NAME: US STORM 3 20060403Ix TAPE: EF06/0286 IN_TIME: 10:37:45:19 DURATION: 00:02:08:06 SOURCES: ABC DATELINE: Near Newbern, Tennessee - 3 Apr 2006 RESTRICTIONS: SHOTLIST: ABC (via NNS - WREG-TV, CBS) - No access Internet ++ AERIAL SHOTS, VIDEO QUALITY AS INCOMING +++ 1. Destroyed home 2. Collapsed church 3. Parking lot of collapsed church 4. Various destroyed farm home 5. Collapsed roof on volunteer fire department 6. Various damaged homes STORYLINE: Thunderstorms packing tornadoes and hail as big as oranges ripped through eight states across the Midwest of the United States on Monday, killing at least 23 people, injuring scores and destroying hundreds of homes. A weather service's Storm Prediction Centre in the state of Oklahoma said it had preliminary reports of 63 tornadoes. Tennessee state was hardest hit, with tornadoes striking five counties on Sunday, the National Weather Service said. Most of the state's 19 deaths were reported along one 25-mile path, from Newbern east to Bradford. The Highway Patrol sent teams to the area Monday with search dogs. Severe thunderstorms, many producing tornadoes, also struck parts of Iowa, Kentucky, Arkansas, Missouri, Ohio, Illinois and Indiana. Strong wind was blamed for at least three deaths in Missouri. A clothing store collapsed in southern Illinois, killing one man. Tennessee officials estimated that 1,200 buildings were damaged in one of the counties.

00:00:00:15 please cut sot First hit butt together husband and wife. 'you see it on the news every day....happen to you.' ... 'a few years ago there was a really small tornado.... Don't know that I wand to be here for a third. (0:20) /

A POLICE CRUISER'S DASHBOARD CAMERA CAPTURED A TORNADO ON VIDEO IN DYER COUNTY TENNESSEE. THUNDERSTORMS PACKING TORNADOES AND HAIL AS BIG AS SOFTBALLS RIPPED THROUGH EIGHT MIDWESTERN STATES KILLING AT LEAST 23 PEOPLE, INJURING SCORES AND DESTROYING HUNDREDS OF HOMES. THE DASHCAM VIDEO SHOWS POWERFUL WINDS WHIPPING DEBRIS IN FRONT OF THE POLICE SQUAD CAR. TENNESSEE WAS HARDEST HIT, WITH TORNADOES STRIKING FIVE COUNTIES. MOST OF THE STATE'S 19 DEATHS WERE REPORTED ALONG A 25 MILE PATH FROM NEWBERN TO BRADFORD. THE HIGHWAY PATROL SENT TEAMS TO THE AREA WITH SEARCH DOGS TO CHECK THE DEBRIS. SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS, MANY PRODUCING TORNADOES, ALSO STRUCK PARTS OF IOWA, KENTUCKY, ARKANSAS, MISSOURI, OHIO, ILLINOIS AND INDIANA. STRONG WIND WAS BLAMED FOR AT LEAST THREE DEATHS IN MISSOURI. A CLOTHING STORE COLLAPSED IN SOUTHERN ILLINOIS, KILLING ONE MAN. THE WEATHER SERVICE'S STORM PREDICTION CENTER SAID IT HAD PRELIMINARY REPORTS OF 63 TORNADOES.

Severe damage from EF3 tornado that struck Little Rock, Arkansas, March 31, 2023. Shot with a DJI Mavic Air2 drone. This is the Walnut Valley neighborhood.

Aerial forward shot of damaged trees and destructed houses in city against sky - Drone shot of destruction in city

NAME: US STORMS 20060403Ix TAPE: EF06/0286 IN_TIME: 11:13:40:00 DURATION: 00:01:57:12 SOURCES: AP TELEVISION DATELINE: Missouri, 3 April 2006 RESTRICTIONS: SHOTLIST: Caruthersville, Missouri ++Audio quality as incoming++ 1. Wide of destroyed home, pan to trees piled up in street and more destroyed homes 2. Woman taking belongings out of destroyed home 3. Pull out from destroyed home to debris-strewn trees 4. Pan of destroyed businesses 5. Fallen water tower 6. SOUNDBITE: (English) Sharon Weir, Daughter of storm survivor: "I heard it (the tornado) was really getting close and while I was on the phone with her she said 'Sharon, I've got to get off the phone, it's here. It's coming.' And I said Mum, get in the hallway and I'll call you back later and that's the last I talked to her until I got here at two o'clock this morning and saw what happened." 7. Various of destroyed homes 8. SOUNDBITE: (English) Sue Crockett, storm survivor: "In my hallway is where you go up in the attic and the hole where you go up in the attic, it blew out. And rain was coming down on me and I wondered if I was in a safe place." 9. Wide of destroyed neighbourhood 10. Repair workers on trucks entering neighbourhood STORYLINE: Thunderstorms have battered eight states across the Midwest of the United States, killing at least 27 people, injuring scores and destroying hundreds of homes. Tennessee was hit hardest by Sunday night's storms, with tornadoes striking five western counties along a 25-mile (40-kilometre) swath of rural Tennessee and killing 27 people, including an infant and a family of four. Tornadoes shredded homes to their foundations, tearing off roofs and knocking down solid brick homes. Hail tore holes in the rooftops and high winds toppled freight cars. About 30 miles (48 kilometres) from Newbern, Tennessee, a tornado caused extensive damage to the southeast Missouri city of Caruthersville. Mayor Diane Sayre said there were no known deaths in the city of 6,700. But residents were busy assessing the damage on Monday. Severe storms also struck parts of Iowa, Kentucky, Arkansas, Missouri, Ohio, Illinois and Indiana. Strong winds were blamed for at least three deaths in Missouri. The Tennessee Valley Authority estimated that more than 15-thousand customers were without power by midday on Monday. The weather service's Storm Prediction Centre in Norman, Oklahoma, said it had preliminary reports of 63 tornadoes. keyword-severe weather

SURVEILLANCE VIDEO FROM BETONVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT IN ARKANSAS CAPTURES STORM AND WIND DAMAGE FROM AREA TORNADOS IN 2006.

