Paul Wellstone

Mr. WELLSTONE

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, just one more minute. I say to my colleague from Iowa, I absolutely understand why he has to object. He is not speaking for himself. I know he is objecting on behalf of someone who is anonymous. I am positive the Senator from Iowa would be the first to support this legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a letter, which is signed by AMVETS, the Disabled American Veterans, the Paralyzed Veterans of America, and the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, which basically was addressed to Senator Lott, saying, move this bill, take objections off, be printed in the Record.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Let me also say to my colleague from Iowa--and this is not aimed at him--as I have said, this is the third or fourth time I have come to the floor asking unanimous consent that we pass this legislation. I would appreciate it if whoever has an anonymous hold on this bill would be willing to step forward. But I want to make it crystal clear to the minority leader, and other colleagues, that I have a hold on every piece of legislation from the other side of the aisle that is not emergency legislation. I have a standing hold on all of your legislation.

Mr. WELLSTONE. I thank the Senator for his courtesy. I know that about him. And I say to the Senator from Iowa, with a twinkle in my eye, I am not putting any anonymous holds on any other legislation he is trying to move. I made it clear on the floor of the Senate, I am putting a hold on all of it unless it is absolutely an emergency.

Mr. WELLSTONE

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Dorgan be allowed to speak following my remarks.

Mr. WELLSTONE. I wish to speak briefly about the amendment Senator Daschle laid down which would allow firefighters, police officers, and emergency medical personnel basic collective bargaining rights; that is to say, the right to form a union and to bargain over hours and wages and working conditions. In other words, what we are saying is the firefighters, the police officers, the emergency medical personnel, the first responders on September 11--and indeed I meet with them all across Minnesota--they will be the first responders in all of our States if, God forbid, we have to deal with other attacks that they have the right to join a union, bargain collectively in order to be able to earn a decent living, in order to have civilized working conditions, in order to be able to support their families. I have to say on this last day of October of the year 2001, this is a no-brainer amendment, a no-brainer in that everybody should support it. It is crystal clear. As many have said, we are redefining heroes and heroines. It is crystal clear people in our country that there is just a reservoir of good feeling and strong support for these men and women. While we can have all of the benefit concerts and everybody can give all of the speeches in the world, enough speeches to deafen all the gods, the way we can actually show our support as Senators is to support this amendment, give the firefighters, give the police officers, and give the emergency medical personnel the right to join a union and bargain collectively. My last point--and believe me, I will not do this, but I could literally talk for the next 20 hours on this, and I will only talk for 1 minute--I want this in the Record if it is not in the Record: Washington Post, A4, ``Quick Action Urged on Economic Stimulus.'' We have some quotes from several members of the administration basically saying if we extend the health insurance subsidies--in other words, people are out of work, it is terrifying, now you have lost your job, now you do not have any health care coverage for yourself and, maybe more importantly, for your children--that if in fact we pass a recovery bill that helps people to afford health care coverage for themselves and their loved ones, workers will lose the incentive to search for new jobs. Coming from several members of the administration, the insulting assumption is if we were to help out unemployed workers with health care benefits so they could afford coverage for themselves and their loved ones, being lazy, they might not then actually find a job and work. This is outrageous. I do not even know if I need to say anything more. I said I would only speak briefly, so I will not say any more. It is just outrageous. We as Democrats have to have an economic recovery act that speaks to the unemployment benefits, speaks to health care coverage, speaks to job training, workforce development, speaks to investment and affordable housing or rebuilding crumbling schools, speaks to the whole infrastructure of public safety in the country, creates jobs, puts money in the economy, and enables people to purchase. We ought to do that. We ought to do it now. If Democrats cannot stand for these families--firefighters, police, and other working families-- and if we cannot do this now, then who are we and for what do we stand? I am confident we will have a strong package of benefits. This is something for which we have to fight hard. I yield the floor.

