John Warner

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. I thank my colleague. I move to withdraw the amendment.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask to have the amendment set aside.

Mr. WARNER. My request is on behalf of Senator Collins, Senator Craig, Senator Allen, and Senator Murkowski. I do so because we have made a conscientious effort, together with the cooperation of the managers of this bill, to find the offset and we simply could not find the offset. The thrust of our amendment is for the teachers in America. The amendment is very simple. It compensates them through a tax deduction for each time they reach into their own pocketbooks or pockets to buy school supplies for their students. We need to increase that amount from $250 which is current law. We need to broaden it so they can use some of the deduction for purposes of continuing education. This is an amendment not for the rich; it is simply for those who serve America and ask very little by way of salary. We cannot move it at this time, but the managers very generously have acceded to this colloquy. The managers have agreed to look at this in future tax legislation and for the time being will agree to extend it so this current law of the $250 deduction will not expire at the end of this calendar year. I ask the question of my colleague.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, the amendment is in compliance with the President's program. It is the desire of this National Education Association just to take existing law, make it permanent, and to increase it to $400, given the calculations of the amounts that are expended each year by teachers all across America, which is larger than existing law, $250. I appreciate the indulgence of my colleagues. I hope this amendment will receive the support of the Senate tomorrow as we proceed to vote. I thank my colleague from Ohio and yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I thank the distinguished Presiding Officer. I thank the managers of this bill and my colleague from Ohio. I will proceed for a few minutes with regard to amendment No. 550, in which I am privileged to be joined by Senators Collins, Allen, Craig, and Murkowski, the Presiding Officer. It relates to the teachers of America. I learned, as other colleagues have learned on their trips to schools, to my utter astonishment that so many teachers reach into their own pockets and take their own dollars, after paying taxes in those instances where they pay taxes, and buy school supplies for the children. They have to use their own money for further teacher education. Last year, the Congress of the United States, at the initiative of myself and many others, finally passed a law by which they got a $250 above-the-line deduction. That was a remarkable achievement legislatively. Unfortunately, that piece of legislation sunsets at the end of this calendar year. The purpose of this amendment is, first, to increase $250 to $400 as the amount of deduction and, second, to enable that amendment now, by virtue of this amendment, to become permanent law so that they can plan their futures a little bit better. This deduction will be there for those wonderful and courageous teacher expenditures which they take out of their own pockets. I find it to be very touching. I was talking to my colleague from Ohio while waiting to take the floor, and he told me that at the time he was Governor, they put similar legislation into State law. This, of course, will be Federal law and apply to all 50 States. This amendment will make this important tax benefit permanent for our teachers. In addition, it will increase the above the line deduction to $400 and expand the allowable uses for the deduction to include professional development expenses. It is important to note that the President's budget calls for this tax relief. I also note that the amendment has been endorsed by the National Education Association. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a letter from the NEA endorsing my amendment.

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, why do teachers need this kind of relief? It is now estimated that the average teacher spends $521 out of their own pocket each year on classroom materials--materials such as pens, pencils and books. First-year teachers spend even more, averaging $701 a year on classroom expenses. Why do they do this? Simply because school budgets are not adequate to meet the costs of education. Our teachers dip into their own pocket to better the education of America's youth. Moreover, in addition to spending substantial money on classroom supplies, many teachers spend even more money out of their own pocket on professional development. Such expenses include tuition, fees, books, and supplies associated with courses that help our teachers become even better instructors. The fact is that these out-of-pocket costs place lasting financial burdens on our teachers. This is one reason our teachers are leaving the profession. Little wonder that our country is in the midst of a teacher shortage. Without a doubt the Teacher Tax Relief Act of 2001 took a step forward in helping to alleviate the Nation's teaching shortage by providing a $250 above-the-line deduction for classroom expenses. However, it is clear that our teachers are spending much more than $250 a year out of their own pockets to better the education of our children. This amendment that I have offered today is the same as the administration's request. Again, the amendment will increase the above- the-line deduction for educators from $250 allowed under the current law to $400; allow educators to include professional development costs within that $400 deduction (under current law, up to $250 is deductible but only for classroom expenses); and make the Teacher Tax relief provisions in the law permanent. Current law sunsets the teacher tax provisions at the end of this year. Our teachers have made a personal commitment to educate the next generation and to strengthen America. And, in my view, the Federal Government should recognize the many sacrifices our teachers make in their career. This amendment is another step forward in providing our educators with the recognition they deserve. In my view, America's teachers deserve better. I ask unanimous consent that an analysis of the President's budget request which depicts exactly the same amendment about which I am speaking also be printed in the Record.