Aerial shot of fallen trees and damaged houses, drone flying over residential district - Destruction in city

EXT BROLL PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA REMARKS FROM LITTLE ROCK, AK / HEAD ON / TRAVEL POOL AND INSPECTING DAMAGE / CUTS OF REMARKS Wednesday, May 07, 2014 President Barack Obama tours tornado damage & remarks in Little Rock, Arkansas; departs JBA; arrives Little Rock DC Slug: 1530 WH AR PATH1 RS33 73 AR: 16x9 Disc #672 NYRS: WASH3 (4523) President Barack Obama remarks after touring tornado destruction 15:30:42 PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Well, good afternoon, everybody. Obviously we just had a chance to tour some of the areas that were devastated by last week's tornadoes and had a chance to meet with some of the families who lost loved ones, also had a chance to thank some of the first responders and the recovery workers and members of the National Guard who have been working nonstop to help families and businesses pick up the pieces after this devastating tornado. I want to express my deep appreciation for Governor Beebe and his outstanding leadership; Senator Pryor, Congressman Griffin, Mayor Firestone. They all showed great leadership and were here, hands-on, on the ground throughout these difficult days. And I'm here to make sure that they know and that everybody who's been affected knows that, you know, the federal government's going to be right here until we get, you know, these communities rebuilt, because when something like this happens to a wonderful community like this one, it happens to all of us and, you know, we've got to be there for them. 15:31:54 You know, after the tornadoes touched down, I immediately approved a major disaster declaration to make sure every federal resource was available to help folks in Faulkner County and other areas affected by the tornadoes. At my direction, FEMA deployed incident management assistance teams to support local recovery efforts. Craig Fugate was down here the day after the storm, and a team of the Army Corps of Engineers has been helping search through the debris. Here in Vilonia, the recovery process is just beginning. It's especially difficult because this town has seen more than its fair share of tragedy. Almost exactly three years ago, another tornado leveled parts of Vilonia, and some families and businesses had just finished rebuilding when they were forced to start all over. But folks here are tough. They look out for one another, and that's been especially clear over the past week. Immediately after the tornado hit, about 200 people, including fire crews from other counties, were ready to go house to house searching for injured neighbors. Some survivors were driven to the hospital by complete strangers. And in the days that followed, thousands of volunteers showed up to help remove debris and hunt for belongings, pick up trash and deliver supplies and water. And one volunteer, 16-year-old Casey Williams, did such a good job coordinating relief efforts that Arkansas state troopers started taking orders from her. I had a chance to meet her, and she is extraordinarily impressive, so I don't know what she's going to be doing in the future, but I know it's going to be something great. You know, more than any disaster, it is that dedication and that commitment to each other that truly defines this town. As one resident said, we just say a prayer and then get to work. So the people of Vilonia and all the other towns devastated by the storm understand there's a lot of work that remains to be done, but I'm here to remind them that they're not doing this work alone. You're country's going to be here for you. We're going to support you every step of the way. You are in our thoughts and prayers. Mr. Mayor, thank you for the great leadership that you've shown. I know that you can count on your governor, and your senator and your congressman are here to make sure that every resource that we have available to you is going to -- going to be, you know, there. 15:34:15 And one of the things that the mayor expressed to me that we've got some concerns about is when this happens in a town like this, it's not just the infrastructure and the buildings that are torn down; you also lose part of your sales tax base, and so we're going to have to figure out how they can make sure that they get back on their feet, and I'll be sure to work with Congressman Griffin and Senator Pryor and Governor Beebe to see if we can do something on that front as well. But I could not be more impressed by the spirit of community that's here. We got this gentleman right here I just had a chance to meet who was in one of these homes, where he lives just -- when the storm hit. Thankfully, he and his 16-year-old son and wife are -- are OK. You know, it's a reminder, obviously, that as important as possessions are, nothing's more important than family. Those families that I had a chance to met -- meet with, they're still mourning those they lost, but they couldn't be more grateful and thankful for the way the community has responded. So this is testament to the strength of this community, the strength of Arkansas and the strength of America. And -- and I could not be more proud of everybody who's participated in the recovery process. 15:35:29 All right? Thank you very much. 15:35:39 Obama glad hands with those at podium behind him 15:39:08 motorcade departs President Barack Obama arrives & departs Joint Base Andrews 15:48:14 Marine One arrives 15:51:12 Obama emerges from Marine One, salutes and walks across tarmac 15:51:57 Obama jogs up steps to Air Force One 15:52:08 Obama turns, waves and boards Air Force One President Barack Obama arrives in Little Rock, Arkansas 15:52:19 Obama jogs down steps from Air Force One 15:52:48 Obama shakes hands with Colonel Patrick Rhatigan, Commander, 19th Airlift Wing & Little Rock AFB 15:53:06 Obama glad hands with dignitaries on the tarmac including Arkansas Governor Mike Beebe, US Senator Mark Pryor, Little Rock Mayor Mark Stodola & US Representative Tim Griffin 15:53:30 men walk to Marine One President Barack Obama travels to tornado destruction site, tours site & remarks 15:54:36 Marine One lands in field 15:57:30 Obama and Arkansas dignitaries emerge from Marine One 15:57:58 motorcade 15:59:30 people gathered on the side of the road 15:59:39 tilt from American flag at half-staff to people gathered alongside road 16:01:00 sign plaque - 2006, Municipal Complex, City of Vilonia 16:01:50 flags at half-staff 16:02:22 people gathered awaiting Obama's arrival 16:02:53 motorcade 16:04:01 Obama gets out of SUV in the middle of tornado destruction 16:05:31 Obama chats with Arkansas dignitaries 16:05:42 pan from destruction to Obama walking with Arkansas dignitaries 16:06:08 Obama walking with dignitaries "So, I understand why the building codes don't necessarily require them, just because I'm sure it's an added expense. But it's hard to figure out. Because they've been hit just a few years ago almost as bad as the one that hit last year. They get hit pretty regularly." 