John Warner

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, if the Senator would enable me to bring to the attention of the Senate a communication at this point in time from the Department of State, it might be helpful. As I read the amendment, it is clear to me that Bremer would now report to the Secretary of State.

Mr. WARNER. There is enormous momentum.

Mr. WARNER. Would the Senator be more explicit?

Mr. WARNER. There is no provision that he continues a direct chain to the Secretary of Defense. That structure, from Bremer right on down through his organization, would now be reporting to the Secretary of State. Am I correct in that?

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, in response to my colleague, the Marshall plan is, in clear terms, a precedent for what the policy decisions of our country are, as embraced in the request for this $21 billion and in the future. But there is a clear distinction. The Marshall plan came in years after the fighting had stopped. As you and I are now in this colloquy on the floor of the Senate, that fighting is going on right now--hundreds of thousands of coalition forces--over a hundred thousand--and many civilians are subjected to the constant threat by this polyglot of former Baathists, former associates of Saddam Hussein, terrorists are moving in. This is a tough situation and there is daily communication between Ambassador Bremer and the military. They have worked side by side. In fact, you visited there, as I have. Their offices are just across the hall from one another. (Mr. CORNYN assumed the Chair.)

Mr. WARNER. The Senator has made that eminently clear. I think right now we are looking at the coalition operation under Bremer now being transferred in its entirety and reporting to the Secretary of State. That organization, under Bremer at the present time, composes, indeed, contributions of a number of personnel from the Departments of State and Defense. It is sort of a coalition within itself of our Federal departments and agencies. Our coalition partners, primarily Great Britain, are integral participants. How would they feel if suddenly they awakened and determined that no longer does their deputy to Bremer from Great Britain report to the Secretary of State? This is a very significant and major change that our distinguished colleague is proposing. In response, the Department of State, through its Assistant Secretary of Legislative Affairs, addressed our colleagues in the Senate by saying the following: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Senator Leahy's proposed amendment to the FY 2004 Supplemental that would transfer control of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) from the Department of Defense to the Department of State. While we appreciate Senator Leahy's confidence in the State Department, we are opposed to the amendment. That is very clear and unequivocal. The decision to establish control of Iraq's reconstruction through the Department of Defense was made because military operations were and are ongoing in Iraq. The immediate objective was to establish a secure and safe environment in Iraq. Restoring basic services and creating conditions for economic growth could not take place until this environment was established. For unity of effort and command, it was judged--and this judgment was from the President on down-- the Department of Defense would be the most appropriate department in which to place CPA. The State Department fully expects to resume control of traditional development efforts in Iraq once the security situation is fully stabilized and an elected government is in place. Thank you again for the opportunity to comment on Senator Leahy's amendment. We will be pleased to provide any additional information you might require. I ask unanimous consent that this letter be printed in the Record.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, if I might address the comment about letting the State Department do its traditional responsibilities, I am referring to testimony before the House of Representatives on September 30, when the Deputy Secretary of State, Secretary Armitage, appeared. He made the following observations. He said that Ambassador Bremer and Secretary Powell speak to each other on the phone occasionally but they e-mail each other if not every day, pretty close to that. He was asked what the role is in postwar Iraq. He said: We have 42 officers there now--42 State Department officers. I don't want to make light of it. Both Ambassador Bremer and his second, Clay McManaway, are both State officers. The guy who is running the show with the railroad is Pat Kennedy, one of the administration officers. So the State Department is heavily involved at the current time. The other officers from the Department of State are spread out not only in I&L but we have Mike Felia down in the southeastern region working with the Shia. We have others with the Kurds. Ambassador Bremer has asked us to come forward with another approximately 60 officers and that we will be able to fill many more of these provinces with State Department officers, the high majority of which will be there with three or four language-speaking capabilities. I say to my colleague, there is the closest of relationships with the Secretaries of State and Defense and directly between the Secretary of State and Ambassador Bremer. As he points out very clearly here, Deputy Secretary of State Armitage and the principal deputy to Ambassador Bremer are now officers on loan from the Secretary of State to the CPA. I urge my colleagues who are following this debate to think for themselves about the consequences of the loss of reconstruction that this would entail. You cannot make the shift in that point of time, and, to me, it would bring a greater threat personally and endangerment to the life and limb of not only the coalition forces in uniform but thousands of civilians who are working in various capacities to bring about the goals of peace and turning over this nation to the Iraqi people.