Mr. WELLSTONE

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, there are a few things I want to do on the floor. I thank Senator Daschle for his amendment. I have not looked at the amendment of the Senator from Texas. Looking at the language of the Daschle amendment, there is the operative language that the role of the Federal labor relations authority, to the extent provided in this title, in accordance with regulations prescribed in the authority, shall protect the right of each employee to join, form, or assist any union organization, or to refrain, freely and without fear of reprisal, and protect each employee in the exercise of such right. I think it ought to be clear that protection is already in the Daschle amendment. The second point is, there is absolutely nothing in this legislation that undercuts State laws. I personally think the right-to-work laws can be debated at some other time. Finally, I point out if they are interested in supporting the second- degree amendment and undercutting the amendment Senator Daschle has introduced--and I ask unanimous consent to be a cosponsor of the Daschle amendment.

Mr. WELLSTONE. That amendment basically is saying: Give the firefighters, the police, and other public safety workers the right to join a union and bargain collectively for decent wages and civilized working conditions, the right to be able to have a good wage to support their family. That is what this amendment says. I originally introduced this bill, or a version of this bill several years ago. Now we can get it to the floor of the Senate introduced by the Senate majority leader. We can give all the speeches in the world about how much we appreciate the first responders, those who came to the World Trade Center building and tried to save people and lost their lives--firefighters, police, and other rescue workers. We can give speeches about it, we can give concerts, we can pass resolutions, but the best way we can say thank you in this Chamber is to give these workers, these men and women, the right to join a union if they want to and to be able to bargain collectively. That is what the vote is about. The second-degree amendment undercuts the amendment that Senator Dashcle and others, myself included, have introduced. We will get back to this later. That is my initial quick response.

Mr. WELLSTONE

Mr. WELLSTONE. I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to Calendar No. 191, S. 739, the Homeless Veterans Program Improvement Act; that the committee-reported substitute amendment be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be read three times, passed, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, this is the second or the third time I have come to the floor. My colleague from Alabama, though we do not agree on all issues, is a friend, so nothing I am about to say is directed to him. He has to object. I would like to know which brave Senator has put an anonymous hold on this bill. With all due respect, this piece of legislation, which is called the Heather French Henry Veterans Assistance Act, is named after Heather French Henry, a Miss America who made this her No. 1 priority. Her dad is a disabled Vietnam vet. It passed out of the Veterans' Affairs Committee with bipartisan unanimous support. It is the same piece of legislation introduced by Lane Evans. There is nobody better in the whole Congress, House and Senate; he is the best when it comes to being for veterans. He has introduced this, moved through the House, and the VA has supported it. We had the Secretary there. He approves of this legislation--Secretary Principi. The VA reported there were 345,000 homeless veterans in 1999, a 34-percent increase in homeless veterans from 1998 to 1999. I bet a third of the males who are homeless are veterans. That is a scandal. I know my colleague from Alabama agrees with that. What does this bill do? It increases the $50 million authorization for the Department of Labor Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program. They basically contract out; the nonprofits do the work at the local level. These are effective job training programs for homeless veterans so they can get back on their feet. The bill authorizes additional funding for community-based organizations which do the best work in providing different transitional services to veterans, whether it be programs that deal with addiction, whether it be programs to help veterans find more affordable housing. Finally, it talks about more comprehensive homeless centers that will be available in the country's major metropolitan areas; in other words, a place where there can be medical care, where there can be job counseling, and where there can be social services. My understanding is--and I don't know how many veterans organizations have now sent in letters, but I can safely say there is not a veterans organization in the country that would oppose this legislation. I could travel to any State, any center, and I could go to a homeless shelter. I used to organize with homeless people, visit with homeless veterans, many Vietnam veterans. This legislation provides some support services for them--job training, counseling for veterans struggling with addiction, other social service programs. There is a Senator who has put a hold on it, and I cannot find out who he or she is. These anonymous holds drive me up the wall. I have never put an anonymous hold on a bill--never. I am putting a hold on just about every single piece of legislation that any Senator on the other side of the aisle wants to put through here until this piece of legislation goes through. I have come out here twice or three times. I can't find out who objects to it. I would love to debate a Senator about why he or she opposes this homeless veterans bill. So I am going to come to the Chamber every day, every single day, and I am going to ask unanimous consent to pass this bill. I hope that whoever opposes it will tell me why. In the meantime, I am putting a hold on just about every single piece of unanimous consent legislation that is proposed from the other side of the aisle, which I hardly ever do. This is a great way to proceed in a bipartisan manner, to have some Senator, who has apparently very little courage, put an anonymous hold on a bill which provides more homeless assistance to veterans, who will not come out here to debate it, and basically stops it dead in its tracks. I have been around here 11 years. The only thing I can figure out is I just put a hold on pretty much everything that comes from the other side of the aisle. I will review them one by one, but I will not do it anonymously. Let me say to my colleagues, many of whom I enjoy and like and rarely am angry with even if I disagree, I am sorry. I apologize. But I am putting a hold on just about every single piece of legislation that comes through here from the other side. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WELLSTONE