16:06:51 Obama walks towards destruction "How you all doing guys?" 16:07:16 Obama talks to two men who survived the tornado "My goodness. We were just talking about. it sounded just like a freight train barreling down on you." / Man "30-40 seconds. It was over." / Obama "So, everybody by the grace of God." / Men "Yes." / Obama "Was there anybody else in the house?" / Man "My wife and my sister." / Obama "So, everybody was okay? / Man "Yes, sir." / Obama "It is something. So how. bits and pieces." / Man "It's going good." 16:08:06 father and two sons standing in front of tornado destruction 16:08:43 Obama "Hey guys!" / Father "Hey, how are you sir?" Obama "Who you got here? / Father "This is Gabriel and this is Garrett." / Obama " Good to see you guys." / Father "Man, it's wonderful seeing you, sir.? / Obama "What's your name, sir?" / Father "Dean Smith." / Obama "Good to see you, Dean. These are some good looking. I brought you something from the White House. Couple of M&Ms. I've got a coin here for you. I only give those to the good ones. How old are you guys?" / Boys "Nine" "I'm six." / Obama "Hey, what happened to your tooth?" / Boy "I lost it." / Obama "Somebody didn't take it? Is it going to come back?" "So, this was your home, huh?" / Dean "Well, we're just coming out. a couple houses." / Obama "Where were you when this happened?" / Dean "Well, they put in the new storm shelter behind the high school." / Obama "I was just hearing about it. About 300 folks went over there." / Dean "Yes, sir." / Obama "Well, thank goodness. You guys had some. at what point did you decide." 16:10:17 Obama (Pointing to two boys) "You got this precious cargo right here." / Dean "I've got two others." / Obama "You've got four?" "So, your home is gone?"(Pointing) "One of those?" "So, what's it look like inside?" 16:10:57 Obama "But obviously you knew all the neighbors around here." 16:11:13 ws Obama talking to father and two sons 16:11:54 Obama walks towards podium 16:12:03 pan from press corps to ws Obama 16:12:19 pan from smashed car to ws Obama 16:12:41 Obama takes the podium with Arkansas Governor Mike Beebe, US Senator Mark Pryor, Little Rock Mayor Mark Stodola & US Representative Tim Griffin behind him 16:14:03 slow push in to Obama at podium 16:14:21 ms Obama speaking 16:14:51 ws Obama at podium with dignitaries behind him 16:16:04 ms Obama speaking 16:16:16 smashed car in fg / Obama at podium in bg 16:16:42 push in to Obama shaking hands with dignitaries President Obama in Little Rock President Obama traveled to Arkansas to view the devastation from tornadoes and severe storms that took place in April of 2014. He also met with the families affected by this disaster, as well as first responders and recovery workers.

AP-APTN-2330: ++US Tornado< Saturday, 24 April 2010< < STORY:++US Tornado- NEW At least 10 killed as tornado strikes Mississippi; homes destroyed LENGTH: 02:30 FIRST RUN: 2330 RESTRICTIONS: No Access NAmerica/Internet TYPE: Eng/Natsound SOURCE: ABC STORY NUMBER: 643875 DATELINE: Yazoo City - 24 April 2010 LENGTH: 02:30   ABC - NO ACCESS NORTH AMERICA/INTERNET  SHOTLIST  1. Wide of a red brick church damaged in tornado, church sign partially knocked over 2. Uprooted tree 3. Damaged brick wall 4. Exposed interior room of church, pan to debris on the ground 5. Damaged roof 6. Debris scattered next to trees 7. SOUNDBITE: (English) Haley Barbour, Mississippi Governor: "We're here on the edge of Yazoo City where there has been a devastating tornado, an enormous tornado that appears to be several miles (kilometres) wide. By God's grace, it did not go into the central part of the city, or the most populated, however, it went through the southern edge and the eastern edge of town but through a number of large neighbourhoods." 8. Wide of uprooted trees in front of damaged church 9. Interior of church, back wall severely damaged 10. SOUNDBITE: (English) Haley Barbour, Mississippi Governor: "As you can see, there are a number of businesses that have been destroyed, others that have been severely damaged. There are churches that have been obliterated. And as you go into the area that you can't get to right now because of the trees that are down and the power lines that are still down because the crews can't get to them, there are many, many homes that are damaged, some that are destroyed." 11. Pan of damaged restaurant (++MUTE++) 12. Debris on table (++MUTE++) 13. SOUNDBITE: (English) Haley Barbour, Mississippi Governor: "We got a lot of resources here on the ground, but we need them. It's a really bad tornado." 14. Burst water pipe spraying water 15. Wide of damaged church 16. Damaged roof  STORYLINE  Tornadoes ripped through America's Southeast on Saturday, killing 10 people in Mississippi and injuring more than a dozen others.  Roofs were torn off businesses, homes were splintered, vehicles were overturned and roads were blocked by toppled trees.  Mississippi Emergency Management Agency spokesman Greg Flynn said five people were killed in Choctaw County, including two children.  Four victims were in Yazoo County and one was in Holmes County.  Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour said the tornado had caused widespread damage to parts of the state.  "It's a really bad tornado," Barbour told reporters.  He said the death toll could have been a lot higher but the tornado did not strike the centre of Yazoo City.  More than 15 other counties were also damaged.  The swath of debris forced rescuers to pick up some of the injured on all-terrain vehicles in the west-central part of the state.  "There are a number of businesses that have been destroyed, others that have been severely damaged. There are churches that have been obliterated," added Barbour.  Barbour said it was fortunate the state had a number of resources available as they needed all of them to assist in dealing with the "devastating" tornado.  Tornadoes were also reported in Louisiana, Arkansas and Alabama, as the severe weather continued to track eastward.  ===============  Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: info@aparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory.  