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to lay the pending amendments aside.

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

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I send an amendment to the desk.

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I see my distinguished colleague from Ohio who arrived a few moments before me. I simply ask of my colleague whether I can proceed for 4 or 5 minutes without being disruptive to the statement on which he is proceeding.

Mr. WARNER

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

Mr. WARNER

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

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I came on the floor to see my colleague. I was aware of the Governor's action. The Governor and I have the same name, although we are not related. He has shown great leadership on this issue. We hope for the best. Virginia has often struck out and led America in the right direction to correct what is perceived as an invasion of privacy and a wrong. I thank the Senator for his remarks.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent a letter to the honorable Bill Frist be printed in the Record.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, I thank him for the reference to our long-term working relationship. The Senator has really taken the lead for over 5 or 6 years. We have worked on this issue for a very long time. It is not something that has just suddenly come to mind.

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

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry: It is my understanding that it is appropriate at this time to proceed to the Warner-Levin-Roberts-Sessions amendment. I send the amendment to the desk.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I, first, wish to thank the distinguished managers, my two colleagues and friends, with whom my friend and partner for 25 years, Senator Levin, and I have had the privilege of working these many years, over a quarter of a century in the Senate. We have, I think, reached a common understanding that I will proceed for several minutes, followed by my colleague from Michigan, and in such time the two managers will address their perspective on this particular amendment. I think they are generally in support; however, I shall let the managers speak for themselves. Mr. President, I rise today to express my support for the ratification of the Protocols to the North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 on Accession of Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. The Protocols that we are considering today would allow those seven nations to become full members of the NATO alliance. My colleagues may recall that, in 1998, I did not vote in favor of the expansion of NATO to include Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic. My opposition at that time was not directed at those three countries. Rather, I was concerned with the broader question of how the expansion of NATO to include newly democratizing countries of Central and Eastern Europe would affect NATO's future missions and its effectiveness as a military alliance. NATO's success in integrating the new members admitted in 1999, and NATO's commitment to enhancing its defense capabilities and those of its prospective new members, have helped persuade me to support the enlargement of NATO today. But I remain concerned that NATO's enlargement by seven additional nations--the largest enlargement in Alliance history--could have dramatic implications for NATO's ability to function as an effective military organization. Today, the threats to NATO member nations come from within and without NATO's periphery. Because of NATO' success, there is no Soviet Union or Warsaw Pact. The threats--such as terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction--are transnational in nature, and they emanate from regions outside of Europe. This was recognized in the Strategic Concept NATO adopted 1999, which envisioned NATO ``out of area'' operations to address new threats. To remain a viable military alliance, NATO must have both the military capability and the political will to respond to the new threats. NATO's recent decision to assume the lead of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, and its willingness to consider supporting a stabilization force in Iraq, are welcome examples of new NATO missions appropriate to today's threats. The Senate Armed Services Committee has a long tradition of strong support for the NATO alliance, and has played an important role in the Senate's consideration of the North Atlantic Treaty and its subsequent amendments. In March and April 2003, the committee conducted two hearings on the future of NATO and on NATO enlargement. The Administration witnesses at these hearings unanimously supported ratification of the NATO enlargement Protocols. One of the issues the committee examined in its NATO hearings was whether the prospective new members would enhance the military effectiveness of the alliance, and how their membership would affect the capabilities gap that currently exists between the United States and many other members of NATO. The witnesses who appeared before our committee testified that NATO was taking concerted efforts to address the ongoing problem of a capabilities and technology gap. They noted the decisions taken by NATO's leaders at the Prague Summit in November, 2002, to launch the Prague Capabilities Commitment and to create a NATO Response Force. Through the Prague Capabilities Commitment, NATO members agreed to spend smarter, pool their resources and pursue ``niche'' specializations such as lift capability, or precision-guided munitions. The NATO response force is envisioned to be a highly