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask that a statement by David Foster of the United Steelworkers of America be printed in the Record. The statement follows: Opposition To Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Intelligent approaches to energy development are needed at a time when energy security, economic development, and environmental protection are more important than ever. USWA District #11 represents thousands of workers in the Pacific Northwest's energy-intensive aluminum industry where 40% of the nation's aluminum capacity is located. The recent West Coast energy crisis that resulted in the shutdown of all ten of that region's aluminum smelters awakened our union to the need for a comprehensive energy policy based on sound environmental principles. We are currently working to help transition the industry to a cleaner, safer, and more dependable mix of energy sources that will help preserve industrial jobs in the United States and lead the industry toward energy self-sufficiency. I believe that the best long-term solution to retaining aluminum jobs in the Northwest is 1) by reducing demand through energy efficiency and conservation, and 2) by increasing the supply of diversified energy sources including clean, renewable energy generated by wind, solar, and geothermal power. This combination would minimize the environmental impacts related to energy extraction and use, create good, family-wage jobs, and protect consumers from supply disruptions and price fluctuations. Consequently, I am convinced that drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is not a sensible option. Rather, it is a shortsighted remedy that is unreliable, environmentally unsound, and fraught with economic shortcomings. As a better alternative, I would encourage the building of a new natural gas pipeline where existing supplies of natural gas can be captured. In particular, I would recommend that the infrastructure for a gas pipeline be developed on the North Slope to bring to market gas currently being shunted back into the ground or flared off. A new Environmental Impact Statement must be completed prior to construction, and North American, rather than imported, steel should be utilized for the construction of the pipeline. This natural gas project would produce many times more jobs and be safer for workers than drilling in the Refuge, and would increase the supply of a cleaner and more valuable energy source, without posing severe threats to sensitive wildlife and tundra.

