Press Release Daily Summary

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) U.S. Senators Jim Talent (R-Mo.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) have a plan to lower health care costs and reduce the number of uninsured all at no cost to the taxpayer. The Senators today reintroduced the Small Business Health Fairness Act, which would establish national Association Health Plans (AHPs) that would allow small business people to purchase health care for themselves and their employees through their trade associations.

“The No. 1 problem facing small business in this country today is the rising cost of health insurance,” Sen. Talent said today in a speech on the Senate floor. “Two-thirds of America’s 44 million uninsured either own a small business, work for a small business or are dependent on someone who does. Our legislation would help reduce the cost of health insurance for small businesses by 10 and 20 percent on average; it would provide health insurance to millions of people who don’t have it and it wouldn’t cost the taxpayer a dime.”

The Senators’ plan got a big boost today with remarks issued by U.S. Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), Chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, who said he is committed to working with Sens. Talent and Snowe to “help resolve differences in the Senate on how to expand health insurance options.”

“As Chairman of the Senate HELP Committee, I hope to move legislation forward during this Congress that will help small businesses and self-employed individuals who are struggling to afford health insurance, whether they need new insurance or cannot afford to keep the coverage they already have,” Enzi continued.

Sen. Enzi’s committee has jurisdiction over Talent and Snowe’s legislation.

Of the 44 million people who are uninsured in the country, 60 percent either own a small business, work for a small business or are dependent on someone who does. Workers in the smallest businesses that do provide health insurance are paying on average 17 percent more for health benefits than workers employed by large companies and costs continue to rise.

Anyone who wants to see how AHPs would operate can look at how health insurance works at Fortune 500 companies. AHPs would operate the same way. They simply allow small business people to join together, nationally, through their trade associations, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Federation of Independent Business or the American Farm Bureau, to purchase the same high-quality health insurance offered by big companies, labor unions, Medicare, Medicaid and the federal employee benefit system.

According to CONSAD, a well-respected economic and public policy analysis firm, the legislation could, by conservative estimates, reduce the number of uninsured by 8.5 million. The plans would constitute powerful competition with the insurance companies who now monopolize the small group market, holding down costs.

President Bush has repeatedly called on the Congress to pass AHPs and he included the proposal in his State of the Union and his 2006 budget request. The plan is a centerpiece of his health care agenda to help reduce the number of uninsured Americans. The House has passed the legislation numerous times. Now the bill is gaining momentum in the Senate with the leadership of Talent and Snowe.

Talent and Snowe’s Association Health Plans legislation is co-sponsored by Senators Kit Bond (R-Mo.), Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), Elizabeth Dole (R-N.C.), John McCain (R-Ariz.), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas), Norm Coleman (R-Minn.), Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) and David Vitter (R-La).

###

FOR RELEASE CONTACT: Susan Wheeler (202) 224-5150
Week of February 20, 2005 Laura Thurston Goodroe (202) 224-7500

PROGRESS IN THE FIGHT AGAINST METHAMPHETAMINE
Guest opinion submitted by Idaho Senator Mike Crapo

Ten-year-old Katie didn’t have a chance. Preliminary reports say she walked into a methamphetamine lab when she knocked on a door in her Indiana hometown of 1,500 to tell someone that a dog had been run over. She was left, hands bound tightly behind her back, to drown in the freezing waters of a creek on a cold January day, 18 miles away.
If such a tragedy can occur in a small Indiana town, it isn’t difficult to imagine a similar crime happening just about anywhere in Idaho, which has been dealing with a significant methamphetamine abuse problem over the past decade. In a barely-averted tragedy recently, methamphetamine put young lives in jeopardy in the otherwise trusted persona of a school bus driver in the Treasure Valley area. As you read this, a Nampa police officer is recovering from being shot and critically wounded by a man who was high on meth.
In 1999, Governor Kempthorne spearheaded a statewide initiative to fight methamphetamine production, coordinating regions and state level law enforcement efforts. The program has proven highly successful. 186 meth labs were seized in 2000, and the number had dropped to 38 by 2004.
Even so, the problem remains. Coeur d’Alene has one of the highest seizure rates of clandestine meth labs in the state—over 50 percent of all labs seized in four of the past six years. Both Ada and Bannock counties have also had high seizure rates in the same time period. These seizures have had the unintended side effect of increased importation of meth. Close to 2,000 Idahoans are arrested annually on meth-related charges, and while the average individual is a 30-year-old male, in the 45-54 age group, three times as many women are arrested.
In coordination with the Governor’s initiative, the Idaho State Police (ISP) implemented a pilot program called the Drug-Endangered Children Initiative (DEC). Meth labs produce up to six times the amount of waste per amount of processed substance. This waste is in the form of airborne particles, vapors and chemical residue, and is especially dangerous to children. DEC identifies children who live in meth houses and removes them from those dangerous situations. In Coeur d’Alene, where the pilot program was implemented, 14 children were identified and 12 tested positive for meth exposure. DEC also identifies children who suffer from direct or indirect exposure to illegal substances. The pilot program in Twin Falls identified 56 children and 18 tested positive for meth exposure.
Methamphetamine, both in use and production endangers human health in numerous ways. It increases the likelihood of chronic health problems, illness and sudden death, violent behavior--especially domestic violence because of the age group affected and nature of methamphetamine production and use, not to mention the deadly combination of drugs and driving. When produced, toxins permeate surfaces and travel through duct work. To address the dangers of former meth houses, the ISP is working with a number of agencies to determine clean-up criteria to make these former places of crime safe for future inhabitants.
Federal funding helps combat methamphetamine use in Idaho. The Administration’s 2006 Budget increases funding for federal drug programs. The President’s message is clear: while we must exercise fiscal restraint in these tight budget times, drug interdiction programs are working and should be funded so as ensure their continued success. I’ve consistently supported a strong federal role working with state and local jurisdictions, and I remain committed to that even within the constraints of the current budget. Unfortunately our fight against drugs will never be over, but we can make progress. We are required to protect our children and provide them with a safe, healthy environment in which to grow and prosper, free from the prison and horrors of drug abuse.

WORD COUNT: 624

News Release

For release: Feb. 16, 2005 Contact: Coy Knobel, phone 202-224-3424
Web address: enzi.senate.gov Email: Coy_Knobel@enzi.senate.gov

Thomas, Enzi continue Second Amendment efforts

Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senators Craig Thomas and Mike Enzi, both R-Wyo., are working to prevent frivolous lawsuits against gun manufacturers and sellers that threaten Second Amendment freedoms.
The senators are co-sponsoring the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, S. 397, that would block politically motivated lawsuits. Thomas and Enzi said over the past few years dozens of cities have brought lawsuits against gun manufacturers and others seeking damages for the unlawful use of their products. The senators’ bill would stop lawsuits filed when a product was used in a crime and not for its intended purpose. The bill would not affect suits brought because of legitimate product failure.
“This is about preserving a way of life in Wyoming. Hunters, target shooters and other sportsmen in Wyoming will be on the verge of extinction if we allow these junk lawsuits against firearm manufacturers to continue. Hunting is an important tradition in our state and big part of our tourism industry,” Thomas said.
“The type of lawsuits this legislation would stop are those brought by gun control advocates trying to restrict our Second Amendment freedoms through the courts,” said Enzi. “Last week the U.S. Senate passed a progressive bill that would ensure that class-action lawsuits are handled in a federal courtroom using uniform procedures. We can add to the effectiveness of legal reform by passing this legislation which adds to the resolve of this country to continue using common sense in the judicial process as well as upholding our cherished Second Amendment rights.”
Senator Craig, R-Idaho, originally sponsored the legislation.
-end-

Unfortunately, due to a scheduling change, Nancy Pelosi's reception for Capitol Hill reporters must be postponed until Monday, March 7.

I apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.

-- Jennifer

United States Senate
Committee on Armed Services
Washington, DC 20510

MEDIA ADVISORY Contact: John Ullyot

February 16, 2005 202-224-6290

* * * MEDIA ADVISORY * * *

CHAIRMAN WARNER ANNOUNCES
OPEN COMMITTEE HEARING

THURSDAY, MARCH 3
ON FY 06 DoD BUDGET REQUEST

Today Senator John W. Warner, R-Va., the Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, announced that the Committee will hold an open hearing March 3 to receive testimony on the Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 2006 and the Future Years Defense Program.

Witnesses:

Honorable Francis J. Harvey

Secretary of the Army

Honorable Gordon R. England

Secretary of the Navy

Honorable Peter B. Teets

Acting Secretary of the Air Force

The hearing will be take place at 9:30 a.m. March 3, in Room SH-216 of the Hart Senate Office Building.

Members of the media are invited to attend.

Please direct all questions to John Ullyot, Director of Communications, at 202-224-6290, or via email at press@warner.senate.gov .

-- 30 --

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Contact: Howard Gantman

Wednesday, February 16, 2005 or Scott Gerber 202/224-9629

http://feinstein.senate.gov/

Senators Coleman and Feinstein to Continue Effort to
Make Using Internet Pharmacies Safer

Washington, DC – U.S. Senators Norm Coleman (R-MN) and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) today introduced legislation to make the way Americans buy prescription drugs on the internet safer and to prevent individuals from obtaining prescription drugs without a prescription.

“Rogue internet pharmacies continue to pose a serious threat to the health and safety of Americans,” Senator Feinstein said. “Simply put, a few unethical physicians and pharmacists have become drug suppliers to a nation. They provide pharmaceuticals – including powerful narcotics and anti-depressants – to patients without an in-person examination, based solely on an online questionnaire. The longer we wait to take action, the more people will be killed or seriously injured as a result of this unethical behavior.”

“The way to stop these physicians and pharmacists is to make them accountable for their actions – by requiring basic disclosure information, prohibiting virtual examinations, and making it easier to shut down rogue Internet pharmacies,” Senator Feinstein said. “If we fail to take these modest, but important steps, there will be hundreds more families who suffer the unbearable loss of a loved one as a result of drugs obtained from rogue Internet pharmacies.”

“This legislation provides a new measure of safety currently missing when consumers try to buy medications on-line through Internet pharmacies,” Coleman said. “This bill will make on-line drug purchasing safer from legitimate domestic Internet sites, and gets us closer to making the reimportation of drugs safe and secure for American consumers. This is a common sense approach to a very serious problem. We need to get this legislation enacted into law as soon as possible.”

This legislation, called “The Ryan Haight Act”, is named for an 18-year-old honor student from La Mesa, California, who died after overdosing on painkillers he bought on the internet with a debit card his parents gave him to buy baseball cards.

Specifically, the legislation will:

Require internet pharmacies to identify their business, pharmacist and physician for consumers;
Prohibit internet pharmacies from distributing drugs to consumers with a prescription based solely on an online questionnaire; and
Give state Attorneys General the ability to shut down rogue websites nationwide, rather than just in their individual jurisdictions.

Since the legislation was introduced, additional cases have come to light, which demonstrate the need for increased regulation of internet pharmacies.

On Jan. 31, 2004, Leisa Kelly and her 17-year-old son Ryan were discovered in their San Andreas, Calif. apartment by Calaveras County sheriff's deputies. The two died from an overdose of the powerful anti-depressant amitriptyline, also known as Elavil. Leisa's mother, Candy, discovered that the drug had been purchased by her grandson through an internet prescription service operated out of North Carolina. The website merely requires the consumer to answer a questionnaire before prescription drugs are shipped. No proof from a physician as to the patient's condition or medical needs is required prior to purchasing the drugs.

Nancy Shapiro of Nashville, TN, lost her 33-year old son, Scott, three days after Christmas 2003. Scott had been ordering hydrocodon, also known as oxycontin, from an internet site without a legitimate prescription. Scott’s tragic death came at the hands of this highly addictive drug, which he obtained without a visit to a doctor or a valid prescription.
The National Association of Boards of Pharmacy estimates that there are thousands of internet pharmacies today. Just four years ago, there were less than 200.

The legislation is supported by the Federation of State Medical Boards, the National Community Pharmacists Association, the CA Medical Association, and the American Pharmacists Association.

Senators Coleman and Feinstein introduced this legislation in the 108th Congress.

###

For Immediate Release Contact: David DiMartino (202)-224-8795 February 16, 2005 Jena Longo (202) 224-5765

OMAHA AND BLOOMFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENTS RECEIVE FEMA FIREFIGHTING GRANTS

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Nebraska’s Senator Ben Nelson announced today that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) has awarded Assistance to Firefighters Grants to the Omaha Fire Department and the Bloomfield Fire Department.

Designed to strengthen and enhance basic firefighting capabilities and other emergency services across the United States, the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program will give awards through four program areas. These areas include the Fire Operations and Firefighter Safety Program, the Fire Prevention Program, the Emergency Medical Services Program, and the Firefighting Vehicles Acquisition Program.

The thirty-fifth round of FEMA grants brings Fire Operations and Firefighter Safety funding to two Nebraska fire departments. The Omaha Fire Department will receive $38,626 for fire prevention, and the Bloomfield Fire Department will receive $17,325 for fire operations and fire safety.

The Fire Operations and Firefighter Safety Program provides funding for additional training, personal protective equipment, wellness and fitness, and modifications to fire stations and facilities. The Fire Prevention Program provides funding for public education and awareness activities, fire code enforcement activities, fire inspector certifications, purchase and installation of smoke alarms and fire suppression systems, wildland mitigation, and arson prevention and detection activities.

“With these funds, our fire departments can expand their efforts to continue to make Nebraska as safe as it can be, said Nelson.” “These grants will assist these two fire departments in more efficiently protecting Nebraska families.”

Additional information about the grants may be found at www.usfa.fema.gov or by calling 1-866-274-0960.

-30-

Jena Longo

Deputy Press Secretary

Nebraska's Senator Ben Nelson

Direct Line: 202-224-5765

Cell: 202-236-7739

For Immediate Release Contact: Michael Brumas or Nancy Wall

February 16, 2005 (202) 224-4124

Who: U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Department of Homeland Security Under Secretary for Border and Transportation Security Asa Hutchinson and Alabama Department of Public Safety Major Charles Andrews

What: News Conference on Immigration Enforcement

When: Monday, February 21, 2005, 11:15 a.m. CST

Where: Robert S. Vance Federal Courthouse, Room 344, Birmingham, AL

(Due to federal holiday, enter through courthouse rear door)

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) will hold a news conference in Birmingham with federal and state law enforcement officials Monday, February 21, 2005, to discuss immigration enforcement in the state.

Sessions will be joined by U.S. Homeland Security Department Under Secretary for Border and Transportation Security Asa Hutchinson and Alabama Department of Public Safety Major Charles Andrews to discuss the federal-state agreement that allows Alabama state troopers to participate in the enforcement of federal immigration law.

As Department of Homeland Security Under Secretary for Border and Transportation Security, Hutchinson oversees all of the department’s border and transportation agencies, which include the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Transportation Security Administration and the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: AMANDA FLAIG

FEBRUARY 16, 2005 JEFFREY SADOSKY

(202) 224-2315

DEWINE BILL PERMITS COMPLETION OF IMPORTANT HISTORIC WORK OF PUBLICLY DISCLOSING U.S. GOVERNMENT RECORDS ABOUT NAZI WAR CRIMINALS

U.S. Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH) today secured Senate passage of his bill that will continue the work of releasing United States government records on Nazi war criminals. Senator DeWine’s bill—introduced yesterday as S. 384--allows the Interagency Working Group (IWG) that was created by his 1998 Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act to continue its work for another two years.

“Undeniably, the Nazi era was one of the darkest chapters in human existence, and there was a natural tendency to try to avoid focusing attention on that tragic part of world history,” said Senator DeWine during a speech on the Senate floor. “But, Congress passed the Nazi War Crimes law because we understood that we owe it to all those who suffered and died in the death camps and to their families to bring the whole truth to light.”

Under the DeWine bill, federal agencies in possession of records of individuals alleged to have committed Nazi war crimes are required to make these records public. The IWG works with U.S. government agencies to locate, identify, and recommend for declassification to the public all records of Nazi war criminals held by the United States. A team of historian and specialists will then complete a report detailing what is discovered.

Non-compliance with the law is allowed on only one condition: if releasing the records compromises a narrowly drawn set of privacy and national security interests. An agency head making such a determination is required to justify the decision to Congress.

“The IWG told me they need more time to complete their important work, and I agree,” said Senator DeWine. “It is my hope that allowing the working group to continue for two more years will bring closure for the many people who have suffered at the hands of Nazi war criminals.”

Representative Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) is gathering cosponsors and will soon introduce companion legislation in the House. Under current law, the IWG was set to expire at the end of March. Senator DeWine expects House passage of either his Senate-passed bill or Representative Maloney’s House companion legislation in the next few weeks.

###

Amanda Flaig

Press Secretary

U.S. Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH)

140 Russell Senate Office Building

Washington, DC 20510

Work: 202-224-7997

Mobile: 202-841-1603

Fax: 202-228-0549

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: AMANDA FLAIG [DEWINE]
FEBRUARY 16, 2005 (202) 224-2315

SEAN OBLACK [DODD]

(202) 224-2823

DEWINE, DODD CONTINUE FIGHT TO PREVENT UNDERAGE DRINKING

Bill Would Coordinate Federal Agencies to Combat Problem While Increasing Prevention Activities

U.S. Senators Mike DeWine (R-OH) and Chris Dodd (D-CT), together with a bi-partisan group of representatives, today introduced a bill to help prevent underage drinking. The Sober Truth on Preventing (STOP) Underage Drinking Act would coordinate relevant federal agencies to work collectively combating underage drinking and increasing prevention activities in states and local communities, including college campuses. The bi-partisan bill would authorize a public service media campaign increasing adult awareness of the threat alcohol poses to their children, as well as increase research and data collection done at the federal level on adolescent alcohol use and brain development.

“The STOP Underage Drinking Act will go a long way to expand and coordinate our nation’s fight against underage drinking,” said Senator DeWine. “This is a problem that is not going away. We have an obligation to do more, and this bill will work to lower underage drinking in both the short and long term.”

“The road to adulthood isn’t an easy one, but when it comes to alcohol and children, it’s a dead-end street,” said Senator Dodd. “This measure will - for the first time - help lead a national effort to combat underage drinking.”

“Limiting youth access to alcohol is essential to solving the underage drinking problem and this legislation will help reach adults with the cold hard facts: the earlier teens drink the more likely they are to become alcohol dependent and to drive drunk,” said Wendy J. Hamilton, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) national president. “We owe it to our youth and to American families to make underage drinking prevention a top public health priority.”

The companion House Bill will be introduced by Representatives Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA), Frank Wolf (R-VA), Tom Osbourne (R-NE), Zach Wamp (R-TN), and Rosa DeLauro (D-CT).

###

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Allison Dobson/ Maureen Knightly

February 16, 2005 202-224-3254

HARKIN INTRODUCES BILL TO SUPPORT COMMUNITY-BASED SERVICES

Legislation would increase access for people with disabilities and older Americans

Washington, D.C.— Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) today announced that he introduced the Medicaid Community-Based Attendant Services and Supports Act of 2005 (MICASSA). The legislation, co-sponsored by Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA), would increase access to community-based services and supports to Americans with disabilities and older Americans.

“I strongly believe that it is important to level the playing field and give eligible individuals equal access to community-based services and supports,” Harkin said. “This vital legislation will open the door to full participation by people with disabilities in our neighborhoods, workplaces, our economy, and our American Dream.”

Specifically, MICASSA gives individuals who are currently eligible for nursing home services and institutional facilities equal access to community-based attendant services and supports, and establishes a demonstration project to evaluate service coordination and cost sharing approaches for those eligible for both Medicaid and Medicare. The legislation also provides additional funding to states to help them reform their long term care systems and increase the provision of home and community based services.

“This legislation is needed to truly bring people with disabilities into the mainstream of society and provide equal opportunity for employment and community activities,” Harkin said.

The following Senators co-sponsored the Harkin-Specter legislation: Edward Kennedy (D-MA),John Kerry (D-MA), Joseph Biden (D-DE), Mark Dayton (D-MN), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Jon Corzine (D-NJ), Charles Schumer (D-NY),Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), Joseph Lieberman (D-CT), and Christopher Dodd (D-CT).

# # #

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Contacts: Scott Gerber (Feinstein) 202/224-9629

Wednesday, February 16, 2005 Natalie Ravitz (Boxer) 202/224-8120

Matt Gerien (Thompson) 202/225-3311

Northern California Wilderness Bill

Approved by Energy Committee

Washington, DC – The Northern California Coastal Wild Heritage Wilderness Act, introduced by Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein (both D-Calif.) and sponsored in the House by Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Napa Valley), was approved by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee today.

“With many of our wildlands vanishing, we need to preserve what remains,” Senator Feinstein said. “I am pleased to be a part of this effort to permanently preserve 300,000 acres along California's northern coast including the King Range, one of California’s most striking and beautiful environmental jewels. My thanks go to Senator Boxer and Representative Thompson for their leadership on this issue and to the members of the committee for moving this bill forward.”

“This bill protects the natural beauty that is at the heart of California’s identity,” Senator Boxer said. “Last year, we were able to pass this bill in the Senate. This year, we must work to make this bill law. I would like to thank the many wonderful people of California who helped with this great community effort and I also thank Senator Feinstein and Congressman Mike Thompson for their leadership on this issue.”

“This bill has broad support and is gaining critical momentum,” Rep. Thompson said. “It will protect some of California’s most treasured lands for many future generations to come. Senators Boxer and Feinstein have demonstrated great vision and leadership in guiding it through the Senate.”

The bill would designate over 300,000 acres of public land in Del Norte, Humboldt, Lake, Mendocino, and Napa counties as wilderness. It would also designate the Black Butte River in Mendocino County as a wild and scenic river. However, the legislation will not close any existing legal roads, nor will it affect any private lands or alter any grazing rights.

The bill is strongly supported by the administration of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-Calif.). In a letter to House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo (R-Tracy), Mike Chrisman, Secretary for Resources under Governor Schwarzenegger, wrote, “The State of California strongly supports this proposed legislation that will permanently protect over 300,000 acres in Northern California for their wilderness values.”

The sponsors of the bill have worked with the Bush Administration, Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho) and Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) to address any concerns about the legislation. During the 108th Session of Congress, the Senate passed the bill by unanimous consent.

A copy of Secretary Chrisman’s letter is available upon request.

###

For Immediate Release
February 16, 2005
Contact: Scott Gerber, 202-224-9629

Senators Hutchison, Feinstein and Kyl Urge Action to Help Border Hospitals Make Up Loss from Undocumented Aliens
Letter to CMS Administrator calls for implementation of program delivering millions to health care providers burdened by unpaid bills

WASHINGTON – Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Jon Kyl (R-AZ) have sent a letter to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Mark McClellan urging rapid implementation of a hospital reimbursement program for emergency care to unauthorized aliens. The program to provide $250 million annually to local hospitals has yet to begin despite an original start date set for September 1, 2004.

Sen. Hutchison originated the letter after CMS acknowledged that it has not yet set a starting date for the program signed into law December 8, 2003, as part of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act. Congress mandated the program be in place September 1, 2004, with payments beginning in December 2004. Meanwhile, healthcare providers are required by federal law to provide this emergency care, incurring all costs as the delay continues.

“This funding is critical to the survival of healthcare providers in Texas and other border states,” Sen. Hutchison said. “These hospitals deserve timely action on a program already passed by Congress and signed by the president. Immediate relief must be provided while we remain focused on developing a long-term solution to eliminate this growing financial problem burdening our healthcare providers.”

"The Federal government has consistently failed to respond to the needs of state and local communities struggling to stay afloat on account of the growing costs of illegal immigration. And all too frequently, local communities are forced to shoulder this burden alone,” Senator Feinstein said. “California's hospitals, for instance, spent $79 million to provide emergency health care to undocumented immigrants, and nationwide, states and hospitals spent billions more in to provide federally-mandated emergency medical treatment to undocumented immigrants. Given the budget crunches facing state and local governments, it is time for the Federal government to step up to the plate."

“It is unfair for our hospitals to bear a hugely disproportionate burden for mandated emergency health treatment for illegal aliens,” Kyl said. “This affects everyone who needs emergency medical care. A lot of other states don’t feel that illegal immigration is a major problem because it’s not perceived as their problem, but the reality is that illegal immigration is a genuinely national issue, and resolving it requires a national commitment not just on health care but also border control, law enforcement and other resources.”

-MORE, LETTER-

The letter, attached below, cites a recent U.S.-Mexico Border Counties Coalition study that found healthcare facilities in 24 border counties lost nearly $200 million in one year alone as a result of providing emergency medical treatment to undocumented aliens. Texas is expected to receive $47 million and California is expected to receive $72 million under the program in Fiscal Year 2005.

February 15, 2005

Dr. Mark B. McClellan

Administrator

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services

P.O. Box 8000

Baltimore, MD 21244

Dear Dr. McClellan:

We are writing to request an update on the implementation of Section 1011 of the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA). Health-care providers were supposed to begin, in December of 2004, submitting to be reimbursed for providing federally mandated, but uncompensated, emergency medical treatment to undocumented aliens. CMS was supposed to begin reimbursing them three months afterward. It is our understanding that the reimbursement program is not yet operational.

Under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTLA), hospitals are required to provide emergency health services regardless of a patient’s status or ability to pay. Many hospitals are facing dire financial circumstances because they receive no reimbursement for the federally mandated emergency health services they provide to undocumented aliens.

Section 1011 of the MMA included $250 million per year for fiscal years 2005 through 2008 for payments to reimburse states for the costs of providing this federally mandated emergency care. A recent study conducted by the U.S.-Mexico Border Counties Coalition found health-care facilities in 24 border counties lost nearly $200 million in one year as a result of providing federally-required emergency medical treatment to illegal immigrants. Texas border hospitals alone pay nearly $74 million a year in uncompensated costs, California border hospitals pay $79 million a year, and Arizona providers incur yearly costs of an estimated $100 million. Under the formula determined in Section 1011, Arizona’s providers are expected to receive $41 million in reimbursements in FY 2005, Texas is expected to receive $47 million and California is expected to receive $72 million.

We ask that you expedite completion of the implementation guidelines so that hospitals providing federally required emergency health services to undocumented aliens begin to receive reimbursement for providing those services. We appreciate your efforts and your attention to this important matter.

Sincerely,

Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX) Dianne Feinstein (CA) Jon Kyl (AZ)

U.S. Senator U.S. Senator U.S. Senator

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Contact: Howard Gantman

Wednesday, February 16, 2005 or Scott Gerber 202/224-9629

http://feinstein.senate.gov

Statement of Senator Feinstein in Support of

Legislation to Expand Stem Cell Research Lines

Washington, DC – U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) today joined with Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), Sens. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Orrin Hatch (R-Ut), and Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) to introduce legislation designed to expand the current federal funding policy for stem cell research. The following is Senator Feinstein’s statement:

“I think it is critical that we move ahead to begin to enact federal guidelines on stem cell research. There are two bills that will do it: First, there is the bill that is being introduced today, which would make more viable stem cell lines available for federally-funded research. And second -- a bill that we will introduce when we get back from recess -- that would ban human cloning, but allow specialized stem cell research called Somatic Cell Nuclear Transplantation to continue under strict federal oversight. This will be introduced by Senators Hatch, Kennedy, Specter, Harkin and me.

If the federal government doesn’t act, we’re going to have a patchwork of state laws – and that’s already happening. Here’s what states are doing:

· California, for instance, is launching a $3 billion initiative to fund cutting edge stem cell research.

· In 2004, New Jersey created a $25 million embryonic stem cell research center. Now, acting Governor Richard Codey plans to introduce a $500 million bond measure to fund embryonic stem cell research over 10 years.

· In Wisconsin, Governor Jim Doyle has proposed investing $750 million to support embryonic stem cell research and other medical research.

· In Connecticut, legislators have reintroduced a bill that would appropriate $10 million per year over two years for a stem cell research fund.

· In New York, legislative leaders have has proposed a $1 billion stem cell bond measure.