ready, rapid reaction force of approximately 25,000 troops with land, sea and air capability, deployable on short notice and able to carry out missions anywhere in the world. The response force will reinforce the need for individual alliance members to develop and contribute unique capabilities to this new force. Regarding the military capabilities of the prospective new members, I was impressed that each of them is similarly being encouraged to focus on specific ``niche'' capabilities where they can achieve a high level of expertise and procure high quality equipment to make a substantial contribution to NATO's military capabilities overall. Some of the invitees already possess specialized capabilities that have served the alliance in the Balkan operations and in the global war on terrorism, including: special forces, nuclear, biological, and chemical defense, mountain fighting, and demining. Equally persuasive was the testimony of our witnesses regarding the contributions of the nations admitted to NATO in 1989. Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic have proved to be steadfast allies and active force contributors to NATO operations in the Balkans, and in the war against terrorism. Mr. President, historically, I was among those who objected to the last enlargement of NATO. At this time, I very carefully considered the proposal by our distinguished President, President Bush, and other world leaders, that the time has come for new members to be brought in. I commend the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense for the careful procedures that led up to the nominations of these new countries to come into the membership of NATO. I am privileged to be on the floor now and to cast my vote in favor of these protocols which will enable the seven countries to become members of NATO in due course. I have to say, I still have some of the concerns I had last time because NATO is such a magnificent organization. Over half a century it has proven its worth time and time again. The Warsaw Pact does not exist, the threats from the Soviet Union do not exist, largely because of the wisdom incorporated in this treaty, and the combination of the military commitments and the political will of the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance members over the years to have that alliance stand there as a deterrent. It has worked, and it has worked well. We cannot foresee the future and, therefore, we must be flexible because worldwide threats have gone through such a major transformation, from major nation-state-sponsored threats to worldwide terrorism, so much of it non-state sponsored. For that reason I want to support the admission of these new nations. Further, while so many of these newly democratic nations do not bring a large army, large navy, or a large air force, in due course their ``niche'' military capabilities will add a very valuable dimension to NATO's ever expanding responsibilities. NATO is participating actively in Afghanistan, and contemplating participating actively in Iraq in peacekeeping and support roles. I shall not discuss this in detail. Nevertheless, that is a tribute to Lord Robertson and others who have recognized that the threat to NATO nations comes from beyond their periphery now, but could be brought within their periphery at any time by the threat of worldwide terrorism. Those are the reasons I support NATO's participation in ``out of area'' operations in Afghanistan and post-conflict Iraq. I remember the words of Ben Franklin as he emerged from the Constitutional Convention and a reporter stopped and asked him: Mr. Franklin: What have you wrought? And his reply was very simple: A republic, if you can keep it. There is a challenge to these NATO nations, soon to be 26 in number. You have the heritage of this great treaty of over half a century, and the challenge is, can we keep it? I think we can. I think we will. Within the current thinking on NATO, Senator Levin, I, and others have identified two issues that dominated our committee's hearings on NATO: the so-called ``consensus rule'' by which NATO operates and the question of whether NATO should have a process for suspending the membership of a nation that is no longer committed to upholding NATO's basic democratic principles. With respect to the consensus rule, the recent divisive debate over planning for the defense of Turkey in the event of war with Iraq demonstrated that achieving consensus in NATO has become more difficult. How difficult will it be with 26 nations? A different manifestation of this problem occurred with respect to NATO operations in Kosovo when ``command by committee'' hampered NATO's leaders' ability to wage the most effective, rapidly responsive military campaign. Such difficulties in reaching consensus are occurring in part because respective NATO members have different views, as they should, about today's threats and how best to respond to them. Achieving consensus is likely to become even more complex as NATO enlarges its membership. That is why I believe--and my colleagues join me on this-- the consensus rule, and NATO's operating procedures more generally, should be periodically reexamined to ensure that NATO has procedures that allow it to plan, reach decisions, and act in a timely fashion. Regarding the issue of a suspension mechanism, some of our committee members have expressed concern about the lack of a mechanism for suspending a NATO member if that nation no longer complies with the fundamental tenets of NATO--democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of law. While it may well be true that NATO has ways other than suspension to deal with such a situation, it is prudent for NATO to consider the matter now, as a conceptual problem, and