Mr. WELLSTONE

Mr. WELLSTONE. Madam President, I believe the Senator from Pennsylvania wants to speak. I will defer to him. I ask unanimous consent that I follow the Senator from Pennsylvania.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I, too, thank the Senator from Michigan.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Above and beyond the National Mental Health Association and the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill, there is a Fairness Coalition of Mental Health, and other children, education, law enforcement, and labor organizations all behind this legislation. There is a broad range of organizations supporting the legislation. I point out to colleagues the legalistic language of the bill. This bill is modeled after the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program in which we participate. It says to a group health plan: Do not treat mental health benefits differently from the coverage of medical and surgical benefits. You have to treat it the same way. The legislation does not mandate that a plan provide mental health coverage but says if you have mental health coverage, you have to treat it the same way or have the same coverage as for physical illness. That is why it is called a parity bill. There are still important steps to take, which I hope someday we will, so all the people in our country who have no coverage will be treated. This legislation for over 100 million would make an enormous difference. The cost to the Nation is enormous. Additional health care costs occur when people cannot get the coverage they need, and they wind up in the emergency room or it leads to other illnesses. There is a productivity loss from people who struggle with illness and get no help. There are the social costs of crime: When people do not get treatment, they cannot work or they wind up homeless. We have a lot of homeless people struggling with mental illness. When we treat children at a young age, it will have a huge impact on whether they have a life of misery where they could end up in trouble, more trouble, then incarceration, or whether they are treated and they can go on and live a very productive, happy, and healthy life. I visited a correction facility--and there are many facilities--in Tallulah, LA. I could talk about this forever. Mr. President, 95 percent of the kids had not committed a violent crime. Too many were kids who struggled with mental illness. They should have been checked at the front end of assessment when a kid breaks and enters a house or steals a car. Remember, we are talking about anywhere from 10 percent to 20 percent of children in this country who struggle with this illness. Too many kids all across the country--and your police, law and order communities, law enforcement communities, will tell you this--do not get any treatment, there is no coverage, and they wind up incarcerated when they should not be incarcerated. Then what happens is almost indescribable. The kids are not able to defend themselves. Quite often they are brutalized. Then they come out of these facilities dysfunctional. But they never should have been in the facility in the first place. We never provided the care for them. There never was the coverage. I am sure there can be some good negotiation and things can be worked out in conference on offset, but I argue for $150 million more a year, or whatever the final costs would be. Is it not worth it to end the discrimination and provide the coverage to so many people, including a good number of whom are our loved ones, with the difference being life or death? In the words of Rabbi Hillel: If not now, when? When are we going to end the discrimination? This is a matter of civil rights. When are we going to have the health care plans that provide the coverage for people who are struggling with this illness, including many children? When are we going to make sure, with the plans now no longer able to discriminate, there will be an infrastructure of care in our communities, the delivery of the care will follow the money, and the money will be in the plans? This is more than worth it. We have 65 Senators supporting this legislation. This is bipartisan. If Senator Domenici and I are working on something together, it has to be bipartisan. I cannot even think of anything else on which we agree--I don't mean that; I am kidding. I urge my colleagues to support this measure. We use the word ``message.'' I hate the word. Everybody says: What is our message? What is our message. This would not be a bad statement. I think it would be good for our country--much less the people we can help, it would be good for our country--if the Senate went on record today supporting an amendment that I think is all about helping people, all about helping some vulnerable people, all about ending discrimination, all about calling for our country, America, to be a better country, all about calling on all of us to be our own best selves, all about making sure we provide care to people, many of whom up to now have not received any care. The consequences of the plans discriminating and not providing care are so tragic. People who struggle from depression and get no care take their lives. Children don't get any care and they wind up incarcerated when they could have a good life. The highest percentage of suicides is in the elderly population. Sometime soon I would like to get to Medicare. With Medicare, if you see your doctor apart from in-home care, you pay a 20 percent copay. But if you are struggling with depression--and the highest rate of suicide is in the elderly population--and you go to see a doctor, you pay a 50-percent copay. That is in Medicare. That is blatant discrimination. Why is depression less important than any other illness? We can help a lot of elderly people. We can help a lot of children. We can help a lot of people in our country. Most important of all, we can help ourselves as Senators. It would not be such a bad thing to have a strong bipartisan vote for something all about values, people helping one another and recognizing we can do better. As Bobby Kennedy would have said, we can do better as a nation. Please Senators, give this amendment your support. Let's pass it with an overwhelming vote. I yield the floor.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Daschle be included as a cosponsor of this amendment.