The fact that cutting edge research is continuing shows the great promise and potential for profit from embryonic stem cell research. But what it also says to me is that there is a void that still needs to be filled -- and which can only be filled by the federal government.

We need an effective stem cell policy both to provide federal funding for viable stem cell lines and to provide federal ethical guidelines. This, I think, is a major shortcoming of current federal law, which I think should be remedied as soon as possible.”

###

NEWS RELEASE

JEFF SESSIONS

United States Senator – Alabama

CONTACT: MICHAEL BRUMAS OR NANCY WALL

(202) 224-4124

For Immediate Release

February 16, 2005

U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions Will Chair Senate Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) today was tapped as Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee, a panel that oversees all strategic forces, space programs, Department of Energy nuclear programs and ballistic missile defense, including Ballistic Missile Defense Organization activities in Huntsville.

“The Strategic Forces subcommittee will deal with our nation’s missile, space and high tech defense programs,” said Sessions. “Our subcommittee will oversee well in excess of $55 billion in appropriations. These programs have played a key role in American military dominance, and Alabama has been at the forefront of these programs. The United States military must remain number one in the world in technology and must dominate space capabilities.

“I’m excited to chair this very important subcommittee, and I look forward to working with our Committee Chairman, John Warner, as we further the goals of our nation.”

Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner (R-VA) appointed Sessions chairman of the subcommittee, and Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) was named the ranking Democrat on the subcommittee. Sessions takes over the Strategic Subcommittee after serving as chairman of the Senate Armed Services Airland Subcommittee last Congress.

-30-

Nancy Wall

Deputy Press Secretary

U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions

Washington, D.C. 20510

202-224-4124

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Contact: Howard Gantman

Wednesday, February 16, 2005 or Scott Gerber 202/224-9629

http://feinstein.senate.gov/

Senator Feinstein and 13 Senate Colleagues Urge U.S.

to Take Leadership Role in Preventing Global Warming

Washington, DC – U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) today introduced a bipartisan resolution calling on the United States to participate in international negotiations to actively reduce greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change.

The resolution is cosponsored by Senators Olympia Snowe (R-Me.), John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jim Jeffords (I-Vt.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii) and Jack Reed (D-R.I.).

“The Kyoto Protocol goes into effect today,” said Senator Feinstein. “More than 140 nations, including all 25 members of the European Union, Russia and China, have ratified the agreement to reduce man-made emissions of greenhouse gases. Of the world’s 38 industrialized countries, only the United States, Australia and Monaco have not ratified the Protocol.

“I believe the United States is making a huge mistake and is missing this important opportunity to protect our planet’s environment. Being a responsible steward of the climate is more than just taking steps to pollute less. It also requires participating in international negotiations on the policies the world will need to achieve significant, long-term reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.”

The resolution urges the United States to “demonstrate international leadership and responsibility regarding reducing the health, environmental, and economic risks posed by climate change by:

(1) carrying out reasonable and responsible actions to ensure significant and meaningful reductions in emissions of all greenhouse gases;

(2) generating climate-friendly technologies by enacting and implementing policies and programs to address all greenhouse gas emissions to promote sustained economic growth;

(3) participating in international negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to achieve significant, long-term, cost-effective reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions; and

(4) supporting the establishment of a long-term objective to prevent the global average temperature from increasing by greater than 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit above preindustrial levels. ”

Following is the prepared text of a floor statement by Senator Feinstein:

Mr. President, I rise today to offer a resolution with Senators Snowe, McCain, Chafee, Murray, Jeffords, Durbin, Lieberman, Leahy, Lautenberg Boxer, Cantwell, Akaka and Reed that urges the Administration to participate in international negotiations and actively reduce our greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming.

The Kyoto Protocol goes into effect today. More than 140 nations, including all 25 members of the European Union, Russia and China, have ratified the agreement to reduce man-made emissions of greenhouse gases.

The United States, which accounts for about one-fourth of the greenhouse gases believed responsible for global warming, has refused to ratify the treaty.

Thirty-five of the world’s thirty-eight industrialized countries—except for the United States, Australia, and Monaco—have ratified this important treaty.

This means that industrialized nations are bound to cut their combined greenhouse gases by 5 percent below 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012.

The United States is missing an important opportunity to protect our planet’s environment by not ratifying the Protocol.

I believe this is a huge mistake.

There is emerging consensus that global warming is real.

According to the National Academy of Sciences, “Since the 1900s global average temperature and atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration have increased dramatically, particularly compared to their levels in the 900 preceding years.”

Scientists now agree on three main facts about global warming.

FACT 1: The Earth is warming.

FACT 2: The primary cause of this warming is man-made activities, especially fossil fuel consumption.

FACT 3: If we don’t act now to reduce emissions, the problem will only get worse.

We have already begun to see the impacts of climate change:

o Four hurricanes of significant force pounded the state of Florida in a six week period last fall. The storms formed over an area of the ocean where surface temperatures have increased an average of 17 degrees over the past decade.

o Eskimos are being forced inland in Alaska as their native homes on the coastline are melting into the sea.

o Glaciers are beginning to disappear in Glacier National Park in Montana. In 100 years, the Park has gone from having 150 glaciers to fewer than 30. And the 30 that remain are two-thirds smaller than they once were.

o In California, water supplies are threatened by smaller snowpacks in the Sierra Nevada. Record snowfalls this winter have provided hope for this summer, but the region still could face drought or floods unless temperatures stay cold enough to maintain the snowpack and average snowfall continues for the rest of the precipitation season.

If we take strong action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, there will be 27 percent snowpack remaining in the Sierras at the end of the century.

However, if we do nothing to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, there will only be 11 percent snowpack left in the Sierras at the end of the century.

The San Diego-based Scripps Institution of Oceanography, a preeminent center for marine science research, will release a study later this week showing that global warming will likely have serious ramifications in the very near future, including:

o A water crisis in the western United States in the next 20 years due to smaller snowpacks.

o The disappearance of the glaciers in the Andes in Peru in as little as 10 years, leaving the population without an adequate water supply during the summer.

o The melting of two-thirds of the glaciers in western China by 2050, seriously diminishing the water supply for the region’s 300 million inhabitants.

Further, the UN Comprehensive Assessment of Freshwater Resources of the World estimates that by 2025, around 5 billion people, out of a total world population of 8 billion, will not have access to adequate water supplies.

And concern about the effects of climate change is mounting around the world.

Scientists fear that an “ecological catastrophe” is developing in Tibet with the melting of the region’s glaciers as a result of global warming.

Glaciers in West Antarctica are thinning twice as fast as they did in the 1990s.

The mean air temperature has risen 4-5 degrees in Alaska in the past three decades causing glaciers to melt and the coastline to recede.

Peru’s Quelccaya ice cap, the largest in the tropics, could be gone by 2100 if it continues to melt at its current rate—contracting more than 600 feet a year in some places.

In addition, according to National Geographic, “the famed snows of Kilimanjaro have melted more than 80 percent since 1912. Glaciers in the Garhwal Himalaya in India are retreating so fast that researchers believe that most central and eastern Himalayan glaciers could virtually disappear by 2035. Arctic sea ice has thinned significantly over the past half century, and its extent has declined by about 10 percent in the past 30 years. Greenland’s ice sheet is shrinking.”

The Pew Center for Climate Change reports strong evidence of global warming in the United States. The findings included:

o The red fox has shifted its habitat northward, where it is encroaching on the Arctic fox’s range.

o Southern, warm-water fish have begun to infiltrate waters off Monterey, California, which were previously dominated by colder-water species.

o The Alaskan tundra, which has for thousands of years been a depository for carbon dioxide, has begun to release more of the gas into the air than it removes because warmer winters are causing stored plant matter to decompose.

o There have been documented trends in which the natural timing of animal or insect life cycles changed and the plants on which they depended did not.

o Many Southern species of butterflies have disappeared entirely over the past century as their range contracted.

According to the International Climate Change Taskforce, of which Senator Snowe is a Co-Chair, if the earth’s average temperature increases by more than 2 degrees Celsius (or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), the world could face substantial agricultural losses, countless people at risk of water shortages, and widespread adverse health impacts such as malaria.

Even more critically, if the temperature rises more than 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit, we could be at risk for catastrophic weather events. For instance, we would risk losing the West Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets, which could raise sea levels, shut down the Gulf Stream, and destroy the world’s forests.

Climate change is real. Its impacts are already being felt. If emissions keep growing at projected levels, greenhouse gases in our atmosphere will reach levels unknown since the time of the dinosaurs during the lifetimes of children born today.

That is why my colleagues and I have introduced this resolution that:

o Urges the Administration to engage in international discussions on post-Kyoto greenhouse gas reductions.

o Calls upon the Administration to take action NOW to reduce emissions domestically.

o Encourages the United States to keep global average temperatures from increasing more than 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit over pre-industrial levels.

As the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases, it is the responsibility of the United States to lead by example. By not ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, we have sent a harsh message to the world that the largest emitter and contributor to global warming refuses to participate in a worldwide program aimed at reducing greenhouse gases.

But fortunately, even though the federal government has refused to acknowledge global warming, many States have recognized that in spite of the federal government’s inaction, action must be taken.

Nearly 40 states have developed their own climate plans.

o An emission trading system is emerging in the Northeast that will require large power plants from Maine to Delaware to reduce their carbon emissions.

o Eighteen states and Washington, DC have enacted renewable portfolio standards. They include Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, and Wisconsin.

o California has enacted legislation that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions from vehicle tailpipes—it is expected that the Northeastern States and Canada will also follow California’s lead.

Yet without concerted federal action, the United States will not be able to achieve real, significant greenhouse gas reductions.

As the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitter, we must act now to reduce the impacts of climate change and save the environment for future generations.

The Kyoto Protocol ends in 2012. Though the Protocol ends, the United States needs to lead and move to negotiate a post-Kyoto framework. There are many things we can do. For example, we can:

o Use our forests and our farmland as a depository for carbon to prevent it from being released into the atmosphere;

o Develop new technologies such as clean coal, renewable energy, and hydrogen vehicles;

o Make better use of existing technologies such as hybrid vehicles and energy efficient buildings, appliances, and power generation; and,

o Use market-based programs, such as cap and trade, to reduce emissions with the least harm to economy.

Being a responsible steward of the climate is more than just taking steps to pollute less. It also requires participating in international negotiations on the policies the world will need to achieve significant, long-term reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

Thank you Mr. President.

###

For Immediate Release

February 16,2005

Contact: Natalie Ravitz, Boxer, 202-224-8120

Scott Gerber, Feinstein, 202-224-9629

SENATE COMMITTEE PASSES BOXER-FEINSTEIN LEGISLATION

TO HONOR CONGRESSMAN ROBERT T. MATSUI

Washington, D.C. – Today the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee passed legislation by U.S. Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein (both D-CA) to honor the late Congressman Robert T. Matsui by naming a United States Courthouse in Sacramento in his memory.

"Congressman Matsui was a dedicated public servant, a protector of civil rights, and a dear friend," said Senator Boxer. "Naming the federal courthouse in Sacramento in Matsui’s honor is an appropriate memorial to his efforts toward a just and fair society."

"Bob Matsui was one of the finest public servants I’ve ever met," said Senator Feinstein. "I will remember him as a trusted colleague and as a good friend. He served the people of Sacramento with distinction and with honor. And I think it is very appropriate to name the federal courthouse in Sacramento after him. It will honor his devotion to justice and to fair play, and it will keep Bob in our hearts and our memories."

Congressman Matsui was instrumental in obtaining more than $142 million in federal funding for the Courthouse.

###

For Immediate Release: Contact: Rich Chrismer Talent (202) 224-4812

Wednesday, February 16, 2005 Andy Blotky Wyden (202) 224-3789

***MEDIA ADVISORY***

TALENT-WYDEN TO UNVEIL PLAN TO SUPPLEMENT TRANSPORATION FUNDING WITH BUILD AMERICA BONDS

Plan Has Strong Backing From Transportation Construction Sector

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) U.S. Senators Jim Talent (R-Mo.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) on Thursday will unveil their plan to increase transportation funding using Build America Bonds, a $30 billion one-time bonding program designed to generate new transportation infrastructure. Representatives of the transportation construction industry will join the senators at the news conference in support of the plan

What: Senators host Capitol Hill news conference unveiling Build America Bonds legislation

Who: U.S. Senators Jim Talent & Ron Wyden

When: Thursday, February 17th 2:00 p.m.

Where: The Capitol, Room S-238

###

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Contact: Howard Gantman

Wednesday, February 16, 2005 or Scott Gerber 202/224-9629

http://feinstein.senate.gov/

Senate Energy Committee Passes Feinstein Yosemite/GGNRA Bill

Washington, DC – The U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources today passed legislation sponsored by U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to provide funding for schools in Yosemite Park and expand lands in the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA).

“I am pleased that the Energy Committee has passed this legislation to help Yosemite students and expand the Golden Gate National Recreation Area,” Senator Feinstein said.

The Yosemite schools portion of the legislation authorizes the National Park Service to provide supplemental funding for three small schools in Yosemite National Park attended by approximately 130 children of park service employees, which have faced significant hardship in recent years and have had to cut down on educational services and faculty just to stay open.

“This bill will help students who attend Yosemite schools avoid a commute of more than 45 miles to and from school each day,” said Senator Feinstein. “Children should not have to face such an arduous journey to receive an education because they live in remote areas and lack access to larger public schools.”

The GGNRA measure in the legislation would add 4,700 acres of pristine natural land to the GGNRA in San Mateo County including a 4,076 parcel known as the Rancho Corral de Tierra. The mountainous property, which surrounds the coastal towns of Moss Beach and Montara, was previously purchased by the Peninsula Open Space Trust (POST). The Trust has agreed to transfer the land to the Federal Government for about half of the purchase cost.

“Adding pristine natural land to the Golden Gate National Recreation Area will protect four major watersheds, preserve the home of numerous threatened, rare and endangered plant and animal species in the region, allow potential access to valuable future trail links to contiguous state and county parks, and establish a dramatic and logical southern entrance to the park,” Senator Feinstein said.

###

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Allison Dobson / Maureen Knightly

February 16, 2005 202.224.3254

Harkin Joins Bipartisan Coalition in Introducing Legislation to Expand Stem Cell Research

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) today was joined at a press conference today by Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA), and Representatives Mike Castle (R-PA), and Diana DeGette (D-CO) to announce legislation designed to expand the current federal funding policy for stem cell research. The bipartisan measure would allow federal funding for stem cell research using stem cell lines derived under strict ethical requirements from excess in vitro fertilization embryos, regardless of the date they were derived.

Harkin’s statement follows.

“When the President announced his stem cell policy in August 2001, I was concerned about its limitations, but I welcomed it as a first step. Stem cell research holds enormous promise for easing human suffering, and federal support is critical to its success.

“Scientists have learned a great deal about stem cells in the three and a half years since that announcement. Unfortunately, one thing they have learned is that the President’s policy will most likely never result in cures and treatments for people who desperately need them.

“The Administration originally said 78 stem cell lines were eligible for federally funded research, meaning they had to be derived before the totally arbitrary date and time of August 9, 2001, at 9 p.m.

“Today, only 22 of those 78 lines are available for research – not nearly enough to reflect the genetic diversity that scientists need.

“But more importantly, a recent study showed that all 22 lines are contaminated with mouse cells, making them dangerous to use in humans.

“It’s now clear that the President’s policy offers only false hope to the millions of people across this country who are suffering from diseases that could be cured or treated through stem cell research – diseases like juvenile diabetes, Parkinson’s, ALS, and many more.

“We need a policy that offers true, meaningful hope to these patients and their loved ones.

“That is why those of us on this stage – Republicans and Democrats, from both the House and Senate – have joined together to introduce legislation that would expand the number of stem cell lines that federally funded scientists can study.

“Our bill would lift the arbitrary eligibility date of August 9, 2001. Under our legislation, all stem cell lines would be eligible for federal research, regardless of the date they were derived, as long as they met strict ethical requirements.

“Since August 2001, scientists have made great advances in deriving stem cell lines. Many of the new lines were grown without mouse feeder cells. Shouldn’t our top scientists be studying those lines, instead of being limited to 22 lines that will never be used in humans?

“We don’t require our astronomers to explore the heavens with 19th century telescopes, and we don’t require our geologists to study the Earth with a tape measure. If we are serious about realizing the promise of stem cell research, our biomedical researchers need access to the best stem cell lines available.”

# # #

"The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act"

Senators Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Tom Harkin (D-IA)

Representatives Mike Castle (R-DE) and Diana DeGette (D-CO)

SUMMARY

This bill expands the number of stem cell lines that are eligible for federally funded research, thereby accelerating scientific progress toward cures and treatments for a wide range of diseases and debilitating health conditions.

Under the current federal policy on human embryonic stem cell research, only those stem cell lines derived before August 9, 2001, are eligible for federally funded research. This bill lifts that restriction. Stem cell lines shall be eligible for federally funded research regardless of the date on which they were derived.

The bill also institutes stronger ethical requirements on stem cell lines that are eligible for federally funded research.

SECTION BY SECTION

Section 1 Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005

Section 2 Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Secretary shall conduct and support research on stem cells that have been derived from embryos if the following requirements are met:

1. Embryos used to derive stem cells were originally created for fertility treatment purposes and are in excess of clinical need;

2. The individuals seeking fertility treatments for whom the embryos were created have determined that the embryos will not be implanted in a woman and will otherwise be discarded; and

3. The individuals for whom the embryos were created have provided written consent for embryo donation.

The Secretary, in consultation with the Director of the NIH, shall issue guidelines 60 days after enactment. These guidelines shall ensure that federally funded researchers adhere to ethical considerations. The Secretary shall annually report to Congress about NIH stem cell research.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: CONTACT: Allison Dobson/ Maureen Knightly

February 16, 2005 202-224-3254

HARKIN ANNOUNCES FIREFIGHTER ASSISTANCE FOR

NINE IOWA COMMUNITIES

WASHINGTON, D.C.--As part of his continued effort to support Iowa’s first responders, Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) announced today that nine Iowa communities were awarded over $1 million from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to increase the effectiveness of fire prevention and to support fire fighter safety.

“I am pleased these brave men and women will receive the essential fire fighting tools they need to keep our communities safe," said Harkin. “The equipment, technology and training these grants will support are the key to protecting Iowa’s firefighters and our homes and loved ones.”

The following fire departments will receive funding:

Ames -- $49,203
Eddyville -- $218,851
Eldora -- $88,560
Elk Horn -- $119,700
Grant -- $166,680
Guttenberg -- $121,500
Manilla -- $106,965
Postville -- $50,458
Traer -- $79,220

Specifically, these grants help Iowa communities fund the purchase of firefighting equipment, firefighter health and safety programs, enhance emergency medical services programs, and conduct fire prevention and safety programs.

DHS expects to announce grants weekly and will distribute $746 million to fire departments across the country.

###

STATEMENT OF SENATOR PAUL S. SARBANES (D-MD)
COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS
WITH FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIRMAN ALAN GREENSPAN

February 16, 2005

I am pleased to welcome Chairman Greenspan before the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs this morning to testify on the Federal Reserve's Semi-Annual Report to Congress on Monetary Policy.

Chairman Greenspan's testimony on the Fed's Monetary Policy Report is always widely anticipated by the Congress, the press, the financial markets, and the public. In addition, I believe this is Chairman Greenspan's first testimony this year before any committee of Congress, so I suspect that heightens the expectation.

The Federal Reserve Act requires the Federal Reserve's Board of Governors to submit a report to Congress by February 20 and July 20 of each year on the conduct of monetary policy by the Fed. It also requires the Chairman of the Federal Reserve to testify before the Congress on both of those reports.

I would like to take note at the outset of today's hearing of the decision announced by the Federal Reserve's Open Market Committee (FOMC) on December 14 to expedite the release of the minutes of FOMC meetings. Beginning with the December 14 FOMC meeting, the minutes of regularly scheduled meetings will be released three weeks after the date of the policy decision. The previous policy was to release minutes of the FOMC meeting after the next FOMC meeting, usually a period of six weeks or more.

This move is consistent with previous actions by the FOMC to announce its policy decisions immediately after its meetings to provide some explanation of the basis for the decision in the announcement. In my view, greater transparency in the FOMC's decision-making process is of great benefit to the operation of the markets and to the public, and will be one of Chairman Greenspan most significant legacies at the Federal Reserve.

- MORE -
Chairman Shelby, I have concerns about the outlook for the U.S. economy, and about the current conduct of monetary policy by the Federal Reserve that I would like to raise briefly this morning.

At the last meeting of the Federal Reserve's Open Market Committee on February 2, the FOMC raised the federal funds rate a quarter point from 2.25 percent to 2.5 percent. This was the sixth consecutive quarter point increase by the FOMC in less than 8 months. It has now gone from 1 to 2.5 percent and it seems to me that while the FOMC feels that this pace can be continued, I think that there is some cause for concern.

The GDP growth in the fourth quarter slowed to 3.1 percent; well below the rate most experts consider our potential growth rate (growth from the 4th quarter of 2003 to the fourth quarter of 2004 was 3.7%).

In my view the labor market remains relatively weak. Employers added only 146,000 payroll jobs in January, 157,000 jobs in December, and 137,000 in November, all of which are just enough to keep pace with population growth.

While the Labor Department reported last week that the unemployment rate dropped in January to 5.2 % from 5.4 % in December it was mostly because of a decline in the number of people looking for work. In fact, most of the decline in the unemployment rate over the last year occurred because of a decline in the share of people looking for work not because of a higher share with jobs. Capacity utilization in our nation's factories remains at low levels. In fact, figures were released this morning that capacity utilization fell to 79 percent. December's level had been reported at 79.2 percent but had been revised downward by a tenth of a point. Wages are rising more slowly than inflation. The economy is still in the situation of 760,000 fewer private sector jobs than we had when President Bush took office four years ago. Over 20 percent of those who are unemployed are long-term unemployed - this has now been the case for the last 28 months.

In the statement released after it's meeting, the FOMC found that "Inflation and longer-term inflation expectations remain well contained." Given this it seems to me that Fed should consider taking a pause from its policy of interest rate increases to see how the economy develops in the first quarter of this year. Some expect that economic growth will slow and given that it seems to me worth considering pausing to survey where we are and assuring ourselves that the economy is indeed strengthening and can withstand the continuing raising of interest rates.

I look forward to pursuing that with the Chairman in the course of his appearance here this morning

Thank you very much.

###

JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator - Texas
CONTACT: Don Stewart (CORNYN) 202-224-0704,

Tracy Schmaler (LEAHY) 202-224-2154

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE February 16, 2005

CORNYN, LEAHY INTRODUCE BIPARTISAN BILL TO PROMOTE OPENNESS IN GOVERNMENT

‘Open government is one of the most basic requirements of any healthy democracy’

WASHINGTON--U.S. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, introduced legislation on Wednesday to achieve meaningful reforms to federal government information laws, most notably the Freedom of Information Act of 1966 (FOIA). The bipartisan Openness Promotes Effectiveness in our National Government Act of 2005 (OPEN Government Act) is aimed at substantially enhancing and expanding the accessibility, accountability, and openness of the federal government. U.S. Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vt.), the committee’s senior Democrat, is the bill’s co-sponsor. The legislation is supported by groups from across the political spectrum, from ACLU to the Heritage Foundation. More information is available at http://cornyn.senate.gov/FOIA

“This reform legislation was created from the belief that FOIA establishes a presumption of openness,” said Cornyn, who in 2001 was presented with the James Madison Award for his efforts to promote open government by the Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas. “Open government is one of the most basic requirements of any healthy democracy. It allows for taxpayers to see where their money is going; it permits the honest exchange of information that ensures government accountability; and it upholds the ideal that government never rules without the consent of the governed.”

“This bill advances one of the most fundamental rights of Americans, the public’s right to know what its government is doing,” said Leahy, who has been a longtime champion of FOIA in Congress. Leahy sponsored the Electronic Freedom of Information Act Amendments, which updated FOIA for the Internet age, and in 1996 he was installed in the Freedom of Information Act Hall of Fame.

“Access to public information in a timely and effective manner is a vital piece of our democratic system of checks and balances that promotes accountability and imbues trust,” said Leahy. “FOIA represents the foundation of our modern open government laws and this bill builds on that by updating its protections to include new technologies and refining the process to reduce delays and encourage accessibility.”

The Cornyn-Leahy legislation is not just pro-openness, pro-accountability, and pro-accessibility - it's also pro-Internet. It includes a hotline enabling citizens to track their requests, including Internet tracking, and grants privileged FOIA fees for bloggers and writers for Internet outlets, providing the same status as traditional media.

The last time Congress approved major reforms to FOIA was nearly a decade ago, and the Senate Judiciary Committee has not convened an oversight hearing on compliance issues since April 30, 1992. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which shares jurisdiction over federal government information, has not held a FOIA oversight hearing since 1980.

“Congress must close loopholes, help requestors obtain timely responses to requests, provide strong incentives for agencies to act on requests in a timely manner, and provide FOIA officials the tools they need to ensure the openness of our government for the people it represents,” Cornyn said. “Achieving the true consent of the governed requires informed consent, and such consent is possible only with an open and accessible government.”

Cornyn said that America’s national security should never take a back seat, but that it shouldn’t be used as a barrier against informed consent either. He cited a broad consensus that the federal government over-classifies, with many documents placed beyond public view “without real justification.” He called for a system of classification that “strikes the right balance between the need to classify documents in our national interest and security, and our national values of open government.”

The OPEN Government Act contains more than a dozen substantive provisions, designed to achieve the following four objectives:

(1) Strengthen FOIA and close loopholes

(2) Help FOIA requestors obtain timely responses to their requests

(3) Ensure that agencies have strong incentives to act on FOIA requests in a timely manner

(4) Provide FOIA officials with all of the tools they need to ensure that our government remains open and accessible

STRENGTHEN FOIA AND CLOSE LOOPHOLES

• Ensure that FOIA applies when agency recordkeeping functions are outsourced

• Establish a new open government impact statement, by requiring that any future Congressional attempt to create a new FOIA exemption be expressly stated within the text of the legislation

• Impose annual reporting requirement on usage of the DHS disclosure exemption for critical infrastructure information

• Protect access to FOIA fee waivers for legitimate journalists, regardless of institutional association – including bloggers and other Internet-based journalists

• Provide reliable reporting of FOIA performance, by requiring agencies to distinguish between first person requests for personal information and other kinds of requests

HELP FOIA REQUESTORS OBTAIN TIMELY RESPONSES

• Establish FOIA hotline services, either by telephone or on the Internet, to enable requestors to track the status of their requests

• Create a new FOIA ombudsman, located at the Administrative Conference of the United States, to review agency FOIA compliance and provide alternatives to litigation

• Authorize reasonable recovery of attorney fees when litigation is inevitable

ENSURE THAT AGENCIES HAVE STRONG INCENTIVES TO ACT ON FOIA REQUESTS IN TIMELY FASHION

• Restore meaningful deadlines for agency action by ensuring that the 20-day statutory clock runs immediately upon the receipt of the request

• Impose real consequences on federal agencies for missing statutory deadlines

• Enhance authority of the Office of Special Counsel to take disciplinary action against government officials who arbitrarily and capriciously deny disclosure

• Strengthen reporting requirements on FOIA compliance to identify agencies plagued by excessive delay, and to identify excessive delays in fee status determinations

PROVIDE FOIA OFFICIALS WITH THE TOOLS THEY NEED TO ENSURE THAT OUR GOVERNMENT REMAINS OPEN AND ACCESSIBLE

• Improve personnel policies for FOIA officials to enhance agency FOIA performance

• Examine the need for FOIA awareness training for federal employees

• Determine appropriate funding levels needed to ensure agency FOIA compliance

Sen. Cornyn served previously as Texas Attorney General, Texas Supreme Court Justice, and Bexar County District Judge.

cornyn.senate.gov

For Immediate Release Contact: David DiMartino (202)-224-8795

February 16, 2005 Jena Longo (202) - 224-5765

NELSON OBJECTS TO HIGHER COPAYS AND HEALTH

CARE FEES FOR AMERICA’S VETERANS

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Nebraska’s Senator Ben Nelson today condemned a proposal in the federal budget submitted by President Bush that would increase the prescription drug co-payment for veterans from $7 to $15 and imposes an annual $250 enrollment fee for middle-income veterans.

