chain of command might have been different. Some day we will know but not without this commission. What we are learning about the failures of intelligence and law enforcement since September 11 is shocking. Naming a national commission dealing with the realities of what happened is going to be a painful national experience. We now know that the CIA had advised the FBI of the names of a hundred terrorists and to watch for their entry into the United States. They failed. We now know as early as 1998 intelligence agencies received information about Bin Laden planning an attack involving aircraft in New York and Washington. We now know, as late as July 2001, the National Security Agency reported 33 communications involving a possible and imminent terrorist attack. We now know the U.S. Government was put on notice by foreign intelligence agencies and our own of the possibility of such attack. This will be a painful national experience--painful for the country, painful for the families. But this problem is not going away. Time will not heal it. The distance between ourselves and the events will not lessen the intensity of the need or the demand for the inquiry. I want nothing but the truth for the families, the communities in my State of New Jersey which have suffered so badly, and mostly for my country. The U.S. Government failed our people. It does not mean that we are not a good people or that this is not a great Government, but good and great governments learn by experiences and their failures. We can be a better country better able to protect our people with a more accountable Government, with intelligence and law enforcement agencies that understand their responsibilities and their needs based on this process. It will be a painful process of growth, but it will happen. We will learn how it is that the FBI, given all these warnings, could not have had people who were possibly trained in Arabic translation, how piles of documents may have accumulated having never been analyzed. We will learn how information about flight schools and the possible warnings of the ill intent of its students never came to proper attention. We will learn how over the course of years a conspiracy was built, signals were received, but we were unable to see the dimensions of a plot that would so change our country. Put aside your loyalties to institutions. Put aside your commitment to individuals. This is not about the bureaucracy. We have passed the point of being able to preserve the reputations of agencies that failed our country. It is no longer about them. It is about the accountability of the United States Government. Whoever is found at fault, whoever is found to have performed their duties, it is time to face the truth. This is the issue that will never go away. This is the one part of the Government, the formation of an independent commission on September 11, 2001, that will happen no matter what we do, no matter how we vote, or whatever is said. It is as inevitable as tomorrow morning's sunrise because the cause is so powerful, so just and so necessary. Give those few widows, parents, and children the one thing they have been demanding. Writing them checks will not change it. Laying wreaths will not change it. Prayers will not change it. They are asking for an answer. They want an answer, and so do other Americans. And I intend to get it for them. I intend to get that answer. I hope it is today. I yield the floor.

Mr. TORRICELLI. I thank my friend. Is the Senator from Tennessee controlling the time?

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the memory of the victims of the Katyn Forest Massacre in 1940. On September 17, 1939, Soviet troops invaded Poland in accordance with the German-Soviet agreement. While Polish troops fought bravely, they ultimately were overwhelmed by the Soviet forces. In an effort to eliminate potential threats to Soviet control of Poland, Soviet troops, under Stalin's orders, committed what some have called one of the most heinous war crimes in history. Over 15,000 Polish soldiers, officers, intellectual leaders, prisoners of war and other Polish citizens were executed. Between four and five thousand Polish bodies were buried in a mass grave in the Katyn Forest. There were no trials, no justice for these innocent victims. While the Soviet government denied complicity, on February 19, 1989 it finally released documents confirming their role in this massacre. However, an admission of complicity does not ease the pain of a nation whose entire population was affected by this horrible event. I am hopeful that as more people learn of the Katyn Forest Massacre, we will be able to come to terms with this tragedy and the pain that it has caused so many. We must continue to honor the memories of those who were lost that day, so that we will not be destined to repeat this century the horrors which so often affected the last.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the work of Bishop William T. Cahoon on the recent Holy Convocation in New Jersey. For more than a quarter century, Bishop Cahoon has dedicated himself to bringing together the ministry and local communities. He currently serves as the Jurisdictional Prelate for the Garden State Jurisdiction, Church of God in Christ, and in 1984 was elected and served as Secretary of the National Board of Trustees. During this time, he has championed issues which empower the family, church and community, and is the founder of the Community Development Corporation, known as the New Garden State Caring Families and Neighborhoods, Inc. In 1997, he was recognized as one of the 100 Most Influential Persons in the State of New Jersey and was given the Man of Distinction Award of his Jurisdictional efforts in 1998. Bishop Cahoon has always believed that ``We must minister to the realities of our unique communities through whatever social, economic, political and spiritual means necessary.'' It is this openness to new ideas of ministering to the people of New Jersey that inspired the recent Holy Convocation, the goal of which was to the paradigm shift to ministering in the 21st century. It was an honor to see Bishop Cahoon at work during the recent Holy Convocation and I wish him the best in his mission.