APTN (Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) AP-NY-04-24-10 2036EDT< ------------------- END -- OF -- ITEM ------------------- AP-APTN-2330: +Chile Schaefer 3< Saturday, 24 April 2010< < STORY:+Chile Schaefer 3- WRAP Former leader of "Colonia Dignidad" dies in prison ADDS more LENGTH: 02:19 FIRST RUN: 2330 RESTRICTIONS: Part No Access Chile/Internet/CNN TYPE: Spanish/Nat SOURCE: AP TELEVISION/CHANNEL 7 STORY NUMBER: 643874 DATELINE: Santiago/Valparaiso - 24 April 2010/FILE LENGTH: 02:19   CHANNEL 7 - NO ACCESS CHILE / INTERNET / CNN  AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY  ++AUDIO AS INCOMING++  SHOTLIST:  (FIRST RUN 1630 EUROPE PRIME NEWS - 24 APRIL 2010) CHANNEL 7 - NO ACCESS CHILE / INTERNET / CNN Santiago, Chile - 24 April 2010 1. Vehicle with judge Jorge Zepeda arriving at prison where Paul Schaefer died 2. Mid of same, AUDIO (Spanish): "I'm not going to make any comments until we know all the facts. Thank you very much." 3. Car entering prison  (FIRST RUN 1630 EUROPE PRIME NEWS - 24 APRIL 2010) CHANNEL 7 - NO ACCESS CHILE / INTERNET / CNN FILE: Location unknown, 2005 4. STILL of Paul Schaefer  (FIRST RUN 1630 EUROPE PRIME NEWS - 24 APRIL 2010) CHANNEL 7 - NO ACCESS CHILE / INTERNET / CNN Santiago, Chile - 24 April 2010 5. SOUNDBITE: (Spanish) Maria Alejandra Esparza, Prison official: "Good morning. We inform the public that at 0720 local time (1120 GMT), April 24th 2010, the patient Paul Schaefer Schneider died at the age of 89 years due to cardiac failure."  (FIRST RUN 1630 EUROPE PRIME NEWS - 24 APRIL 2010) CHANNEL 7 - NO ACCESS CHILE / INTERNET / CNN FILE: Date and location unknown 6. STILL of Schaefer (black and white photograph)  (FIRST RUN 1630 EUROPE PRIME NEWS - 24 APRIL 2010) CHANNEL 7 - NO ACCESS CHILE / INTERNET / CNN Santiago, Chile - 24 April 2010 7. SOUNDBITE: (Spanish) Jorge Zepeda, Judge investigating Schaefer's death: "I was given the death certificate. I talked to the doctors who assisted him at his time of death. It was a death caused by a respiratory and cardiac failure due to his age and other circumstances. Basically he had a cardiac precondition." 8. Exterior of Supreme Court ++MUTE++  ++NEW (FIRST RUN 2330 AMERICAS PRIME NEWS - 24 APRIL 2010) CHANNEL 7 - NO ACCESS CHILE / INTERNET / CNN Valparaiso, Chile - 24 April 2010 9. Wide of Chilean President Sebastian Pinera greeting woman 10. SOUNDBITE: (Spanish) Sebastian Pinera, Chilean President: "The death of Paul Schaefer will stop us from continuing any penal prosecution because there can't be such a thing in this world against dead people. Nonetheless, we all know there is another kind of justice, one that never ends; divine justice. But we won't let any crime committed against any boy or girl in our country go unpunished." 11. Various of Pinera playing table tennis with children  (FIRST RUN 1830 NORTH AMERICA PRIME NEWS - 24 APRIL 2010) AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY FILE: Buenos Aires, Argentina - 13 March 2005 ++NIGHT SHOTS++ 12. Various of Schaefer being helped out of ambulance and into a wheelchair 13. Various of police and other personnel wheeling Schaefer into terminal building at Aeroparque Airport  STORYLINE:  The former head of a secretive German colony in southern Chile, Paul Schaefer, died in Chile on Saturday of heart failure at the prison hospital where he was imprisoned for sexually abusing children.  A corrections department statement said Schaefer was being treated for heart problems and other difficulties related to his advanced age. He was 89.  The former Nazi corporal was sentenced in 2006 to 20 years in jail for sexually abusing children at Colonia Dignidad, the controversial colony he founded in 1961 in a remote area 210 miles (340 kilometres) south of the capital, Santiago.  Schaefer and other colony leaders were also accused of human rights abuses and letting security services use the colony to detain, torture and execute dissidents during the 1973-90 dictatorship of General Augusto Pinochet.  A judge began investigating Schaefer in 1997 and a court convicted him in absentia after he fled to Argentina.  He stayed in hiding in Argentina until he was found in 2005 and extradited back to Chile.  Schaefer was convicted in 2006 of sexually abusing 20 children who attended the colony's school and clinic.  He was sentenced to 20 years, plus three additional years for an illegal weapons conviction.  In two separate cases in 2008, Schaefer received more prison time for the torture of seven colony residents and for the fatal poisoning of a renegade security agent during Pinochet's dictatorship.  He was also investigated for tax evasion.  Chilean President Sebastian Pinera said on Saturday that while Schaefer lived to serve only a fraction of his prison sentences, he would now face "a divine justice."  Schaefer's adopted daughter, Rebeca Schaefer, is asking for him to be buried in the German colony's cemetery, but there was no immediate word on whether the community would allow it.  Colonia Dignidad members say Schaefer treated them cruelly, forcing married couples to live apart and separating children from their parents.  Residents were prevented from leaving the colony, and those who angered Schaefer were subject to electric shocks, high doses of tranquilisers and long periods of isolation.  ===============  Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: info@aparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory.  APTN (Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) AP-NY-04-24-10 2028EDT< ------------------- END -- OF -- ITEM ------------------- AP-APTN-2330: Mexico Dresses< Saturday, 24 April 2010< < STORY:Mexico Dresses- REPLAY Rare collection of dolls wearing 300 traditional dresses LENGTH: 02:38 FIRST RUN: 2030 RESTRICTIONS: AP Clients Only TYPE: Spanish/Nat SOURCE: AP TELEVISION STORY NUMBER: 643869 DATELINE: Mexico City - 24 April 2010/Recent LENGTH: 02:38   AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY  SHOTLIST  24 April 2010 1. Wide of entrance to "Mexico: Dressed in Tradition" exhibit at Museum of Popular Art 2. Wide pan of exhibition 3. Portrait of owner of the doll collection, Maria Esther Zuno de Echeverria 4. Dolls on display with dresses and traditional craft objects 5. Various close-ups of dolls 6. Maria Esther Echeverria, daughter of Maria Esther Zuno de Echeverria, giving instructions to woman arranging dress 7. Close-up of woman arranging dress  19 April 2010 8. Wide of news conference 9. SOUNDBITE: (Spanish) Maria Esther Echeverria Zuno, daughter of doll collection owner Maria Esther Zuno de Echeverria: "She (Maria Esther Zuno de Echeverria) took the initiative from the patriotism in her heart to save in her way the different costumes of the country. So, she made a prototype of a doll that you will see, it measures 53 centimetres (20.8 inches) tall. And she said, 'I'm going to leave them up and down the country so that the people of each community can dress them with the outfits that they use in their dances, in their everyday lives, in their festivities.'"  