have some options in mind, rather than be confronted with a problem in the future, and be somewhat unprepared should it arise. Given the tremendous interest of the Armed Services Committee in these two subjects, I, along with Senators Levin, Roberts, and Sessions, am offering an amendment to the resolution of ratification for these protocols that would urge the President--I repeat, urge the President--of the United States to raise these subjects for discussion in the North Atlantic Council at NATO, and request that a report on these subjects be provided to the relevant committees of the Congress. I have consulted closely with administration officials, and negotiated the language in this amendment with administration officials way into last night, in order to receive their support, and they have no objections today. I hope we can achieve that because we have-- Senator Levin and I, speaking for our group--have made some concessions in order to have this matter treated in such a way that the whole Senate can be supportive. I conclude by saying, based on the hearings conducted by the Armed Services Committee and subsequent analysis, I am persuaded that the NATO enlargement protocols we are considering today will advance the national security interests of the United States and deserve the Senate's support. Lastly, on the assumption that NATO, I think very wisely, will take a role in Afghanistan, on the assumption again that NATO, again very wisely, will take a role in Iraq, which is a positive thing, I say this with respect to the coalition of forces: We will achieve the end result that is now unfolding in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is yet to be completed, but basically the desired result will have been achieved in Afghanistan and Iraq at some cost--with the bloodshed of Americans and other coalition partners, with enormous tax dollars. These are very significant contributions by the coalition of forces and this great United States of America. I think it is a minimal suggestion that NATO consider changing its procedures for deciding to undertake such operations in the future to avoid the problems we have recently witnessed. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment to the resolution of ratification I am proposing today, and to join me in giving our advice and consent to ratification of the protocols to the North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 on Accession of Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation, along with my colleague, Senator Allen, to mint a commemorative coin celebrating the 400th anniversary of the founding of Jamestown, VA in 2007. The lasting significance of Jamestown stretches far beyond its contributions to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Our Nation is indebted to the 104 original inhabitants of Jamestown who, after completing a harrowing journey across the Atlantic in May of 1607, established the first permanent English settlement in America. The legacies of Jamestown extend from the founding of our representative democracy in which we serve today, to the free market enterprise system on which our economy has flourished. Our unshakeable traditions of common law, agricultural production, manufacturing, and our free market economy received their humble beginnings from the entrepreneurial spirit of the Jamestown colonists. The colonists established and implemented the principles of a representative government to build our American democracy that has withstood the test of time and internal conflict. The Jamestown settlers elected America's first democratic assembly, the Virginia House of Burgesses. The structure and procedures of this first legislative body still resonates in the chamber we serve in today. Our political philosophies and traditions took hold in the untamed landscape of Jamestown Island and remain the cornerstone of our republic today. Jamestown also marked the beginning of the American cultural identity, hosting a combination of diverse cultural traditions. The settlement united English, Native American, and African cultures compelling each one to learn valuable lessons from the others. The colonists at Jamestown were the first immigrants to travel to America, making us a nation of immigrants of which we are so proud today. The colony at Jamestown showcased the triumph of American ingenuity and hard work. Colonists at Jamestown were forced to battle starvation, disease, and the weather of their new home. Life in Jamestown was a struggle, and the determination shown by the colonists set the foundation for the revolutionary ideas that guided Americans through the colonial era. Now 395 years later, the history of our Nation continues to come alive in Jamestown. Since 1994, archaeologists have found the remains of the original Jamestown fort constructed in 1607 and over 350,000 artifacts from the colonial period. These fascinating discoveries have given scholars, visitors, and most importantly, America's young people, a realistic view of 17th century American life. The continuing restoration and discovery of the original Jamestown colony provides all Americans with a window on their roots, and to the foundation on which this great Nation was built. The proceeds from this commemorative coin will help both the National Park Service and the Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities continue their research at the Jamestown site, complete necessary construction projects at the Jamestown National Park, and provide funds for events surrounding the 400th anniversary celebration. In addition, this legislation would help ensure that the Jamestown Rediscovery project will have adequate funds to continue educating the American public on our colonial history. In the 106th Congress, the House and Senate created the Jamestown 400th Commemoration Commission to ensure that the anniversary in 2007 is a truly national event. This legislation that I introduce today continues along this same line. Recent events have brought about a renewed reverence and interest in our nation's history among the American people. This legislation would help bring national attention to this important anniversary and would serve as a fitting tribute to America's first permanent settlers. This event celebrates America's colonial history and gives every American a chance to help support America's Hometown, Jamestown, VA. I ask my colleagues in the Senate to join me in supporting our Nation's and Virginia's colonial traditions with this important legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the text of this legislation be printed in the Record.