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, if I might again bring to my colleague's attention the momentum that is presently in the CPA and its achievements. CPA is providing funds through military commanders--I want to point that out--military commanders in the field, coalition military commanders to fund projects at the village and municipal level. Approximately $24 million has been spent on over 6,200 projects to date. Health projects: Saddam Hussein budgeted $13 million for health care in 2002, approximately 50 cents per person. For the second half of 2003, CPA allocated $211 million--I repeat, $211 million--a 3,200 percent increase in health care. On April 9, only 30 percent of Iraqi hospitals were functioning. CPA is bringing the health care system back to life. Now all 240 hospitals in Iraq are up and running. The CPA has wiped away the old corrupt system for distributing medical supplies and pharmaceuticals. In the past 90 days, 9,000 tons of medical supplies have been delivered, an increase of 700 percent. Because of the CPA, Iraqi children have received 22 million doses of vaccine to cover over 4 million children and nearly a million pregnant women. Education: Saddam starved the country's schools of cash for more than 20 years. Children were taught pro-regime slogans in classrooms little better than livestock sheds. Enrollment in some areas had dropped to 50 percent of eligible children. CPA is refurbishing more than 1,000 schools. The schools will have new plumbing instead of raw sewage in the playgrounds, fresh paint, blackboards, pencils, and teaching equipment. Justice system: Nationwide, 90 percent of the courts are up and running. Criminal courts in Baghdad reopened in May. A central criminal court made up of specially vetted judges and prosecutors has been established to try cases in public. The first trial was held August 25. I could go on and on. I ask unanimous consent to print these success stories in the Record.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, for the Committee on Armed Services I report favorably the following nomination lists which were printed in the Records on the dates indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the limited private school choice provisions in the District of Columbia Appropriations bill. As you know, private school choice, also commonly known as a voucher, refers to the use of public money to allow a limited number of students to attend a K-12 private school. As a strong supporter of our Nation's public schools, I certainly appreciate the views of those who believe that public money should be used to improve only public schools. However, as a member of the Senate's Education Committee, I also strongly believe that if our educational system is to improve, as needed, we cannot remain stuck in the status-quo. We must look for innovative ways to improve our schools. While providing additional money into an educational system can help--money alone is never enough. I commend the Mayor of Washington, DC--Mayor Anthony Williams--who along with others have all come together in support of an innovative idea to improve the educational system in the District of Columbia: an infusion of money into the public school system along with a limited private school choice option for the District of Columbia. How fortunate we are to have the leadership of Mayor Williams in the District of Columbia. The legislation before us does just what Mayor Williams has requested. It adds an additional $40 million in education spending in the District. $27 million of that $40 million will go to the District's public schools and charter schools. The remaining $13 million will be used for the limited private school choice option provided in this bill. And while some may be critical of spending $13 million on private school choice, I believe it is important to view this money in the context of other education spending. In comparison to the $13 million we will spend in this bill on private school choice, the Federal Government currently spends about $12.5 billion on the Pell Grant program. And as we all know, the Pell Grant Program provides grants to students to help them afford the cost of tuition at an institution of higher learning, regardless of whether the institution is a public or private one. Similarly, the proposal before us today will allow certain low-income students in the District to attend private K-12 school. More specifically, the school choice provisions in this legislation will provide scholarships of up to $7,500 to allow 2,000 low-income students the opportunity to attend private school. These scholarships will be sufficient in dollar amount to cover the cost of tuition at approximately two-thirds of the private schools in the District. It is my hope that the remaining one-third of private schools in the District, whose tuition is more expensive than $7,500 a year, will consider making special exceptions to also open their doors to the low-income students in the District who are scholarship recipients. In my view, the proposal supported by Mayor Williams and put forth in this legislation is a win-win situation. The school system gets more money and low-income students are given a unique educational opportunity. Over 50 years ago, I was given a similarly unique opportunity to obtain a quality education as I was a recipient of the GI bill. The education that I was fortunate enough to receive as a result of the GI bill has allowed me to achieve most of the dreams to which I have aspired. Without the GI bill, I certainly would not be standing here today. Similarly, the private school choice proposal before the Senate today will provide certain students in the District with an opportunity to receive a strong education. And, along with that education, these scholarships will provide these students the same opportunity I had to achieve my goals in life. I commend the work and leadership of the chairman, Senator