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, since there was news today that Dr. Hyman is stepping down as Director of the National Institute of Mental Health, and since I believe we are going to pass legislation on antidiscrimination in mental health coverage which will be landmark and will make a real difference in the lives of people--and I have spoken plenty about the amendment already--I wanted to thank Dr. Hyman for all of his leadership. He has been an exceptional director. I have had a chance to work very closely with him through Ellen Gerrity, a fellow in my office. We are lucky enough to have her working with us. She worked for the IMH. I think Dr. Hyman has done a good job, along with Dr. Satcher, who is Surgeon General. He has done magnificent work. The two of them have done perhaps the best job we have seen in the history of our country of providing an education for people in the country. So much of mental illness is a brain disease. It can be diagnosed. It is very treatable. That is the good news. The bad news is there is a huge gap between what we know and what we don't know. We are trying to close that gap-- not all of it but a good part of it--with this piece of legislation. I thank Dr. Hyman. He is one of the people I have had a chance to work closely with in Washington. He is a good example of someone who, with a highly developed sense of public service, has made a huge difference. I thought I would use this opportunity to thank Dr. Hyman and wish him the very best as he moves on to be, as I understand, provost at Harvard University. We have had a number of Senators--I don't need to speak more--who have come to the floor and have spoken. I think what they have said is not only significant, but the way they have said it is significant. Senator Domenici always speaks about this issue with a tremendous amount of eloquence and a lot of knowledge. His wife Nancy Domenici--I don't think he would be offended if I said it--is probably every bit the leader he is. I don't want to say more, but she is every bit the leader he is. We have two Senators out here managing the appropriations bill who want to move us forward. After we have done the work to make sure we deal with rule XVI and germaneness--and we have done a lot of work on the budget point of order--I think they have been very gracious in letting us go forward. Senators Harkin and Specter are very supportive of this piece of legislation. Senator Thomas from the State of Wyoming came and spoke. It reminds me of 1996, I think it was, when we passed partial legislation. I remember Senator Simpson came out on the floor and spoke about a tragedy within his own family. I believe it was a niece who took her life at a young age. Senator Corzine came out on the floor and made it very clear that this issue means a great deal to him. Senator Reid spoke about his own experience, that his father took his life. Senator Harry Reid has been absolutely, in his own very quiet way, perhaps the most powerful Senator, in a positive way, on the whole issue of treating depression than anybody in the Senate. Senator Kennedy came out and spoke. He has devoted a good part of his career to this issue. He is the health care Senator, but, actually, long before we had this kind of coalition--and we have 150 organizations supporting this piece of legislation. We have organizations such as the National Mental Health Association and NAMI-- the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill--that deserve a lot of credit, along with the whole coalition. If I went through all 150 organizations, it would take a lot of time. But I personally think Senator Kennedy deserves a great deal of credit for being willing to light a candle a long time ago to speak to this awful discrimination. I also thank all of these different organizations because the truth is, when we started out on this matter over a half a decade ago, it was then an issue--it still is an issue of discrimination--but the problem was there was not exactly a political constituency that had any real clout. Then I think what has happened in the last 6, 7, 8, 9 years is that a lot of families have said: We are the ones who struggle with this illness--or we have a loved one who struggles with this illness-- and we refuse to be treated as men and women of lesser worth. We are men and women of worth and dignity. We struggle with an illness just as any other illness. We are going to be advocating for ourselves. It has been the citizen politics, the citizen lobbying that has led to the result of--we have a dispute as to whether it is 65 or 67 Senators who now support this. This piece of legislation passed out of the HELP Committee on a 21-0 vote. We made some compromises, but it is still an enormous step forward. I do not think it would have happened without the citizen politics. I say to the Presiding Officer--because we both represent the State of Minnesota--we represent a State that is a model State, as we are in many ways, but we passed full parity for both substance abuse addiction, which I think is terribly important--and I think that is the next piece of legislation on which we ought to work--and mental health and, by the way, with very little cost but with great benefit. The estimates of the amount of money we have saved in our State for people who now get the treatment and, therefore, are productive and go to work or do well in school and do well in their families verses what was going on before is just stunning and important. The problem is because of ERISA, a lot of the self-insured plans are not covered, so we still have 50 percent of the people not covered and, thus, the need for national community regulation. But I thank a lot of the people in Minnesota who both the Presiding Officer and I know well; and certainly Sheila and I have gotten to know them very well because we have had so many meetings with so many people. I mentioned the Kluesners earlier, Mary and Al Kluesner. I mentioned the Westins. But there are so many others who have met with us, who have met in public. There have been so many picnics on our lakes that I have attended with people. There are so many people who have told their own stories. They have made a huge difference. So again, colleagues, we have 65 or 67 Senators who support this measure. It is strongly bipartisan. We now have the support of the chair and ranking chair of the Appropriations Committee, and the chair and ranking chair of the Budget Committee. We have the whip who has spoken, and Senator Daschle, the Senate majority leader, who has asked to be a cosponsor. We have 150 organizations: Religious, children, labor, and health. We are close to adopting an amendment that I believe we can keep in conference. I am not trying to be coy, but I think if I had to have somebody in my corner, I would want Tom Harkin more than anybody else. He chairs this committee. If I had to have one person to fight for me, he would be the one. So I thank colleagues. We may have a lot more debate yet, but I think we are going to take this journey. I believe we are going to wind up in a good place where we are going to make our country better. We are going to make our country better by passing this. I see other colleagues in this Chamber, so I do not want to take any more time. I yield the floor.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Very quickly, I know Senator Domenici is in a markup on the energy and water bill, along with Senator Harkin. I thank my two colleagues for their amendment. I think it just adds to the strength of the bill. It is very important to have their support. So I thank both of them for their work.