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation, along with my colleague, Senator Allen, to mint a commemorative coin celebrating the 400th anniversary of the founding of Jamestown, VA in 2007. The lasting significance of Jamestown stretches far beyond its contributions to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Our Nation is indebted to the 104 original inhabitants of Jamestown who, after completing a harrowing journey across the Atlantic in May of 1607, established the first permanent English settlement in America. The legacies of Jamestown extend from the founding of our representative democracy in which we serve today, to the free market enterprise system on which our economy has flourished. Our unshakeable traditions of common law, agricultural production, manufacturing, and our free market economy received their humble beginnings from the entrepreneurial spirit of the Jamestown colonists. The colonists established and implemented the principles of a representative government to build our American democracy that has withstood the test of time and internal conflict. The Jamestown settlers elected America's first democratic assembly, the Virginia House of Burgesses. The structure and procedures of this first legislative body still resonates in the chamber we serve in today. Our political philosophies and traditions took hold in the untamed landscape of Jamestown Island and remain the cornerstone of our republic today. Jamestown also marked the beginning of the American cultural identity, hosting a combination of diverse cultural traditions. The settlement united English, Native American, and African cultures compelling each one to learn valuable lessons from the others. The colonists at Jamestown were the first immigrants to travel to America, making us a nation of immigrants of which we are so proud today. The colony at Jamestown showcased the triumph of American ingenuity and hard work. Colonists at Jamestown were forced to battle starvation, disease, and the weather of their new home. Life in Jamestown was a struggle, and the determination shown by the colonists set the foundation for the revolutionary ideas that guided Americans through the colonial era. Now 395 years later, the history of our Nation continues to come alive in Jamestown. Since 1994, archaeologists have found the remains of the original Jamestown fort constructed in 1607 and over 350,000 artifacts from the colonial period. These fascinating discoveries have given scholars, visitors, and most importantly, America's young people, a realistic view of 17th century American life. The continuing restoration and discovery of the original Jamestown colony provides all Americans with a window on their roots, and to the foundation on which this great Nation was built. The proceeds from this commemorative coin will help both the National Park Service and the Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities continue their research at the Jamestown site, complete necessary construction projects at the Jamestown National Park, and provide funds for events surrounding the 400th anniversary celebration. In addition, this legislation would help ensure that the Jamestown Rediscovery project will have adequate funds to continue educating the American public on our colonial history. In the 106th Congress, the House and Senate created the Jamestown 400th Commemoration Commission to ensure that the anniversary in 2007 is a truly national event. This legislation that I introduce today continues along this same line. Recent events have brought about a renewed reverence and interest in our nation's history among the American people. This legislation would help bring national attention to this important anniversary and would serve as a fitting tribute to America's first permanent settlers. This event celebrates America's colonial history and gives every American a chance to help support America's Hometown, Jamestown, VA. I ask my colleagues in the Senate to join me in supporting our Nation's and Virginia's colonial traditions with this important legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the text of this legislation be printed in the Record.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Before my colleague departs, I commend him for the interest the Senator has taken in the men and women of the Armed Forces, the national security policy of this country as a Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Well done, sir. I have been privileged to be on that committee now, this being my 25th year in the Senate, and the personal rewards from it for the association that the Senator has as a member of the committee with the men and women in uniform is beyond expectation. I thank the Senator for his service. (The remarks of Mr. Warner and Mr. Dayton pertaining to the introduction of S. 951 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