“I agree with a Korean veteran who was quoted as calling it a stab in the back,” said Nelson. “We, as a nation, must fulfill our commitment to veterans just as they fulfilled their commitment to our country. We made a promise and it would be wrong to renege on it.”

This is the third time the President has proposed a fee for the approximately 1.3 million non-disabled, higher income veterans among the 7 million people enrolled in the VA medical system. Thus far, Congress has been unwilling to go along.

Veterans groups point to those who are trying to manage their own medical care and say the increases proposed in the budget would drive away many men and women who depend on the VA for care.

The President proposes to increase VA medical care spending from $21.4 billion to $22.4 billion a year with much of the increase coming from the $250 annual fee and by increasing the prescription co-pay from $7 to $15 for non-disabled, higher income individuals.

“This amounts to a user tax,” said Nelson.

Veterans with service-related disabilities and low income vets would continue to receive free care. All others would need to pay for part of their medical costs.

A letter to the Senate and House Budget Committees, signed by Nelson and others stated, “It is unacceptable to place the burden of needed increases for veteran’s health care on the shoulders of America’s veterans themselves. The President’s budget request for veteran’s health care is unacceptable, and does not even meet inflation. We urge you to reject the President’s proposal to increase health care costs for veterans and provide the men and women who have served our country with the health care they have earned and deserve.”

-30-

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Allison Dobson/ Maureen Knightly

February 16, 2005 202-224-3524

Harkin Questions Bush on Effects of Social Security Privatization on Americans with Disabilities

Washington, D.C.—Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) today wrote to President Bush asking him to explain how the administration’s Social Security privatization proposals will affect people with disabilities. The president’s own Social Security Commission’s calculations assume that disability benefits will be cut the same as retirement benefits. Additionally, a General Accounting Office (GAO) report in the 107th Congress found that all Social Security privatization proposals would require cuts to disability payments. Harkin was joined on the letter by13 other senators.

“Americans with disabilities are deeply concerned. They do not want to wait until a proposal surfaces that reduces their benefits. We need to know with certainty how the president plans to prevent cuts to these needed benefits,” Harkin said.

Social Security is critical for the 6.2 million Americans that receive disability benefits, and an average healthy 20 year old today has a 30 percent chance of becoming disabled in his or her lifetime. Equally important, people with disabilities rely on all facets of Social Security, including Retirement Insurance when they age out of SSDI, benefits from their parents who have reached retirement age, and Survivor’s Insurance. All the while, Social Security has been able to provide this support at a relatively low cost.

Historically the disability, retirement, and survivor programs in Social Security have all used the same formula. If the president plans to apply different formulas to each, there are many difficult policy issues that must be resolved. Before Congress can begin to consider Social Security reform, we believe it is essential to know how people with disabilities will be affected.

“President Bush says that he has no current plans to cut disability benefits. And I hope that remains the case. Unfortunately, the president’s Social Security privatization plan leaves a lot of questions as to how people with disabilities will be treated,” Harkin said. “We have no details from the president, and I am deeply concerned that he has not thought this through.”

Other senators that signed onto the letter include: Harry Reid (D-NV), John Kerry (D-MA), Jon Corzine (D-NJ), Max Baucus (D-MT), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Tim Johnson (D-SD), Patty Murray (D-WA), Christopher Dodd (D-CT), Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), Daniel Inouye (D-HI), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), and John Rockefeller (D-WV).

A copy of the letter (3 pages) follows. A PDF of the letter is available upon request.

# # #

February 15, 2005

President George W. Bush

The White House

Washington, DC 20502

Dear President Bush:

Almost fifteen years ago, Congress passed a piece of landmark civil rights legislation – the Americans with Disabilities Act. Your father signed that bill into law. Among other significant achievements of that legislation was a commitment by Congress and the Executive Branch to people with disabilities. We decided that as a matter of public policy, people with disabilities should never be left out of the discussion. They should never be shunted to the side, or considered second class citizens.

Mr. President, we have listened carefully to all you have said about changing the Social Security program. We have not heard how you intend to protect people with disabilities. As you know, Social Security is absolutely critical to millions of Americans with disabilities. We are worried that disability insurance is an important aspect of the program that is often left out of the debate. Equally important, people with disabilities rely on all facets of Social Security, including Retirement Insurance when they age out of SSDI. They rely on benefits from their parents who have reached retirement age. They rely on Survivor’s Insurance, which is critical to families affected by disability that lose a breadwinner.

We note that in your Commission’s report of December 2001, only two pages were devoted to disability. It says:

In the absence of fully developed proposals, the calculations carried out for the Commission and included in the report assume that defined benefits will be changed in similar ways for [both retirement and disability] programs.

The Commission says it is not necessarily recommending this, but the proof is in the numbers. All of the Commission's calculations assume that disability benefits will be cut the same as retirement benefits. Without those cuts, the Commission's numbers simply do not add up.

Mr. President, people with disabilities are deeply concerned. They don’t want to wait until a proposal surfaces that leaves their benefits out. We need to know with certainty what your thoughts are on how to prevent cuts to these needed benefits. According to published reports, on February 3, a mother of an adult with disabilities asked you what would happen to her daughter if you created private accounts in Social Security, and you said she would not be affected.

We appreciate that expression of reassurance. However, historically the disability, retirement, and survivor programs in social security have all used the same formula. If you plan to apply different formulas to each, there are many difficult policy issues that must be resolved. Before Congress can begin to consider Social Security reform, we believe it is essential to know how people with disabilities will be affected.

To that end, we would appreciate your responses to the following questions:

· If you plan to preserve the current formula for Disability Insurance (DI), but apply a less generous formula to retirement benefits, does that mean that people who age out of DI and start receiving old-age benefits will receive a higher benefit than other old-age recipients, or will individuals receiving DI who reach retirement age have their benefits cut dramatically at that time?

· If you protect DI benefits (either until retirement or for life) will that mean greater cuts to old-age benefits?

· Given the number of people with disabilities getting survivor’s benefits, do you have a plan to protect their income if there is a shift in benefit calculations?

· What will be the impact on the benefit levels for individuals with disabilities who are receiving benefits based on their parent’s retirement? Will you protect their income as well?

· If trillions of additional dollars in transition costs are incurred, do you have a plan in place to protect other needed sources of funding that provide a lifeline for people with disabilities – such as housing programs for people with disabilities and Medicare and Medicaid – in the face of inevitable budget pressures?

· How would your proposal affect Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments?

· What if a 30-year old has been diverting funding to a private account, and then becomes disabled?

o Would the benefits be proportionally cut to reflect the diversion of funds to the private account?

o When would this person have access to that account, if at all?

o Such a person will have had far fewer years to save money, and will have to live many more years on that meager savings. Do you expect this account to carry this person through life?

o What about a 65 year old who becomes disabled a few years before becoming eligible for retirement benefits? Will that person’s benefits and personal accounts be treated the same way as the 30-year old?

It has been three years since your Social Security Commission recommended further policy development on the Social Security Disability program. To date, we have not seen any further reports or details. We look forward to receiving detailed information on these critical issues and working with you to truly strengthen Social Security, while protecting people with disabilities.

Sincerely,

______________________________ ______________________________

FLOOR STATEMENT

NAZI WAR CRIMES DISCLOSURE ACT EXTENSION

U.S. SENATOR MIKE DeWINE

FEBRUARY 16, 2005

Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill -- S. 384 -- that would extend a very important law -- and that is the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act. This Act has launched a mission of discovery that has proven both disturbing and necessary. I’d like to take a few moments today to talk about the Act’s specific merits, but before I do that, there are some people whom I would like to thank.

First, I want to thank the Leader and his staff for allowing us time today on the Floor to debate this measure, and I’d also like to thank Judiciary Committee Chairman Specter for agreeing sometime ago to hold a hearing about our bill. It was his strong support of our efforts that allowed us to move so quickly on this issue.

He gave a strong push to all involved to resolve their differences and move forward so that we could be in the position we are today. I thank him for his leadership and support.

Mr. President, in 1998, Congress first passed the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act, which our friend and colleague Senator Patrick Moynihan and I introduced together in the Senate and my friend Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney introduced in the House. The purpose of this law was to make public previously classified information about a terrible part of history -- the history of Nazi persecution and the relationship of the U.S. government to Nazi war criminals in the aftermath of World War II and during the Cold War.

Undeniably, the Nazi era was one of the darkest chapters in human existence, and there was a natural tendency to try to avoid focusing attention on that tragic part of world history. But, Congress passed the Nazi War Crimes law because we understood that we owe it to all those who suffered and died in the death camps and to their families to bring the whole truth to light.

The Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act has been in effect since 1998, and its fundamental results have been produced primarily through the efforts of the Interagency Working Group, also known as the IWG, which the law created. The IWG includes the Director of the Holocaust Museum, the Historian of the Department of State, the Archivist of the United States, representatives from the CIA, FBI, DOJ (specifically, the Office of Special Investigations), DOD, and three outside appointees known as “the public members” -- who are Elizabeth Holtzman, Richard Ben-Veniste, and Thomas Baer.

The IWG also includes a number of professional historians and archivists, who, along with the public members and the other IWG members, took on the task of locating, identifying, and recommending documents for declassification, as long as the declassification posed no threat to national security.

At this point Mr. President, I think it is important to offer thanks to all the members of the IWG for their years of hard work on this project. The staff, including the archivists and historians, has done remarkable work and has helped to produce a tremendous amount of research on this critical project. In particular, we owe a debt of gratitude to the public members of the IWG -- Elizabeth Holtzman, Richard Ben-Veniste and Thomas Baer -- who have worked without compensation and spent literally hundreds and hundreds of hours of their own time on this effort. We give them our thanks. They have contributed mightily to the knowledge of this terrible era in world history.

Mr. President, once the IWG was created, it worked closely with the CIA, the FBI, the NSA, the Army, and a number of other agencies to examine and evaluate an enormous number of documents. In fact, since 1998, the Interagency Working Group has coordinated the single largest specifically focused declassification effort in American history. In its first year of operation alone, the IWG screened so many documents for possible declassification and uncovered so much work to do that Congress extended its life in 2001, under the leadership of Senator Feinstein, and then again with my sponsorship in 2004. At this point, over 100 million documents have been screened for possible relevancy, and over 8 million documents have been declassified and used to create a book titled, U.S. Intelligence and the Nazis. This book, which I have right here, now provides us with 15 chapters of insight into the Holocaust and the post-World War II era -- insight into what U.S. government officials knew and when they knew it.

When I came to the Floor almost seven years ago to introduce and help pass the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act, Mr. President, I brought with me several aerial U.S. intelligence photographs taken in 1944 of Auschwitz. In the photographs, which were discovered by photo analysts from the CIA in 1978, prisoners were being led into gas chambers. This confirmed that our government knew that these atrocities were occurring. What else did they know? At that time, we could not be sure.

Now, however, due in great part to this law, we are much closer to answering that question. The book has contributed to our understanding of history -- much more so than we ever hoped. Let me tell just a couple of the many stories this research has uncovered.

For example, the historians were able to examine a range of documents produced by Gonzalo Montt, the Chilean consul in Prague during the early 1940s. Montt was a Nazi sympathizer and, as such, appears to have had significant access to Nazi plans regarding “the Jewish problem” and how the regime was planning to address it -- and that plan involved moving the Jews into ghettos, expropriating their assets, and eventually eradicating the Jewish population.

British intelligence got access to many of Montt’s dispatches to his home government and provided them to the United States as early as March 1942. Under the law, the IWG recommended that these documents be declassified, and our government agreed. These documents show that certain officials in our government had some evidence of Nazi intentions toward the Jews at least six months earlier than had previously been known.

Further, as the authors, themselves, say, these documents show again that “for many Americans and Britons inside and outside of government, the central, overriding concern during 1939-1945 was the war, itself -- not the barbaric policies that accompanied it.”

Other documents showed other details. For example, in a chapter written by Professor Norman J.W. Goda, a professor at Ohio University, the book details how the German government, in coordination with a number of U.S. and European banks, worked together to funnel money illegally expropriated from the accounts of German Jewish nationals back to Germany. Although the details are somewhat complex, in essence, the German government used these expropriated assets to lure a prior generation of German immigrants back to Germany from the United States and, essentially, invest in the German war effort.

A large U.S. bank was intimately involved in this scheme, and profited greatly from it. The scheme was discovered in late 1940 by the FBI, and it began a lengthy investigation. Rather than shut down the operation, the Bureau surveilled the many participants and eventually did arrest a large number of them. At some point during the investigation, the bank, itself, did cooperate with the investigation and was never prosecuted in order to protect FBI and Army intelligence sources. Until this project began, this story had never fully been exposed.

Mr. President, as this book shows and those stories illustrate, this project has been a great success, and the IWG has been very effective at their task -- but the law is due to expire at the end of March and the IWG needs more time. Unfortunately, during the course of the last year, the IWG and the CIA have had several ongoing disagreements about the correct interpretation of the law and what type of disclosure the law requires.

After a great deal of effort, the parties have finally come to a common understanding of what the law requires. Specifically, it is now understood that the law was drafted broadly, so that as much information as possible may be released -- both about specific Nazi war crimes and also about the relationship the U.S. government had with Nazi war criminals in the post World War II and Cold War era.

With this understanding going forward, the various parties who comprise the IWG agree that there is a need for some more time to conclude their important work, and I agree, as well. Accordingly, yesterday I introduced, along with Senators Feinstein and Cornyn, legislation that will extend the life of the IWG for two additional years, until March 2007. Both the IWG and the CIA agree that two years is a reasonable amount of time for the extension, and I agree.

I hope and expect that well within those two years, the IWG, working closely with the CIA, will be able to examine the remaining documents and release the important information that still lays within the files of the CIA -- unexamined by the public. We have come a long way and told a large part of the story, and it is time to finish the job.

Finally, Mr. President, I would like to note for the record the contributions of the many people who have helped us to get to where we are today. Once again, Senator Specter, the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, was instrumental in putting the power of the Judiciary Committee behind our effort to move this issue quickly. I also would like to thank Senator Leahy, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, who has been a leader on this issue since the beginning, along with our co-sponsors on the Committee, Senator Feinstein and Senator Cornyn.

In the House of Representatives, as I mentioned earlier, Representative Carolyn Maloney has been my counterpart and the leader on this issue since the beginning. I look forward to working with Representative Maloney and with Chairman Davis, Chairman Sensenbrenner and Chairman Hoekstra to help move this legislation in the House.

Of course, I also must recognize the commitment, dedication, and vision of the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan. He spent countless hours involved in this issue. He knew how important this was to deepening our understanding of history. He appreciated the value of uncovering this information and what it would mean to those who suffered through the Holocaust and their families.

Mr. President, I also must mention that the CIA, of course, has played a critical role in resolving this dispute and moving forward toward the completion of this project. I’d like to thank former DCI George Tenet for his efforts in that regard and, in particular, mention current DCI Porter Goss, who, as a Congressman from Florida, was a cosponsor of the original legislation in the House. Again, as I noted earlier, the members and staff of the IWG, including the public members, deserve our special thanks.

I should mention again the efforts of leadership and Floor staff, particularly Sharon Soderstrom and Laura Dove, for helping to move this legislation so quickly and make sure we had the opportunity to consider it prior to the expiration of the IWG next month.

Finally, on a personal note, I’d like to thank the staffs of all of the members who have played such a large role on this issue. In particular, I would like to recognize the contributions of my former Judiciary Committee Staff Director Louis Dupart. Louis was a critical part of the team that helped us turn this idea into law back in 1998. Even though he is no longer working in the Senate, he has never stopped working to help promote this legislation and the effective implementation of the law. His ongoing efforts have been crucial to the success of our efforts here today.

Again Mr. President, I’d like to urge my colleagues to vote for this important and timely piece of legislation to extend our efforts to finally and fully open our files regarding this horrific period in history and give the victims of the Nazi era and their families as complete an accounting as possible. We owe them no less.

Amanda Flaig

Press Secretary

U.S. Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH)

140 Russell Senate Office Building

Washington, DC 20510

Work: 202-224-7997

Mobile: 202-841-1603

Fax: 202-228-0549

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Don Stewart (CORNYN) 202-224-0704

Tracy Schmaler (LEAHY) 202-224-2154

CORNYN, LEAHY INTRODUCE BILL TO PROMOTE OPENNESS IN GOVERNMENT

…Bipartisan Legislation Improves, Strengthens FOIA

WASHINGTON (Wednesday, Feb. 16) -- U.S. Senators John Cornyn (R-Texas), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the ranking Democratic member of the panel, introduced legislation on Wednesday to achieve meaningful reforms to federal government information laws, most notably the Freedom of Information Act of 1966 (FOIA).

The bipartisan “Openness Promotes Effectiveness in our National Government Act of 2005”, or the OPEN Government Act, is aimed at substantially enhancing and expanding the accessibility, accountability, and openness of the federal government. The legislation is supported by groups from across the political spectrum, including the ACLU and the Heritage Foundation.

The OPEN Government Act contains more than a dozen substantive provisions, designed to achieve the following four objectives:

(1) Strengthen FOIA and close loopholes

(2) Help FOIA requestors obtain timely responses to their requests

(3) Ensure that agencies have strong incentives to act on FOIA requests in a timely manner

(4) Provide FOIA officials with all of the tools they need to ensure that our government remains open and accessible

STRENGTHEN FOIA AND CLOSE LOOPHOLES

· Ensure that FOIA applies when agency recordkeeping functions are outsourced

· Establish a new open government impact statement, by requiring that any future Congressional attempt to create a new FOIA exemption be expressly stated within the text of the legislation

· Impose annual reporting requirement on usage of the DHS disclosure exemption for critical infrastructure information

· Protect access to FOIA fee waivers for legitimate journalists, regardless of institutional association – including bloggers and other Internet-based journalists

· Provide reliable reporting of FOIA performance, by requiring agencies to distinguish between first person requests for personal information and other kinds of requests

HELP FOIA REQUESTORS OBTAIN TIMELY RESPONSES

· Establish FOIA hotline services, either by telephone or on the Internet, to enable requestors to track the status of their requests

· Create a new FOIA ombudsman, located at the Administrative Conference of the United States, to review agency FOIA compliance and provide alternatives to litigation

· Authorize reasonable recovery of attorney fees when litigation is inevitable

ENSURE THAT AGENCIES HAVE STRONG INCENTIVES TO ACT ON FOIA REQUESTS IN TIMELY FASHION

· Restore meaningful deadlines for agency action by ensuring that the 20-day statutory clock runs immediately upon the receipt of the request

· Impose real consequences on federal agencies for missing statutory deadlines

· Enhance authority of the Office of Special Counsel to take disciplinary action against government officials who arbitrarily and capriciously deny disclosure

· Strengthen reporting requirements on FOIA compliance to identify agencies plagued by excessive delay, and to identify excessive delays in fee status determinations

PROVIDE FOIA OFFICIALS WITH THE TOOLS THEY NEED TO ENSURE THAT OUR GOVERNMENT REMAINS OPEN AND ACCESSIBLE

· Improve personnel policies for FOIA officials to enhance agency FOIA performance

· Examine the need for FOIA awareness training for federal employees

· Determine appropriate funding levels needed to ensure agency FOIA compliance

# # # # #

(Senator Leahy’s remarks on the introduction of the bill, delivered on the Senate floor Wednesday morning, follows.)

Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy

Introduction of the

“Openness Promotes Effectiveness

In our National Government Act”

(OPEN Government Act of 2005)

February 16, 2005

MR. LEAHY. I am pleased to join as a partner with the Senator from Texas in introducing the OPEN Government Act of 2005. I have devoted a considerable portion of my work in the Senate to improving government oversight, government openness and citizen “right-to-know” laws to make government work better for the American people, and at times it has been a lonely battle. Finding dedicated allies on the other side of the aisle has proven difficult. That is why I am delighted to have a partner in John Cornyn. Senator Cornyn has a distinguished record of supporting open government dating back to his days as Attorney General of Texas. In fact, some of the provisions in the bill we introduce today are modeled after sections of the Texas Public Information Act.

I believe that we both see this effort as the first of many bipartisan steps we can take together in the new Congress. Senator Cornyn and I began to forge a partnership on improving public access to government information well over a year ago when, during the 108th Congress, we worked with several other Senators and with the Library of Congress to improve the publicly accessible congressional information website, THOMAS. He and I also cooperated last fall in a successful effort to ensure that “government information,” including the application of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), be subject to the jurisdiction of both the Judiciary Committee and the newly constituted Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

The bill we introduce today is a collection of commonsense modifications designed to update FOIA and improve the timely processing of FOIA requests by Federal agencies. It was drafted after a long and thoughtful process of consultation with individuals and organizations that rely on FOIA to obtain information and share it with the public, including the news media, librarians, and public interest organizations representing all facets of the political spectrum.

The OPEN Government Act reaffirms the fundamental premise of FOIA: government information belongs to all Americans and should be subject to a presumption in favor of disclosure. James Madison said that “a popular government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or tragedy or perhaps both.” His caution rings just as true today. The public’s right to know what its government is doing promotes accountability, imbues trust and contributes to our system of checks and balances.

First enacted in 1966, FOIA represents the foundation of our modern open government laws. In 1996, I was the principal author of the Electronic Freedom of Information Act Amendments, which updated FOIA for the internet age. The bill we introduce today is the next step: a practical set of important modifications that respond to common complaints and limitations in the current system that we have heard, whether from frequent FOIA requestors, such as representatives of the press, or individual citizens who may only occasionally rely on FOIA, but who nonetheless deserve timely and comprehensive responses to their requests.

Chief among the problems with FOIA implementation is agency delay. Following the successful model of the Texas Public Information Act, this legislation imposes penalties on agencies that miss statutory deadlines to release documents and strengthens reporting requirements on FOIA compliance.

The OPEN Government Act responds to some confusion over the applicability of FOIA to agency records that are held by outside private contractors. It does this by clarifying that such records are subject to FOIA wherever they are located.

Our legislation establishes an ombudsman to mediate FOIA disputes between agencies and requestors, a step that many FOIA requestors believe will help to ameliorate the need for FOIA litigation in the Federal courts. We hope that this mechanism will work to the benefit of all parties. However, where mediation fails to resolve disputes, our bill preserves the rights of requestors to litigate under FOIA.

Our bill responds to recent Federal jurisprudence by explicitly providing for recovery of attorneys’ fees under the so-called “catalyst theory.” That is, where a FOIA lawsuit was the catalyst for an agency determination to release documents prior to a court’s entry of judgment, the plaintiff may recover attorneys’ fees.

Finally, the bill requires reports on a controversial law, the Critical Infrastructure Information Act, enacted as part of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, and it protects fee-waiver status for journalists under FOIA.

Letters of support for the OPEN Government Act have been submitted by the American Association of Law Libraries, American Civil Liberties Union, American Library Association, American Society of Newspaper Editors, Associated Press Managing Editors, Association of Health Care Journalists, Center for Democracy & Technology, Coalition of Journalists for Open Government, Committee of Concerned Journalists, Education Writers Association, Electronic Privacy Information Center, Federation of American Scientists/Project on Government Secrecy, Free Congress Foundation/Center for Privacy & Technology Policy, Freedom of Information Center/University of Missouri, The Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas, The Heritage Foundation/Center for Media and Public Policy, Information Trust, National Conference of Editorial Writers, National Freedom of Information Coalition, National Newspaper Association, National Security Archive/George Washington University, Newspaper Association of America, People for the American Way, Project on Government Oversight, Radio-Television News Directors Association, The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and the Society of Environmental Journalists.

The Freedom of Information Act is an invigorating mechanism that helps keep our government more open and effective and closer to the American people. FOIA has had serious setbacks in recent years that endanger its effectiveness. This legislation is a rare chance to advance the public’s right to know.

I thank my colleague, the Senator from Texas, for the time and effort he has devoted to protecting the public’s right to know, and I urge all members of the Senate to join us in supporting this important legislation.

# # # # #

For Immediate Release

Tuesday, Feb. 15, 2005

Senators Introduce Legislation to Focus Farm Payments to Small and Medium Sized Farmers

WASHINGTON — Sen. Chuck Grassley today introduced legislation to target farm subsidies to small and medium sized farmers. He introduced the legislation with Sen. Byron Dorgan, of North Dakota.

“The reality of farm payments is not a pretty site and the numbers only continue to get worse. We’re now facing the fact that more than 72 percent of the payments have gone to only 10 percent of our nation’s farmers,” Grassley said. “This proposal has always been very popular and now with the President’s support, I expect good things will happen.”

The bill limits payments to $250,000 – identical to the President’s cap. The bill also includes other provisions supported in the President’s budget. Items in the legislation include limiting the subterfuge surrounding the three-entity rule, eliminating the use of generic certificates, and developing a measurable standard to determine who should and should not be receiving farm subsidies.

Here are specifics of the legislation.

• The legislation would establish caps of $40,000 on direct payments, $60,000 on counter cyclical payments, and $150,000 on loan deficiency payments and marketing loan gains, including gains on generic certificates and forfeited commodities. The combined limit would be $250,000. Under current law the cap on direct payments is $80,000 and the cap is $130,000 on counter cyclical payments. There is no effective cap on loan deficiency payments and marketing loan gains.

• The legislation would direct the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) to promulgate regulations that count all payments on production under the primary control of a single person toward that person’s limitations. This would prevent large farms from avoiding limitations by constructing complex business relationships that allow them to control production but put crop ownership and payments in the name of other parties.

• The legislation would improve the “measurable standard” by which USDA determines who should and should not receive farm payments. It requires the Secretary to promulgate regulations that define “primary control” to better determine who should qualify for farm payments.

• The legislation would improve USDA’s enforcement ability by instituting firm penalties for fraud. For example, a person who commits fraud in connection with a scheme or device constructed for the purpose of evading existing payment limits will be ineligible to receive farm payments for the crop year from which the scheme or device is adopted and the succeeding 5 crop years.

Grassley and Dorgan today held a press conference to introduce the legislation. They were joined by a number of organizations supporting the bill. These organizations included: Citizens Against Government Waste, the Environmental Defense, the Free Enterprise Fund, the Izaak Walton League of America, the National Catholic Rural Life Conference, the National Taxpayers Union, Oxfam America, the Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, Taxpayers for Commonsense

Here is a copy of Grassley’s statement from the press conference.

Prepared Statement of Sen. Chuck Grassley, of Iowa

Press Conference

The Rural America Preservation Act

Tuesday, Feb. 15, 2005

The American people recognize the importance of the family farmer to our nation, and the need to provide an adequate safety net for family farmers. In recent years, however, assistance to farmers has come under increasing scrutiny.

Critics of farm payments have argued that the largest corporate farms reap most of program benefits. The reality is over 72 % of the payments have gone to only 10 % of our nation's farmers. There is good reason to be critical of our farm programs.

What's more, farm payments that were originally designed to benefit small and medium-sized family farmers have contributed to their own demise. Unlimited farm payments have placed upward pressure on land prices and have contributed to overproduction and lower commodity prices, driving many family farmers off the farm.

The Senate has agreed, by an overwhelming bipartisan vote during the 2002 farm bill debate and during two Senate Budget Committee markups that targeting federal assistance to small and medium-sized family farmers is the right thing to do.

It has been my hope since the 2002 farm bill conference committee dropped the payment limit amendment that Congress would establish legitimate, reasonable payment limits similar to S. 667, the payment limits bill we introduced last session.