Mr. WELLSTONE. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Madam President, I thank my colleague from Pennsylvania. I know in discussions with the Senator from Pennsylvania and Senator Harkin from Iowa that we can go over all of the points. We have made a special effort to deal with it. First of all, I thank my colleague, Senator Domenici from New Mexico. It has been my honor to have worked with him now for over half a decade on this question. I believe the Senate will pass this amendment. When we pass this amendment, I think it will be viewed favorably by historians. I am not trying to be melodramatic. There are 67 Senators, Republican and Democrat alike, who support this piece of legislation. It passed out of the HELP Committee by a 21- to-0 vote. There are 150 organizations that support it. There are two reasons. First of all, this legislation is major civil rights legislation. We are coming to November 2001. When this amendment and bill pass, I believe we can keep it in conference. We will have passed a major piece of civil rights legislation which will say that we will no longer permit discrimination against those people who struggle with mental illness in our country. This legislation says, when it comes to those who are struggling with this illness, there will no longer be discrimination. It is modeled after the Federal Employees Benefits Plan. It basically says there will be the same requirements when it comes to deductibles, copays, and days in the hospital and outpatient visits. I thank the Senator from Massachusetts as chairman of the HELP Committee for helping us get this through the Health Committee on a 21- to-0 vote. He and his staff have been there throughout all of the negotiations and work on this bill. I thank Senator Domenici. Next to Senator Domenici, I thank Senator Kennedy. I think there is going to be an overwhelmingly positive vote because it is just wrong for someone who is struggling with this kind of illness to be told they are going to have to pay a higher copay, and they are going to have to pay a higher deductible. No health insurance plan will let them stay a few days in the hospital. No. They can only have a certain number of outpatient visits. We will not do that with someone who suffers from a heart condition, nor to someone who is suffering from diabetes, nor to someone who broke their ankle. We don't say to them they are going to be in the hospital only 1 day and that is it, or 2 days and that is it. Nor would we charge them high copays and deductibles to the point where they can't afford it. We have to end the discrimination. It is 2001. The time has come for this idea. The Surgeon General in his report said close to 20 percent of American people struggle with this illness and 18 million people struggle with depression. I have had the honor of working with Al and Mary Kluesner from Minnesota. They started an organization. It is now a national organization. It is called SAVE. Two of their children committed suicide. They have two children who are doing spectacularly well. Up until very recently, a lot of families, parents, brothers, sisters, husbands, and wives blamed themselves when they lost a loved one who took their life. There has been this shame. People have blamed themselves. But now we know a lot more. Now we know how much of that is biochemical. Now we know it can be diagnosed. Now we know it is treatable. The success rate for treatment of those who are struggling with depression is 80 percent. Kay Jamison, a psychiatrist at Johns Hopkins who has tried to take her life twice, has written several powerful books. One book is called ``An Unquiet Mind'' about her own experiences. Just a month ago she received the McArthur Award--the genius grant --for her work. She has written about the gap between what we know and what we do. It is lethal. The Kluesners became involved and people all across the country have become involved. They no longer will accept the stigma. They no longer will accept the discrimination. They have come out of the closet. They have come out of the closet to speak for their loved ones because they know it is a matter of life or death. If we would end the discrimination, we would get the care to people; we would save some lives. Suicide is the third leading cause of death among young people in our country. In Minnesota, it is the second leading cause of death. So much of this can be diagnosed. So much of this is preventable. That is why this amendment and this legislation is so important. It is not just a question of civil rights. It is not just a question of saying it is the end of discrimination. It is also a question of what we can now do as a nation. Because if our health care plans-- modeled after the plan that we participate in, the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan--say there will be no difference in terms of the way we treat this illness versus any physical illness, then, I say to Senator Domenici, the care will follow the money. Once the health care plans provide the coverage, you will have an infrastructure of care out there for people that we do not have right now. There will be arguments and counterarguments, and I am ready for all of them. Let me just