Mr. WARNER. I thank the Presiding Officer for his courtesies, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I wish to applaud my distinguished colleague, Senator Allen, for his leadership. We are privileged in Virginia, primarily in the northern area, and then to an extent in the Tidewater and Richmond areas, to have a very heavy concentration of technology firms. Under the leadership of Senator Allen and other Senate colleagues we are addressing the needs of the technology improvements at historically black colleges and universities. Sixty percent of all jobs require information technology skills, and jobs in information technology can pay significantly higher salaries than jobs in other fields. At the same time, many of our historically black colleges and universities often lack the resources and the capital to offer an educational program and assistance to their students to bridge the digital divide that exists in many places in America. The bill will establish a grant program for these institutions of higher learning to bring increased access to computer technology and the Internet to their student populations. In Virginia, there are five historically black colleges and universities that will be given an opportunity for grants and/or matching funds to achieve this most noble goal of bridging the digital divide.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. I thank my distinguished colleague for responding. I wish to emphasize a very important point the Senator from Minnesota made. This may not be the final resolution of this complex set of issues. But given the desperate circumstances of so many who have to make the choice between food and drugs, I think it is a very carefully crafted interim step that could be enacted into law and later quickly superseded should that hoped-for event occur in the future of a more comprehensive piece of legislation. I think the emphasis on that is very important. I would say, all of us here in the Senate benefit greatly by professional staff. On my staff, Chris Yianilos really worked diligently to bring this legislation into being and he collaborated with a distinguished member of your staff, Mr. Bob Hall. I also thank Priscilla Hanley, who worked with Senator Collins on the legislation. The first is that the Warner-Dayton-Collins bill provides Medicare beneficiaries with a refundable--I repeat--a refundable tax credit of 50 cents on every dollar of out-of-pocket prescription drug costs. Whether you actually pay income taxes or not, you are eligible to get the benefit of this tax credit. The benefit is capped at $500 for the expenses of an individual senior. Married seniors would be eligible for a credit up to $1,000. The cap is based on a recent study by the Kaiser Family Foundation that estimates that the average senior's out-of-pocket prescription drug costs is almost $1,000. Thus the proposal will cover 50 percent of the out-of-pocket drug costs for the average senior. To take advantage of this refundable tax credit, Medicare beneficiaries will not have to worry about whether their drug is covered under some formulary. In addition, there are no premiums, no deductibles. Medicare beneficiaries will simply take their prescriptions, get them filled, and then apply for their refundable tax credit. Second, in recognition that a generous but necessary refundable tax credit such as this can be costly, we have imposed a responsible income phase-out on older Americans who can benefit from this tax credit. The phase-out level begins for individuals who earn $75,000 per year. Married Medicare beneficiaries begin to phase-out of the benefit at $150,000 a year. This cost containment mechanism will affect less than 10 percent of all Medicare beneficiaries but allows us to responsibly provide a refundable tax credit that will cover about 50 percent of the average Medicare beneficiary's out-of-pocket drug costs. Again 90 percent of all Medicare beneficiaries will not be affected by the phase-out. In other words, they are beneath the phase-out caps. Only those individuals who are blessed with a larger income among America's seniors, who can afford in large measure to pay for their prescription drugs, will be phased-out. Third, the legislation will sunset once a comprehensive Medicare prescription drug benefit is signed into law. Again, as my colleague