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, we will always remember where we were on this day, 1 year ago. As on other moments of tragedy in American history, September 11 will forever be in our hearts and mind. For those who were lost, for those who gave of themselves to save others. On that day, we were all one. We were all Americans. When we reflect upon a tragedy such as this, there are many who come into our minds. We reflect upon the honored dead who we remember today, including the friends and family we lost. We think of our loved ones who are still with us today. We remember all of the firefighters, police and ordinary citizens who risked their lives to save people they often did not even know. We reflect upon the members of our armed forces who diligently work to protect us from any future tragedy. On this solemn occasion, I would like to take a brief moment to recognize the efforts of the members of the AFL-CIO on September 11 and its aftermath. Indeed, there were few others as affected by September 11 than the labor community. The firefighters and police who bravely sacrificed and risked their lives were union members. The laborers, ironworkers, and operating engineers who helped dig for survivors while the fires still burned were union members. The nurses, doctors and EMTs who cared for the injured and dying were union members. Those who manned the ferries and fireboats that transported both the survivors and the bodies of the victims across the harbor were union members. Their efforts greatly affected the lives of many. In the aftermath, unions across America started up blood drives and the AFL-CIO Union Community Fund along with dozens of local and international unions raised relief funds for the families and children who have been left behind. On this day of solemn remembrance, I want to recognize all of the sacrifices of these valiant men and women. Their response to this tragedy was truly heroic.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, a promising young life that began in New Jersey just 14 years ago was tragically cut short these few weeks past in a freak boating accident on my State's otherwise- beautiful northern shore. Alton Hovnanian only 14 was a rising and stellar member of the latest generation of a great and good New Jersey family whose legendary hard work in the real estate industry created an American business enterprise of remarkable size and stature. Now, sadly, in the cruelest alteration of fate, this same good family suffers the greatest loss of all, the death of a child. And I would put before this Chamber today that this is a shared loss felt within these Senate walls not only because this kind of suffering is too great for any family to bear alone, but that the untimely death of this young man represents the loss of the optimistic spirit and positive energy of a young American mind. Not preoccupied with self, often characteristic of this age, Alton Hovnanian had an interest in and concern for others, a deep interest and concern for the workings of the U.S. Government, and perhaps surprisingly, for those of us in this room. As a child of only 14, he was largely unknown to us, but Alton Hovnanian was a bright, good citizen of my State and this country who I am sure many of my colleagues would have been delighted and inspired to know. Alton was certainly interested in us and knew many of our names, our expertise, our committees and concerns. Isn't this an honor for us to now know that a 14-year-old New Jersey boy sat before his family room television set in Monmouth County and chose to turn the channel, not to a game show or sitcom, but to C-Span, the History Channel, and CNN in order to learn yet more about us and the work we do. How many young men and young women, boys and girls are there today, tuning in, attentive, and eager to learn more about this Nation's leadership and work? Unknown to us, Alton Hovnanian was watching and I am honored by his attention. If any of us wonder why it is we get up in the morning, remember this: there are 14-year-olds like Alton watching us, and they care. How powerfully inspiring it is for us to remember the reach of the work afforded by our office. Alton Hovnanian was not a head of state or a captain of industry, though he seemed certainly well on his way, as the achievements in his young life were many. Indeed, Alton set the standard in his age group. With a lifelong love of boating and the water, especially the New Jersey coastline near his home, Alton earned the rights and privileges of a full captain license and the highest scuba diving accreditation. He was the recognized leader in community service outreach efforts at the Rumson Country Day School and was voted the ``Most Likely to Succeed'' by his peers at that excellent institution at its middle school graduation just weeks ago. Having traveled extensively with his family throughout much of the world, Alton was comfortable in many different nations and maintained an active curiosity about other countries, cultures, traditions and cuisine. He brought home, however, an ironclad insistence that things be right here at home, with concern for the comfort and care of our less fortunate citizens, and in the proper order of things within this Nation. Alton Hovnanian represented the best of young America. He wanted the best for this Nation and for those around him. He was a loving son, a good citizen, a student of history and government and a responsible leader among his peers. He has honored all of us with his life. May we always remember him as his father would, ``Good sailor, brave captain, dear friend, let your gentle spirit fill our sails.''