While we have not yet achieved our ultimate goal, no one can question that the votes have been there for payment limits. Unfortunately, a 2/3rds majority in the Senate hasn't been enough to protect this issue in conference. But times are clearly changing thanks to the President's support for payment limits in his budget proposal.

The legislation we are introducing today adopts the President's proposed cap of $250,000, while maintaining other concepts from S. 667 that the President has embraced like; limiting the subterfuge surrounding the three-entity rule, curtailing the use of generic certificates, and developing a measurable standard to determine who should and should not be receiving farm subsidies.

I look forward to working with Senator Dorgan again on this issue. With the President's support I believe we will have success.

Before we open it up to questions, I’d like to give a little more detail about the measurable standard issue in our bill.

The development of a “measurable standard” is a crucial issue. Between 1999 and 2002, farmers received approximately $60 billion in federal farm program payments from USDA to support production of "program crops" like corn, cotton, soybeans, rice, and wheat.

Congress enacted the Agriculture Reconciliation Act of 1987 (commonly referred to as the Farm Program Payments Integrity Act) to establish eligibility conditions for recipients and to ensure that only entities "actively engaged in farming" received payments.

To be considered actively engaged in farming, the Farm Program Payments Integrity Act requires an individual or entity to provide a significant contribution of inputs (capital, land or equipment) as well as a significant contribution of services of personal labor or active management to the farming operation.

Unfortunately, there have been many reports of rampant fraud and abuse. One example of this is from a press account describing a family owned property which reportedly received $38 million between 1996 and 2001 on a 61,000 acre spread. The farm was leased to a complex partnership involving 39 local investors who in turn had 66 separate corporations, which were seemingly created to maximize government payments.

This arrangement and others like it raise questions about the interpretation and enforcement of the 1987 Act's requirement that each partner be actively engaged in farming.

Due to these reports I wrote the Government Accountability Office on March 4th, 2003, and requested an analysis of the implementation and current application of the Farm Program Payments Integrity Act of 1987.

The GAO conducted it's review from May 2003 through March 2004. The information the GAO revealed is stunning and ultimately explains that just about anybody can get a piece of the farm subsidy pie.

I want to encourage all of you to take a look at that report, I have copies here today, it’s on the GAO’s website and it’s an invaluable resource. It was published last April, but the problems found in the report are still affecting us today and in desperate need of remedy.

-30-

United States Senate
Committee on Armed Services
Washington, DC 20510

MEDIA ADVISORY Contact: John Ullyot

February 15, 2005 202-224-6290

* * * MEDIA ADVISORY * * *

CHAIRMAN WARNER ANNOUNCES
OPEN COMMITTEE HEARING

TUESDAY, MARCH 1
ON FY 06 DoD BUDGET REQUEST

Today Senator John W. Warner, R-Va., the Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, announced that the Committee will hold an open hearing March 1 to receive testimony from combatant commanders on their military strategy and operational requirements in review of the Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 2006.

Witnesses:

General James L. Jones, Jr., USMC

Commander, U.S. European Command and

Supreme Allied Commander, Europe

General John P. Abizaid, USA

Commander, U.S. Central Command

General Bryan D. Brown, USA

Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command

The hearing will be take place at 9:30 a.m. March 1, in Room SH-216 of the Hart Senate Office Building.

Members of the media are invited to attend.

Please direct all questions to John Ullyot, Director of Communications, at 202-224-6290, or via email at press@warner.senate.gov .

-- 30 --

[WASHINGTON (Tuesday, Feb. 15) - The Senate on Tuesday afternoon overwhelmingly voted, 98-0, to confirm Michael Chertoff to be the next Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. Below is a statement in support of the nomination from Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the ranking Democratic member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.]

Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy

On the Nomination of Michael Chertoff

To Be Secretary of Homeland Security

February 15, 2005

MR. LEAHY. Today the Senate will complete the consideration of the nomination of Michael Chertoff to head the Department of Homeland Security.

Judge Chertoff currently serves as a Federal Judge on the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. This is a lifetime appointment that he has held for a relatively short time and that he will be abandoning to return to Executive Branch service. I helped expedite and voted in favor of Judge Chertoff when his nomination to the Third Circuit came to the Senate in 2003.

Before that he was the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Criminal Division at the Department of Justice. I helped expedite and voted in favor of that nomination in 2001.

I have worked with Mike Chertoff and appreciate his background as a prosecutor. He is very capable. He works hard. What one sees when you consider his career is that much of the time he acts as a consummate professional in our best tradition. Although there have been times when he has shown partisanship in an apparent effort to “earn his spurs” with those on the extreme right, it is my hope and expectation that he will bring his better angels with him as he embarks on his new role as Secretary of the Office of Homeland Security. That is not a position that needs or deserves even a hint of partisanship. Indeed, one of the moments that marred Secretary Ridge’s tenure was when he stepped out of character to make a blatantly partisan pitch during the run-up to the recent presidential election.

I was astonished when President Bush announced that he had chosen Bernie Kerik to replace Secretary Ridge. When newspapers and news magazines began looking at that nomination, it became apparent that the vetting of that nomination was shoddy and that Mr. Kerik was an unacceptable choice on a number of grounds. That misadventure cost us time and led to Judge Chertoff’s nomination being made later than it should have been by the Administration.

The Senate has expedited consideration of this nomination. In what I hope is a sign of better days to come and of increased responsiveness, I note that this nominee has responded in kind by seeking to answer in one day’s time a letter I sent to him. I appreciate that kind of responsiveness.

In light of his effort, I will excuse his missing the point in failing to respond directly to my first question. I raised with the nominee an aspect of his conversations with representatives of the intelligence community while he was serving as a principal law enforcer charged with prosecutions under the anti-torture law. My question to Judge Chertoff was an opportunity for him to reflect on the inappropriateness of the chief prosecutor advising lawyers for possible investigatory targets regarding how he would apply the law and what might provide a safe harbor when it came to torture.

I commend Senator Levin for trying to get to the substance of those conversations during confirmation hearings. Sadly but all too characteristically, the Bush Administration has refused to provide him or the Senate with the relevant materials in this regard. I am, likewise, concerned that Mr. Chertoff was not more assertive during discussions with the Office of Legal Counsel as it headed down the wrong road in trying artificially to narrow the definition of torture to provide latitude that contributed to widespread international scandals in our wrongful treatment of prisoners. I wish someone within the Bush Administration at the time had stood up for the rule of law and had succeeded in derailing the search directed by Judge Gonzales to create loopholes in our law.

I appreciate that Judge Chertoff has committed to implementing the recommendations of the Inspector General with respect to preserving the civil rights of those detained by the Government in his answer to my second question. That inquiry derived from his testimony to the Judiciary Committee in November 2001.

Finally, I asked a series of questions about the so-called “wall” between law enforcement investigations and intelligence. The 9/11 Commission Report went a long way toward dismantling the myth that former Attorney General Ashcroft had tried to perpetuate. I recall when even President Bush upbraided Attorney General Ashcroft following his assault upon Commissioner Gorelick at the 9/11 Commission hearings.

I pointed out that during the Clinton Administration almost one year before September 11, 2001, the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel had issued an official memorandum noting the Government’s position on “Sharing Title III Electronic Surveillance Material with the Intelligence Community,” which concluded that law enforcement officials may share surveillance information with the intelligence community to obtain assistance in preventing, investigating or prosecuting a crime, or where the information was of overriding importance to national security or foreign relations.

As Judge Chertoff recalls, it was Attorney General Ashcroft who adopted measures on January 21, 2000, and it was the memorandum issued by Deputy Attorney General Thompson on August 6, 2001, that governed information sharing in the days leading to the disaster that was September 11. Indeed, Judge Chertoff notes: “When it was deemed to be appropriate, additional procedures were put in place in specific cases, or in sets of related cases.” He proceeds to concede that without any change in the law, in the time between September 11 and enactment of the USA PATRIOT Act: “With court approval, some of these procedures were modified between 9/11 and October 26, 2001, the effective date of the USA PATRIOT Act.”

The 9/11 Commission established during its investigation that in the days and months before September 11, 2001, information sharing requirements and procedures were misunderstood and misapplied at the Department of Justice. I appreciated Judge Chertoff’s offering a glimpse into the inner workings of the Ashcroft Justice Department in the days that led up to 9/11 when he noted that there was a “vigorous internal debate about the appropriate procedures for sharing information collected in foreign intelligence and counterterrorism investigations with criminal agents and prosecutors.” That “internal debate” was unresolved on September 11, 2001, when terrorists struck in New York and at the Pentagon and were thwarted in the sky over Pennsylvania.

When the Justice Department came forward to work with the Senate in the weeks following the attacks, I worked with Mr. Chertoff to ensure that law enforcement and intelligence efforts were better coordinated, and I urged him, the Attorney General and the Director of the FBI to change the culture that had led to destructive and dysfunctional hoarding of essential security information.

I ask that copies of my letter to Judge Chertoff and his response be included in the Record at this point.

Heading the Department of Homeland Security is a position that may be one of the more difficult assignments in Washington and in Government. The work of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is crucial to the safety and security of the American people. There remain many problems in integrating the elements of the Department and in making them as effective as we need them to be. I remain concerned with a number of issues in need of greater attention at DHS and much more significant support from the highest levels of the Bush Administration. Working with Secretary Chertoff, maybe we will be able to get that attention and support.

First Responders. The Bush Administration has failed to provide the necessary assistance for first responders throughout our nation. As the costs borne by law enforcement agencies across the country continue to rise, we need to increase the partnership help offered to our nation’s first responders. Instead, in the President’s new budget, he has proposed cutting overall funding for first responders by $670 million. These cuts target vital emergency services affecting every State, regardless of size or population. The President also proposed cutting the all-state minimum for first-responder grants from 0.75 percent to 0.25 percent. That new formula would result in the loss of funds to police, firefighters and emergency rescue squads in dozens of states from coast to coast. In Vermont, this would mean a loss of at least $10 million dollars in fiscal year 2006 – grant funds that are used to provide security services along thousands of miles of our border with three states. Vermont’s border with Canada spans approximately 95 miles, but the Swanton Border Patrol is charged with protecting 24,000 square miles, which includes not only the entire State of Vermont, but also numerous counties in New York and New Hampshire. Within this area, the Swanton Border Patrol is required to patrol more than 261 miles of International Boundary.

Vulnerable Ports. Our approach to port security is also insufficient. More than 90 percent of the world’s trade is moved in cargo containers. The Government Accountability Office has found that the information that the Bureau of Customs and Border Patrol uses to determine which cargo should be searched is “one of the least reliable or useful for targeting purposes.” In addition, our government has been slow to install radiation detection portals at our ports, leaving us vulnerable to the smuggling of a nuclear or radiological weapon.

Mass Transit Measures Idle. Our mass transit systems are similarly at risk. While we spent about $4.5 billion on aviation security last year, we devoted only $65 million to rail security, even though five times as many people take trains as planes every day. The Madrid bombing vividly demonstrated the potential vulnerability of mass transit, and I am concerned that the Administration is not responding effectively enough to this threat. This needs to be a higher priority than the Administration has made it. The TSA has been slow in developing security procedures at port and rail facilities around the country, and our transit and freight transportation systems remain at risk. The recent DHS budget submission cuts funding for the following essential security programs: port security grants, port security incident response, intercity bus grants, container threat assessments, nuclear detection and monitoring, hazmat truck tracking and training, and rail security inspectors.

Air Security Concerns Linger. Despite the dedicated resources to aviation security, problems remain. There have been several reorganizations of the TSA’s airport screeners program, but reports from the GAO and the DHS Office of Inspector General suggest that the screening programs for baggage and passengers at our nation’s airports are not as effective as they should be. We need to ensure that the $4,734,784,000 budget request for aviation security this year is spent wisely and properly.

Immigration. Secretary Chertoff, if he is confirmed, will oversee both the enforcement of our immigration laws and the granting of immigration benefits. We face a number of important choices on immigration in the coming years, and I hope that he will play a constructive role.

I urge him to support the bipartisan efforts in Congress to improve the H-2B visa program, so we can meet the needs of small employers around our nation who depend on seasonal immigrant labor to stay in business. I hope he will support the bipartisan “AgJOBS” bill, which provides relief both to the agriculture industry and to the immigrant farm workers who make up a majority of the farm workforce in our nation. And as the Congress debates fundamental immigration reform, I hope that Judge Chertoff will work to help ensure that any reform efforts recognize and embrace the tremendous contributions of immigrants to our economy and our culture.

I would like to note the release last week of a report by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, a bipartisan commission created by Congress that we asked to study the expedited removal system and its effect on asylum seekers. In his response to me last week, Judge Chertoff showed a commendable concern for the civil rights of those who were detained due to alleged immigration violations during the 9/11 investigation. His concern should be even more pronounced here, where the Commission found that DHS detains people who seek refuge in the United States – and are not even accused of committing any criminal or civil violation – under conditions that “are entirely inappropriate for asylum seekers fleeing persecution.”

If we are to recapture America’s rightful place as a haven for the oppressed, the tragic situation of asylum seekers must be rectified. The Commission offered a number of recommendations that can be implemented through administrative action, such as establishing an office within DHS to oversee the treatment of refugees and asylum seekers and issuing formal regulations governing when asylum seekers should be released from detention. I urge Judge Chertoff to begin the process of making these changes immediately.

As Secretary, Judge Chertoff will also supervise a number of outstanding federal employees who are Vermonters and work for various components of the Department, particularly in DHS’ immigration agencies. I believe he will be pleased with their efforts and their expertise.

Secretary Ridge and I have disagreed strongly about DHS’ efforts to privatize Immigration Information Officer (IIO) and other positions at the agency, and Congress has barred that privatization for the current fiscal year. Among other duties, IIOs perform background checks on applicants for immigration benefits, a function that should be performed by government employees. I urge Secretary Chertoff to consider the repeated votes of both the House and Senate to maintain these positions as government employees and to make no effort to revisit the unwise and unpopular efforts of his predecessor.

I will support this nomination. Secretary Chertoff will face great challenges ahead. I hope that he will work with me and others, on both sides of the aisle, in finding the best solutions in meeting them.

# # # # #

For Immediate Release

February 15, 2005

Contacts: Melanie Alvord (202) 224-8456

Aaron Saunders (202) 224-3991

Opening Statement of Chairman Ted Stevens and

Questions and Answers of Witnesses

Senate Commerce Committee Hearing on

Proposed Transportation Security Administration Budget

Opening Statement of Chairman Stevens:

I welcome the witnesses who are here to discuss the President’s fiscal year 2006 budget proposal for the Transportation Security Administration.

Since September 11th, we have made major improvements in securing all modes of transportation in this country. Still, much remains to be done.

Congress must carefully consider the 120 percent fee increase proposed on travelers. The fee increase, we’re told, could result in lost revenue for an industry that is already on the financial ropes.

Last year alone, the airline industry lost about $10 billion. The question we have to ask is: Is this the right time to add another $1.5 billion in fees to an industry that already pays, and that travelers pay into, $15 billion in taxes and fees to a variety of government agencies?

TSA remains behind on the procurement and installation of explosive detection machines in airports around the country. The Known Traveler program is also behind. And, background checks on airport workers remain and issue.

Questions and Answers with The Honorable David M. Stone, Assistant Secretary, Transportation Security Administration, and Ms. Cathleen A. Berrick, Director, Homeland Security and Justice, U.S. General Accounting Office:

Chairman Stevens: You have an enormous responsibility. This is not just transportation of airline security. It is the total transportation security of the whole country. But, we seem to be putting emphasis only on the air passengers to contribute to the cost of the security that we’ve insisted on putting in place throughout the transportation system. Do you have any plans to put fees on any other portion of the transportation system as we go forward with these plans that you’ve documented in your statement and that Ms. Berrick has commented upon.

Assistant Secretary Stone: I have no plans right now to assign additional fees.

Chairman Stevens: I’m talking about other than airline passengers. Is anyone else going to pay other than the taxpayer and airline passengers?

Assistant Secretary Stone: In the other modes of transportation, sir?

Chairman Stevens: In terms of putting up the security system that we have that covers rail, bus, air, everything – I presume that is what your statement says – total transportation programs of the United States are subject to your jurisdiction and you have taxes only on the airline passengers. Now, do you plan on putting fees or taxes on any other person that uses some of those transportation systems?

Assistant Secretary Stone: We have no plans to put additional fees on any of those other modal areas other than those that I understand currently exist.

Chairman Stevens: Tell me why? I mean all of them, the buses, they’re covered by your security system, trains are covered by your security system, boats are covered by your security system. Why should only airline passengers contribute beyond taxpayers for the security system?

Assistant Secretary Stone: I think a user fee approach with all those modes of transportation merits review for the very aspect of this theme that it really has to be a shared responsibility. Right now the general taxpayer has a share of roughly 57 percent of the aviation screening and this just adjusts it down to 20 percent. There’s always going to be that percentage of sharing and so I would agree that each mode of transportation merits review for what type of fees are paid for both by users as well as the general taxpayer.

Chairman Stevens: Do you have plans for any additional security measures that apply to automobiles in general upon our highways?

Assistant Secretary Stone: I do not sir, for automobiles.

Chairman Stevens: Is that a subject that’s left totally for local and state jurisdiction?

Assistant Secretary Stone: Currently, I do not have visibility on whether or not the states and local jurisdictions are reviewing the automobile piece of that. Our responsibilities for highways, though, are very clear. And, therefore, the $20 million Highway Watch Program, which we work with ATA, American Trucking Association, is the foundation of that. With regard to fees for automobiles in support of that, I have no plans for that.

Chairman Stevens: Well, let me tell you a little story that I heard in one of the airports – I’ll not say which one it was because I don’t want to get people running out and asking too many questions about it. But, one of the security people at an airport that I flew into told me that he had noticed an automobile in their parking lot several times that had a very distinctive license plate and the person appeared to be doing things erratically and was obviously from the Middle East. He decided to put that license plate up on the Net and a couple of weeks later he got a call from a distant city, all the way across the country saying that they had seen this license plate and wanted to know what did he know about the people that were involved. Well, he told them why he had done it, the automobile was suspicious in what it was doing. And, they tracked that automobile in the other city and when it came back he got notice all the long the line of how that car was coming across the country and when they finally found it back in its original city, it did do some things that were fairly out of the ordinary and they picked this person up. It turned out that was an employee of the airport and under questioning he had not flown because he is on the no-fly list. But, they had tracked him using license plates. Now, aren’t we missing a whole area of security threats by screening only the people at airports, only the people getting on and off airplanes? We know there was a terrible disaster that came from airlines being used as weapons of mass destruction, but aren’t the people who are capable of doing that using other means of transportation now? They’re not flying, they’re on the no fly list. Now, don’t you have any plans for extending the system of security?

Assistant Secretary Stone: We do. In fact, every morning we spend about two hours reviewing a report from the Terror Screening Center, to use the example you just gave, in which that type of information on suspicious cars, license plate, law enforcement action is reviewed by TSA each morning from an inter-modal point of view – trains, mass transit, rail, highways, pipeline security – all of that intelligence in the Terror Screening Center is integrated into a two hour morning brief where we look at each mode of transportation, what the threats are, and how they interrelate to one another. And, so, that very approach of it’s all related, it has to be inter-modal, and the Terror Screening databases apply, not just to aviation, but need to be looked at across all modes and so that morning brief is the centerpiece of what we do because it gets at that very issue of domain awareness and being able to follow-up on leads and how they connect to one another.

Ms. Berrick: And, Mr. Chairman, if I can add to that, GAO is currently doing several reviews, looking at other modes of transportation. And, the difference between aviation and other modes is that other modes of transportation are inherently open to promote the flow of goods and people. For example, we’re looking at rail security. So, in looking at rail security, TSA will need to consider different security measures that would be appropriate for that environment. And, one of the issues we’re looking at is what is being done in other countries to secure their rail systems and can that be applied to the United States. You asked earlier about taxes for other modes of transportation. Right now, for other modes of transportation, the transit operators are primarily funding security enhancements. They get some grants and they also get some assistance from the Department of Transportations, but primarily they are shouldering the burden for security improvements.

Chairman Stevens: Thank you very much. My time is up. I intend to go further in this when it comes around to my time again. It does seem to me that other people beyond airline passengers ought to be paying for this security – the taxpayers, obviously. We don’t even call these taxes, we call them fees now, right? They’re taxes as far as the airline passenger is concerned, but there’s no such burden on other people who use other forms of transportation and I think that’s wrong.

Questions – Round Two:

Chairman Stevens: Our screening that is taking place now is really driven so much by the past and not really in tune with the future. Now, for instance, I saw a display of a fellow with a deck of cards that stood about five feet away from a person holding a big carrot and he sliced off a piece of that carrot, just by throwing a card. I saw another person take a credit card and cut through what would be the thickness of a person’s neck in two seconds, much faster than a knife could do it. Yet, we seem to be really zeroing in on how can we pick up knives? Has any knife been the cause of an attempted hijacking since 9-11?

Assistant Secretary Stone: Not that I’m aware of, no sir.

Chairman Stevens: But, we’re spending a lot of money to get them, aren’t we?

Assistant Secretary Stone: We sure are sir, in the wake of the box cutters.

Chairman Stevens: Are they the threat now? Isn’t the threat now chemicals and substances and the ability to use a plane as a weapon not withstanding the fact that there are Air Marshals and they can’t get through to the pilots? Hasn’t the system changed now? Do we really need to spend more money on trying to pick up knives and fingernail files?

Assistant Secretary Stone: I would agree with you – the threat has changed in that the focus on box cutters and knives and the regulations pertaining to them should be revisited.

Chairman Stevens: I’ve got to tell you in my State, we only have one main road and we have a railroad. No one on the road and no one on the railroad pays any fees, but every time you get on an airplane you pay a fee now. As a matter of fact, in most instances, to get in from the rural areas, you have to get on two, maybe three planes to get to Anchorage. Now, there’s a maximum they have to pay in one day as I understand it. You want to increase that maximum by three dollars. So, those of us that don’t have trains and roads and buses and taxis, who commute from maybe Kenai in Alaska, it’s about 50 (air) miles south of Anchorage, they commute back and forth, they pay this fee twice a day. If you commuted across the river up there in New York or New Jersey, you wouldn’t pay any security fee. Yet, you’re a great deal more of a risk to the nation’s security than you are if you travel from Kenai to Anchorage and back everyday for work. I think this fee system is very burdensome on people in rural areas and for that reason I hope to have another hearing on the whole subject of fees, but right now, I want to thank the two of you for what you’ve done in coming today. I do think we have some other questions we have to ask you. For instance, I don’t see anything in this proposal to fund the Letters of Intent that were issued for baggage screening devices and there’s a whole priority list, as I understand it. Our airport in Anchorage is the tenth biggest airport, but were fifteenth on the security list, little questions like that I’d like to have some time to ask you. What really are we doing with regard to the situation where – I saw this – a woman getting on a plane in Sitka going 25 minutes to Juneau, an elderly lady, a grandmother, obviously, with three kids, her name pops up, so she goes through all of this stuff and she’s going to be on the plane less time than it took to go through the screening process. Shouldn’t there be some differences for intra-state travel in a State like mine? You don’t search people getting on buses, you don’t search people getting in taxis. Yet, we use airplanes for taxis and we’re searched every time we get on a plane. Now, I think that this whole system is not sensitive to the situation of the passenger. It’s just one size fits all. You can go up to Nome, two planes a day, you’ve got two flights a day and they’re going to search those two planes. As a matter of fact, the people getting off have been searched, too, and they’re just going within their own State and couldn’t be a threat to anybody’s economy or security. I really think this thing needs an intensive look. We intend to continue these hearings. We intend to dig into this and find out why do we all have to wear the same pair of shoes to get on an airplane in different parts of the United States and why don’t the people who are the greatest risk – the ones who don’t fly – the no-fly people, they’re in our community, how are we going to ferret them out? I really think this Committee – that is why we insisted on keeping jurisdiction over TSA – our jurisdiction covers all means of transportation, yet it seems that your main focus is airline transportation, primarily because of what happened on 9-11. And, that is a serious, serious thing. But, we’ve done everything we can to prevent that from rehappening, but I don’t see what we’re doing to prevent something even worse from happening in terms of chemical substances, biological substances, and, really, the protection of massive areas as opposed to imposing these fees on people who use commuters every day to go back to forth to make their living.

###

___________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 15, 2005
Contact: John Reid
Director of Communications
202-224-4746

*** MEDIA ADVISORY ***

COLLEGE PRESIDENTS TO JOIN ALLEN FOR INTRODUCTION OF BILL PROVIDING TECHNOLOGY GRANTS FOR MINORITY COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES

WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senator George Allen (R-VA) will be joined by the Presidents of four of Virginia’s Historically Black Colleges and Universities on Thursday, February 17th as he announces plans to introduce his Senate Bill to increase technology funding for the schools. The bill provides federal grants for minority serving institutions to upgrade their technology and telecommunications infrastructure.

WHO: Senators George Allen (R-VA) and Jim Talent (R-MO)
      Reps. Randy Forbes (R-VA) and Ed Towns (D-NY)
      Dr. William Harvey – President of Hampton University
      Dr. Marie McDemmond – President of Norfolk State University
     Dr. John Waddell – President of St. Paul’s College
      President Eddie Moore – Virginia State University
      President Cheryl Crazy Bull – North West Indian College

WHAT: Introduction of “Minority Serving Institution Digital & Wireless Technology and Opportunity Act of 2005”

WHEN: Thursday, February 17th at 10:00 AM

WHERE: Russell Senate Office Building Room 253

# # #

This measure was introduced today floor debate is TENTATIVELY set for tomorrow, followed by a vote.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: AMANDA FLAIG

FEBRUARY 15, 2005 JEFFREY SADOSKY

(202) 224-2315

DEWINE CONTINUES PUSH FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF NAZI WAR CRIMINAL RECORDS

DeWine Wants Working Group To Have Opportunity To Finish Important Historical Work

U.S. Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH) has continued his work promoting the release of United States government records on Nazi war criminals. Today Senator DeWine introduced a measure that would allow the Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group (IWG) to continue its work for another two years.

“The extension of the working group is vital to ensure that these important documents are made public,” said Senator DeWine. “Since my bill became law, more than 8 million pages of documents have been released and an entire book has been written, but there’s still more work to be done. Holocaust victims are growing older every day, and the time remaining for them to obtain answers to the questions that have troubled them for nearly six decades will soon come to an end. We owe it to those who suffered – and to those who seek to prevent future genocides -- to disclose the records the United States has on this issue.”

Senator DeWine’s Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act established the IWG in 1998. The bill requires federal agencies in possession of records of individuals alleged to have committed Nazi war crimes to make these records public. The IWG works with U.S. government agencies to locate, identify, and recommend for declassification to the public all records of Nazi war criminals held by the United States. A team of historian and specialists will then complete a report detailing what is discovered.

“I’m glad to see that the CIA and IWG have come to a common understanding that the law must be construed broadly so that as much information as possible may be released—both about specific Nazi war crimes, and also, about the relationship the United States government had with Nazi war criminals in the post World War II and Cold War era.”

Breann González

Press Assistant

U.S. Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH)

152 Russell Senate Office Building

Washington D.C. 20510

202.224.8915

Senator Feinstein is going to try to attend this news conference, but may be late due to a markup in the energy committee at the same time.

11:30 a.m. -- (STEM CELLS/FUNDS/SPECTER) NEWS CONFERENCE -- Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), Sens. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) , Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) , Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) join Reps. Michael Castle (R-Del.) and Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) at a news conference to introduce legislation designed to expand the current federal funding policy for stem cell research.
Location: The Capitol, Senate Radio-TV Gallery

Contact: Scott Gerber, 202-224-9629

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: AMANDA FLAIG

FEBRUARY 16, 2005 JEFF SADOSKY

(202) 224-2315

DEWINE CONTINUES PUSH FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF NAZI WAR CRIMINAL RECORDS

BACKGROUND: U.S. Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH) has continued his work promoting the release of United States government records on Nazi war criminals. Today Senator DeWine introduced a measure that would allow the Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group (IWG) to continue its work for another two years. [See attached press release]

TIME: TODAY, Wednesday, February 16, 2005 from 4:00 p.m. to 4:15 p.m.