24 April 2010 10. Dolls dressed in traditional clothing and painted masks 11. Close-up of dolls with painted masks 12. Group of dolls in different outfits  19 April 2010 13. SOUNDBITE: (Spanish) Maria Esther Echeverria Zuno, daughter of doll collection owner Maria Esther Zuno de Echeverria: "She wanted to preserve this testimony so that now with the passing of 40 years, we realise that it was the perfect testimony to things that probably don't exist any more, things that have been changed, or things that we can no longer find."  24 April 2010 14. Various of dancers and musicians performing in traditional costumes 15. Wide of members of public entering exhibition 16. Wide of dancers posing for photograph with dolls 17. Close-up of dolls  STORYLINE  An exhibition of hundreds of dolls wearing traditional Mexican regional costumes opened in Mexico City on Saturday.  The rare collection comprises about 500 dolls dressed in costumes representing a wide cross-section of the Mexico's diverse cultural heritage.  It was assembled by former Mexican First Lady, Maria Esther Zuno de Echeverria, who was the late wife of ex-president Luis Echeverria Alvarez.  She started the project during the 1970s.  Her daughter, Maria Esther Echeverria Zuno, who organised the exhibition, said her mother came up with the idea of using dolls to make a record of the different traditional costumes from the country's various regions.  She said her mother made a "prototype of a doll" that she then had copied and distributed across the country "so that the people of each community can dress them with the outfits that they use in their dances, in their everyday lives, in their festivities."  "Now with the passing of 40 years, we realise that it was the perfect testimony to things that probably don't exist any more", Echeverria Zuno said.  Echeverria Zuno added she hoped to be able to create a national museum dedicated to gathering and preserving regional costumes, because many families have collected such items but lack spaces to exhibit them.  The collection also includes full-sized traditional outfits.  Dancers from Veracruz, who helped to celebrate the inauguration of the exhibition with a traditional number, were an energetic and life-size reminder of the community histories in each doll.  The exhibition at the Museum of Popular Art runs until 1 August 2010.  ===============  Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: info@aparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory.  APTN (Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) AP-NY-04-24-10 1932EDT< ------------------- END -- OF -- ITEM ------------------- AP-APTN-2330: World Armenia< Saturday, 24 April 2010< < STORY:World Armenia- WRAP Memorials for Armenians killed by Turks during WWI LENGTH: 05:19 FIRST RUN: 1830 RESTRICTIONS: AP Clients Only TYPE: Various/Nat SOURCE: AP TELEVISION STORY NUMBER: 643863 DATELINE: Various, 24 Apr 2010 LENGTH: 05:19   AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY  SHOTLIST  (FIRST RUN 1330 EUROPE PRIME NEWS - 24 APRIL 2010) Yerevan, Armenia 1. Various of people walking towards the Wide of Tsitsernakaberd Memorial to the victims of the 1915 mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks 2. Close of wreaths of flowers 3. Wide of memorial, guard of honour 4. Various of Armenian President, Serge Sarkisian, and other Armenian officials arriving to the shrine, laying flowers 5. Close of Sarkisian 6. Wide of ceremony marking the 95th anniversary of the start of mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks 7. SOUNDBITE (Armenian) Raffi Arutyunyan, local resident: "My clan was from Sebastia. Forty people were killed at the time of the genocide in 1915. All perished, everyone. I have not a single relative. My relatives are the whole Armenian people. Everyone was destroyed, everyone." 8. Wide of people laying flowers to the shrine  (FIRST RUN 1830 NORTH AMERICA PRIME NEWS - 24 APRIL 2010) Istanbul, Turkey 9. Various of people gathering in Taksim square for remembrance event 10. SOUNDBITE (Turkish) Ahmet Yildirim, Member Organisation against Racism and Nationalism: "For 95 years there was a secret. The story of the 1.5 (m) million Armenians was unknown in Turkey. This reality has been brought to light today." 11. Sign reading (Turkish) 'Their pain is our pain, their mourning is our mourning' 12. Mid of participants holding candles in memory of the victims 13. Mid participant holding a red flower and Armenian newspaper titled "24 April 1915" 14. SOUNDBITE (Turkish) Yalcin Ergundogan, Journalist: "As a Turkish citizen, I feel deep sorrow for what happened to the Armenians on our soil. I want to share their pain. I would like to apologise to them all." 15. Wide of Nationalist protesters gathered across the street 16. UPSOUND: (Turkish) Protester: "There are people who are giving their lives for this country, as opposed to those traitors (Pointing to the mourning event across the street)." 17. Wide of protesters chanting UPSOUND: (Turkish) "This is Turkey: either love it or leave it" 18. Protesters leaving the area 19. Various of people seated in the square as a moment of silence is held 20. Wide of flowers being left on the banner dedicated to the victims 21. Various of candles being lit 22. Wide of participants standing and clapping  (FIRST RUN 1330 EUROPE PRIME NEWS - 24 APRIL 2010) Moscow, Russia 23. Wide pan of Armenians living in Moscow gathered for a remembrance event 24. Mid of two Armenian girls holding posters reading, from left (Russian) 'Do not hope for oblivion. We remember' and 'We Demand recognition of the genocide and elimination of its consequences.'  (FIRST RUN 1330 EUROPE PRIME NEWS - 24 APRIL 2010) Jerusalem's Old City 25. Pan of Armenians during a ceremony in a cemetery to commemorate the Armenian victims of mass killings by Ottoman Turks 26. Pan of clergymen during religious ceremony  (FIRST RUN 1330 EUROPE PRIME NEWS - 24 APRIL 2010) Jerusalem 27. Pan of protest outside the Turkish Embassy 28. Zoom in of banner reading (English) 'Turkey guilty of genocide' 29. Child with Armenian flag, holding placard with a picture of ethnic Armenian journalist Hrant Dink, who was gunned down in 2007 in Istanbul by a Turkish nationalist youth  (FIRST RUN 1830 NORTH AMERICA PRIME NEWS - 24 APRIL 2010) Paris, France 30. People including, French singer-songwriter of Armenian descent, Charles Aznavour walking in parade on the Champs-Elysees towards Arc de Triomphe 31. Pan from Armenian delegations carrying bouquets of flowers to wide shot of Arc de Triomphe 32. Delegations and war veterans arriving at the tomb of the unknown soldier under the Arc de Triomphe 33. Mid of woman holding flower and watching 34. Officials with Charles Aznavour (centre wearing sun glasses) arriving at the tomb of the unknown soldier 35. French soldiers watching 36. Aznavour laying wreath at the tomb of the unknown soldier under the Arc de Triomphe 37. Crowd behind barriers watching the ceremony 38. Aznavour being helped to relight the flame at the tomb of the unknown soldier 39. SOUNDBITE (French) Knarik Demiriam, France citizen of Armenian descent: "It still hurts. It still hurts. All these memories, I've lived with them. I grew up with them. My children, my grand-children, all the Armenians." 