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize Thomas A. Pankok. Mr. Pankok has been a great public servant and an outstanding member of the community over the years. Mr. Pankok currently resides in Pennsville, New Jersey. He married Alma Land in 1958 with whom he has three children, Thomas Pankok Jr., Kathy and Timothy and seven grandchildren. Thomas Pankok is a graduate of Salem High School and a veteran of the United States Navy. He served four years during the Korean conflict. In 1956, after his tour of duty, Thomas Pankok began a lengthy career with Bell Telephone Company, serving 30 years with the company. In 1981, Thomas Pankok was elected to the State Assembly. As a member of the Assembly, Mr. Pankok served two terms and authored many important pieces of legislation. After his first term in the Assembly, he was awarded with the ``Freshman Legislator of the Year'' award, presented by the State Association of Counties. In addition, to his work in the State Assembly, Thomas Pankok also served over 15 years as a Salem County Freeholder. The role of state and local government is vital to our democracy. For our federal system of government to succeed, we must have effective and committed leaders at the state and local level. The United States Congress needs and relies on partners like Thomas Pankok in local government and I salute him and thank him for his efforts. So, I join with Salem County and the entire State of New Jersey in recognizing Thomas A. Pankok, an outstanding public servant, citizen, veteran and father. His efforts upon the behalf of the people of Salem County have been vital to the community and are much appreciated.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize Al Santoro, who has been a great public servant for the people of New Jersey and has served over twenty three years at the Ocean County Board of Elections. Mr. Santoro is retiring after many years of outstanding service from his position as Secretary-Commissioner with the Ocean County Board of Elections at the end of July. Born and raised in Newark, Al Santoro became involved in civic duty at a young age under the wings of his father, Raymond Santoro, who served as a Councilman in Newark. After completing his education, Mr. Santoro served in the United States Army from 1958 to 1960 in Germany. During his tenure at the Ocean County Board of Elections, Al Santoro has been an important part in making our democracy work. His efforts helped ensure that the electoral mechanisms in place succeeded and that our elections are fair and just to all. The lifeblood of our democracy is the assurance that our political process works and that its integrity is not in question. Al Santoro has helped to make that a reality for the citizens of Ocean County. Surely, there can be no higher calling in our Republic. So, I join the people of Ocean County and the entire State of New Jersey in recognizing Al Santoro for his outstanding service to the community.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, for the last 7 months, the Senate Ethics Committee has reviewed documents and statements relating to allegations made against me by a former political contributor and friend. I am now in receipt of the conclusions of the committee. I thank the members of the Ethics Committee for their hours of deliberation. I also apologize to each of them for subjecting them to the painful ordeal of sitting in judgment of a colleague. In closing its preliminary inquiry into this matter, the Ethics Committee has concluded that in several specific instances rules of the Senate were violated. As a consequence, the committee has admonished me. I want my colleagues in the Senate to know that I agree with the committee's conclusions, fully accept their findings, and take full personal responsibility. It has always been my contention that I believed that at no time did I accept any gifts or violate any Senate rules. The committee has concluded otherwise in several circumstances and directed me to make immediate payment in several instances to assure full compliance with the rules of the Senate. I will comply immediately. I apologize to the people of New Jersey for having placed the seat of the Senate that they have allowed me to occupy in this position. The day I was elected to the Senate remains among the most cherished of my life. During recent weeks, I have spent long nights tormented by the question of how I could have allowed such lapses of judgment to compromise all that I have fought to build. It might take a lifetime to answer that question to my own satisfaction. The question I want every person in New Jersey to have answered today is that all during this ordeal I never stopped fighting for the things in which I believe. I never compromised in the struggle to make the lives of the people I love better. I am grateful that this matter has come to a close, regretful as they might be, sorrowful as I remain. I thank my colleagues for their time and their attention. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Under the amendment I am going to offer to this legislation in the coming days, as certainly as pharmaceutical companies will have to disclose any gifts they are giving, any incentives they are giving to doctors to influence their medical judgments, so, too, pharmaceutical manufacturers will have to disclose any rebates given to PBMs so the clients of the PBMs know what they are getting and can demand that those rebates be handed down to senior citizens at a lower price. It is simply transparency. It is what every American is asking of every American corporation. We have a free enterprise system for people to price their products, but we do demand truth and honesty. This is a minimum of transparency that we can bring to the pharmaceutical industry in America. I yield the floor.

