Making Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30. 2006
MAKING EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2006
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I had the good fortune early in my political life to meet and work as an intern for Paul Douglas, a Senator from Illinois from 1948 to 1966. He wrote several books about ethics in government that are still widely quoted. I was fortunate to meet him and then to meet a man who counted him as a mentor, Senator Paul Simon. Both inspired me to do a few more things in my public life than I might otherwise have done.
For instance, Paul Douglas had a rule in his office for staff that they couldn't take anything they couldn't drink. I assume that meant they could have an expensive drink at some local restaurant, but they certainly couldn't take a meal or a gift or anything like that. He had a personal rule that he wouldn't take a gift in his office that was worth more than $2.50. I can recall some angry constituent who sent Senator Paul Douglas a handmade, tooled leather belt with Paul Douglas' name on it which he returned. I am sure the donor was offended, but that was his rule. He made complete disclosure of his income and net worth, as did Paul Simon. I have tried to follow their example.
We need meaningful ethics reform, but I agree with Senator Reid that we also need to have a serious conversation about campaign financing. They are related issues, but they are not the same. The issue we decided to vote on in the Senate on lobbying and ethics reform was timely and important. We know what happened. Mr. Jack Abramoff created a scandal across Washington with the excesses in which he was involved. He has pled guilty on some and is working with the Government, and there may be further indictments and convictions as a result. At least one Member of the House, TOM DELAY of Texas, was indicted and ultimately resigned before his trial. Others in both political parties are under suspicion.
Neither political party has a monopoly on virtue. I know honest and hard-working people on both sides of the aisle. We should do our level best to restore the confidence of America in the process and the people who participate in it.
The effort now by some House Republicans to inject campaign finance reform into this is a poison pill. They know if they can complicate the issue, ultimately nothing will happen. We would like to see our conference strictly set on lobbying and ethics reform.
My personal feeling--and it may only be mine; maybe a few others share it--is that when it comes to campaign financing, we need to do something dramatic, something that States have already proven can make a significant difference. I am talking about public financing. I didn't come to this idea quickly. In fact, I didn't like the idea when I was first elected. I thought it was unconscionable that somehow we would create a system of public financing that would finance some of the strange and extreme candidates who appear from time to time. But I have come to realize that unless and until we make a significant change in the way we finance campaigns, we are not going to restore the integrity of this institution and others. We are not going to restore the confidence of the American people.
It is dangerous to walk the streets around the Capitol because of all the traffic, all the visitors. It is even more dangerous during the course of the day as Members of the House and Senate race to their party headquarter buildings to make fundraising telephone calls, which we have to do; it is the only way to raise the funds so that people of modest means have a chance to compete in the campaign arena. It takes more and more of our time and more time away from what we should be doing on the floors of our respective Chambers. Public financing is an appropriate way to address that. If we did it on a comprehensive basis, we could have genuine reform.
Senator Reid of Nevada has said that is a worthy goal, campaign finance reform, but let's do it the right way, not have something parachuted into the conference committee by House Republicans as a poison pill to real ethics reform. I will do everything I can to defeat what is so-called ethics reform out of the House that does little or nothing to clean up our act on Capitol Hill and tries to inject a clearly political issue into this debate. We need to pass the kind of reform that will restore confidence. Complicating it with campaign finance reform is not the way to do it at this moment.
Let's do it the right way. Let's have hearings, deadlines. Let's create a bill. I would like to join with other Senators, perhaps from both sides of the aisle, to make sure public financing is part of the debate.
I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I rise in support of the amendment being offered by my colleague from Vermont to provide much-needed emergency assistance to sub-Saharan Africa and elsewhere through the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance.
Specifically, his amendment, which I am proud to cosponsor, would increase humanitarian aid funds by $35 million.
The amendment has also now been modified to provide $12 million for hurricane relief assistance to Guatemala, which I also support.
This supplemental is intended to meet emergencies. Well, many countries in Africa especially face dire emergencies, and the money provided in the Leahy amendment is desperately needed.
The United Nations reports that more than 8 million people are facing a food crisis in the Horn of Africa--2 million people in Ethiopia alone are facing critical food shortages.
The world has waited too long before, to respond to crises in Ethiopia and elsewhere. Let's act now and not wait for the television cameras to jar us into action.
The Bush administration has not requested additional funds in the supplemental bill to meet this mounting crisis, despite the fact that conditions in the region have worsened considerably in recent months.
Other regions are also facing emergency situations, most notably West Africa, the Great Lakes region, and Chad.
And yet, in spite of these growing needs, the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance faces the prospect of having to slash the budgets of lifesaving programs.
I want to focus on one example: the Democratic Republic of Congo.
I am told that in the Democratic Republic of Congo, critical U.S. assistance budgets for this year may be cut in half.
In December, I visited the DRC, and I have to tell you, it is hard to imagine a place in greater need.
However, budgetary pressures are forcing U.S. programs in the DRC to collapse the depth and breadth of their efforts.
This means cutting food security programs, clean water, maternal and child health care programs, and other efforts to address fundamental human needs.
The DRC has been wracked by war for years.
Now, it finally sees some hope, but there are 2 million displaced people there.