from Minnesota mentioned, and others, this is an interim proposal. Therefore, it can be superseded by a more comprehensive bill. We wholeheartedly agree this legislation is not a substitute for a comprehensive prescription drug Medicare benefit, and we will continue to work with the President and our colleagues from both sides of the aisle in the Senate who support a more comprehensive piece of legislation. But as I stated earlier, America's seniors cannot wait any longer for relief, and this proposal provides a real benefit to America's seniors. I am pleased to be joined by Senator Dayton and Senator Collins in introducing the Older Americans Prescription Drug Tax Relief Act. I urge my colleagues to give this matter consideration and, hopefully, it can be enacted into law. Let us do something. Let us open the door and talk to the Cuban people. Travel and other policies that deal with Cuba will continue to be a top priority for those of us in the newly formed Senate Cuba Working Group. The working group members have expressed their support for changes in our policies toward Cuba, and we will continue to be a part of the dialogue. I do encourage all of my colleagues to join us in that effort. I encourage all of my colleagues to take a look at this bill that has been introduced today. I know there are people looking at it. I expect a lot more cosponsors on it. This is the most reasonable provision dealing with Cuba that has been presented during the 6 years I have been here. We have tried some bigger bites at the apple. They have not worked. So we are moving back to the travel restrictions, a bill that is very limited. It allows one to travel and to have those things that are necessary for travel. For instance, the right to take baggage to Cuba cannot be cut off. That is another way the law can be subverted. So it is a very straightforward travel policy that will get Americans into Cuba to talk to Cubans to promote the ideas we believe in. I ask my colleagues to join me in this effort.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce this morning a bill on which my distinguished colleagues from Minnesota and Maine and I have collaborated. That is the Older Americans Prescription Drug Tax Relief Act. I will speak a minute or two on it, then should the Senator from Minnesota desire to speak to this, I will yield to the Senator and then resume the balance of my statement. By way of introduction, all Members of this body have heard the tragic stories about older Americans who must choose between paying for their groceries and paying for their medicines. Many older Americans are forced into this choice because, unbelievably, the Medicare program still lacks an outpatient prescription drug benefit. America's seniors deserve much better. Our President, the House of Representatives, and every single Member of this Senate, all 100 Members, share the common goal of enacting a comprehensive Medicare prescription drug benefit. Over the years, we worked diligently to achieve those goals but have yet not reached what I would consider, and I think others would consider, success. We have all worked in support of this vitally important goal, but, again, success has alluded us. Unfortunately, we have not been able to reach a consensus. I hope this bill might be a new initiative that would merit the attention of my colleagues, and that it might provide a basis for that consensus. As we here in the Nation's Capital debate how best to add a Medicare prescription drug benefit and continue to debate the specifics of such benefits such as premiums, co-pays, deductibles, formularies, and whether to run the program through the existing Medicare system or through a public-private partnership, our seniors continue to suffer. Medicare beneficiaries have waited far too long for Congress to provide some sort of relief for their prescription drug costs. I remain committed, as are my distinguished colleagues from Minnesota and Maine, to working with our colleagues on creating a comprehensive prescription drug benefit in the Medicare program. I believe we must act now, however, to provide some relief at this point in time. We cannot defer this decision any longer. The Warner-Dayton-Collins proposal will provide real relief to Medicare beneficiaries. The legislation is simple and can be described in three points.