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for 1 additional minute to conclude.

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, the Senate is engaged in probably the most important health care debate in a generation. If we succeed in establishing a pharmaceutical benefit for the American people, it will be the greatest contribution to health care since Medicare. We are engaged in this debate in the middle of an economic and corporate crisis. It would not be honest or even productive to pretend that one event is taking place without the backdrop of the other. It is an extraordinary time to be redesigning the delivery system of an industry while corporate America is going through a series of tumultuous events. I have an amendment prepared that I will offer to this legislation that is the nexus between the two problems because the pharmaceutical industry requires a transparency and a proper accounting of itself in the delivery and pricing of its products, just as certainly a variety of other American industries have suffered from their failure to do the same. I address specifically two persistent problems. First, when an American family goes to a pharmacy to buy a prescription product, they operate under the assumption that they are getting sound medical advice, that the prescription that is being offered to them is suited for their problem, their malady, it is priced properly, and a medical judgment is being made on the merits. That is the assumption of every American family. It may not always be sound. Through the years, marketing techniques from sporting events and theater productions to expensive vacations and gifts have become part of the routine of marketing pharmaceutical products. American families and senior citizens are left not knowing whether a product is being prescribed because it is the best for their health or because the doctor is indebted to a marketer or a corporation. The same could be true of a pharmacy. Of all the corporate governance issues in America that deserve transparency, nothing could be more fundamental than the relationship between an individual American family and the delivery of their health care. People want to know, people have a right to know, is a gift an incentive, part of the prescribing of a prescription drug, or is it the quality of the product? Has a doctor been convinced this is the right drug for your child, for your family, for your health, or is this simply part of a relationship with an undisclosed incentive? Under the amendment that I will offer, any corporation providing a gift to a doctor or health care provider as part of marketing a pharmaceutical product will need to disclose it. The incentive can be provided, the gift can be provided, you can offer the vacation, but at least people have a right to know whether the sales of products are related to price, science, the merits, or the financial incentive to consume them. Some will argue that such techniques are common in industry. It may be true, but it is one thing if a retailer is getting an incentive to sell you a shirt or an automobile manufacturer is getting a secret or private incentive to an automobile dealer. That might be business. It may or may not interfere with the right judgment of the proper pricing, but that is marketing. It is something else when it interferes with the judgment of a doctor and the confidence in health care delivery upon which people have come to rely, a judgment that involves not simply price but the intangible of trust in a health care provider. Second, the amendment expands to deal with pharmaceutical benefit managers, otherwise known as PBMs. PBMs are essentially health maintenance organizations designed to deal with the delivery of pharmaceutical products. They are the middlemen who have placed themselves between drug manufacturers, health plans, and pharmacies. If they operate properly, they negotiate better prices, provide service and delivery at a superior cost to a beneficiary. For most of the last 25 years, that is exactly how they have operated. A problem has developed, much like the gift, the vacation offered for selling a pharmaceutical product, except it happens on a much larger scale. Pharmaceutical benefit managers have an obligation to their clients, the people who have contracted with them to buy the best product at the best price. The best product is to be based on a medical judgment. The best price is what can be negotiated. But the law has allowed a practice that is as morally wrong as it is reprehensible. Pharmaceutical benefit managers who allegedly represent their clients go to pharmaceutical companies and ask for rebates. That is a polite word for a kickback. The client, the senior citizen, the working person is left believing they are buying a pharmaceutical product represented to them because it will deal with