40. Child watching 41. Singer singing the Armenian national anthem 42. Wide of ceremony  STORYLINE  Hundreds of thousands of Armenians laid flowers on Saturday at a monument to the victims of mass killings by Ottoman Turks, marking the 95th anniversary of the start of the slaughter.  Historians estimate that up to 1.5 (m) million Armenians were killed by Ottoman Turks around the time of World War I.  Residents of Yerevan and other regions and representatives of the Armenian diaspora marched to a monument on a hill overlooking the capital.  Armenian President Serge Sarkisian described the slaughter as "unprecedented in its scope, monstrosity and graveness of its consequences" in an address to the nation.  In Turkey's largest city, Istanbul, five-hundred people including journalists and members of the Organisation Against Racism and Nationalism held a memorial event for the victims of the 1915 events.  The participants gathered in the central Taksim Square, one of the city's most crowded areas, where they laid flowers and lit candles in front of a large banner reading 'Their pain is our pain, their mourning is our mourning.'  The demonstrators sat down in the square for a moment of silence.  Across the street, members of nationalist movements protested against the remembrance event, with one protester denouncing its participants as "traitors."  The small group of nationalists sang the Turkish national anthem and chanted anti-Armenian slogans.  Also on Saturday, hundreds of ethnic Armenians gathered in Moscow to mark the anniversary.  In Jerusalem, members of the Armenian community held remembrance ceremonies.  The day was opened with a prayer at the Armenian church in the Jerusalem's Old City, followed by a religious memorial ceremony at the Armenian cemetery nearby.  After the religious ceremonies, ethnic Armenians made their way to the Turkish consulate in East Jerusalem where they protested calling on Turkey to recognise what they say was a genocide.  The protesters were holding Armenian flags and placards including one reading "Turkey guilty of genocide."  A picture of ethnic Armenian journalist Hrant Dink, who was gunned down in 2007 in Istanbul by a Turkish nationalist youth could also be seen.  In Paris, more than 1,000 Armenians and officials attended a ceremony to commemorate the anniversary.  The ceremony, led by the French singer of Armenian descent Charles Aznavour, took place at the Arc de Triomphe.  Aznavour, who was appointed ambassador of Armenia to Switzerland in 2009, as well as the country's permanent delegate to the United Nations in Geneva, laid a wreath and re-lit the flame at the tomb of the unknown soldier.  In the United States, President Barack Obama also marked Armenian Remembrance Day by issuing a statement saying, "The indomitable spirit of the Armenian people is a lasting triumph over those who set out to destroy them."  The slaying began on April 24, 1915 with the rounding up of about 800 Armenian intellectuals.  The Ottoman authorities then evicted Armenians from their homes in actions that spiralled into the mass slaughter of the Armenian population.  Turkey denies that the deaths constituted genocide, saying the toll has been inflated and those killed were victims of civil war as the Ottoman Empire collapsed.  Countries recognising the killings as genocide include Uruguay, Chile, Argentina, Russia, Canada, Lebanon, Belgium, Greece, Italy, the Vatican, France, Switzerland, Slovakia, the Netherlands, Poland, Lithuania and Cyprus.  Last month, Sweden's parliament narrowly approved a resolution recognising the slaying of Armenians as genocide.  Turkey has warned the US administration of diplomatic consequences if it fails to prevent the passage of a congressional resolution that would similarly brand the killings.  The Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Representative's last month passed a resolution declaring the killings genocide, but it is unclear whether the full House will vote on it.  ===============  Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: info@aparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory.  APTN (Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) AP-NY-04-24-10 1931EDT< ------------------- END -- OF -- ITEM ------------------- AP-APTN-2330: Peru Vatican< Saturday, 24 April 2010< < STORY:Peru Vatican- REPLAY Protest against comments made by Vatican's No.2 official LENGTH: 01:57 FIRST RUN: 2030 RESTRICTIONS: AP Clients Only TYPE: Spanish/Natsound SOURCE: AP TELEVISION STORY NUMBER: 643865 DATELINE: Lima - 24 April 2010 LENGTH: 01:57    AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY  SHOTLIST  1. Wide of demonstrators in front of the Vatican nunciature 2. Mid of protesters with a poster reading (Spanish) "To cover up a crime is also a crime." 3. Mid of women waving gay rights rainbow flags 4. Close of banner reading (Spanish) "No prayers will stop a rapist." 5. Protesters 6. Close of banner reading (Spanish) "No to child abuse, to break the silence is everybody's duty." (with pictures of children on the banner) 7. SOUNDBITE: (Spanish) Cristian Olivera, Leader of the Gay Movement in Lima: "Today we are here, we are gays, lesbians, bisexuals, trans (transsexuals), feminists and other groups, protesting in front of the Vatican nunciature in Peru against Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone's comments. He has put paedophilia at the same level as homosexuality. We are here to denounce that kind of idea that it only promotes hate and discrimination against our community. We also want to denounce the covering, the spirit of enterprise inside of the church that makes them cover up these kind of crimes within their ranks." 8. Various of Catholic worshippers praying and standing in front of the nunciature 9. People kneeling down and praying with a photo of Pope Benedict XVI in their hands 10. Man shouting against the church outside the same venue 11. Women with drums, also protesting against the crisis of alleged abuse within the church 12. Wide of the building with both sets of demonstrators  STORYLINE  Gay rights activists protested in front of the Vatican nunciature in the Peruvian capital Lima on Saturday following remarks made by the Vatican's No. 2 official, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, who said the sex scandals haunting the Catholic church were linked to homosexuality.  