The Democratic Republic of Congo has long been called one of the world's most neglected emergencies. Let's change that.
The situation in the DRC is just one of the humanitarian crises that currently plague the continent of Africa.
But we can make a difference. We must not cut our disaster assistance to countries like the Congo in half.
That kind of cut undermines everything we have been trying to do. It would be a strategic mistake and a moral failure.
I call on my colleagues to support this additional emergency aid offered by the Leahy amendment.
These supplemental funds are urgently needed and they will go a long way toward providing relief to the millions of Africans and others in the world who find themselves facing absolutely dire circumstances.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I would like to take this opportunity to discuss my fire grant amendment to the Iraq and Hurricane Katrina emergency supplemental bill. Although there are procedural reasons why I cannot offer this amendment at this time, it would provide an additional $100 million for firefighter assistance grants to address the 9/11 Commission's finding that Congress should give high priority to providing funding for communications connectivity in high-risk areas.
We should implement the recommendations of the independent, bipartisan 9/11 Commission and finally protect our ports and airports, our borders and mass-transit systems, our chemical and nuclear power plants, and our food and water supplies from terrorist attack. In July 2004, the 9/11 Commission submitted to Congress and the Nation a report containing 41 recommendations on how to improve intelligence operations and homeland security. In December 2004, Congress enacted the Intelligence Reform Act, ``the 9/11 Act'', authorizing several of these recommendations. However, we have failed to live up to the commitments made in the 9/11 Act.
Almost every single one of the recommendations made in the 9/11 Act on homeland security has been significantly underfunded. In addition, there has been a severe lack of leadership and competency at the Department of Homeland Security--culminating in the failed response to Hurricane Katrina. On December 5, 2005, when the 9/11 Commission issued its final report card, it gave the administration and Congress a series of C's, D's, and F's on many areas in homeland security. These areas include port security, border security, aviation security, chemical plant security, and first responders. We should have an aggressive, robust plan to secure our homeland, and this amendment would implement one of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations.
In the 9/11 Commission's December 2005 report card, the administration received an ``F'' on communications for first responders. Indeed, Hurricane Katrina exposed that, 4 years after 9/11, little progress has been made in creating a system where police, fire, and emergency medical service departments can communicate with each other. Homeland Security's fiscal year 2007 budget decreases first responder and homeland security funding by $400 million, which affects first responders across Illinois and throughout the Nation. Additional Federal funds are needed to protect our investments in homeland security preparation and response.
Last year, more than $25 million was awarded to Illinois fire departments for equipment. Unfortunately, the fiscal year 2007 budget reduces funding for the Fire Program from $545 million to $293 million. This program provides equipment and training to fire departments in Illinois and across the country to help them prepare and respond to terrorist incidents. One way to assist firefighters is to make sure that they have the necessary equipment that makes it possible for them to communicate across departments and agencies.
In Illinois, STARCOM21 is the official statewide public safety two-way radio system. It has been designed to serve State, local, and Federal law enforcement agencies statewide by facilitating multi-agency communication through radio interoperability. This important program is part of a push by the Federal Government to address communication problems experienced by first responders during national emergencies. As part of its STARCOM program, Illinois has purchased and distributed radios to 698 law enforcement agencies at a cost of $3,899,630, for an average cost of approximately $6,000 each; 755 fire departments at a cost of $4,531,580; and 212 emergency management, public health, and other agencies at a cost of $1,272,882. This is a total of 1,665 radios for $9.7 million. This is a little more than half of the universe of public safety agencies in the State. Illinois would like to provide additional radios to some of the larger cities--there are 10 cities in Illinois with populations over 100,000 people--but Federal assistance is required.
My amendment addresses the 9/11 Commission's recommendation that first responders have interoperable communications equipment. My amendment would provide an additional $100 million for interoperable communications equipment so that first responders can respond to natural disasters, terrorist attacks, and other public safety needs. Fire grants are already used by some jurisdictions for the purpose of obtaining communications equipment, and my amendment sets aside a pool of funding to encourage more departments to do so. This is important to help emergency responders field effective and reliable interoperable communications equipment to respond to natural disasters, terrorist attacks, and the public safety needs of America's communities.
The lack of interoperable communications for America's first responders puts them and our communities in danger. Too many of our police, fire, emergency medical services, and transportation officials cannot communicate with each other, and our local departments are not able to link their communications with State and Federal emergency response agencies. A June 2004 U.S. Conference of Mayors survey found that 94 percent of cities do not have interoperable capability between police, fire, and emergency medical services, and 60 percent of cities do not have interoperable capability with the State emergency operations center. Almost half of the cities that responded to the survey said that a lack of interoperable communications had made response to an incident within the last year difficult. In November 2003, OMB testified before Congress that there is insufficient funding in place to solve the Nation's interoperability problem, and it would cost more than $15 billion to begin to fix the problem.
I appreciate Senator Stabenow's work on this issue and her cosponsorship of this important amendment. This is such an important issue for firefighters in Illinois and across the country that when there is another opportunity, I intend to bring this amendment before the Senate, and I hope that my colleagues will consider supporting it.
http://thomas.loc.gov/