their illness and has the best science and is at the best price. What they do not know is the pharmaceutical benefit manager may be offering that product because they are getting hundreds of thousands of dollars or millions of dollars in a rebate. Indeed, nothing else would explain what has emerged. Pharmaceutical benefit managers are far less inclined to ever recommend generic drugs. Indeed, at the moment, brand name drugs are offered only 46 percent of the time compared with 54 percent of the time by a local pharmacist. The cost of a brand name drug offered by a pharmaceutical benefit manager can be $47 compared with $37 at a local pharmacy. So people who believe they are in a benefit plan to negotiate a better price are paying more, and they are not only paying more, they may be directed to products that are offered not based on a medical judgment or on a cost basis but because of a secret rebate. The chart on my left illustrates exactly the problem, in what is now a four-tiered system from manufacturer to senior citizen. The manufacturer may offer a rebate with the belief that it could lower price and make their product more available through pharmacies to senior citizens, and many of these rebates may be offered by pharmaceutical manufacturers with the belief that like the rebate from an automobile manufacturer to an auto dealer, it is making the product more available, but here is the problem. The law allows the pharmaceutical benefit manager to keep the money. It does not go to the pharmacy. It never reaches the senior citizen. It stays here. The pharmaceutical benefit managers are in a contractual relationship supposedly representing the senior citizen. They are supposed to be their advocate, getting their price. Instead, they are keeping the money.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the 10th anniversary of the renewed sister city relationship between the Township of Princeton, NJ, and the village of Pettoranello, Italy. Over the past 10 years the township and village have formed a strong bond and benefitted greatly from their relationship. Guiseppe Perna and Achille Carnevale, sons of the village of Pettoranello, came to Princeton in the 1850s. They, along with the many immigrants who followed, built much of the Princeton community and University that still stands today. The people of Pettoranello had a great influence on the Princeton community that continues to be felt. Those first immigrants from Pettoranello brought not only their families, but also their traditions while maintaining strong ties to their village in Italy. In 1994, a group of Princeton citizens led by Mayor Phyllis L. Marchand visited Mayor Antonio Camillo Paolino and the village of Pettoranello, renewing the special sister city relationship between the two municipalities. Over the years, the Township of Princeton continues to recognize the ties that bind the Princeton community and the village of Pettoranello, Italy. The two sister cities have gained a great deal from each other through the exchange of music, athletics, medicine and literature. So, I join with people of the Township of Princeton, NJ, and Pettoranello, Italy, in saluting the 10th anniversary of the renewed sister city relationship between these two municipalities. May their spirit of friendship and continued exchange of ideas and goods be a model for all of us to admire and emulate.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, today, Senator Hatch and I are introducing legislation to modernize and simplify the foreign tax credit. The legislation contains two meritorious provisions that we hope Congress will enact this year, in that they are both long overdue. The first provision addresses the problem of double taxation that results when foreign tax credits expire unused under current law. To enhance the international competitiveness of U.S. companies operating overseas, and to help avoid this unfair double taxation, our legislation simply extends the current 5-year foreign tax credit carryforward period for five additional years to a 10-year carryforward. The second provision reforms current law, which unduly hinders U.S. companies in their efforts to penetrate foreign markets by imposing the so-called 10/50 foreign tax credit rule. Due to legal and political realities, many U.S. companies are forced to operate through corporate joint ventures in partnership with local businesses. The 10/50 rule imposes a foreign tax credit limitation for each of these corporate joint ventures where a U.S. company owns at least 10 percent but not more than a 50 percent interest in a foreign company, and thus increases the cost of doing business for U.S. firms competing abroad. 10/50 reform would restore parity in the tax treatment of joint- venture income to other income earned overseas by U.S. companies by applying ``look-through'' treatment. Without this change, U.S.-based companies engaged in joint ventures overseas will continue to be disadvantaged vis a vis foreign competitors. Congress attempted to rectify this problem in a large tax bill that was ultimately vetoed in 1999. The Clinton Treasury also recommended enactment of this crucial tax change in its FY 2000 budget package and similarly, the Joint Committee on Taxation endorsed this non-controversial provision in its 2001 Simplification Study. As indicated earlier, these two changes are long overdue and we urge their expeditious enactment.