COORDINATES: Galaxy 3 7 Horizontal Downlink 3840 C-band

###

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: AMANDA FLAIG

FEBRUARY 15, 2005 JEFFREY SADOSKY

(202) 224-2315

DEWINE CONTINUES PUSH FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF NAZI WAR CRIMINAL RECORDS

DeWine Wants Working Group To Have Opportunity To Finish Important Historical Work

###

Breann González

Press Assistant

U.S. Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH)

152 Russell Senate Office Building

Washington D.C. 20510

202.224.8915

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Contact: Matt Hartwig

February 16, 2005 202-224-3254

HARKIN ANNOUNCES FUNDING FOR NEW AURORA WELLNESS CENTER/LIBRARY

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) today announced that the City of Aurora will receive a $25,000 grant from U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Community Facility Grant program. The money will be used to construct a community wellness center and library serving residents of all ages in Aurora and the surrounding rural area within a 20 mile radius.

“Improving overall health and wellness is vitally important to improving Iowans quality of life,” said Harkin. “I am thrilled the residents of Aurora have taken the initiative to construct this new wellness center and library and help residents across the area lead longer, healthy lives.”

Harkin recently authored the HeLP America Act (S. 2558) comprehensive legislation to provide all sectors - child care centers, schools, workplaces, and communities -with the tools they need to reach the goal of making America a healthier place.

# # #

Advisory for Iowa Reporters and Editors

Tuesday, February 15, 2005

During this week’s conference call with farm broadcasters, Sen. Chuck Grassley addressed the following issues:

Grassley Reintroducing Payment Limit Bill

Prospect of Reopening Farm Bill

Importation of Canadian Beef

WTO Negotiations

To access the comments, call 1-800-545-1267. Dial 500, then 1.

Voice mail box prompts:

Enter 6............................................Advance audio ten seconds.

Enter 4............................................Back-up audio ten seconds.

Enter 3............................................Advance audio one minute.

Enter 1.............................................Back-up audio one minute.

Or go to http://grassley.senate.gov. Click on News, then Radio Actualities.

-30-

For Immediate Release:

DATE: Tuesday, February 15, 2005

CONTACT: Jim Manley (202) 224-2939

ISAKSON PRAISES FILIBUSTER

Republican Senator recognizes use of filibuster as important tool of American Democracy

Today, Senator Johnny Isakson (R-GA) spoke on the Senate Floor about a meeting with Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Saleh, a Kurd. He said,

“And even though the results of the election were not complete at the time we were there, we knew they would be in a minority, and we asked, ‘don’t you fear that the Shiites inevitably being in the majority, that you will be overturned?’

He says, oh, no we have a secret weapon. Mr. President, this is a Kurdish Leader in the middle of Iraq in the 21st Century who said he had a secret weapon.

And when we asked what it was, he said one word: ‘Filibuster’.”

Isakson went on to praise Iraq for basing their government on American democracy and using the filibuster as “the way they would ensure that the majority never overran the minority.”

###

For Immediate Release CONTACT: Jim Manley, 202-224-2939

February 15, 2005

DEMOCRATS ASK THEIR QUESTION OF THE DAY ON SOCIAL SECURITY:

“How much money is the $5 trillion in new debt the Republican Social Security privatization plan will create?”

$5 Trillion Could Give Every American Over $16,000. [Census Bureau]

$5 Trillion Is Nearly Twice the Size of the Budget This Year. [White House, Office of Management and Budget]

$5 Trillion is Over 140 Times the Amount the President Proposes Spending on Homeland Security. [White House, Office of Management and Budget]

STATEMENT OF SENATOR CARL LEVIN TO THE PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS
ON THE UNITED NATIONS OIL-FOR-FOOD PROGRAM

February 15, 2004
Today the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations is conducting its second hearing on the United Nations Oil-for-Food program. Today’s focus is on the process used by the U.N. to monitor Iraq’s oil sales and to inspect imported goods imported by Iraq with the proceeds of those sales. U.N. employees, U.N. contractors, and U.N. member states all had roles to play in inspecting goods, monitoring oil sales, and enforcing U.N. sanctions. Their failures as well as their successes hold important lessons for future U.N. sanctions programs.

The U.N. recently released 58 audits reports on the Oil-for-food program that were prepared by the U.N.’s internal auditor, the Office of Internal Oversight Services. The public release of these reports set an important new precedent in U.N. auditing, opened the door to greater U.N. oversight at the U.N., and contributed to the culture of increased transparency and accountability that needs to take hold at the U.N. It is a positive omen.

The U.N audit reports show that the Office of Iraqi Programs lacked basic financial controls and exercised inadequate oversight of the Oil-for-Food program. The U.N.’s Independent Inquiry Committee-known as “the Volcker Committee”-also shows us that the U.N.’s auditing efforts themselves were inadequate. The Volcker report found, for example, that the audits of the Oil-for-Food program were understaffed and underfunded; the audits’ scope was often too narrow; and the follow-up process to correct identified problems was flawed.

The Volcker report also presented disturbing evidence that the head of the U.N.’s Office of Iraqi Programs, Benon Sevan, may have personally profited from oil allocations made by Iraq. This evidence, as well as additional evidence to be presented today, builds upon the foundation in the Duelfer report addressing the receipt of Iraqi oil allocations and vouchers. In addition, the Volcker report identified problems with how the U.N. selected Saybolt, Lloyds Register, and BNP for key Oil-for-Food administrative contracts.

The Volcker Committee in its report noted that it was continuing to investigate the U.N.’s decision to award an inspection contract to Cotecna in 1998, to determine whether favoritism played a role. This Subcommittee is also examining that issue. Kojo Annan, a former Cotecna consultant, denies any improper conduct in the award of the contract. But while Kojo Annan has cooperated with the Subcommittee by voluntarily submitting to a lengthy interview, we have been unable to reach a judgment about the contract award due to a lack of Subcommittee access to U.N. documents and personnel. Questions about how the Cotecna contract was awarded remain unanswered.

The UN has responded to the Volcker report by expressing a determination to remedy identified deficiencies and strengthen its management, procurement, and auditing functions. The U.N.’s comments suggest that the UN staff has gotten the Volcker Committee’s message and is willing to embark on real change. I hope so. To bolster public confidence, it is essential that the U.N. fully implement the Volcker Committee’s recommendations.

A key concern about the Oil-for-Food program is the extent to which it was manipulated by Saddam Hussein to obtain illicit revenues for his regime. We know that some of Saddam Hussein’s revenue from sales of oil came from the kickbacks he got from contractors involved in the Oil-for-Food program. But the bulk of his illicit oil sale revenues actually came from the money he received from unregulated sales of Iraqi oil, entirely outside of the Oil-for-Food program, primarily to Turkey, Jordan, and Syria. We and the rest of the world looked the other way from those sales even though they were prohibited by the U.N. sanctions regime.

The Volcker report states:

“There can be no question that bribes and other abuses … provided many opportunities for illicit gains, often as part of a deliberate effort by Iraq to ‘reward friends’ or cultivate political influence. What is not clear is the extent to which those illicit financial gains benefited middlemen … and corrupt individual Iraqi officials rather than the Iraqi Regime. What does appear clear is that the major source of external financial resources to the Iraqi Regime resulted from sanctions violations outside the [Oil-for-Food] Programme’s framework.”

Using numbers provided by the Duelfer report, it appears that Saddam’s abuse of the Oil-for-Food program provided about one-sixth of Iraq’s total illicit income, while nearly three-quarters of his illicit income came from open oil sales which weren’t supposed to take place because they were outside of the Oil-For-Food program. Those sales were primarily with Jordan, Syria, and Turkey. They occurred with our knowledge and acquiescence.

In fact, as we have dug through the historical record, we have found evidence suggesting that Iraq may have obtained even more illicit revenue from its oil trade with Turkey than previously estimated. The Duelfer report, for example, states that from 1991-1998, Iraq obtained at most $30 million per year from illegal oil sales, outside of the UN oil-for-food program, with its neighbors. However, the evidence now suggests that Iraq’s illegal oil trade with Turkey alone during these years generated far more revenue for Saddam than that-perhaps hundreds of millions of dollars each year.

In July 1992, the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Edward Perkins and the Principal Deputy Secretary of State George Ward testified before the House Foreign Affairs Committee that the U.S. was “satisfied” with Turkey’s compliance with the U.N. sanctions. But Congressman Lee Hamilton stated he had reports there were “1,500 trucks [with illicit goods] going into Iraq every day from Turkey. . . . I’m talking about 1,500 trucks. You’re talking as if a knapsack is going across the border from time to time, carried on one person’s back.”

The press reported “big profits” were being made from Iraq’s oil sales to Turkey in 1992. The New York Times also noted that “the Western allies and just about everybody else seem ready to avert their gaze from [this illegal smuggling].”

Three years later, the New York Times estimated that, in 1994, Iraq was illegally selling about 200,000 barrels of oil per day through Turkey, obtaining illicit revenue for Saddam Hussein totaling between $700 million and $800 million per year. The article quoted the Administration protesting that the illegal trade was at most half this amount, but that still means $300 to $400 million in a single year for Saddam.

The oil sales that we and the world tolerated were open and obvious, despite their being in violation of the UN sanctions we helped put in place. For example, in March 1998, the BBC posted this photograph, reporting that it had found “clear evidence that Iraq is breaking U.N. sanctions by exporting hundreds of millions of dollars worth of oil across its borders into the Gulf and Turkey. Huge convoys of trucks and many ships carry the fuel out of Iraq where it is sold on the black market.”

In June 1998, the New York Times reported 50,000-60,000 barrels per day of oil and diesel fuel were being trucked from Iraq into Turkey, and Saddam’s son Uday was personally in charge of these sales. An Administration official acknowledged the illegal trade, saying: “The tendency has been to turn a blind eye because the Turks are benefiting from it at a time when the Turks are complaining anyway about sanctions on Iraq.”

In 2000, Turkey signed an official trade protocol with Iraq. In 2002, according to the Duelfer report, Iraq was selling “40,000 to 80,000 barrels of oil per day to Turkey using approximately 450 to 500 Turkish trucks.” Duelfer estimated that, in 2002 alone, these oil sales generated about $330 million for Saddam.

It is clear that the whole world, including the United States, knew about Iraq’s oil sales to Turkey, Jordan, and Syria. In the case of the United States, we not only knew about the oil sales, it actively stopped the United Nations’ Iraq sanctions committee -- known as the 661 Committee -- from acting to stop these sales. Beginning in 1996, Turkey formally asked the United Nations, through the so-called 661 Committee, for permission to increase its oil trade with Iraq.

The United States expressly and repeatedly objected to the 661 Committee’s consideration of Turkey’s application instead of voting to turn it down. The U.S. could have voted to end the sales. Instead it stopped the U.N. from acting. The result was that illegal oil sales to Turkey continued unabated. As a result, hundreds of millions of dollars went into the pockets of Saddam Hussein.

Both the Clinton and Bush administrations demonstrated in other ways an awareness and implicit approval of Iraq’s oil sales to Turkey and Jordan. Both administrations repeatedly sent to Congress waivers from U.S. laws prohibiting U.S. foreign aid to any country that violated UN sanctions on Iraq. Each year since 1994, Congress has prohibited foreign aid to any country violating UN sanctions on Iraq. But both the Clinton and Bush administrations repeatedly issued waivers for Turkey and Jordan. Oil sales by Iraq to Turkey and Jordan continued apace, in violation of U.N. sanctions apace, with our knowledge and implied consent.

The U.N. sanctions, despite all of the leakage, abuses, and looking the other way to violations, were stopping Saddam from re-arming Iraq. In testimony to Congress in 2001 about the sanctions, Secretary of State Colin Powell stated, “I think credit has to be given … for putting in place a [sanctions] regime that has kept him pretty much in check.”

The sanctions were working sufficiently well that Saddam used every tactic at his disposal to circumvent and corrupt them. He was intent on undermining the UN sanctions regime precisely because they were working so well.

UN sanctions represent one of the few available non-military tools to control the behavior of threatening nations. Helping sanctions work more effectively is an important goal - and fixing responsibility when they are allowed to be circumvented or corrupted will hopefully prevent that from happening in the future.

I commend the Chairman for his determined efforts to achieve these goals through these hearings, and I commend our staffs for the way they have worked together in carrying out the investigation on which our hearings are based.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: CONTACT: BARBARA RILEY

2/15/05

SUNUNU: BUSH TO VISIT NEW HAMPSHIRE TO HIGHLIGHT IMPORTANCE OF MODERNIZING SOCIAL SECURITY

WASHINGTON, DC – United States Senator John Sununu (R-NH) today (2/15) issued remarks regarding President George W. Bush’s Wednesday visit (2/16) to New Hampshire. The President will participate in a conversation on Social Security at the Pease International Tradeport. Sununu, who will attend the event with the President, issued the following statement:

“President Bush’s trip to New Hampshire provides an opportunity for him to explain to people in New Hampshire and across the country the tremendous value and benefit that will result from modernizing Social Security. Given the impending retirement of the ‘Baby Boom’ generation, our country needs a retirement program for younger workers that will be as solid and reliable as the system enjoyed by our parents and grandparents.

“As Congress works with the President to tackle this difficult problem, it is important to note that any reforms would not affect those who are age 55 or older. The President will talk with New Hampshire residents about the importance of empowering younger workers with the option of using a portion of their Social Security taxes to create a personal account – money that they know will be there for them when they retire. Under such a plan, the government would no longer be able to spend Social Security surpluses. Moreover, these investments will deliver a much stronger rate of return than the current system.

“Social Security modernization will result in a retirement system that is stronger and more fiscally sound than the pay-as-you-go system we have today. The President understands that personal accounts can create real opportunity for younger workers – especially those at middle and lower incomes, who have fewer chances to save for retirement. It’s a better system, it’s a stronger system and it’s one that will be better suited to the changes in our workforce for decades to come.”

-30-

Barbara J. Riley

Communications Director

Senator John E. Sununu

P: 202-224-2841

F: 202-224-1961

barbara_riley@sununu.senate.gov

FOR PLANNING PURPOSES CONTACT: Allison Dobson / Maureen Knightly

202-224-3254

*** SATELLITE ADVISORY ***

***TODAY***

HARKIN, SESAME STREET’S ELMO AND ROSITA HOST HEALTHY MINUTES ICN SESSION

Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) will join Sesame Street’s Elmo and Rosita on Iowa Public Television’s Kids Clubhouse today, February 15th, to talk about making healthy food and exercise part of Iowa students’ everyday lives. In this "Healthy Minutes" ICN session to Iowa classrooms, Senator Harkin, Elmo and Rosita will share a special message LIVE from Washington D.C. about the power of nutrition and activity.

In a special question and answer part of the session, Senator Harkin, Elmo and Rosita will answer pre-submitted questions from Iowa students regarding their favorite healthy snack, form of exercise or any other healthy habit questions.

Coordinates of the satellite feed are as follows:

DATE: TODAY, February 15, 2005

TIME: 3:00-3:15 pm CST

GALAXY: 3

TRANSPONDER: 6 Vertical

DOWNLINK: 3820

AUDIO: 6.2/6.8

# # #

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE For More Information Contact:

February 15, 2005 Bill Duhnke (202) 224-1700

MEDIA ADVISORY

SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE TO HOLD

OPEN HEARING ON THE WORLD THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES

WASHINGTON, DC – The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence will hold an open hearing on the World Threat to the United States on Wednesday, February 16, 2005.

WHAT: U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Hearing on the World Threat to the U.S.

WHEN: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 at 10:00AM, EST

WHERE: Hart Senate Office Building Room 216

WHO: The following witnesses will appear before the Committee:

Robert J Mueller, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation

Porter Goss, Director of Central Intelligence

Vice Admiral Lowell E. Jacoby, Director, Defense Intelligence Agency

Thomas Fingar, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Intelligence and Research, U.S. Department of State

Admiral James Loy, Acting Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security

###

Senator DeWine is delivering the key note address at the Global Health Council/Child Survival event at the City Club at Franklin Square.

Senator DeWine, along with Senator Dodd and a bipartisan group of House members are introducing their STOP underage drinking bill.

Amanda Flaig

Press Secretary

U.S. Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH)

140 Russell Senate Office Building

Washington, DC 20510

Work: 202-224-7997

Mobile: 202-841-1603

Fax: 202-228-0549

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Allison Dobson/ Maureen Knightly

February 15, 2005

Harkin: Bush Budget Slashes Rural Health Care in Iowa

Rural Health Care Initiatives Cut 80 Percent, Many Eliminated

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) today criticized President Bush for proposing to cut rural health programs in Iowa by 80 percent while providing tax breaks to the wealthy and pushing other controversial big-spending measures. Harkin is the ranking Democrat on the Senate Appropriations subcommittee that funds health initiatives.

“All Americans deserve access to quality, affordable health care. Rural health initiatives should not have to suffer in order to give away hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts to the wealthy,” said Harkin. “This budget does not add up – the president cannot boast of fiscally responsible policies if the only people he expects to be tightening their belts are middle income families, while his tax giveaways to the rich are pushing the country further into debt.”

Throughout the president’s budget, multiple initiatives that impact Iowans will be cut or eliminated completely, including the Emergency Medical Services for Children (EMSC) Program, Rural Hospital Flexibility Grants, Healthy Community Access Program (HCAP), Rural Access to Emergency Devices (RAED) Grant Program, and Rural Health Outreach Grants.

Specific information follows on cuts to health care initiatives that Iowans rely upon:

Emergency Medical Services for Children (EMSC) – Eliminated

This program improves and enhances the ability of current EMS systems to meet the unique needs of the pediatric patients (0-18 years old) in Iowa. Through a partnership with Iowa/Nebraska Kiwanis Foundation, Iowa’s EMSC program provides pediatric specific equipment to basic EMS provider services and training. To date over 213 EMS programs have received assistance to buy pediatric equipment with over 1,400 EMS providers trained. Additionally, the EMSC program helps provide injury prevention programs such as bike helmet safety, child passenger safety seat training, booster seat training, and child identification programs.

Katrina Altenhofen, MPH, PS

State Director, Iowa Emergency Medical Services for Children

319-331-2189

“Iowa has enjoyed numerous accolades due to this program. One of the most recent successes has come through the partnership of the EMSC program and the Nebraska-Iowa Kiwanis foundation. On April 7, 2004 I presented the Underwood EMS service with pediatric equipment sponsored by the Kiwanis. At that time they were given a two-hour educational lecture on pediatric assessment and utilization of the equipment. Three days later on April 10, 2004 a young girl was injured due to a ATV incident the Underwood EMS providers not only had the right equipment but they also had the right education to be able to provide the right care at the right time.”

Rural Hospital Flexibility Grant — Eliminated

Seventy-seven rural hospitals in Iowa will lose funding if this cut is enacted. This program helps small hospitals convert to a more financially viable certification and develop networks to bring health care procedures and professionals to rural America. The Small Rural Hospital Improvement Grants (SHIP), part of the Rural Hospital Flexibility Program, provide rural hospitals with the resources to reduce medical errors, improve the quality of care, and to comply with government regulations. *A list of hospitals that have recently received SHIP funds is available upon request.

Keith Heuser

CEO, Clarinda Medical Center

712-542-8214

“The Rural Hospital Flexibility Grant has been important to small rural hospitals like ours for two reasons. First, it has helped us enhance our quality care, and secondly, the purpose of the program -- to offset a lopsided reimbursement system – has helped underfunded rural operations.”

Amy McDaniel

CFO, Wright Medical Center, Clarion

319-642-5543

“We are in our second year of participation in the Rural Hospital Flexibility Grant program. This program has allowed us to provide better quality patient care to the rural communities. We have been able to fund projects that would not normally be implemented due to the tight financial constraints that we face in the rural setting.”

Fran Zichal

CEO, Central Community Hospital, Elkader

563-245-7000

“We have received a number of grants over the past twenty years. This grant was the best at putting the dollars right where they needed to go. It made a difference for our patients and will continue to do so in years to come. We hope Congress reinstates the program.”

Karen Bossard

Administrator, Greene County Medical Center, Jefferson

515-386-2114

“The Small Rural Hospital Improvement Grant Program (SHIP) has been a very important program for rural hospitals. It has made it possible to prepare for the implementation of HIPAA and to develop programs to prevent medication errors that hospitals may not have developed if the SHIP grant program had not been available. Because of the SHIP grant, Greene County Medical Center has a much more accurate accounting of medications and has reduced the number of medication errors or near misses considerably.”

Chris Eckhoff

Assistant Administrator, Franklin General Hospital, Hampton

641-456-5000

Healthy Community Access Program (HCAP) – Eliminated

HCAP helps health care providers develop integrated, community-wide systems that serve the uninsured and underinsured. The Mercy Foundation in Des Moines received a HCAP grant of $953,000 in 2002. The President of the Mercy Foundation, Wayne King is available to talk to reporters about this important funding: 515-247-3248.

Rural Access to Emergency Devices (RAED) Grant Program – 77% cut

Almost every county in Iowa received emergency defibrillators as a result of this program. Although many Iowa communities are still in need of this life-saving equipment, the President has proposed a 77% cut to the program. *A list of Iowa communities that have recently received RAED funds is available upon request.

H.R. “Butch” Gibbs

Humeston, Iowa

641-877-6731

“President Bush’s proposed cut in the funding of the Rural Access Grant for Emergency Medical Devices, specifically Automated External Defibrillators (AED), will cause many Americans to die needlessly. My life was saved on April 2, 2004, by early CPR and the quick arrival of an AED. That AED was made available to our community’s First Responders by federal funds made available to the state of Iowa. I would not be alive today if it were not for the Rural Access Grant for Emergency Medical Devices—and I was the second person in our small southern Iowa town, population 543, to be saved in the first year this AED was made availed to our first responders.”

Bill Fish

Glidden First Responders (Carroll County)

712-792-1335

“Because of this program, we were able to put defibrillators in each of the school districts and each fire department in Carroll County. This equipment is now available within minutes of all residents of the county, giving everyone access to quality life-saving measures, if needed.”

Ed Knight

Fire Chief, Boone Fire Department

515-432-3436

“We were fortunate to receive an AED for the Department last March. With shrinking budgets always confronting communities, particularly rural communities, this program gets the AED's to areas where they are desperately needed, but not available. To discontinue this program would have a negative impact on rural communities and their citizens.”

Todd Jackson

Fire Chief, Creston Fire Department

641-782-5610

“Our department received a defibrillator through the Rural Access to Emergency Devices program. We have already saved one life with the equipment. In addition to saving civilian lives, because half of all firefighter fatalities are due to heart attacks while working on emergencies, the equipment gives us comfort that we can also save the lives of firefighters on the job.”

Rural Health Outreach Grants – 73% cut

This program is designed to encourage the development of new and innovative health care delivery systems and rural communities that lack essential health care services. The president has proposed to cut this important initiative from $39.6 million to $10.8 million.

Shelley Bickel

Decatur County Access 4 Project Manager

641-446-2339

“The proposed cuts WILL greatly affect our Access 4 program. Because of this grant we have been able to help K-12th grade students who have behavioral health problems in four school districts. This is the poorest county in Iowa and without this grant many children would fall through the cracks and not receive help. We are trying to reach children at an early age and provide prevention and counseling so that these kids can continue on in life and become the best that they can be.”

Vickie Lewis

Substance Abuse Treatment Unit of Central Iowa, Marshalltown

641-752-5421

“The Rural Health Grant is funding free community-wide trainings for agency staff on topics related to substance abuse and mental health issues for youth. We are also providing substance abuse education, early intervention, and treatment services for youth in Marshall County. Without these funds, we will be limited to the number of services we can provide as well as limiting our ability to work with families who do not have funding to pay for their treatment.”

# # #

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Allison Dobson/ Maureen Knightly

February 15, 2005

HARKIN AIMS TO STOP NEW TAX CUTS

FOR THE WEATHIEST HIDDEN DEEP IN BUDGET

Unless Repealed, Tax Cuts Begin to Take Effect in 2006

Washington, D.C.—Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) will introduce legislation to eliminate two new tax breaks for upper income taxpayers hidden deep in President Bush’s budget. These two tax cuts, included in the 2001 tax bill but scheduled to take effect for the first time next year, will cost American taxpayers $146 billion in the coming decade. Fifty-four percent of the tax breaks go to the top 0.2 percent of households-- those making over $1 million a year. Only three percent go to those making under $200,000 a year.

“President Bush has talked about the need to make tough choices in this year’s budget,” Harkin said. “He has asked middle income families for sacrifice when it comes to their children’s education, their health care, and their public safety. Yet millionaires get yet another tax cut? Going through with these irresponsible tax breaks is a slap in the face to these hard working Americans.”

Harkin’s proposal would reverse two items in the 2001 tax bill that remove limits on the personal exemptions and deductions for high-income taxpayers. The tax cut measures:

Ø Repeal a provision of law enacted in 1990 that scales back the magnitude of itemized deductions that high-income taxpayers can take.

Ø Repeal another provision enacted in 1990, under which the personal exemption is phased out for households with very high incomes.

“The president needs to come clean about these hidden budget items with massive price tags that balloon our budget deficit,” Harkin said. “The administration has wracked up the largest deficits in American history that cannot be ignored. The president needs to explain to American taxpayers how these types of hidden tax cuts will put America on sounder footing.”

Harkin proposes using half of the $146 billion to address the budget deficit and the other half for education measures.

# # #

For Immediate Release Contact: David DiMartino (202)-224-8795

February 15, 2005 Jena Longo (202) - 224-5765

NELSON PRESSES TSA OFFICIAL ON “USER TAX” HIKE

Nebraska’s Senator Concerned About Proposed Hike in Security Fee for Travelers

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Airline travelers are facing steep increases in security fees under a proposal put forth by the Administration for the Transportation Security Agency (TSA), the government agency charged with airport and other transportation security measures, Nebraska’s Senator Ben Nelson said today.

At a Senate Commerce Committee hearing on the fiscal year 2006 budget for the TSA, Senators, including Nelson, asked pointed questions about the proposed per-flight increase in the security fee. Some Senators, including Nelson expressed concern about the fee increase and its impact on travelers from rural areas who often have no choice but to take connecting flights to get to their destinations. Multiple flights per trip could unfairly shift a higher cost to those travelers through the increased fees.

“TSA’s plan to shift the cost of the screening and security programs to travelers through increased security fees amounts to nothing more than a user tax,” said Senator Nelson, after the hearing. Nelson is a member of the Senate Commerce Committee. “Travelers from rural areas will assume an unjust share of the cost due to the fact they use connecting flights more than travelers in urban areas.”

At the hearing, David M. Stone, Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary for the Transportation Security Administration, said this morning the proposed passenger fee increase would mean passengers would cover 73 percent of airport screening costs instead of the current 36 percent. Stone said this change shifts the burden from the taxpayer to the user. The current fees and the proposed fee increase apply only to airline travelers.

“The responsibility of securing the airways should not rest solely on airline travelers,” Nelson said. “From what I heard at the hearing today there seems to be adequate concern on both sides of the aisle about this plan to shift costs to airline travelers. My major concern is that we are doing more of the same at a higher cost and not necessarily increasing security.”

Nelson also said that he has concerns about TSA's lack of attention to security for ports, rail, motor carriers and other transportation modes. In early 2001, Nelson predicted that the greatest security threat we faced was not the prospect of a missile attack from a hostile government but a terrorist attack in the form of a nuclear bomb or other weapon of mass destruction brought into one of our harbors or across an unsecured border.

-30-

David DiMartino
Communications Director
Nebraska's Senator Ben Nelson
202-224-8795

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Contact: Howard Gantman

Tuesday, February 15, 2005 or Scott Gerber 202/224-9629

http://feinstein.senate.gov

Statement of Senator Feinstein on

Missile Defense System Failure

“The latest test failure of the missile defense system – the second since December 15th – demonstrates once again that we are rushing to deploy a system that is unproven, too costly, and inadequate for our national security needs in the post-September 11th world.