Dozens gathered outside the nunciature holding banners criticising Bertone's recent comments.  Bertone said earlier in the month that the sex scandals haunting the church were linked to homosexuality, rather than vows of celibacy, among priests.  The Cardinal also said that many psychologists and psychiatrists had demonstrated that there was no relationship between celibacy and paedophilia.  He also asserted that the church had never impeded investigations of paedophilia by priests.  Cristian Olivera, leader of the Gay Movement in Lima, said the demonstrators were denouncing Bertone's comments that put paedophilia and homosexuality on the same level.  "We are here to denounce that kind of idea that it only promotes hate and discrimination against our community," he said.  As the demonstrations continued, another group of Catholic worshippers prayed outside the nunciature, some holding pictures of Pope Benedict XVI.  Bertone's recent comments have further stoked the worst crisis to engulf the Catholic church in years, as further accusations pile up that the Vatican, and even the pontiff Benedict XVI as Cardinal Ratzinger, obstructed investigations into abuse.  While running the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Ratzinger resisted pleas from a California diocese to laicise a priest who had pleaded no contest to lewd conduct for tying up and molesting two boys, according to correspondence obtained by The Associated Press.  Self described abuse victims have called on church officials, including Pope Benedict XVI, to take personal responsibility for clerical abuse.  They allege that a culture of cover-up and secrecy has allowed priests to rape and molest children unchecked for decades.  Hundreds of people have reported cases of abuse by priests at schools, orphanages and other church-run institutions.  Victims say bishops and other church members higher-up covered up the crimes, choosing to protect the church rather than children.  The Vatican recently published guidelines instructing bishops to report abuse to police when civil laws require it.  The Vatican insists that it has long been church policy, though it was never before explicitly written.  ===============  Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: info@aparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory.  APTN (Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) AP-NY-04-24-10 1930EDT< ------------------- END -- OF -- ITEM ------------------- AP-APTN-2330: Mexico Attack< Saturday, 24 April 2010< < STORY:Mexico Attack- REPLAY GRAPHIC 4 killed in ambush on security official's convoy LENGTH: 02:17 FIRST RUN: 2030 RESTRICTIONS: AP Clients Only TYPE: Natsound SOURCE: AP TELEVISION STORY NUMBER: 643868 DATELINE: Michoacan - 24 April 2010 LENGTH: 02:17   AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY  ++CLIENTS NOTE: THIS EDIT CONTAINS GRAPHIC MATERIAL++  SHOTLIST ++NIGHT SHOTS++ 1. Tracking shot of body lying on street, police officers arriving at scene 2. Paramedics carrying wounded woman on stretcher 3. Injured person being treated in ambulance 4. Firefighter putting out fire in vehicle 5. Paramedics helping wounded woman 6. Wounded woman with bandaged head inside vehicle, UPSOUND: (Spanish) "Help me out " 7. Pan across damaged vehicle that was part of convoy 8. Injured man being helped away 9. Women and children who survived the attack walking down road 10. Dead man lying in front seat of vehicle 11. Close of car door with bullet holes 12. Wide of scene 13. Wounded man being treated by paramedics 14. Various of police at scene 15. Injured woman lying on stretcher 16. Vehicle from convoy in front of truck used to block road 17. Various of bullet cases 18. Dead man covered with sheet 19. Wide of scene of attack 20. Wide pan of police cars and traffic on street at scene 21. Wide of police at scene  STORYLINE  Gunmen armed with assault rifles and grenades attacked a convoy carrying the top security official of Mexico's western state of Michoacan on Saturday, leaving four dead and 10 wounded in the second such ambush in as many days.  Public Safety Secretary Minerva Bautista was recovering from non-life-threatening wounds, said an official of the state attorney general's office who was not authorised to be quoted by name.  Bautista was travelling in a bullet-resistant sport utility vehicle.  The dead included two of her bodyguards and two bystanders.  Of the nine people wounded in addition to Bautista, five were bystanders - including two girls aged 2 and 12 - and four were part of Bautista's security detail.  There was no immediate information on the identity of the attackers, who numbered about 20, or a possible motive.  However, drug violence is common in Michoacan, the home base of La Familia cartel.  Bautista was returning from the inauguration of a fair when her three-vehicle convoy was stopped just after midnight by a truck the attackers apparently used to block the road.  Mexican drug cartels have been known to target security officials; the acting federal police chief was shot dead in May 2008 in an attack attributed to drug traffickers lashing back at a nationwide crackdown on organised crime.  On Friday, gunmen ambushed two police vehicles at a busy intersection in the northern border city of Ciudad Juarez, killing seven officers and a 17-year-old boy caught in the crossfire.  More than 22,700 people have been killed in Mexico's drug war since December 2006, when President Felipe Calderon launched an offensive against the cartels.  ===============  Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: info@aparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory.  