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, today, Senator Hatch and I are introducing legislation to modernize and simplify the foreign tax credit. The legislation contains two meritorious provisions that we hope Congress will enact this year, in that they are both long overdue. The first provision addresses the problem of double taxation that results when foreign tax credits expire unused under current law. To enhance the international competitiveness of U.S. companies operating overseas, and to help avoid this unfair double taxation, our legislation simply extends the current 5-year foreign tax credit carryforward period for five additional years to a 10-year carryforward. The second provision reforms current law, which unduly hinders U.S. companies in their efforts to penetrate foreign markets by imposing the so-called 10/50 foreign tax credit rule. Due to legal and political realities, many U.S. companies are forced to operate through corporate joint ventures in partnership with local businesses. The 10/50 rule imposes a foreign tax credit limitation for each of these corporate joint ventures where a U.S. company owns at least 10 percent but not more than a 50 percent interest in a foreign company, and thus increases the cost of doing business for U.S. firms competing abroad. 10/50 reform would restore parity in the tax treatment of joint- venture income to other income earned overseas by U.S. companies by applying ``look-through'' treatment. Without this change, U.S.-based companies engaged in joint ventures overseas will continue to be disadvantaged vis a vis foreign competitors. Congress attempted to rectify this problem in a large tax bill that was ultimately vetoed in 1999. The Clinton Treasury also recommended enactment of this crucial tax change in its FY 2000 budget package and similarly, the Joint Committee on Taxation endorsed this non-controversial provision in its 2001 Simplification Study. As indicated earlier, these two changes are long overdue and we urge their expeditious enactment.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, our oceans are one of America's most precious and valuable resources. For hundreds of millions of people, our coastal waters are a place of relaxation, recreation, and rejuvenation. The oceans are also a tremendous supply of fish and other seafood, many caught by commercial fishers and others by recreational sportsmen and hobbyists. There is a growing concern, however, about protecting ocean habitat from the damaging effects of some types of commercial fishing gear. The manner in which these concerns are presently being handled by the National Marine Fishery Service has led to a great deal of confusion and litigation. Therefore, in an effort to protect important ocean substrates that are recognized as critical areas of marine habitat, I, with my colleague, Senator Max Cleland of Georgia, am introducing a bill today that takes a much more direct approach. I have received many letters from constituents in my home State of New Jersey who are concerned about the use of ``rock hopper'' nets in the New York Bight area and elsewhere. They have chronicled the negative effects of this gear and the damage they see occurring as a result of its use. In response to their concerns I feel compelled to introduce in the Senate companion legislation to Congressman Joel Hefley's Sea Bed Protection Act of 2002, which he introduced recently in the House. This bill will amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation Act by reining in the use of this damaging fishing gear. Rock hopper nets are used in hard-bottom areas where naturally occurring vertical structures prevents the use of more conventional trawl gear. The rock hopper incorporates a series of rollers that act like the drum on the front of a steamroller. While operating, the rollers prevent the net from becoming entangled by guiding it up and over obstructions. While it is effective at catching fish, it is equally effective at damaging the sea floor where it is used. It has been clearly documented that rock hopper nets kill clinging organisms and living corals, the very things that attracted the fish they were designed to catch in the first place. The heavy rollers and sweeps that guide the nets crush marine life and can even flatten bottom topography. When a specific piece of equipment is demonstrated to be harmful to marine life or the marine environment, it is common sense to stop using it and find a more ecosystem-friendly method of harvesting fish for the market. It is folly to allow the continued use of fishing gear that has an uncontrollable level of bycatch of that is damaging to the very habitat necessary for the fish it catches to grow and reproduce. Rock hopper nets are clearly a threat to fragile habitats that are particularly important to a healthy marine ecosystem. The Sea Bed Protection Act will limit their use and protect critical habitat, while highlighting our concern for the broader issues of sustainable fisheries and habitat protection.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. I thank the Senator from North Dakota for his clarification of this issue and his leadership on this vital homeland security supplemental appropriations bill.