While the President’s FY 2006 budget request cuts approximately $1 billion in funding for the missile defense program, it remains the most expensive defense program in the Pentagon’s budget.

Yet, there is no indication that the system will actually work while our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq lack body armor and other equipment essential for their missions. No missile defense can stop a terrorist from smuggling a nuclear bomb into this country on a container ship or through another soft port of entry.

Clearly, we need to take a step back and make better decisions on how to spend our resources to face a growing number of national security challenges, including providing for non-proliferation activities, deterrence, homeland security, and counter-proliferation.”

###

For Immediate Release Contact: David DiMartino (202)-224-8795

February 15, 2005 Jena Longo (202) - 224-5765

NELSON JOINS EFFORT TO CREATE BIPARTISAN COMMISSION ON MEDICAID

Washington, DC—Nebraska’s Senator Ben Nelson has co-sponsored legislation that would create a bipartisan panel that would give a comprehensive and thorough review of what is and is not working within the federal Medicaid program and how to improve service delivery and quality in the most cost-effective way possible.

Medicaid is the federal initiative that covers health care costs for low-income Americans.

Last week, the Bush administration unveiled a budget proposal that calls for $60 billion in cuts to Medicaid over the next decade.

Before enacting the White House cuts, Nelson said he believes it is important to first hear from a bipartisan panel in charge of studying Medicaid.

“Medicaid costs in Nebraska are astronomical and federal cuts could have adverse effects on state expenses and taxes,” said Nelson. “For instance, in 2005 Nebraska will spend $1.6 billion on Medicaid of which $932 million comes from the Federal government and we’ll spend more next year as the program typically increases by 13 percent per year.”

“Before making steep cuts, it would make sense to find out what can be improved about Medicaid. This bill would accomplish that goal,” Nelson added.

The Medicaid Commission would be comprised of 24 members that reflect all the stakeholders and components in the Medicaid program. Those members include the following:

One Member appointed by the President
Two House members (current or former) appointed by the Speaker and Minority Leader
Two Senators (current or former) appointed by the Majority and Minority Leader
Two Governors designated by NGA
Two Legislators designated by NCSL
Two state Medicaid director designated by NASMD

-30-

Jim Fagin

Deputy Director of Communications

Nebraska's Senator Ben Nelson

7602 Pacific Street

Omaha, Nebraska 68114

402-398-0283

Cell 402-616-2652

For Immediate Release Contact: David DiMartino (202)-224-8795

February 11, 2005 Jim Fagin (402)-398-0283

*** MEDIA ADVISORY ***

NELSON TO SPEAK IN LINCOLN

OMAHA, NE—Nebraska’s Senator Ben Nelson will address the League of Nebraska Municipalities Midwinter meeting in Lincoln on Monday, February 14, 2005.

Senator Nelson will touch on several current topics including efforts to help dozens of Nebraska towns that are facing crippling charges to comply with new regulations concerning arsenic in their water supplies, threats to reduce Homeland Security funding for rural states like Nebraska, and budget recommendations to reduce Community Development Block Grant funding.

Senator Nelson’s presentation is open to the news media.

Following his address there will be a media availability.

Date: Monday February 14, 2005

Address: 10:25am to 10:45am

Media availability: 10:45am to 11am cst

Cornhusker Hotel

333 S. 13th

Lincoln, NE

Contact: Jim Fagin

402-398-0283

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

February 11, 2005

CONTACT: Jim Manley, 202-224-2939

Reid Statement on President’s Medicare Veto Threat

“Make no mistake, the President’s blanket veto threat is designed to protect only special interests - the big drug companies and HMOs his flawed bill gave billions to in the new law. This is an attempt by the President to stop the bipartisan groundswell for drug reimportation and price negotiation, and just the latest example of the Republican Party putting special interests ahead of the American people. The only individuals threatening to take away seniors' benefits through reductions and caps are Republicans, and the President does not need to threaten a veto to stop them.”

###

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Contact: Matt Hartwig

February 11, 2005 202-224-3254

HARKIN DETAILS BUSH BUDGET CUTS HURTING ECONOMIC PROSPERITY AND QUALITY OF LIFE IN RURAL AMERICA

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Small businesses and rural Main Streets are the lifeblood of rural economies, both in Iowa and across the country. Unfortunately for the millions of Americans living in these areas, the president’s budget is seeking to slash vital funding initiatives that create jobs, grow local economies and improve the overall quality of life for rural residents. Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) today continued to highlight the misplaced priorities of the president’s budget by outlining what these cuts would mean to Iowans.

“Businesses and communities across rural Iowa rely, in part, on access to resources such as federal loans and grants, to create jobs and grow the local economy,” Harkin said. “If the president has his way, however, access to many of these vital resources will be limited or even closed. To be clear, we are not talking about corporate welfare here. We are talking about grants to build new fire stations, loans and grants to develop value-added businesses using locally grown crops, and resources that provide rural residents with basic needs such as clean water.”

Rob Lundquist, a Taylor County, Iowa resident, can attest to the importance of these initiatives to rural Iowa. Mr. Lundquist serves on the Board of Supervisors for Taylor County and as chair of the Board for Southern Iowa Resource Conservation and Development (RC&D), serving seven southern Iowa counties. In the past 34 years, the Southern Iowa RC&D has been working with local organizations to empower them to solve their problems. Examples of such projects in the past five years include encouraging youth entrepreneurship, creating rural water supplies, promoting tourism and developing outdoor recreation, identifying value-added crops, and improving rural fire protection. In the president’s budget recently submitted to Congress, Mr. Lundquist would see federal funding that Southern Iowa RC&D depends on to assist with these projects disappear.

“As a county supervisor and chairman of an RC&D, I have seen the benefits from federal rural development funds,” Mr. Lundquist said. “While providing water and fire protection to rural areas may seem trivial to some in Washington, it is of critical importance to people living in rural Iowa. Whether it is a new rural water system, a new community center, or a new value-added business employing local residents, access to these vital rural development funds can mean life or death for many rural Iowa communities.”

Rural development funding goes to a broad range of projects aimed at growing rural economies and improving the overall quality of life. The president’s budget guts many of these vital initiatives. For instance, the president has previously declared his intention to provide access to broadband technology to all Americans by 2007. But in his budget, the president would cut loan assistance to companies seeking to provide this access to small businesses and rural residents by 34 percent. Cutting funds that provide access to broadband directly undercuts the president’s stated goal.

In addition, the president would cut hundreds of millions of dollars from initiatives that provide the basic services all Americans need. The president’s budget would slash the amount of money available to help rural communities provide clean water to its residents by 24 percent. The president would also take away 30 percent of the funding for grants that help build child care centers and purchase fire trucks. These cuts strike directly at the quality of life rural citizens in Iowa and across the nation enjoy.

Numerous rural development programs important to Iowa that are facing large cuts include:

· A 24% CUT in grants for rural water and waste water projects. These funds go to the smallest and poorest communities with the worst water problems.

· $40 million in Rural Business Enterprise grants is eliminated. These grants supply funds to small and emerging rural businesses through support of local government.

· A 34% CUT in broadband loan assistance.

· A more than 60 % ($24.5 million) reduction in value-added grants to farmer-owned businesses.

· A $79 million reduction in the funding available for the Rural Business Investment Program. The funds are used to leverage venture capital funds in rural areas, a crucial component for the creation of mid sized businesses.

· A $59 million CUT in Community Facilities Grant programs. These cuts include:

o Rural Community Development Initiative cut $6 million

o Community Facility Economic Impact Initiative Grants cut $18 million.

o High Energy Cost Grants cut $28 million

o A 30 percent, or $7 million, cut in grant program to fund childcare centers, fire trucks and community buildings.

· A $24 million CUT in the Rural Housing and Economic Development program. In Iowa, this program has been important in helping rural Iowans realize the dream of home ownership.

# # #

For Immediate Release: Contact: Will Hart - 202-224-5762

February 11, 2005

ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE

BUSINESS MEETING

The Environment and Public Works Committee will conduct a business meeting. The following is a list to be considered:

Legislation:

S. 131 Clear Skies Act of 2005

S. 125, a bill to designate the United States courthouse located at 501 I Street in Sacramento, California, as the "Robert T. Matsui United States Courthouse".

WHO: Environment and Public Works Committee

WHAT: Business Meeting

WHERE: 406 Dirksen

WHEN: 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, February 16, 2005

For Immediate Release

Friday, Feb. 11, 2005

Grassley to Visit 20 Communities to Meet with Iowans

Iowa Senator Encourages Local Residents to Come, Ask Questions

WASHINGTON – Sen. Chuck Grassley announced today that he will visit twenty counties to meet with Iowans during the President’s Day Congressional recess to be held Feb. 21 – 25.

Town meetings are planned for Creston, Mt. Ayr, Leon, Corydon, Centerville, Albia, Chariton, Newton, Marshalltown, Ottumwa, Bloomfield, Keosauqua, Fairfield, Mount Pleasant, Fort Madison, West Burlington and Wapello and are open to the public.

Grassley will also attend events in Osceola, Des Moines and Davenport.

"Representative government requires the type of dialogue that these meetings are all about," Grassley said. “My annual meeting with county residents allows me to share with Iowans what I'm doing in Washington and hear their views on issues that are important to them. I take the common sense input I receive back to Washington on behalf of my constituents.”

Grassley said that he hopes many area residents will attend his meetings and share their views with him. He said that these meetings will be a good opportunity for him to take questions from Iowans on any subject.

Here is information about Grassley's town meetings.

Monday, February 21, 2005

2:15 – 3:15 p.m. Visit Plum Building Systems, 1805 North Main Street (Highway 69), Osceola

4:15 – 5:15 p.m. Union County Town Meeting, Creston City Hall, Council Chambers, 116 West Adams Street, Creston

Tuesday, February 22, 2005

7:30 – 8:30 a.m. Ringgold County Town Meeting, Ringgold County Courthouse, Assembly Room, 109 West Madison, Mt Ayr

10:00 – 11:00 a.m. Decatur County Town Meeting, Leon Community Center, Northeast Room, 203 NE 2nd Street

11:45 a.m. – 12:45 p.m. Wayne County Town Meeting, Wayne County Courthouse, Meeting Room, 100 North Lafayette, Corydon

1:30 – 2:30 p.m. Appanoose County Town Meeting, Centerville Deere Credit, 999 North 18th Steet, Centerville

3:15 - 4:15 p.m. Monroe County Town Meeting, First Iowa State Bank, Heritage Hall, 19 Benton Avenue East, Albia

5:00 - 6:00 p.m. Lucas County Town Meeting, Chariton City Hall, Council Chambers, 115 South Main Street, Chariton

Wednesday, February 23, 2005

7:30 - 8:30 a.m. Jasper County Town Meeting, Jasper County Courthouse, Multipurpose Room, 101 1st Street North, Newton

9:30 - 10:30 a.m. Marshall County Town Meeting, Marshall County Courthouse, Meeting Room 1, 1 East Main Street, Marshalltown

1:15 - 2:00 p.m. Attend Iowa Hospital Association Legislative Days, Polk County Convention Center, Des Moines

4:15 - 5:15 p.m. Wapello County Town Meeting, Ottumwa City Hall, City Council Cambers, 105 East 3rd Street, Ottumwa

Thursday, February 24, 2005

7:30 - 8:30 a.m. Davis County Town Meeting, Mutchler Community Center, 900 East North Street, Bloomfield

9:30 - 10:30 a.m. Van Buren County Town Meeting, Village Cup and Cakes, Meeting Room, 202 Main Street, Keosauqua

11:45 a.m. - 12:45 p.m. Jefferson County Town Meeting, Jefferson County Courthouse, 3rd Floor Conference Room, 51 East Briggs Avenue, Fairfield

1:30 - 2:30 p.m. Henry County Town Meeting, Henry County Courthouse, Law Library, 100 East Washington Street, Mount Pleasant

3:45 - 4:45 p.m. Lee County Town Meeting, Fort Madison City Hall, City Council Chambers, 811 Avenue E, Fort Madison

Friday, February 25, 2005

7:30 - 8:30 a.m. Des Moines County Town Meeting, Southeastern Community College, West Burlington Campus, Building 400, Room 406, 1500 West Agency Road, West Burlington

9:30 - 10:30 a.m. Louisa County Town Meeting, Louisa County Courthouse, Courtroom, 117 South Main Street, Wapello

1:00 p.m. Speak at Palmer College Commencement, Lyceum Hall, 115 West 7th Street, Davenport

***Grassley will be available to the press for 15 minutes following each event.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Drew Goesl

February 10, 2005 (202) 224-6436

Lincoln: Bush Fails Rural America

Washington – U.S. Senator Blanche Lincoln today issued what she called a "Rural Report Card" to illustrate the impact of President Bush’s cuts in programs that directly affect the quality of life of rural Americans.

Lincoln said that while reducing the government’s deficit s is essential, it shouldn’t rest disproportionately on the backs of rural America– all Americans should share the burden. She warned that President Bush’s FY 2006 budget, which he submitted to Congress earlier this week, relies too heavily on working families in rural America to make sacrifices while the President continues to advocate additional tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy.

"We have to find a responsible way for all Americans to share in this burden, and I think that my constituents stand ready to accept their share of that sacrifice," Lincoln said. "However, I’m not going to ask the working families of this country to shoulder the entire burden. Rural programs are often the first programs on the chopping block, yet these are among the most important to our local communities and the economies they support. Our spending cuts must be fair– even if it requires rolling back the tax cuts for the ultra wealthy."

Lincoln’s Rural Report Card focused on five areas where President Bush’s budget cuts deep into rural America which include:

1) RURAL LAW ENFORCEMENT – Lincoln pointed to the President’s budget cuts in funding for local and state law enforcement and first responders. She said the following funding sources are critical to Arkansas law enforcement. She said such cuts, totaling approximately $19 billion nationally, will inhibit a wide range of services rural communities depend on including combating Arkansas’ growing meth problem.

First Responders: The President’s budget includes a 27 percent cut, totaling approximately $455 million, in first responders funding. Lincoln said these cuts would hinder critical state and local efforts to protect our communities by making less funding available for the preparedness of first responders and citizens, public health, infrastructure security and other public safety activities. Lincoln said she was particularly concerned with how these cuts would effect the amount of federal Homeland Security funding provided to small and rural states such as Arkansas.

FIRE Grants: The President’s budget includes a $215 million cut which Lincoln said would force these rural fire departments to cut back on equipment purchase, safety training, fire prevention programs, and the purchase new vehicles. Lincoln said that these grants are especially important to Arkansas’ rural and volunteer fire departments. Since 2001, the FIRE

Act grant program has provided vital resources to many of Arkansas’ 900 fire departments, 85 percent of which are voluntary. Lincoln said that since last Spring, more than 180 awards have been granted to Arkansas fire departments, totaling over $12 million.

Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program: The President’s budget proposes eliminating this important program, which was budgeted at $536.5 million last year. Lincoln said she was deeply concerned with the elimination of this program because it would significantly impact the ability of Arkansas law enforcement to combat the state’s growing meth problem. She said the existence of 19 Drug Task Forces, funded by the Byrne Grants, are especially crucial in a state like Arkansas, which was recently ranked third in the nation (per capita) in terms of the number of meth labs seized and has recently seen the number of labs seized per year exceed 1,200.

Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): The President’s budget includes an 80 percent cut, totaling approximately $489 million, in COPS funding. Since Congress created this successful initiative with Lincoln’s support in 1994, the COPS Programs has assisted Arkansas law enforcement agencies in reducing violent crime across the state. In doing so, it has helped counties throughout Arkansas to hire additional officers for community policing and homeland security activities by helping provide for their salaries and benefits. Since 1998, the Drug Enforcement Administration has used COPS funds for the training and certification of 379 state and local law enforcement officers as of June, 2004.

Lincoln also pointed out that the President cuts the COPS Methamphetamine Enforcement and Clean-Up by $32.5 million. She said these cuts would be greatly felt in Arkansas, where the use of methamphetamine is growing and has become the #1 priority for the state’s drug law enforcement. COPS funding provided for the clean up and disposal of hazardous wastes found at 810 meth lab sites seized by Arkansas state and local law enforcement in 2003, and funded the cost which totaled more than $1.39 million.

Juvenile Justice Programs: The President’s budget includes a 49 percent cut, totaling approximately $186 million, in Juvenile Justice Programs. Lincoln said these cuts would dramatically weaken the Juvenile Justice System, whose funds support state and local efforts to prevent juvenile delinquency and address juvenile crime. The President also seeks the elimination of the Juvenile Accountability Block Grants (JABG), which was funded by Congress in FY 2005 at $55 million.

2) RURAL HEALTHCARE – Lincoln said that the President eliminates 28 important health programs, which total $1.369 billion.

Medicaid: Arkansas will lose more than $560 million in Medicaid dollars over the next 10 years under the President’s cuts. In 2010, Arkansas will lose more than $55 million. Lincoln pointed out that because of these cuts more than 5,700 Arkansas seniors and 22,000 children will lose their healthcare coverage.

AHEC: One of the most devastating cuts affects Arkansas’ Area Health Education Centers. Arkansas has six such centers. The President’s budget would eliminate these vital centers for health and health education.

3) EDUCATION – Lincoln said that the President has proposed cutting education funding by $530 million nationwide. She said this would hurt rural school districts in Arkansas that rely on federal dollars such as Title I, which provides services to low income students. She said the President’s cuts to Title I could affect more than 28,000 Arkansas children.

Lincoln noted that Arkansas school districts are already struggling to meet the demands of the new No Child Left Behind law, which the President has never fully funded, so now is not the time to cut such vital funding. She pointed out that the President’s budget proposed extending the No Child Left Behind law to high schools at the expense of eliminating 48 programs, including all the vocational and technical education programs, education technology state grants, GEAR UP, Safe and Drug-Free Schools initiatives and the Communities State Grants, TRIO Talent Search and Upward Bound programs.

Title I: The President’s budget only proposes funding Arkansas’ program at $128 million, but the No Child Left Behind Law mandates that Arkansas receive $218 million.

After School Programs: The President’s budget only proposes funding Arkansas’ program at $9 million, but the No Child Left Behind Law mandates that Arkansas receive $21 million. Lincoln said this could effect more than 15,000 Arkansas children.

Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act: The President’s budget cuts this funding by more than $37 million.

Other important educational initiatives cut in the President’s budget, with the level of funding Arkansas stands to lose:

Even Start, $1.9 million;

Educational Technology State Grants, $4.5 million;

Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities State Grants, $4 million;

Vocational Education State Grants, $12.7 million;

Tech-Prep Education State Grants, $1.18 million;

Byrd Honors Scholarships, $370,500;

Supported Employment State Grants, $313,787

Assistive Technology State Grant Program, $386,476

Protection and Advocacy for Assistive Technology, $50,000

Adult Basic and Literacy Education State Grants, $4,002,770

State Grants for Incarcerated Youth Offenders, $222,126

Mathematics and Science Partnerships, $321,873

State Grants for Innovative Programs, $872,106

Education for Homeless Children and Youth, $6,870

4) ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT – The President’s budget would drastically cut economic initiatives relied on by Arkansas’ rural communities. Lincoln pointed out that the economic development initiatives specifically benefit communities in Arkansas of 3,000 or fewer residents. She said these cuts will be detrimental to rural America.

Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program: The President’s budget restructures how the grants in this important program are allocated. Last year, CDBG alone was funded at $4.8 billion. The President proposes to consolidate CDBG with 17 other local assistance programs and fund the entire group at $3.71 billion. Lincoln said this would make it more difficult for Arkansas’ Department of Economic Development to compete for this type of funding. She said these cuts could severely impair the state’s ability to provide grants to Arkansas’ rural communities. In addition, she said that this move would directly impact the 14 entitlement cities that receive CDBG funds (cities include: Bentonville, Conway, Fort Smith, Jonesboro, Rogers, Texarkana, Fayetteville, Hot Springs, Jacksonville, Little Rock, North Little Rock, Pine Bluff, Springdale, and West Memphis). Lincoln pointed out that CDBG funds have been used for a variety of projects in Arkansas, including senior citizen centers, public health facilities, childcare facilities, affordable housing rehabilitation and construction projects, and rural fire stations.

5) AGRICULTURE – Lincoln said the fine print of the President’s budget includes drastic cuts in farm and commodity programs that are vital to Arkansas’ farmers. Lincoln said that the President’s cuts would break a firm promise the federal government has made to American farmers and ranchers. Lincoln also pointed out that the President’s cuts in Food Stamps will severely impact rural Arkansans.

"The President did not have to cut these programs," she said. "The entire farm bill is one-half percent of the federal budget. Yet, he chose these cuts that endanger entire communities in rural America. He chose to protect tax cuts for the ultra wealthy above our working farm families who are the backbone of rural America.

"This should be a wake up call to the heartland of this country– many of whom supported President Bush’s re-election. These programs have huge impacts on the quality of life in our rural communities. From his recent proposal to privatize Social Security, to these devastating cuts in his budget– the President has made it abundantly clear that he’s going after working families in rural America. His approach is not balanced and I intend to fight these cuts all the way."

More information on how the President’s budget cuts disproportionately affect rural Americans can be obtained by contacting Lincoln’s office at: (202) 224-4843.

-30-

Media Advisory Contact: David DiMartino (202) 224-8795

February 11, 2005 Jena Longo (202) 224-5765

*** PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY***

NEXT WEEK WITH NEBRASKA’S SENATOR BEN NELSON

WASHINGTON, DC – The following information is Nebraska’s Senator Ben Nelson’s public schedule for the week of February 14 through February 19, 2005. The information is provided for planning purposes. Events may be canceled or added. For more information, please contact David DiMartino or Jena Longo at the numbers listed above.

Please note: All times are EASTERN TIME unless otherwise noted. Times and locations are subject to change.

MONDAY, February 14, 2005

10:25 AM CT: NELSON TRO DELIVER REMARKS TO LEAGUE OF NEBRASKA MUNICIPALITIES MID-WINTER CONFERENCE

Cornhusker Hotel, Rooms D, E & F

Lincoln, NE

10:45 AM CT: MEDIA AVAILABILTIY

Contact: Jim Fagin c: 402.616.2652

Cornhusker Hotel

Lincoln, NE

TUESDAY, February 15, 2005

9:30 AM ET: SENATE ARMED SERVICES HEARING

Topic: Plans for the atomic energy defense activities of the Dept. of Energy and to review FY06 budget request for atomic energy defense activities of the Dept. of Energy and National Nuclear Security Admin.

Witness: Honorable Samuel Bodman, Secretary of Energy

Hart Senate Office Building, Room 216, Washington, DC

10:00 AM ET: SENATE COMMERCE COMMITTEE HEARING

Topic: FY06 Budget Proposal for Dept. of Homeland Security's Transportation Security Administration and related programs.

Location: Russell Senate Office Building, Room 253, Washington, DC

11:15 AM ET: WEEKLY CONFERENCE CALL WITH NEBRASKA REPORTERS

Note: Call-in information provided under separate advisory. Call Jena Longo at 202-224-5765 with questions.

Location: 720 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510

12:30 PM ET: LUNCH MEETING WITH TREASURY SECRETARY JOHN SNOW

Topic: Social Security

Location: Treasury Department, Washington, DC

2:30 PM ET: MEETING WITH DELEGATION OF LINCOLN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

Location: 720 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC

3:00 PM ET: MEETING WITH BOARD MEMBERS OF THE NEBRASKA COMMUNITY COLLEGE ASSOCIATION

Location: 720 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC

3:30 PM ET: MEETING WITH WOMEN INVOLVED IN FARM ECONOMICS

Location: 720 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510

4:00 PM ET: ARMED SERVICES HEARING

Topic: Nominations: Mr. John Paul Woodley, Jr. to be Asst. Sec. of the Army for Civil Works; Mr. Buddie J. Penn to be Asst. Sec. of the Navy for Installations and Environment; and Admiral William Fallan, USN, for reappointment to the grade of Admiral and to be Commander of US Pacific Command.

Location: 222 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC

WEDNESDAY, February 16, 2005

8:00 AM ET: NEBRASKA BREAKFAST

Location: Dirksen Senate Office Building, South Servery, Washington, DC

9:30 AM ET: MEETING WITH MIKE MOSER, MAYOR OF COLUMBUS AND OTHERS

Location: 720 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC

10:00 AM ET: MEETING WITH DOUG KRISTENSEN, CHANCELLOR, UNK

Location: 720 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC

2:30 PM ET: MEETING WITH NEBRASKA FARM BUREAU

Location: 720 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC

3:00 PM ET MEETING WITH NEBRASKA TRIBAL COLLEGES

Location: 720 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC

3:30 PM ET: MEETING WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF NEBRASKA EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS (NET)

Location: 720 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC

THURSDAY, February 17, 2005

9:30 AM ET: SENATE ARMED SERVICES HEARING

Topic: Department of Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 06 and the Future Years Defense Program.

Witnesses: Honorable Donald Rumsfeld and Gen. Richard B. Myers, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff.

216 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC

3:00 PM ET: MEETING WITH DELEGATES OF THE NEBRASKA RECREATION AND PARK ASSOCIATION

Location: 720 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC

Please note that all times are subject to change without notice. If you would like more information about any of these meetings please contact David DiMartino at 202-224-8795 or Jena Longo at 202-224-5765.

-30-

Jena Longo

Deputy Press Secretary

Nebraska's Senator Ben Nelson

Direct Line: 202-224-5765

Cell: 202-236-7739

M E M O R A N D U M

To: Reporters and Editors

Fr: Jill Gerber for Chairman Grassley, 202/224-6522

Re: Leasing tax shelters

Da: Friday, Feb. 11, 2005

Sen. Chuck Grassley, chairman of the Committee on Finance, today made the following comment on the Treasury Department’s action to target “sale-in and lease-out” tax arrangements as tax shelters.

“I appreciate the Treasury Department’s effort to shut down these abusive deals. The department has done a very good job of going after bogus leasing shelters since the Finance Committee exposed them. Today’s action complements our new law going after these deals. It reaches back to the deals that otherwise might have gotten away. This Treasury Department has been very active in attacking tax shelters, and I appreciate the support it’s given to the Finance Committee in our anti-shelter efforts.”

M E M O R A N D U M

To: Reporters and Editors

Re: Leasing tax shelters

Da: Friday, Feb. 11, 2005

For Immediate Release Contact: David DiMartino (202)-224-8795

February 14, 2005 Jim Fagin (402)-398-0283

*** MEDIA ADVISORY ***

NELSON TO SPEAK IN LINCOLN

OMAHA, NE—Nebraska’s Senator Ben Nelson will address the League of Nebraska Municipalities Midwinter meeting in Lincoln on Monday, February 14, 2005.

Senator Nelson’s presentation is open to the news media.

Following his address there will be a media availability.

Date: Monday February 14, 2005

Address: 10:25am to 10:45am

Media availability: 10:45am to 11am cst

Cornhusker Hotel

333 S. 13th

Lincoln, NE

Contact: Jim Fagin

402-398-0283

From: Crider, Jennifer
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 4:10 PM
Subject: Pelosi reception for Capitol Hill reporters

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi

Cordially invites Capitol Hill reporters to a reception to celebrate the 109th Congress

Thursday, February 17, 2005

5:00 p.m. - 6:30 p.m.