make a couple more points because I will be in this Chamber for a while with this amendment, and other Senators are in the Chamber right now. There was a young woman named Anna Westin. Her mom and dad, Kitty and Mark Westin, have brought parents together as well. They have brought parents together because their daughter--a beautiful young woman-- struggled with anorexia. Same issue: She tried to get coverage from the plan. It was the Blue Cross/Blue Shield plan in Minnesota. They could not get the coverage for the days in-hospital that she needed to be there. They lost their daughter. By the way, Blue Cross/Blue Shield has made a settlement with them and is going to do much better in terms of providing the coverage. I cannot make a one-to-one correlation and say because she did not get coverage, therefore, Anna took her life. But I can tell you this: I have met with parents, I promise you, all across the country who have told me about what it means when they cannot get coverage to take care of their children. I went down to Houston; and Sheila Jackson-Lee had a hearing she wanted to do with me. It dealt with mental health and children. It was unbelievable the number of people who came who wanted to speak about their desperate story with their own children. At this public hearing, the guy who was the head of the corrections system for one of the largest counties in the United States of America--I could not believe what he said--said: I am a law and order person. Nobody seemed to doubt that. And he said: I want to tell you, a lot of people believe that if these kids are locked up in our facilities, they have done something wrong. He said: I want to tell you--I think the figure he used was 40 percent--40 percent of these kids, if they had gotten some help, would not even be in jail. They should not be locked up. It is the only place the parents can get any help for them. There was a time when we talked about how we institutionalized people, we warehoused people struggling with mental illness--adults and children in institutions. Now we are warehousing them in our jails, and many people should not be there--many children should not be there. So this legislation ends the discrimination for a broad range of mental illnesses that affect adults and children. This legislation has an exclusion for small business so that businesses are not covered unless they have 50 employees or more. This bill has been scored by CBO as costing no more than a 1-percent increase in premium. Then there is the benefit of what happens when we finally end the discrimination and what happens when we finally provide the coverage for people. We had testimony--my last point because I will have a chance to speak later--before the HELP Committee, I say to Senator Kennedy. There were a number of people who came in--I wish I could remember all of their names: doctors, psychiatrists, social workers--and they were talking about the aftermath of September 11. I am not mixing agendas. I am being as intellectually honest as I can. One woman, who worked with the firefighters, said: I want to tell you that given what people have gone through, you are going to have to have an infrastructure of mental health care. Her name is Dr. Kerry Kelly. She talked about her experiences with her onsite work as chief medical officer of the New York Fire Department. She just basically said: Look, we are going to need a lot of help for family members. And people have been saying that all across the country. So, I say to colleagues, please consider this legislation civil rights in ending discrimination. Colleagues, please consider this legislation as a way of finally providing the care to men, women, and children who, if they are provided with the care, can go on and lead good, productive lives. And, colleagues, also please consider this legislation preparedness legislation. The truth is, no longer, when we talk about health care for adults or health care for children, or public health, or what we have to do, can we not consider mental health part of the cake. It is part of how we deliver humane and dignified and affordable health care to people in the country. This is about as important a piece of legislation as I think we can pass. But, look, I have my biases. I came here as a Senator who has a brother who has struggled with this illness all of his life. When I was elected in 1990, I thought if there was one thing I would try to do, for sure, I would try to end this discrimination in coverage. For sure, I wanted to make sure that people were able to get the help they needed. I have had a chance to work with Senator Domenici for over half a decade. And I have had a chance to work with Senator Kennedy for over a decade. Now is the moment where we can pass this legislation as a part of this bill. And I think we can keep it in conference. This would be a huge step forward for our country. We need each other as never before. There is an ethic going on in this country about the ways we can help one another. I think that is all for the good in the most difficult of times. This would be the best possible way of living up to this value and this ethic, to adopt this amendment with an overwhelming vote. I yield the floor.