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise to enter into a brief colloquy with the distinguished chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Treasury and General Government, Senator Dorgan, and my colleague from New Jersey, Senator Corzine, regarding reimbursement by the Postal Service of anthrax-related costs incurred by health care providers in New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, as your know, last fall our Nation experienced the worst biological warfare attack in American history when terrorists used the mail system to send deadly anthrax spores to various political and media targets. New Jersey--where all of the tainted letters were mailed--was literally at the frontlines of the anthrax crisis, and New Jersey health care providers bore the brunt of responding to the crisis. Indeed, the Postal Service urged its employees to seek testing and antibiotic therapy at New Jersey hospitals, and these hospitals responded promptly and effectively, providing invaluable health care services to affected employees and customers. Unfortunately, despite assurances from the Administration that the Postal Service would reimburse these costs, the Postal Service has not reimbursed any of the costs. Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding that the committee is aware of the costs incurred by New Jersey health care providers and encourages the Postal Service to meet the need to reimburse the costs incurred by them in responding to last fall's anthrax crisis.

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, my own State of New Jersey was severely impacted by the disruption to major transportation systems caused by the terrorist attacks. Before September 11, 66,000 New Jersey residents had commuted daily to Lower Manhattan through the World Trade Center PATH Station. The loss of this station has severely strained many of New Jersey's rail, bus, and ferry systems, which will continue to operate above capacity for the foreseeable future.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, our oceans are one of America's most precious and valuable resources. For hundreds of millions of people, our coastal waters are a place of relaxation, recreation, and rejuvenation. The oceans are also a tremendous supply of fish and other seafood, many caught by commercial fishers and others by recreational sportsmen and hobbyists. There is a growing concern, however, about protecting ocean habitat from the damaging effects of some types of commercial fishing gear. The manner in which these concerns are presently being handled by the National Marine Fishery Service has led to a great deal of confusion and litigation. Therefore, in an effort to protect important ocean substrates that are recognized as critical areas of marine habitat, I, with my colleague, Senator Max Cleland of Georgia, am introducing a bill today that takes a much more direct approach. I have received many letters from constituents in my home State of New Jersey who are concerned about the use of ``rock hopper'' nets in the New York Bight area and elsewhere. They have chronicled the negative effects of this gear and the damage they see occurring as a result of its use. In response to their concerns I feel compelled to introduce in the Senate companion legislation to Congressman Joel Hefley's Sea Bed Protection Act of 2002, which he introduced recently in the House. This bill will amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation Act by reining in the use of this damaging fishing gear. Rock hopper nets are used in hard-bottom areas where naturally occurring vertical structures prevents the use of more conventional trawl gear. The rock hopper incorporates a series of rollers that act like the drum on the front of a steamroller. While operating, the rollers prevent the net from becoming entangled by guiding it up and over obstructions. While it is effective at catching fish, it is equally effective at damaging the sea floor where it is used. It has been clearly documented that rock hopper nets kill clinging organisms and living corals, the very things that attracted the fish they were designed to catch in the first place. The heavy rollers and sweeps that guide the nets crush marine life and can even flatten bottom topography. When a specific piece of equipment is demonstrated to be harmful to marine life or the marine environment, it is common sense to stop using it and find a more ecosystem-friendly method of harvesting fish for the market. It is folly to allow the continued use of fishing gear that has an uncontrollable level of bycatch of that is damaging to the very habitat necessary for the fish it catches to grow and reproduce. Rock hopper nets are clearly a threat to fragile habitats that are particularly important to a healthy marine ecosystem. The Sea Bed Protection Act will limit their use and protect critical habitat, while highlighting our concern for the broader issues of sustainable fisheries and habitat protection.