DeWine, my colleague in the Virginia congressional delegation, Tom Davis, Mayor Anthony Williams, the local media, and other philanthropists and community leaders who have worked closely together in support of this private school choice initiative. It is my intention to support this limited private school choice initiative, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, first, I compliment my distinguished colleague from Utah. The Bennett family has given two generations of service to the Senate, and the Senator can speak with a background and understanding of this institution and a conscience for this institution to follow. I commend my distinguished colleague. I join this morning in speaking out about this situation, and indeed, if I may say, the responsibility of this Chamber, each individually and collectively, as we deal with these issues. I have been privileged to be a member of this Chamber for a quarter of a century. I, too, was gravely concerned to hear remarks from several of our colleagues regarding criticism of this operation in Iraq. Criticism is welcome. Our President welcomes it. It is freedom of speech. But there seems to be a responsibility, if you criticize, answer the question, Are we as a nation--is the world better off today, having deposed Saddam Hussein and his regime of terrorism, or should we have left it as it was? That question has to be answered by those who wish to employ this strident rhetoric, but they fail to do so. Throughout the military history of this country, from World War I, World War II, Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, our military planners have done their best--a clear victory in World War I, a clear victory in World War II, an indecisive conclusion in Korea--still there is no armistice as such--and an indecisive and somewhat tragic conclusion in Vietnam. So as we look at the records in Afghanistan, militarily, it clearly was a success. Could the planning have been more comprehensive? Possibly so. And there will come a time--and I wish to stress that-- there will come a time when this Chamber and the House of Representatives and the Congress as a whole can determine the accountability for these operations. At this time, our focus should be behind the Commander in Chief, our President, who at this very moment is addressing the United Nations on the policies and the goals of our Nation working with a coalition of forces in Iraq.

Mr. WARNER. I yield.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I think that carefully paraphrases what that brilliant strategist and President said. There is no doubt about it. And there will be a time to determine what went right, what did not go according to plan, and such deficiencies, and the accountability. But right now our obligation is owing to the men and the women who are fighting there and their families at home. Stop to think of the reaction of a young wife, surrounded by small children, not knowing from day to day whether her husband will survive another day's engagement in Afghanistan or Iraq, and they hear this whole thing has been a fraud perpetrated upon this family and was made up in Texas. I find that very painful. I have had the privilege of almost a lifetime of association with the men and women of the Armed Forces of the United States--over half a century. Modest was my contribution on active duty, but through this half century I have learned much from these men and women with whom I have been privileged to work and support now as a Member of the Senate. We always have to focus on that family and their reaction to every word we say on this floor, every word that is said in the Congress. How does it affect that young wife or spouse of a female serving in uniform, as many are in these troubled areas of the world? How is that family affected, and not only the children but the parents? By and large, people who go into uniform do so solely for patriotism. It is an all-volunteer force. There is no draft. No one is compelled to do this. They volunteer. They volunteer as a consequence of the inspiration of their older brothers and sisters, their fathers, their uncles, their grandfathers who have served in previous military conflicts. They look upon the Congress as that bastion that safeguards-- safeguards--those who are put in harm's way. I ask, do these comments constitute embracing, as we should, those families, those children? Is that safeguarding those put in harm's way? I say no. I simply say the goal of this operation in Iraq and the goal of the operation in Afghanistan is to bring to those troubled regions of the world, at long last, a measure of freedom for the peoples of those nations, a measure of their ability to govern themselves. I am proud the United States, behind our President, has taken that leadership to bring about that measure of freedom and democracy in those foreign lands. Yes, each of us is paying by the loss of life, the loss of limb, but history will record, in this hour of world history, America stands strong. It is committed to its goals. I am confident this body will support our President on measures that he needs to fulfill these objectives. The decision to confront Saddam Hussein was not without careful deliberation, extensive diplomacy, and substantial effort to find a peaceful solution. It had been the conclusion of three consecutive American administrations, countless other nations, and the United Nations that Saddam Hussein's Iraqi regime had weapons of mass destruction, had used them on his own people and neighboring countries, and was a clear and present danger to regional and world peace. It had been the conclusion of the Clinton administration that Saddam Hussein had stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, was actively seeking more, and would ultimately use them again. The United Nations Security Council had passed 17 resolutions, stretching back to 1991--12 years-- requiring full cooperation in disarming itself of weapons of mass destruction. Saddam Hussein's