Please RSVP to Andrew Stoddard at 202-226-7616 or andrew.stoddard@mail.house.gov

Jennifer Crider
Press Secretary
House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi
202-226-7616
202-225-3302

http://democraticleader.house.gov/

JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator - Texas
CONTACT: DON STEWART
(202) 224-0704 office (202) 365-6702 cell

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE February 14, 2005

PRESIDENT’S NOMINEES DESERVE UP-OR-DOWN VOTE, CORNYN SAYS

President sends 20 nominations to the Senate, Cornyn calls for ‘fresh start’ for process, restoration of 51-vote tradition for confirmation of judges

WASHINGTON—U.S. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, made the following statement Monday regarding President Bush’s renomination of 20 individuals to the federal judiciary who did not receive up-or-down votes in the President’s first term, some of whom were first nominated more than three years ago:

“Though recent comments by the Senate Democrat leadership cause me to think otherwise, it is my sincere hope that with a new Senate, tempered by the last two elections, we will have a fresh start to the confirmation process.

“Sadly, the judicial confirmation process has become increasingly divisive in recent years, and as a former judge, I am deeply troubled by that. But surely all Americans can agree that we should have the same rules regardless of which party controls the White House and the Senate. For 200 years, we have had a majority-vote standard for judicial nominees. Senate Democrats should not try to change that rule just because a Republican now occupies the White House.

“It would make no sense to require Republicans to be elected by a 60 percent vote, while only requiring 51 percent of Democrats. Similarly, our Constitution and Senate tradition provide that a majority of senators may confirm a judicial nominee, whether the president is a Democrat or Republican. The Senate should reject the double standard that Democrats have created for confirming President Bush’s nominees and restore our constitutional and traditional standards.

“The American people sent a strong message on November 2 against the obstructionist tactics that, unfortunately, we saw all too often in the past four years. I’m hopeful that the will of the American people has been made clear to the obstructionists and that these 20 nominees will receive swift up-or-down votes, as all judicial nominees deserve.”

Sen. Cornyn, as a member of the Judiciary Committee, has been active in working to confirm the President’s judicial nominees. He and Justice Priscilla Owen served together on the Texas Supreme Court for three years.

The nominees sent to the Senate on Monday were obstructed in the 108th Congress, and despite majority, bipartisan support, never received an up-or-down vote in the Senate.Throughout history the Senate has consistently confirmed judges who enjoyed majority but not 60-vote support — including Clinton appointees Richard Paez, William Fletcher, and Susan Oki Mollway, and Carter appointees Abner Mikva and L. T. Senter. Yet some Washington interest groups, and a partisan minority of the Senate now demand that this president's judicial nominees must be supported by a supermajority of senators, or else be denied even the courtesy of an up-or-down vote, through the unprecedented use of the filibuster.

--Below is the list of candidates President Bush has renominated to judicial seats--

Court of Appeals:

Terrence W. Boyle (4th Circuit) (first nominated May 9, 2001)

Priscilla Richman Owen (5th Circuit) (first nominated May 9, 2001)

David W. McKeague (6th Circuit) (first nominated November 8, 2001)

Susan Bieke Neilson (6th Circuit) (first nominated November 8, 2001)

Henry W. Saad (6th Circuit) (first nominated November 8, 2001)

Richard A. Griffin (6th Circuit) (first nominated June 26, 2002)

William H. Pryor (11th Circuit) (first nominated April 9, 2003)

William Gerry Myers, III (9th Circuit) (first nominated May 15, 2003)

Janice Rogers Brown (District of Columbia Circuit) (first nominated July 25, 2003)

Brett M. Kavanaugh (District of Columbia Circuit) (first nominated July 25, 2003)

William James Haynes, II (4th Circuit) (first nominated September 29, 2003)

Thomas B. Griffith (District of Columbia Circuit) (first nominated May 10, 2004)

District Courts:

James C. Dever, III (Eastern District, North Carolina) (first nominated May 22, 2002)

Thomas L. Ludington (Eastern District, Michigan) (first nominated September 12, 2002)

Robert J. Conrad (Western District, North Carolina) (first nominated April 28, 2003)

Daniel P. Ryan (Eastern District, Michigan) (first nominated April 28, 2003)

Peter G. Sheridan (New Jersey) (first nominated November 5, 2003)

Paul A. Crotty (Southern District, New York) (first nominated September 7, 2004)

Sean F. Cox (Eastern District, Michigan) (first nominated September 10, 2004)

J. Michael Seabright (Hawaii) (first nominated September 15, 2004)

Also formally nominated were:

Jennifer M. Anderson, of the District of Columbia, to be Associate Judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia for the term of fifteen years, vice Steffen W. Graae, retired.

Laura A. Cordero, of the District of Columbia, to be Associate Judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia for the term of fifteen years, vice Shellie F. Bowers, retired.

A. No?l Anketell Kramer, of the District of Columbia, to be a Judge of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals for the term of fifteen years, vice John M. Steadman, retired.

Juliet JoAnn McKenna, of the District of Columbia, to be Associate Judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia for the term of fifteen years, vice Nan R. Shuker, retired.

Gretchen C.F. Shappert, of North Carolina, to be United States Attorney for the Western District of North Carolina, for the term of four years, vice Robert J. Conrad, Jr., resigned.

Earl C. Aguigui, of Guam, to be United States Marshal for the District of Guam and concurrently United States Marshal for the District of the Northern Mariana Islands for the term of four years, vice Joaquin L.G. Salas, term expired.

www.cornyn.senate.gov

For Planning Purposes Only

Media Advisory Contact: Scott Hoeflich (Specter) 202-224-9020

February 14, 2005 Alison Dobson (Harkin) 202-224-5698

Elizabeth Wenk (Castle) 202-226-0719

Josh Freed (DeGette) 202-225-4431

* * * PRESS CONFERENCE * * *

BIPARISAN, BICAMERAL COALITION

TO INTRODUCE STEM CELL RESEARCH LEGISLATION

Legislation is Designed to Expand Current Federal Funding Policy

EVENT: Sen. Arlen Specter, Sen. Tom Harkin, Congressman Mike Castle and Congresswoman Diana DeGette will introduce legislation designed to expand the current federal funding policy for stem cell research.

DATE/TIME: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 @ 11:30 am

LOCATION: Senate Radio/TV Gallery

Washington, D.C.

Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA), Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA), Congressman Mike Castle (R-DE) and Congresswoman Diana DeGette (D-CO) will introduce legislation designed to expand the current federal funding policy for stem cell research. The legislation would allow federal funding for stem cell research using stem cell lines derived under strict ethical requirements from excess in vitro fertilization embryos, regardless of the date they were derived.

The legislation sets additional ethical requirements for stem cell lines to be eligible for funding: 1) they are derived from embryos originally created for fertility treatment and were in excess of clinical need; 2) it was determined that the embryos would never be implanted in a woman and would be discarded; and 3) the embryos were donated with the written informed consent of the individuals seeking fertility treatment without financial or other inducements.

Co-sponsors of the legislation are expected to attend.

# # #

February 14, 2005

Following is a statement by U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) on President Bush’s renomination Monday of Judge Bill Pryor to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals:

“President Bush has great admiration for Judge Pryor and I am pleased but not surprised by this renomination. Judge Pryor is doing a great job as circuit judge and winning praise from fair-minded observers. Those who blocked Judge Bill Pryor from getting an up or down vote should reevaluate their position and allow this superb lawyer to continue to serve our legal system. I strongly believe the opposition to Judge Pryor was driven by misinformation and politics. Senators now have an opportunity to look at his judicial service. The recess appointment has provided Judge Pryor with an opportunity to demonstrate his commitment to the rule of law and to prove that he would not take a political agenda to the bench. He has demonstrated just that, ruling in favor of the little guy on more than one occasion .I hope that senators will consider the great merits of his candidacy, including his record on the 11th Circuit. With the new makeup of the Senate, I believe we will be closer to confirmation.”

For Immediate Release

DATE: Monday, February 14, 2005

CONTACT: Jim Manley 202 224-2939

REID STATEMENT ON NOMINATION OF EXTREMIST JUDGES

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid released the following statement today:

“The President is at it again with the extremist judges.

“Last year, the Senate worked to confirm 204 of the President’s judicial nominees and rejected only the 10 most extreme. This confirmation record is better than that achieved by President Clinton, President George H.W. Bush and President Reagan. Despite our unprecedented effort to work with the President in discharging our constitutional duty to advise and consent to his nominees, today he renominated 7 of the 10 rejected nominees. We should not divert attention from other pressing issues facing this nation to redebate the merits of nominees already found too extreme by this Chamber.

“To replay this narrow and completed debate demonstrates the Bush Administration’s failure to craft a positive agenda for the American people.”

###

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 14, 2005
Contact: John Reid
Director of Communications
(202) 224-4746

ALLEN RETURNS FROM MIDDLE EAST TRIP
Senator Back in U.S. After Meetings with Troops, Leaders in Iraq, Israel

WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senator George Allen (R-VA), member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, returned today from a Middle East trip in which he visited with American military troops and government officials in the countries of Iraq and Israel.

In Iraq, Senator Allen met with: Virginia National Guard troops and other American service members stationed in the country; members of the new Iraqi government; members of the U.S. Embassy team; and General George Casey, Commander of the Multi-National Force – Iraq.

Allen said, “During my stay in Iraq, I told our troops how proud we at home are of their service and dedication. It’s always an invigorating experience spending time with the brave men and women of our Armed Forces who risk and sacrifice so much to keep us safe and defend our freedoms. The patriots in Iraq are truly some of the finest that our nation has to offer and I’m so proud of the way they represent Virginia and America.

“After meeting with the current Iraqi Vice President Ibrahim al-Jaafari – I’m optimistic about the prospects for the future of Iraq. Mr. Jaafari is the leader of the Dawa party, which was part of the successful Shi’ite coalition that won the most seats in the new Iraqi parliament. It was encouraging to hear Mr. Jaafari in agreement with certain principles that we all believe in. He wants to make sure all people in Iraq have equal rights and their rights are not enhanced nor diminished on account of their religious beliefs.

“The large election turnout on January 30th reaffirmed my faith in the human spirit that no matter one’s culture, there is a natural yearning to want to control your own destiny. I’m looking forward to this historic opportunity for the people of Iraq who have been repressed for generations; they now have a chance to chart their own course and choose their own leaders.”

In Israel, Senator Allen met with Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Minister of Finance Benjamin Netanyahu, Labor Party leader Simon Peres as well as General Gilad about their new plans to create a lasting peace with the Palestinians.

Allen said, “There is a new ray of hope for peace with the death of the corrupt terrorist Arafat and the election of Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas. Prime Minister Sharon and the Israelis are willing to take unilateral action by disengaging from all Israeli settlements. In return, Mahmoud Abbas must control Hamas and other terrorist groups. The U.S. will continue to stand with our friend Israel and those who seek a peaceful resolution of disputes which have harmed Israel and the Palestinians.”

# # #

Rep. John Lewis, Delegation Leader
Sen. George Allen, Honorary Co-Chair
Sen. Jon Corzine, Honorary Co-Chair
Rep. Steny Hoyer, Honorary Co-Chair
Rep. Fred Upton, Honorary Co-Chair
Doug Tanner, The Faith & Politics Institute

There are stories here you might have been overlooking. Join us for a background briefing on a modern-day pilgrimage that exposes the core of American democracy.

SPEAKERS:

Rep. John Lewis
Sen. George Allen
Sen. Dick Durbin
Rep. Fred Upton
Doug Tanner, Moderator

Tuesday, February 15, 2005
10:00 a.m.-12:00 noon
Members Room
Library of Congress
Thomas Jefferson Building
Washington, DC

RSVP: Kathryn.Williams@mail.house.gov
202.225.3801

Brenda Jones
Director of Communications for
The Honorable John Lewis
U.S. House of Representatives
343 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
ph - 202.226.4673
fx - 202.225.3166
www.house.gov/johnlewis

Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.,

Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee,

On The White House’s Official Re-Nominations of Judicial Nominees

February 14, 2005

“In renominating some of their most controversial nominees, the Bush Administration has again chosen confrontation over cooperation and ideology over moderation.

“The President’s words about wanting to reach across the aisle to work with Democrats are ringing a little hollow at this point. Democratic senators cooperated in confirming 204 of President Bush’s judicial nominees in his first term, and we were able to reach the lowest judicial vacancy rates in 16 years. Yet many of these controversial nominees are certain to continue to divide the country and to divide the Senate.

“The Senate should not be a rubber stamp for this or any White House. The independent federal judiciary should not be made into an arm of either political party, and when any president tries to do that, it threatens the public’s trust in our courts.

“The President and his partisans might consider toning down their rhetoric as they reflect on the fact that only ten of his nominations were blocked in the 108th Congress, while more than 60 of President Clinton’s judicial nominees were blocked by Republicans.”

# # # # #

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: AMANDA FLAIG [DEWINE]

FEBRUARY 14, 2005 (202) 224-2315

LYNN BECKER [KOHL]

(202) 224-5653

DEWINE, KOHL STATEMENT REGARDING THE PROPOSED MERGER BETWEEN VERIZON AND MCI

Statement by U.S. Senators Mike DeWine (R-OH) and Herb Kohl

(D-WI), Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights:

“The proposed merger among Verizon and MCI is another major step in the ongoing consolidation of the telecom industry. More and more we appear to be moving toward a world in which consumers will face one dominant local telephone company, which bundles its local service with long-distance, high-speed internet, and wireless service. This bundling and the ongoing consolidation continue to raise troubling questions about competition and the availability of consumer choice. Accordingly, the Antitrust Subcommittee intends to scrutinize this latest deal very closely and to examine its consequences for consumers and competition across the nation.”

###

Amanda Flaig

Press Secretary

U.S. Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH)

140 Russell Senate Office Building

Washington, DC 20510

Work: 202-224-7997

Mobile: 202-841-1603

Fax: 202-228-0549

NEWS RELEASE

JEFF SESSIONS

United States Senator – Alabama

CONTACT: MICHAEL BRUMAS OR NANCY WALL

(202) 224-4124

For Immediate Release

President Bush Includes Sessions’ Military Death Benefits Enhancements In The Supplemental Spending Bill

WASHINGTON — An emergency military supplemental spending bill includes Sen. Jeff Sessions’ proposal to pay up to $500,000 for military personnel killed in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The $82 billion spending package to fund military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan would authorize an increase in the death gratuity to $100,000 from $12,420 for service men and women killed in combat or in operations designated by the Secretary of Defense. According to the supplemental bill, the Servicemen’s Group Life Insurance cap would increase to $400,000 from $250,000 for all military personnel.

These enhanced benefits would be retroactive to October 7, 2001, to cover those killed while deployed in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan.

“All soldiers who serve their country and put their lives at risk need to know that if something happens to them, their families will be well taken care of. That’s the bond we have with our military men and women and their families,” said Sessions, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee which held a hearing earlier this month on Sessions’ enhanced death benefits legislation. “I am delighted that the President is addressing this critical issue in the supplemental bill. I look forward to working with him on this.”

According to the supplemental spending bill, military personnel who died in the Iraq and Afghan campaigns would receive a one-time lump sum payment of $238,000, replicating the increased SGLI coverage of $150,000 and additional death gratuity of $88,000.

The supplemental also would require the military to provide written notification to a spouse or next of kin of a service member who elects not to choose the maximum SGLI coverage of $400,000. Also, a married service member could not elect to reduce or decline the insurance without spousal concurrence.

-30-

M E M O R A N D U M

TO: Reporters and Editors

FR: Beth Levine

The Ofc. Of Sen. Chuck Grassley, 202-224-6197

RE: Grassley Schedule for week of Feb. 14, 2005

DA: Monday, Feb. 14, 2005

Following is Sen. Grassley’s schedule for Feb. 14 – 18.

• Grassley will meet with Iowans from Lamoni; the Johnson County Board of Supervisors; Muscatine; the Technology Corridor (Iowa City/Cedar Rapids area) Chambers of Commerce; Des Moines Area Community College; Western Iowa Technical Community College; the University of Iowa; Palmer College; Manly; the National Rural Letter Carriers Association; Iowa Public Television; the Iowa Hospital Association; the Iowa Park and Recreation Association; Ankeny; the Herbert Hoover Presidential Museum; and Calmar.

• On Tuesday, Feb. 15 at 9:30 a.m. (ET), Sen. Grassley will introduce Ambassador Bob Zoellick to members of the Foreign Relations Committee during his confirmation hearing to be Deputy Secretary of State. Zoellick testified often before Grassley’s Finance Committee as the U.S. Trade Representative.

• On Tuesday, Feb. 15 at noon (ET), Sen. Grassley will hold a press conference to introduce his legislation to focus farm payments to small and medium sized farmers. Sen. Byron Dorgan, of North Dakota, will also participate in the news conference with several organization that have confirmed their support for the legislation. The President showed his support for limits on farm subsidies when he included in his fiscal 2006 budget several parts of Grassley’s legislation from previous years. The press conference will be held in room 192 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

• On Wednesday, Feb. 16 at 10 a.m. (ET), Sen. Grassley will lead a hearing of the Senate Finance Committee to hear testimony from Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt. He will be testifying about the Department of Health and Human Services budget for fiscal 2006.

• On Wednesday, Feb. 16 at 8 p.m. (ET), Sen. Grassley will participate in his live, call-in television program. During "Ask Your Senator" Grassley takes questions from Iowans on any subject from 8-8:30 p.m. (ET). Iowans can phone Grassley by dialing toll-free 800/736-8255. Questions also can be e-mailed in advance to askyoursenator@saa.senate.gov.

• On Thursday, Feb. 17 at 9:30 a.m. (ET), Sen. Grassley will participate in a mark-up of his bankruptcy reform bill in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Grassley first held a hearing in April 1997 in the Crime and Courts Judiciary Subcommittee he chaired. The bankruptcy reform bill would cut down on abusive and frivolous filings that hurt the economy. The bill requires people to repay at least some of their debt IF they have the means to do so.

-30-

Media Advisory Contact: David DiMartino (202)-224-8795

February 15, 2005 Jena Longo (202) 224-5765

*** NELSON CONFERENCE CALL ADVISORY ***

TODAY, Tuesday, February 15
at 10:15 a.m. CT/9:15 a.m. MT

WASHINGTON, DC B Nebraska’s Senator Ben Nelson will hold his weekly conference call with the Nebraska media Tuesday, February 15, 2005 at 10:15 a.m. CT, 9:15 a.m. MT). Participants are asked to call in at 10:05 a.m. CT (9:05 a.m. MT).

To Enter the Conference Call:

Dial 1-866-909-2663.
When prompted, press “1” to join a meeting.
Enter Meeting ID number “8739321”
When prompted, state name.
Enter call.

Senator Nelson will enter the call at 10:15 a.m. CT/9:15 a.m. MT.

For more information, please call David DiMartino at 202-224-8795, or Jena Longo at 202-224-5765.

-30-

Jena Longo

Deputy Press Secretary

Nebraska's Senator Ben Nelson

Direct Line: 202-224-5765

Cell: 202-236-7739

For Immediate Release

DATE: Monday, February 14, 2005

CONTACT: Jim Manley 202 224-2939

REID STATEMENT ON CONTRACTING ABUSES IN IRAQ

WASHINGTON, D.C. --- U.S. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid released the following statement today at a Democratic Policy Committee hearing on contracting abuses in Iraq:

Remarks as prepared:

I want to thank Senator Dorgan and the Democratic Policy Committee for holding this hearing, and for the testimony of our witnesses today. I believe this matter of contracting abuses, and how we handle the overall reconstruction of Iraq, is tied closely to our chances for success in Iraq.

Of course, there have been vocal disagreements about the President’s policies in Iraq, the missing weapons of mass destruction, and the bases for war.

But now that our troops are mired in a dangerous effort to defeat the insurgency and are also trying to help rebuild the country, Americans of all political persuasions simply want the United States to succeed and our troops to be as safe as possible.

I have been critical of the President for failing to lay out a real and understandable plan for success. And I will continue to press the President to level with the American people and to lay out a plan to deal with the many challenges that lie ahead: defeating the insurgents, training Iraqi security forces, getting Iraqi moderates and Sunnis involved in the new government, enlisting the help of more allies, and getting the reconstruction back on track.

I am especially perplexed and disturbed by what has happened with the reconstruction and the contracting. We are close to 24 months into this conflict with Iraq, and the Administration still can’t seem to get it right.

A December 2004 report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies found that upwards of 30-percent of the reconstruction money is being lost to corruption, fraud, and mismanagement.

More than a year ago, the Administration urgently requested $18.4 billion in emergency funding for reconstruction efforts in Iraq. The Congress delivered, but the Administration hasn’t. Thus far, only 20% of the money has been spent. Meanwhile, U.S. taxpayers and the Iraqis wait for the Administration to roll-out a real plan -- a plan to involve Iraqis in small-scale, high visibility projects that can deliver real impact to Iraqi economy.

While we wait for a real reconstruction plan, the contracting and accounting abuses continue to mount.

Just recently, the Special Inspector General for Iraq released an audit showing the Coalition Provisional Authority has lost track of nearly $9 billion in Iraqi oil funds.

And unfortunately, as we will hear today, there are many more examples of CPA mismanagement. Let me cite just a few:

· The CPA covered the payroll of one Iraqi Ministry that claimed it employed 8,206 security guards, but really only employed 600.

· The State Department found that in 2003, American diplomats pressured Halliburton to keep using a Kuwaiti subcontractor to handle fuel sales. The subcontractor charged more than twice the cost of available alternatives, leading to $61 million in overbilling.

· A company called Custer Battles allegedly billed the CPA $157,000 for a helicopter pad that cost $95,000. The same company also repainted forklifts that were abandoned by Baghdad Airways, and then charged the CPA thousands of dollars, claiming these same forklifts were leased.

The fraud, waste and abuse we have seen in the contracting process reinforces my view that we had a plan to win the war, but we had no plan to win the peace. No plan for post-conflict reconstruction. Trouble was all but guaranteed in this environment.

But the subject matter of this hearing should not be viewed in isolation, as merely accounting and business irregularities.

How we conduct business in Iraq, how we undertake the reconstruction, and how successful we are at helping to rebuild the country is directly tied to our overall success, and directly tied to the security of our soldiers and the threats they face.

I will never forget what General Myers and General Abizaid have told the Congress on more than one occasion. I am paraphrasing, but they indicated “that we have overwhelming firepower in Iraq; that we would continue to win every firefight with the enemy, every battle, and every incursion, but that the war in Iraq would be won by non-military means.” This was a rather startling statement from two senior military officers.

When pressed, the Generals explained that defeating a counterinsurgency requires the complete arsenal of American power: military power, economic power, diplomatic power and political power.

When, for example, the unemployment rate among young Iraqi men still stands at over 50%, when Iraqis have to stand in line for hours for a single gallon of gasoline, when water and electricity are only sporadically available, you begin to have the conditions that allow insurgencies to thrive.

Many ordinary Iraqis – the “fence sitters” as some call them – are prone to either join those fighting U.S. forces or at least give aid and support to the insurgents, as the quality of their own life degrades.

The Commander of the First Cavalry in Baghdad has said that when his troops were given the resources to work on reconstruction projects – on sewer systems and power lines – the number of threats against his troops went down.

So, when we talk about an absence of contracting controls, badly qualified contractors, poor management by inexperienced officials, over-billing and profiteering, corruption, and a failure to deliver basic services to the Iraqis – not only is this wrong and in some cases possibly criminal, but it also contributes to the poor security position we find ourselves in today, and it makes achieving success even harder. We have to do better.

So I appreciate very much the leadership of Senator Dorgan and his staff for convening this important hearing. With billions of dollars and the security of our forces at stake, we have to get this contracting and reconstruction right. We owe it to our troops, the U.S. taxpayers, and the Iraqi people.

###

Tuesday, February 15

9:30 a.m. SFRC Confirmation Hearing for Bob Zoellick, Dirksen 419

2:30 p.m. SFRC Coffee with Egypt Foreign Minister Ali Abdoul Gheit, S-116 Capitol, photo-op at top, Stake-out at end of 45 minute meeting

3:30 p.m. Lugar meets with U.S. Ambassador to Iraq John Negroponte, S-116 Capitol. Stake out only.
Other committee members may attend.

Wednesday, February 16

10 a.m. SFRC Hearing on the State Department Budget, with Secretary Rice, Dirksen 419

Thursday, February 17

9:30 a.m. SFRC Hearing on Russian Democracy, and Yukos oil company, Dirksen 419

Andy Fisher
Press Secretary
Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Sen. Dick Lugar, Chairman
andy_fisher@lugar.senate.gov
202-224-2079

For Immediate Release CONTACT: Jim Manley, 202-224-2939

February 14, 2005

DEMOCRATS ASK THEIR QUESTION OF THE DAY ON SOCIAL SECURITY:

“Who will finance the $5 trillion in debt created by the president’s Social Security privatization plan?”

China and Japan Will Finance Most of the Debt. If recent trends continue, virtually all the additional debt required by the Republican privatization plan is likely to be borrowed from foreigners. Last year, between January and November, publicly-held debt increased by $363 billion, $362 billion of which represented an increase in foreign holdings of such debt. Currently, the largest holders of our debt are Japan ($715 billion) and China ($191 billion).” [U.S. Treasury Department, Major Foreign Holders of Treasury Securities, 1/18/05]

FOR PLANNING PURPOSES CONTACT: Allison Dobson / Maureen Knightly

202-224-3254

*** SATELLITE ADVISORY ***

***TODAY***

HARKIN, SESAME STREET’S ELMO AND ROSITA DISCUSS HEALTHY EATING, WELLNESS

Footage Great for Preview Stories on Tuesday’s ICN Session

Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) will join Sesame Street’s Elmo and Rosita on Iowa Public Television’s Kids Clubhouse on Tuesday, February 15 to talk about making healthy food and exercise part of Iowa students’ everyday lives. In this "Healthy Minutes" ICN session to Iowa classrooms, Senator Harkin, Elmo and Rosita will share a special message LIVE from Washington D.C. about the power of nutrition and activity.

In May of 2004, Harkin filmed two PSA’s with Sesame Street’s Elmo and Rosita. This footage can be used for preview stories on the ICN session.

**TOMMORROW afternoon we will have a satellite feed of the actual Healthy Minutes ICN session.

Coordinates of the satellite feed of the 2004 Harkin/Elmo PSA’s are as follows:

DATE: TODAY, February 14, 2005

TIME: 3:35-3:40 pm CST

GALAXY: 3c

TRANSPONDER: 7

DOWNLINK: 3840

AUDIO: 6.2/6.8

# # #

Statement of Senator Carl Levin
On the Nomination of Judge Michael Chertoff
February 14, 2005

Mr. President, let me begin by saying that I intend to vote to confirm Judge Chertoff to be Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security based on what I know of him. What deeply troubles me is that information relevant to his confirmation has been arbitrarily denied to the Senate by the Justice Department.

In the course of preparing for the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee’s hearing on Judge Chertoff’s nomination, a document came to my attention bearing on Judge Chertoff’s responsibilities when he headed the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. The document was recently released by the FBI in response to a Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, request by the American Civil Liberties Union. It is dated May 10, 2004. It indicates that FBI personnel working at the Guantanamo Detention Facility had major concerns about interrogation techniques used on detainees from Afghanistan by Department of Defense personnel that “differed drastically” from traditional methods employed by FBI personnel. DOD and FBI techniques differed so drastically that FBI agents decided that they had to “step out of the picture” so as not to participate in DOD-led interrogations.

DoD interrogation techniques have been the focus of a number of the investigations into detainee abuse allegations, including abuses graphically depicted in the photographs from Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. Major General George Fay, who investigated detainee abuses by military intelligence personnel at Abu Ghraib, found that interrogators at that prison were improperly using harsh interrogation techniques that came from Guantanamo, including stress positions, isolation, nudity and the use of dogs to “fear up” detainees. The report of the panel chaired by former Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger found that these “more aggressive” interrogation techniques developed in Guantanamo “migrated” to Afghanistan and Iraq and contributed to widespread abuses. The FBI document that I am talking about today makes clear that concerns about DoD’s interrogation techniques in use at Guantanamo and so strenuously objected to by FBI agents started at least as early as Fall 2002, before the abuses occurred at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere.