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, today I recognize Dr. Norman Samuels, who has served as the Provost of the Newark Campus of Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey for the past 20 years. Dr. Samuels is retiring from his position as Provost after 20 years of outstanding service. Dr. Samuels has been a member of the Rutgers-Newark family since 1967, when he first joined the university as an assistant professor of Political Science. He then proceeded to serve as Associate Dean for Academic Affairs at the Rutgers Newark College of Arts and Sciences, NCAS, from 1971-76; as Dean of NCAS from 1976-82; and as Provost since 1982. During his tenure as Provost, Dr. Samuels has directed the development of the Newark campus into a major national research university center with extensive undergraduate, graduate, professional and outreach programs. It has been Dr. Samuels' vision and dedication to create an inspiring new atmosphere in Newark, along with his commitment to establish an imaginative urban educational enterprise that has led to Rutgers-Newark becoming what it is today. As a result of his many fine efforts, Rutgers-Newark is ranked first among national universities in diversity by U.S. News and World Report and has held that title ever since the magazine created that category. Dr. Samuels, a native of Montreal, Quebec, received his B.A. from McGill University, and his M.A. and Ph.D. from Duke University. He currently resides in West Orange with his wife Sandra, a physician in the Rutgers-Newark's student health center. In his post-retirement life, Dr. Samuels plans a return to teaching as a political science professor at Rutgers-Newark. So I join with Newark Campus of Rutgers University in recognizing Dr. Norman Samuels, a visionary who helped steer the University from its difficult days of civil unrest to its current burgeoning resurgence. On the campus of Rutgers-Newark, no one person has had a greater hand in Rutgers' commitment to its students and the City than Dr. Samuels. He is to be saluted.

Mr. TORRICELLI

Mr. TORRICELLI. I appreciate my colleagues raising this national security issue today. The unintended consequences of biasing our tuna tariffs against the Philippines were brought to my attention by both the Philippine Ambassador, as well as through the work of my distinguished colleagues. I am deeply concerned about how this bill will undermine America's counter-terrorism work in Mindanao and fully support the view that this issue must be resolved before the conference report is presented to the Senate. Enough has already been said about how undermining Mindanao's largest employer will spread instability, harm America's image, and waste past taxpayer investment in a critically important region. I do not need to elaborate further on those points. I would like to take just a moment, however, to highlight for my colleagues how this ill-advised provision came to be. The House Ways and Means Committee initially added it to their Andean trade bill. It was not part of the administration's request for Andean counter-narcotics legislation. It was added without a hearing and without examination of the national security implications of making this change in trade law. When the bill came before the Senate Finance Committee, the committee voted to limit the extent of the preference granted to the Andean countries. I supported that change as an improvement in the bill, but it did not go far enough to resolve the matter. I was hopeful that suggestions made by Senators Inouye and Stevens might be included into this bill to actually solve the problem created by this tuna provision. Fixing this provision on the floor, however, will not now be possible. Therefore, I join my colleagues in urging that parity be maintained for all America's friends seeking to participate in our tuna market. Tipping the balance of this market toward one group and away from another is unfair, wasteful, shortsighted, and counter to America's broader international interests.