response was defiance and deception. In October 2002, after an unprecedented amount of debate, the Senate voted 77-23 to authorize the President to use force in Iraq. The House of Representatives also voted overwhelmingly in favor of authorizing the use of force. By that act, it became our war and the American people's war, not the President's war. At this critical juncture, it is our responsibility to provide the resources necessary to finish the job. American armed forces, joined by a robust coalition, achieved extraordinary, rapid military success in Iraq, with minimum casualties and damage. This is a clear tribute to the professionalism and dedication of our young men and women in uniform and those who support them. We have succeeded in ridding the world of a brutal tyrant and have revealed the extent of his barbarism. We should be congratulating our President and our armed forces on a job well done, not criticizing and undermining their heroic efforts. Extensive planning was done for combat operations, as well as post conflict stability operations. We all know that no plan survives its initial confrontation with reality on the battlefield. Plans must be flexible and adapt to conditions as they are encountered. No one could have anticipated the complete disintegration of Iraqi security and governance institutions. No one knew how badly the Iraqi infrastructure had deteriorated under Saddam Hussein's 30-plus years of mismanagement. American forces and coalition partners have done a remarkable job of restoring basic services, rebuilding schools and hospitals, preventing ethnic violence and creating an environment where reconstruction can succeed. This is being done in a difficult environment of harsh conditions and significant risk, as those who have been removed from power seek to delay inevitable defeat and as terrorists lash out at the loss of another haven. What is the best way to reduce U.S. casualties and create the conditions for withdrawing U.S. troops? The key is to improve the security situation by restoring essential services, recruiting and training dependable, indigenous Iraqi security forces, and repairing the infrastructure so that real economic growth and opportunity can flourish. The emergency supplemental request of $87 billion submitted by President Bush specifically addresses this need. It is imperative that we give our President and our troops the resources they need to complete their missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. The faster the money gets to these countries, the faster conditions will improve, and the faster our troops will come home. We must, and we will, stay the course and achieve our goals. This is also a clear message of support and resolve to our troops, their families, and the neighborhoods and communities that support them. Lasting peace and security in Iraq will be achieved when we establish the environment for a democratic, economically viable Iraq. The supplemental request now before the Congress will ensure such an environment and is the best path to the earliest possible return of our troops. Half a century ago, the Marshall plan brought peace and prosperity to a war-ravaged continent. That modest investment has been repaid a hundredfold or more. The funding we are being asked to provide for this important region is an equally important investment that will, likewise, be repaid many times over in the decades to come. I urge my colleagues to support and rapidly approve the President's request and send a message of overwhelming bipartisan support to our troops, and to all American citizens, of the need to stay the course and secure this important victory in the war on terrorism. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Yes.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I have no objection, but I will indicate that I desire to follow the distinguished Senator from Utah. I will seek recognition at that time for another 4 to 6 minutes.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the nomination of Glen Conrad, who has been nominated to serve as a judge on the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia. I had the pleasure of introducing him before the Senate Judiciary Committee this past July. Judge Conrad has been nominated to fill the vacancy of Judge James Turk who began his service on this court in 1972 and recently took senior status. After Judge Turk informed Senator Allen and me about his intent to take senior status, Senator Allen and I began our search to find the most qualified and well-respected individual to fill Judge Turk's seat on the bench. During that process one name repeatedly was brought up--that name was Glen Conrad. After interviewing Judge Conrad personally, Senator Allen and I were pleased to send this fine nominee's name to President Bush for consideration. President Bush promptly thereafter nominated Judge Conrad on April 28, 2003. Judge Conrad's background makes him highly qualified for this position, and I strongly support his nomination. His experience with the law is extensive. After graduating from the Marshall Wythe School of Law at the College of William and Mary, Mr. Conrad served as a probation officer in the Western District of Virginia. A little more than a year later, Mr. Conrad was selected to serve as a United States magistrate judge in the Western District. And, for the last 27 years, Judge Conrad has served as a magistrate judge in the Western District. During his over a quarter of a century as a magistrate judge in the Western District of Virginia, Judge Conrad has earned a stellar reputation. From the many letters that I have received in support of his nomination, there is unanimity in describing Judge Conrad as intelligent, courteous, hard working and having an excellent judicial temperament. I am confident that Judge Conrad will continue his service on the Western District of Virginia bench consistent with this reputation. I urge my colleagues to support Judge Conrad's nomination.