Mr. WELLSTONE. I thank the Senator from Wyoming for his support. It means a lot. His voice is important. I appreciate his mentioning that is not something that only applies to metropolitan America; it is important in rural America. I thank Senator Corzine as well. I will not take much time now. Senator Corzine asked that he be a cosponsor of the amendment. I believe Senators Byrd and Stevens, with the agreement that we now have, asked to be included as cosponsors. I ask unanimous consent they all be added as cosponsors.

Mr. WELLSTONE. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WELLSTONE. I will respond very briefly, as one of the co-managers of the amendment. I thank the Senator from Texas. I actually don't mean that as sort of fake Senatorial courtesy. He has intellectual integrity, and I understand exactly what he is saying. Two quick points I will say to him: There is an argument on the CBO scoring of $1.3 billion over 10 years. I say to my colleague, I would challenge that. I believe Senator Domenici would as well. He is in a markup right now on another bill. I understand my colleague is going to reserve final judgment on the conference report, but the quarrel I have with it is with the assumption. The assumption that CBO is making, not $5 billion, $1.4 billion over 10 years, the assumption that is being made is that with the mental health coverage ending the discrimination, that what employers will do is, therefore, in order to make up the cost, which CBO, by the way, said is minuscule, less than a 1 percent increase in premiums, will cut wages for employees. That is the assumption. And then, with less wages, there will be less that will be contributed to Social Security. For the record, I would challenge that assumption. I will challenge that assumption on the basis of what we have seen in States that have the mental health parity where that has not happened. For a lot of companies and a lot of employers, it is a very attractive proposition to offer this coverage because families are crying out for it. As to the second point, that the money is not going to be spent, we are not saying that there isn't going to be the expenditure of money. We are saying it is not going to lie against this bill. We are going to handle this just as anything else we do. We paid for the tax cuts. We will pay for this. I yield the floor.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, again, I appreciate what my colleague said. Initially, I was talking about the Social Security cost, not the overall cost. We have been very clear about the fact that it would require some investment of resources. The fact is, I again say to my colleague from Texas, there are plenty of examples of States that have moved forward. Quite to the contrary of wages going down, people have been supportive of it because this is not a small thing. This affects about 50 million adults in the country. Depression alone affects 18 million. The reason we have 150 organizations--religious, labor, law enforcement, children, you name it--and the reason we have 65 Senators on this bill is that they have heard from people across the country, including Democrats, Republicans, and others, who have said this is what happened to me and my family because of the discrimination and because there is no coverage. If a health care plan is going to have mental health coverage, it ought to be treated the same as any physical illness. It is a matter of discrimination, of basically civil rights. Ending the discrimination and making sure people get coverage is what this is about. I yield the floor.

Mr. WELLSTONE

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

Mr. WELLSTONE. Madam President, I yield to my colleague from New Mexico.