The document at issue indicates that FBI agents communicated regularly with Justice Department officials, including senior officials in the Criminal Division headed by Mr. Chertoff before he was appointed to the federal bench. Their communication expressed their deep concerns about techniques employed by DoD personnel. Let me read from that document, which is displayed on the chart beside me. It is from an FBI email to TJ Harrington (Division 13) from an official whose name has been redacted. It reads in part as follows:

I went to GTMO with BLANK early on and we discussed the effectiveness of BLANK with the SSA [Supervisory Special Agent]. We (BAU [Behavioral Analysis Unit] and ITOS1 [International Terrorism Operations Section 1] had also met with General’s Dunlevey and Miller explaining our position (Law Enforcement techniques) vs. DOD. Both agreed the Bureau has their way of doing business and DoD has their marching orders from the Sec Def. Although the two techniques differed drastically, both Generals believed they had a job to accomplish....In my weekly meetings with DOJ we often discussed BLANK techniques and how they were not effective or producing Intel that was reliable.”

Then there is a series of blanks, which appear to be individuals’ names that have been redacted, withheld from release, with the abbreviation “SES” after the names indicating the individuals were members of the Senior Executive Service. The document then says all o f those SES employees were from the DOJ Criminal Division and they

“attended meetings with FBI. We all agree BLANK were going to be an issue in the military commission cases. I know BLANK brought to the attention of BLANK.”

It is those redactions, the information that has been deleted, including the names of the senior officials in the Criminal Division participating in meetings with the FBI agents, which thwart the Senate in its Constitutional role of deliberating on Judge Chertoff. Judge Chertoff was the head of the Criminal Division of the Justice Department from April 2001 until June of 2003.

On February 4, 2005, Senator Lieberman and I wrote to FBI Director Robert Mueller regarding this document. A copy of that letter is displayed next to me. It states:

“We ask that an unredacted version of this three-page document be provided to the Office of Senate Security where we and staff members with appropriate clearance can review it. Please provide an unredacted copy...by no later than 4:00 pm on Friday, February 4, 2005. If you will not provide a copy of this document, please provide a legal justification for doing so.”

In a letter dated February 7, 2005, the Department of Justice - not the FBI to whom we wrote but the Department of Justice - wrote back denying our request. The Justice Department claimed that an unredacted copy could not be provided because it contained “information covered by the Privacy Act,...as well as deliberative process material.”

The Justice Department’s reasons for denying our request are not just unfounded and unacceptable. They are incredible. They are extreme. The Privacy Act is designed primarily to prevent the U.S. government from disclosing personal information about private individuals who have not consented to that disclosure. It is not intended to be a means of concealing the names of public officials engaged in government conduct funded with taxpayers’ dollars. The Department of Justice’s invocation of the Privacy Act to deny the Senate relevant information regarding a nomination before the Senate is an abuse of the Privacy Act and a dangerous precedent. Denying Congress documents relevant to our functions, if sustained, would effectively end most Congressional oversight because government employees are named in thousands of documents that Congress relies on in carrying out our responsibilities. Senator Lieberman and I have written to Attorney General Gonzales requesting that he reconsider the decision to withhold this information.

When I asked Judge Chertoff about this document at his nomination hearing on February 2, he could not recall discussions between FBI and DOJ Criminal Division officials concerning DOD interrogation techniques at Guantanamo. He stated, “... I don’t recall having any discussion about techniques that the Defense Department was using in Guantanamo, other than simply the question of whether interrogations or questioning down there was effective or not.” Judge Chertoff could not say who were the Criminal Division officials whose names had been redacted from the document. Nor could he even confirm that the discussions referred to in the document between people from his Criminal Division and the FBI and Defense Department officials occurred during his tenure as head of the Criminal Division.

If Judge Chertoff doesn’t know that these discussions took place or who in his division might have engaged in these discussions, or when they took place, doesn’t that end the matter? Of course not. By denying the Senate access to the names listed in this document, the Department of Justice has prevented the Senate from finding out that information so that we might refresh Judge Chertoff’s recollection about the conversations referred to in the document with the senior Criminal Division personnel regarding DoD interrogation techniques at Guantanamo. If the names of the Criminal Division personnel were known to him or to us we could surely ask them whom they discussed these matters with higher up in the Criminal Division, including possibly with Judge Chertoff. We clearly have a right to find out their names to ask them the same relevant questions we could ask them if their names were not redacted.

By its contorted reliance on the Privacy Act, the Justice Department is denying the Senate information relevant to our consideration of whether to give our consent to this nominee. Our Constitutional mandate is clear. The Justice Department’s decision to cover up this information is deeply disturbing. Not only is the Senate being thwarted. The American public is being denied relevant information. If this misuse of the Privacy Act is not resisted, Congressional oversight of our governmental activities will be controlled by the Executive Branch that we are supposed to oversee. We cannot allow the Department of Justice action to stand unchallenged.

The particular FBI document that Senator Lieberman and I have sought and the other FOIA documents dramatize the refusal of the Administration to be straight with the American people and with Congress relative to the detainee abuse issue. Thwarting Congressional oversight seems to be deeply ingrained in the Administration, particularly on the issue of detainee abuse.

From the start, the Administration has been slow in alerting Congress on the issue of detainee abuse. Specialist Joseph Darby courageously came forward to the Defense Department with allegations and photos of horrible abuses at Abu Ghraib on January 13, 2004. Yet the Administration did not inform Congress of the existence of the nature and scope of these allegations and photos until April 28th, 2004, the day these pictures were aired on a major network news program. The Congress only learned of the report of Major General Taguba, who investigated the allegations of abuse by military police at Abu Ghraib between January 31 and March 12th, 2004, after it was leaked to the press in early May. We did not learn of White House Counsel Gonzales’ memo of January 25, 2002, advising the President that the protections of the Geneva Conventions were “obsolete” and “quaint,” until it was obtained by the press in mid-May 2004. We did not learn of the August 1, 2002, memo by the Office of Legal Counsel on his novel interpretation of the anti-torture statute, the so-called Torture Memo, until it was obtained by the press in early June 2004. This was the memo that defined prohibited torture extremely narrowly, for example that physical pain would have to be equivalent to organ failure, impairment of bodily functions, or death to count as torture under the anti-torture statute. And we now know of a second Office of Legal Counsel opinion from around the same time as the August 1, 2002 Torture Memo, which analyzes the legality of specific interrogation techniques. This memo has still not been made available to the Congress.

The Armed Services Committee made a standing request, on May 13, 2004, in a letter from Chairman Warner to Secretary Rumsfeld, for “all relevant documentation” relating to allegations of prisoner abuse, and for “all legal reviews and related documentation concerning approval of interrogation techniques.” The response can only be considered slow and partial.

The Defense Department has engaged in considerable foot-dragging in getting Congress the findings of its investigations into key aspects of the detainee abuse issue. Although the Defense Department at one point estimated that the report of General Formica regarding abuse allegations against special operations forces in Iraq would be ready last August, and this report was briefed to the Secretary of Defense over a month ago, only late last Friday afternoon did the Armed Services Committee receive this report. We have yet to receive the report of Navy Inspector General Vice Admiral Church into DoD interrogation techniques in Guantanamo, Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere. The Defense Department initially estimated that this report would be ready six months ago. The Department’s slow-rolling has delayed additional public hearings on the detainee abuse issue.

It is astonishing to me that only after becoming aware of the allegations of detainee abuse at Guantanamo contained in the documents produced by the FBI under the ACLU’s FOIA request did the Defense Department direct that an investigation into these allegations be initiated.

The FBI documents that have been released under the FOIA request, although redacted, nonetheless describe the FBI’s “battles” during 2002 and 2003 with DoD commanders at Guantanamo regarding the use by DoD of “aggressive” and “coercive” interrogation techniques. In response to an FBI internal inquiry, allegations of detainee mistreatment at Guantanamo surfaced during the summer of 2004. This led the Bureau’s Inspection Division in July 2004 to contact all employees who served at Guantanamo after September 11, 2001, and request any information regarding detainee mistreatment at that facility.

FBI employees’ responses to the FBI Inspection Division’s request relating to Guantanamo indicate that FBI personnel repeatedly raised concerns regarding DoD interrogation techniques, including with DoD commanders at Guantanamo from late 2002 into mid-2003. One email, dated May 10, 2004, describes how FBI officials raised their concerns with General Dunlavey, who was in charge of interrogation operations until October 2002, and with General Miller, who was commander of the facility from October 2002 until March 2004. In these discussions the FBI officials were told, “DoD has their marching orders from the Sec Def [Secretary of Defense].” The agent adds, “Although the two [agencies’] techniques differed drastically, both Generals believed they had a job to accomplish.”

Another email dated December 9, 2002, states that it has two attachments: a description of an interrogation matter raised with the Commanding General at Guantanamo, presumably General Miller; and secondly, “an outline of the coercive techniques in the military’s interviewing tool kit.” The FBI agent concludes by promising to bring back to Headquarters a copy of the military’s Interview Plan for an unnamed detainee, saying, “You won’t believe it!”

The responses to the FBI’s internal inquiry show that FBI officials had many objections to DoD interrogation techniques. In his confirmation hearing, Judge Chertoff suggested that FBI and DOD differences regarding interrogation techniques at Guantanamo might have related to whether Miranda warnings were provided. But that was not the case. FBI agents had official guidance not to provide to detainees at Guantanamo. The differences between the two agencies’ methods were different than that and went much deeper.

Other FBI documents produced under the FOIA request show that agents complained about the effectiveness of DoD’s methods for producing reliable intelligence compared to the FBI’s interviewing techniques. One agent reported telling DoD officials that the intelligence DoD was producing was “nothing more than what FBI got using simple investigative techniques...” Another FBI official complained that whenever an agent would begin to develop a rapport with a detainee, “the military would step in and the detainee would stop being cooperative.”

Another major FBI concern was that DoD interrogators were impersonating FBI Agents. In one email, dated December 5, 2003, an agent complained that DoD interrogators had impersonated FBI agents in attempting to produce intelligence. The FBI agents expressed the concern that should this detainee’s story ever be made public, the FBI will be left “holding the bag” because it would appear that “these torture techniques were done [by] ‘FBI’ interrogators.”

A couple of the FBI emails challenge Defense officials’ public statements in 2004 regarding DoD methods of interrogation used at Guantanamo. For example, one email, dated May 13, 2004, reacts to statements of Major General Geoffrey Miller, who at that time had moved from commanding the Guantanamo facility to Iraq, where he was in charge of all detention facilities, including Abu Ghraib. It states:

“Yesterday...we were surprised to read an article in stars and stripes, in which gen miller is quoted as saying that he believes in the rapport-building approach. This is not what he was saying at gitmo when i was there. [Redacted] and i did cart wheels. the battles fought in gitmo while gen miller he [sic] was there are on the record.”

The FBI agents’ responses to the Inspection Division’s request regarding Guantanamo refer to other documents reflecting the FBI agents’ serious concerns over DoD interrogation techniques. Among the documents cited are a lengthy “electronic communication” (EC) drafted by the FBI’s Behavioral Assessment Unit dated May 30, 2003, contrasting the Bureau’s interrogation methodology with that of DoD; an electronic communication by the FBI’s Military Liaison and Detention Unit in November 2003 “as to FBI’s disapproval [redacted] regardless of whether they [DoD interrogation techniques] were approved by the Deputy Secretary of Defense”; and a “must read” electronic communication from the FBI’s Miami Division. Also, a December 2003 email refers to a request by the Military Liaison and Detention Unit that “information be documented to protect the FBI” because of their “long standing and documented position against use of some of DOD’s interrogation practices....” Either these documents remain unreleased to the public or, if released, their content has been almost entirely redacted.

Reflecting the position in the documents I’ve referred to is a May 19, 2004, memo to all divisions from FBI General Counsel Valerie Caproni. This memo states that “existing FBI policy...has consistently provided that FBI personnel may not obtain statements during interrogations by the use of force, threats, physical abuse, threats of such abuse or severe physical conditions” and that “no interrogation of detainees, regardless of status, shall be conducted using methods which could be interpreted as inherently coercive, such as physical abuse or the threat of such abuse to the person being interrogated or to any third party, or imposing severe physical conditions.” It adds that FBI personnel who participate in interrogations with non-FBI personnel shall comply with FBI policy at all times. Specifically, “FBI personnel shall not participate in any treatment or use any interrogation technique that is in violation of these guidelines regardless of whether the co-interrogator is in compliance with his or her own guidelines.” Accordingly, the guidance to FBI personnel was to remove themselves from the situation if the interrogation is being conducted in a manner not compliant with FBI policy.

In response to the FBI Inspection Division’s request, several FBI agents reported observing “aggressive treatment” of detainees at Guantanamo. One agent reports witnessing on a couple of occasions detainees “chained hand and foot in a fetal position on the floor, with no chair, food or water.” He describes how often times these detainees had urinated or defecated on themselves, having been left in this position for 18-24 hours or more. One detainee subjected to these techniques had apparently been “literally pulling his own hair out throughout the night.” The agent speculated that these techniques were being used by “the military, government contract employees” and a third group whose identity has been redacted.

The FBI documents indicate that Bureau officials intended to notify the Defense Department regarding the FBI Inspection Division’s findings regarding Guantanamo abuse allegations. A summary of that internal inquiry states that 26 of the agents who responded to Inspection Division’s request said they had observed some form of detainee mistreatment by non-FBI personnel. After reviewing these statements, FBI General Counsel Valerie Caproni deemed 17 of these incidents to involve “appropriate DoD approved interrogation techniques.” The remaining nine were determined to require follow-up interviews. The summary states that the FBI Inspection Division was to prepare a report based on those follow-up interviews, to be forwarded to General Counsel Caproni, who would in turn notify the Defense Department. It isn’t clear whether this report was ever prepared or provided to the Defense Department. If it does exist, the Defense Department has not provided it to the Senate Armed Services Committee.

In addition, other FBI documents released under the FOIA request include a partially-redacted letter, dated July 14, 2004, from Thomas Harrington, who served as the head of the FBI team at Guantanamo, to Maj. Gen. Donald Ryder, commanding general of the Army Criminal Investigation Command, detailing highly aggressive interrogation techniques at Guantanamo. The incidents witnessed by FBI agents as early as Fall 2002 include what appeared to be a female interrogator squeezing a male detainee’s genitals and bending back his thumbs, and the use of a dog to intimidate a detainee. Details of a third incident were redacted from the letter, but according to the press, the letter describes a prisoner gagged with duct tape covering much of his head to prevent him from reciting the Koran. Another incident involved a detainee suffering from extreme mental trauma after being kept in an isolation cell flooded with lights for three months.

The Harrington letter indicates that these incidents and other FBI concerns were discussed with two officials in DoD General Counsel’s office in mid-2003. Despite the Armed Services Committee’s standing request for “all relevant documentation” relating to the prisoner abuse issue, the Committee was not told by the Defense Department of their receiving the Harrington letter last July, nor have we been informed regarding what actions the Department took in response to these allegations.

What the documents produced under the FOIA request indicate is that the Administration’s policies on the meaning of torture and the legality of specific interrogation techniques had taken the lid off what constituted aggressive interrogation techniques and opened the door to abuses. The document that Senator Lieberman and I have sought in the course of the Judge Chertoff’s nomination proceedings shows clearly that the FBI was raising its concerns about DoD interrogation techniques as early as the fall of 2002. This would be a few months after the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel issued its August 1, 2002, memo interpreting the federal anti-torture statutes.

A December, 2002 memo by Secretary Rumsfeld put the stamp of approval additional interrogation techniques that went beyond those under existing Army doctrine for use at Guantanamo. These included stress positions; isolation; deprivation of light and auditory stimuli; 20-hour interrogations; nudity; and exploiting a detainee’s phobias (such as fear of dogs). One month later Secretary Rumsfeld rescinded his approval of these techniques. He ultimately approved in April 2003 a narrower set of interrogation techniques. Regardless of which memo was in effect at the time of the FBI memo, Congress needs to find out whether the alleged mistreatment reflected the most aggressive DoD approved interrogation techniques temporarily authorized for Guantanamo in December 2002, or went beyond even those.

The concerns that the FBI expressed to the Defense Department were classified, but reports of abusive practices at Guantanamo leaked to the press. A New York Times article from November 2004 reported on a confidential International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) report, which found that the highly refined system for the detention and interrogation of detainees at Guantanamo was “tantamount to torture.” The article also states that the report, based on an ICRC visit to the facility last June, notes incidents of detainees being subjected to loud, persistent music, prolonged cold, and “some beatings.”

Another New York Times article dated January 1, 2005, cited anonymous interviews with military officials who participated in interrogations at Guantanamo, confirming the use of the same kinds of aggressive interrogation techniques that FBI agents reported. These techniques reportedly included shackling inmates for hours, leaving them to soil themselves or subjecting them to loud music. Again, as the reports of General Fay and the Schlesinger Panel concluded, it was these aggressive techniques in use at Guantanamo that migrated to Afghanistan and Iraq and contributed to the occurrence of detainee abuse there.

It was not just the FBI that objected to these techniques. We have recently learned of a June 2004 memorandum written by Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) Director, Vice Admiral Lowell Jacoby, to Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Stephen Cambone advising him that DIA interrogators had been threatened by U.S. special operations forces, instructed not to leave the compound, and ordered not to talk to anyone in the United States when the DIA personnel observed and sought to document and report that they had observed those personnel physically abuse a detainee during an interrogation in Iraq.

The Jacoby memorandum is another example of how this Congress has not been kept apprised and is only finding out after the fact about the depth and breadth of the allegations of detainee abuse.

That is totally unacceptable and should energize the Congress. But what should doubly energize us - all of us - is when the Department of Justice denies us information relevant to our Constitutional responsibilities after a specific request for the information.

Mr. President, my purpose in coming to the floor this afternoon is to alert the Senate to this direct challenge to our ability not only to perform our confirmation responsibilities but our ability to perform our oversight function so essential to the system of checks and balances that serve as a brake on the powers of the Executive Branch.

It’s not the first time the Administration has asserted broad new powers to withhold information from Congress. A broad claim of executive power was made in a letter sent to Senator Warner and me from the Deputy General Counsel of the Department of Defense. The letter referred to “the President’s constitutional authority to withhold information the disclosure of which could impair foreign relations, [or] national security, [or] the deliberative process of the Executive.”

Presidents traditionally claim the constitutional authority to assert executive privilege when personally determining that it is necessary to do so to protect the ability to receive candid advice from senior officials in the executive branch.

But that is not the issue here.

The privilege asserted by that DoJ letter that Senator Lieberman and I received is not limited to cases involving presidential deliberations and advice given to the President himself. That letter asserts the power to make unilateral decisions to withhold documents relating to foreign relations, national security, or deliberations within all parts of the executive branch. That’s a breathtaking claim that must be resisted, and resisted on a bipartisan basis, by any Congress serious about the oath we have taken to defend the Constitution. The DoJ letter is a bald assertion of a privilege whereby Executive Branch officials can withhold anything from Congress that those officials, in their sole discretion, determine to be sensitive, embarrassing, or make such officials uncomfortable. Congress insisted on access to documents of this kind in the past because they are essential to the conduct of our oversight functions.

The document withheld from us in the confirmation matter before us goes beyond any previous assertion by any administration ever, as far as I can determine. There has been no claim of executive privilege here and the document itself has no bearing on any advice given to the President by anybody.

All of us should object to the withholding of the complete May 4, 2004 FBI memo which refers to discussions at which members of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division were present involving abuses at Guantanamo, when Judge Chertoff was head of that division.

The Department of Justice’s use of the Privacy Act takes the efforts to thwart Congressional oversight to a new extreme. It is the latest manifestation of the Executive Branch’s determination to seize any crumb of justification to prevent Congress access to Executive Branch documents needed to carry out our constitutional responsibilities of confirmation and oversight.

Congress cannot sit idly by while the Executive Branch asserts sweeping authority to frustrate Congress’ exercise of our Constitutional responsibilities. Broad Executive Branch assertions of privileged information and its distortion of the Privacy Act threaten to reduce the Senate’s role in advising and consenting on senior level appointments to an exercise in rubber stamping the Administration’s nominees. The Senate must assert its constitutional power to get information relevant to the confirmation process and to our oversight responsibilities.

Congress has not carried out its constitutional oversight responsibilities in the area of detainee abuse, as evidenced by the fresh revelations of abuse allegations in Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo and elsewhere. Those allegations came not from our oversight activities but from FOIA requests and media initiatives. The Administration has not lived up to its promise to keep Congress informed on the issue of prisoner abuse. The Administration has effectively stifled even modest Congressional efforts at oversight.

Based on the information available I will vote to confirm Judge Chertoff, as I believe most or all of us will. But all of us should stand up to the Administration’s denial of a document relevant to that confirmation. And we should act in unison to affirm and carry out the Senate’s traditional oversight activities, regardless of which Party controls this body or the White House.

Media Advisory Contact: David DiMartino (202)-224-8795

February 14, 2005 Jena Longo (202) 224-5765

*** NELSON CONFERENCE CALL ADVISORY ***
Tuesday, February 15
at 10:15 a.m. CT/9:15 a.m. MT

To Enter the Conference Call:

Dial 1-866-909-2663.
When prompted, press “1” to join a meeting.
Enter Meeting ID number “8739321”
When prompted, state name.
Enter call.

Senator Nelson will enter the call at 10:15 a.m. CT/9:15 a.m. MT.

For more information, please call David DiMartino at 202-224-8795, or Jena Longo at 202-224-5765.

-30-

Jena Longo

Deputy Press Secretary

Nebraska's Senator Ben Nelson

Direct Line: 202-224-5765

Cell: 202-236-7739

For Immediate Release CONTACT: Jim Manley, 202-224-2939

February 14, 2005

Democrats Unveil the President’s Social Security Valentine’s Day Present

$5 Trillion in New Debt to China and Japan

Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) and Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.) today decried the efforts by President Bush to heap $5 trillion in debt onto future generations by privatizing Social Security. On Valentine's Day, Stabenow and Murray unveiled the $5 trillion present the President intends to give China and Japan while sticking Americans with the bill.

“This is a great Valentine’s Day gift to countries holding U.S. publicly issued debt, but it’s a genuine heartbreak for America’s families, who will be saddled with the burden of having to pay the bill for this privatization scheme,” Stabenow said.

Though the President’s budget does not reflect the true cost of the Social Security privatization plan, over the next twenty years, the plan will cost taxpayers nearly $5 trillion. Bush’s plan fails to address the long-term challenge facing the system and instead continues to pass the bill to the next generation.

“We should not create new problems for the next generation to handle. Trouble is, the President's plan actually adds to the problems of the next generation – it does nothing to solve them,” Murray said.

The Senators unveiled the Valentine that is attached.

###

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Contact: Matt Hartwig

February 14, 2005 202-224-3254

HARKIN SEEKS TO EXPAND USE OF ETHANOL

Project would turn ethanol into hydrogen fuel for vehicle use

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Continuing his push to increase the use of clean, renewable energy, Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) today introduced legislation to help turn ethanol into hydrogen for use as fuel in a new generation of hybrid electric vehicles. Harkin’s bill authorizes $5 million over three years to demonstrate the cost-effective production of hydrogen from ethanol and other farm-based fuels. The hydrogen would then be used by a fleet of at least 10 hybrid electric vehicles converted to run on hydrogen. Last spring, Harkin met with representatives of General Motors to test-drive their hydrogen-powered demonstration vehicle, the HydroGen3.

“We must start relying more heavily on renewable energy as part of our comprehensive energy solution in this country,” Harkin said. “Part of that solution includes using more renewable fuels like ethanol. And another part of the solution is developing hydrogen-powered vehicles and the systems to support them. This project moves us closer to the use of hydrogen as a viable fuel for the future.”

Ultimately it is believed that hydrogen from ethanol and other renewable sources can form the backbone of a reliable transportation system based on existing fueling stations. Expanded use of this technology would dramatically reduce smog-producing pollutants, lessen our dependence on foreign oil, and provide an economic boost to rural America by adding value to agricultural output.

“Converting ethanol into hydrogen is a smart step for the environment, for our energy security, and for America’s farmers,” Harkin said. “We have to think creatively in preparing for our energy future; hydrogen offers us that opportunity.”

The renewable fuels community agrees. Renewable Fuels Association President Bob Dinneen stated: "We believe ethanol can play an important role in fueling the future hydrogen economy. Ethanol has been proven to be more efficient and easier to reform into hydrogen than gasoline. And as a domestic, renewable fuel, ethanol used for hydrogen will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance energy security compared to fossil fuels."

Harkin’s bill would seek to accomplish the following goals within three years of enactment of the legislation:

Within the first year, build and install an ethanol-to-hydrogen fueling system and convert 10 internal combustion hybrid electric vehicles to run on hydrogen
Fund the continued operation of the hybrid electric vehicles for the subsequent two years, fueled at the ethanol-to-hydrogen reformer.
Collect emissions and fuel economy data under a variety of operating and weather conditions

# # #

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi Cordially invites Capitol Hill reporters to a reception to celebrate the 109th Congress

Thursday, February 17, 2005

5:00 p.m. - 6:30 p.m.

Please RSVP to Andrew Stoddard at 202-226-7616 or andrew.stoddard@mail.house.gov

Jennifer Crider
Press Secretary
House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi
202-226-7616
202-225-3302

http://democraticleader.house.gov/

I just received verbal confirmation from C-SPAN that they will be covering our hearing on the VA’s budget
LIVE -- on C-SPAN 1.

The hearing begins at 10 am Eastern. See C-SPAN’s website for more details: http://www.c-span.org

Jeff Schrade, Communications Director
U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho), Chairman
412 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Direct: 202-224-9093 Fax: 202-228-5655 http://veterans.senate.gov
-------------------------------------------------------------
NEWS FROM THE CHAIRMAN OF THE U.S. SENATE COMMITTEE ON VETERANS AFFAIRS

Contact: Jeff Schrade
202-224-9093

COMMITTEE RELEASES FULL WITNESS LIST FOR VETERANS BUDGET HEARING VA Secretary Jim Nicholson to testify along with Veterans Service Organizations

(Washington, DC) Chairman Larry Craig (R-Idaho) announced today the full witness list for tomorrow’s hearing of the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs on the President’s proposed budget for the Department of Veterans Affairs.

The hearing will be held in room 418 of the Russell Senate Office Building, Tuesday, February 15, starting at 10 a.m. and webcast live at: http://veterans.senate.gov. It may also be available – audio-only – on the C-SPAN website for committee hearings, located at http://www.capitolhearings.org.

The White House has requested a record $70.8 billion in the fiscal year 2006 budget for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Of that $33.4 billion is for discretionary funding – most of it, $28.2 billion, is targeted for health care. Another $37.4 billion is for mandatory funding – mostly for compensation, pension and other benefit programs.

Should Congress approve the budget proposal, the VA reports that funding for veterans health care will have increased by 47 percent since President Bush took office. Despite those record increases, several veterans organizations issued a press release last week calling for $31.2 billion in funding for veterans' health care during 2006 – an increase of $3 billion over the White House’ proposal.

Among those testifying will be:

Panel I – Veterans Administration
The Honorable Jim Nicholson, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, accompanied by:
• The Honorable Daniel L. Cooper, Under Secretary for Benefits;
• Jonathan B. Perlin, M.D., Acting Under Secretary for Health;
• Mr. Richard A. Wannemaker, Acting Under Secretary for Memorial Affairs;
• The Honorable Tim McClain, General Counsel; and
• Ms. Rita A. Reed, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Budget.

Panel II – Veterans Service Organizations
• Mr. Peter S. Gaytan, Principal Deputy Director, Veterans Affairs and Rehabilitation, The American Legion
• Mr. Dennis M. Cullinan, Director, National Legislative Service, Veterans of Foreign Wars
• Mr. Joseph A. Violante, National Legislative Director, Disabled American Veterans
• Mr. Richard B. Fuller, National Legislative Director, Paralyzed Veterans of America
• Mr. Richard Jones, National Legislative Director, AMVETS.

#####