Mr. WARNER

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

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, there are moments in our lives in the Senate that we shall never forget. This morning is one I am privileged to share with my beloved colleagues in this Chamber on both sides of the aisle a few moments to draw from our hearts and from our memory and reflect upon September 11, 2 years ago. We were here that day, prepared to go into our regular routine, when we were told to evacuate. We did that in an orderly and calm way. Wherever we could gather, we tried to follow the situation as best we could. Several hours later, after the plane had crashed into the Department of Defense, I called the Secretary of Defense. I spent over 5 years of my life in that building. I wanted to come over and join him and the men and women in uniform of our country to do what little I might be able to do to bring about a reassurance not only to those on site at the Pentagon but around the world. I did that, joining the Secretary and then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Shelton, in the command and control center deep into the basement of the Pentagon. We talked to the President on two occasions. I remember so well he had a firm hand on the situation, as did those in the Department of Defense. We observed firemen, policemen, Red Cross workers and all doing the best they could to remove the bodies and care for the wounded. Military and civilian alike in that building showed extraordinary heroism that day. I was deeply humbled to stand there and observe that. Later, the Secretary and the Chairman of the JCS went in to address a very large gathering of press. As they concluded their remarks, they invited me to say a word. I had nothing prepared but simply spoke from the heart. As I go back over the written text of what I said, I am reminded of how this has come true. I said: This is indeed the most tragic hour in American history, and yet I think it can be its finest hour, as our President and those with him, most notably our Secretary of Defense, our Chairman, and the men and women of the Armed Forces all over the world stand ready not only to defend this Nation and our allies against further attack but to take such actions as directed in the future in retaliation for this terrorist act--a series of terrorist acts, unprecedented in world history. We call upon the entire world to step up and help, because terrorism is a common enemy to all, and we're in it all together. The United States has borne the brunt, but who can be next? Step forward and let us hold accountable and punish those who have perpetrated this attack. I believe those words have proven to be true. Certainly great leadership from our President and the men and women of the Armed Forces, indeed, the world, has gathered to join us on the battlefields of Afghanistan, where I and many Members have visited, as well as the battlefields of Iraq where just weeks ago I accompanied Members of this Chamber to be with our men and women of the Armed Forces. Our Nation stands tall. It has been and will continue to be our finest hour. Now, Mr. President, we observe a moment of silence in reverence for those men and women, civilian and military, who lost their lives at the Department of Defense in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished colleague. How privileged, how humble we are to stand here in these 200-plus years of this Senate, and to be here on behalf of the people of the Commonwealth of Virginia. It is a great privilege. I thank my colleague and I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, may I at this time yield the floor to my distinguished colleague, Senator Allen.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, in our efforts to ensure that the United States remains an economic and military superpower in the 21st century, we must strive to improve the quality of math and science education in this country. The No Child Left Behind Act took some major steps in the right direction towards improving math and science education at the K-12 level. However, our work is not done. The Federal Government is not doing enough at the higher education level to ensure that our Nation's colleges and universities are producing graduates to meet our country's national security needs. This is evidenced by the fact that legislation was signed into law by President Clinton in 2000 to allow America's employers to bring into this country almost 200,000 highly skilled foreign workers a year through the H-1B visa program. America's employers needed these highly skilled workers to fill job vacancies in high tech, engineering, science and other highly skilled positions. Why couldn't we fill these almost 200,000 job vacancies a year with American workers? Because this country's educational system was not producing enough graduates with degrees in these highly skilled fields to meet the demand. Admittedly, not long after this legislation was signed into law, America's economy was hit by a decline, and this decline was greatly exacerbated with the events of September 11. But our economy is bouncing back. Regardless, we must not forget the lessons learned on September 11. One of the clearest messages was that we live in a dangerous and ever- changing world. Our world is much more dangerous today in many aspects than it was when I served this country with brief tours of duty in World War II and the Korean War. While citizens of this country sleep each night, the other half of the world is thinking and contriving of every possible way to take the business and the economy from the United States of America. In addition, while we are sleeping, people all over the world are trying to figure out how to come and take our security and our freedom away from us. Once there was a great ocean that protected this nation. Now, with cyberspace, and all the other modern technologies it is simply one world in economy, one world in national security. Our country must continually be prepared to meet these threats. One way we can ensure that we are prepared to meet these ever- changing 21st century threats is to ensure that America's young minds gain the technical expertise necessary to understand and defend against these threats. Now, I love Shakespeare. I love theater. I love music, and I love political science, sociology and a lot of the liberal arts disciplines. Majors in these disciplines are important to a well-rounded and enlightened citizenry. However, I also love this country, and I love freedom. Unfortunately, today, our institutions of higher learning are not producing enough graduates with degrees in the requisite scientific programs to meet our country's future national security needs. If this continues, how will we defend our Nation and defend freedom? Will we rely more heavily on importing highly skilled workers than we have in the past? To ensure our country's role in the future, we must look within our borders to meet these needs. Unfortunately, today, a look inside our borders shows that this country is facing a dire shortage of math, science, and engineering students. According to the National Science Foundation (NSF), the engineering, mathematics, and science fields show declining numbers of degrees. Over the last 20 years, there has been a 20 percent decrease in the number of people receiving bachelors' degrees in engineering . Moreover, during roughly the same time, the number of students graduating with bachelors in physics has dropped by nearly 20 percent, and the number graduating with a bachelors in mathematics has decreased more than 25 percent. While the U.S. produces fewer and fewer mathematicians, scientists, and engineers, the rest of the world is making up the difference. And, America is importing them. We are grateful for their willingness to come to our shores and share their exceptional talents. America, however, must now take steps to encourage, at all levels of our educational process, young people to undertake the training necessary to meet our Nation's demands. There is no doubt the course work is rigorous, particularly the long hours in the laboratory. I learned firsthand the rigors involved in earning an engineering degree because as a consequence of my military service, I was privileged to receive from my great Nation GI bill education benefits. Without these benefits, I would not have earned my engineering degree and would not have achieved my career goals. However, given the rigors, and given the great need for graduates with backgrounds in scientific courses of study, it is an absolute necessity for the Congress to help in every way to inspire and reward America's youth to pursue scientific courses of study. Accordingly, I have submitted an amendment to this bill to encourage individuals to pursue programs of study in math, science, and engineering. The amendment is simple. It simply provides that the maximum Pell Grant award an individual can receive will be increased by 50 percent if he or she pursues a program of study in math, science, or engineering. As you know, the Pell Grant program, which is funded at about $12 billion a year, is one of the most successful and respected educational initiatives taken by the Congress. The concept behind the Pell Grant properly recognizes the needs of young people coming from economic backgrounds which make it difficult for them to acquire higher education. Nevertheless, we in the Congress have an obligation when expending taxpayer money, to do so in a manner that meets our Nation's needs. Our Nation desperately needs more trained students in math, science, and engineering. That is an indisputable objective. The Pell Grant program, in my judgment, offers Congress the opportunity to provide incentives for student recipients to pursue curricula in math, science, and engineering. My Pell Grant amendment is one idea, but I am certain it is not the only idea. As a member of the Senate's Education Committee, I hope that my chairman, Senator Gregg, will schedule hearings as part of the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act to look into our system of higher education and whether this country is on track to produce graduates who meet the current and projected needs of this country. At this time, I will not offer my amendment in order to give the Education Committee a sufficient opportunity to address this issue. At some time in this Congress, though, I fully intend to reintroduce an amendment along these lines after the committee has reviewed the issues, after I get the views of the administration, and after the wide range of people who on a daily basis review the Pell Grant program have an opportunity to share their views as well.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 178, S. 888.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate immediately proceed to executive session to consider en bloc the following nominations on today's Executive Calendar: Calendar Nos. 344, 345, 346, 353, and 355. Further, I ask unanimous consent that the Foreign Relations Committee and the Finance Committee be discharged from further consideration of the following nominations from their respective committees: from the Foreign Relations Committee, PN764, Jeffrey Marcus; from the Finance Committee, PN477, Teresa Ressel. I further ask unanimous consent that the nominations be considered and confirmed, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then return to legislative session.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I understand that the following appropriations bills are at the desk: H.R. 2799 and H.R. 2861. I ask for their first reading en bloc.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I now ask for their second reading and object to further proceedings on these matters.