APTN (Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) AP-NY-04-24-10 1929EDT< ------------------- END -- OF -- ITEM ------------------- AP-APTN-2330: US IMF 4< Saturday, 24 April 2010< < STORY:US IMF 4- WRAP IMF mtg; leaders pledge to tackle gvt debt; family photo, sots LENGTH: 03:56 FIRST RUN: 2330 RESTRICTIONS: AP Clients Only TYPE: English/Natsound SOURCE: AP TELEVISION/AGENCY POOL STORY NUMBER: 643870 DATELINE: Washington DC - 24 April 2010 LENGTH: 03:56   AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY AGENCY POOL - AP CLIENTS ONLY  SHOTLIST  (FIRST RUN 1630 EUROPE PRIME NEWS - 24 APRIL 2010) AGENCY POOL - AP CLIENTS ONLY 1. Various of world finance ministers posing for a group photo for the Spring 2010 meeting of the IMFC (International Monetary and Financial Committee)  (FIRST RUN 2030 LATAM PRIME NEWS - 24 APRIL 2010) AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY 2. Wide of news conference with the Chair of the IMFC (International Monetary and Financial Committee) Egyptian Finance Minister Youssef Boutros-Ghali (second from right) and the IMF (International Monetary Fund) Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn (second from left) 3. SOUNDBITE (English) Dominique Strauss-Kahn, IMF Managing Director: "All the ministers there, the governors, are clearly aware that the, well, the recovery is here, faster in some parts of the world, namely Asia, more sluggish in other parts of the world, especially the European Union, Japan also, but that even if the recovery is there, we really have to take into consideration the different downside risks that may materialise. And the two principle ones, the most important on which we have been asked to work for the coming months, are, of course, unemployment, which is still rising in many countries, especially in advanced economies, and the heavy burden of debt, in especially also advanced economies but not only." 4. Cutaway of media 5. SOUNDBITE (English) Dominique Strauss-Kahn, IMF Managing Director: "So, this first phase after panic, action, and relief, is clearly the phase of rebuilding. Rebuilding the international institution and trying to make them more effective to be able not to avoid, of course, but at least to prevent and to decrease the likelihood of any crisis in the future." 6. Cutaway of media 7. SOUNDBITE (English) Dominique Strauss-Kahn, IMF Managing Director: "And so, what is the IMF doing? Trying to provide advice on behalf of the entire international community, trying to provide resources to help on behalf of the entire community. So, the Greek citizens shouldn't fear the IMF. We are there to try to help them." 8. Wide of a separate news conference with the IMF Western Hemisphere Department Director Nicolas Eyzaguirre (third from left) 9. SOUNDBITE (English) Nicolas Eyzaguirre, Director of the IMF Western Hemisphere Department: "In the United States, in particular, that as you know is within this Western Hemisphere, the drive from the global crisis will persist for some time, unfortunately, as unhealed financial systems and weak household balance sheets, coupled with still high unemployment, continue to hold back private sector demand." 10. Cutaway of media 11. SOUNDBITE (English) Nicolas Eyzaguirre, Director of the IMF Western Hemisphere Department: "In the regional picture, countries with strong policy frameworks that are very well-connected to financial markets and they also are commodity exporters, net commodity exporters, will be the ones growing the more. On the other extreme, I would say some smaller economies that are heavily dependent on tourism and remittances and are highly indebted are still facing some problems." 12. Wide of news conference  (FIRST RUN 1630 EUROPE PRIME NEWS - 24 APRIL 2010) AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY 13. SOUNDBITE (English) Anoop Singh, Director of the Asia and Pacific Department, IMF: "It's also interesting to note that Asia's faster recovery, relative to the rest of the world, seems to mark a break from the past. This is the first time that Asia's contribution to a global recovery has outstripped that of other regions. Second, while in past recessions we have seen Asia's recovery - in those cases - generally driven by exports, this time it has been reinforced by resilient domestic demand." 14. Wide of news conference  STORYLINE  Financial leaders, with a nervous eye on Greece, pledged on Saturday in Washington DC to address the risks posed to the global recovery from high government debt.  The policy-setting panel of the 186-nation International Monetary Fund (IMF) cited signs that the recovery from the global downturn was gaining strength, but also noted difficult challenges lay ahead.  Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the IMF Managing Director, said that most countries in Asia were recovering faster from the recession than members of the European Union.  Kahn stressed that financial leaders must take into account the downside risks that may materialise in the upcoming months.  "The two principle ones.... (are) unemployment, which is still rising in many countries, especially in advanced economies, and the heavy burden of debt," he said.  Kahn added that it was time to "rebuild" the international institution and avoid repeating the mistakes that had already been made.  The debt crisis in Greece has dominated the IMF's meetings in Washington this weekend, with finance officials from the US and other nations on the agency's board of directors committing the IMF to tackling that cascading problem.  A closing statement issued after the committee's meeting did not mention Greece's troubles, and the IMF's managing director refused at a news conference to provide specific answers about a potential loan package for Athens.  Strauss-Kahn said that information would have to wait until the end of negotiations involving the European Union, the IMF and the Greek government.  He attempted deflect rising anger amongst the Greek people about the austerity measures they could face from economic reforms demanded by the IMF in return for its financial support.  "Greek citizens should not fear the IMF," he said. "We are there to try to help them."  Greece's Finance Minister, George Papaconstantinou, flew to Washington for two days of talks with top officials of the IMF, the European Union and the Obama administration.  Papaconstantinou met with the Strauss-Kahn, and Olli Rehn, the top economic official with the European Commission.  He also had discussions with US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and planned talks over the weekend with finance ministers from Russia, Brazil and China.  Greece is hoping to obtain loans of about 40 (b) billion US dollars from the group of 16 European countries which, like Greece, use the euro as a common currency, and an additional 13.4 (b) billion US dollars from the IMF.  Also at the meeting, the director of the IMF's Western Hemisphere Department offered more detailed information about the rate of progress within his region.  Nicolas Eyzaguirre said that the United States still had some significant barriers to work through before a more robust, lasting recovery can take hold.  "Unhealed financial systems and weak household balance sheets, coupled with still high unemployment continue to hold back private sector demand," Eyzaguirre said at an earlier news conference.  He also noted that Latin American and Caribbean countries that rely on the export of goods will fare better and recover more quickly than those that are heavily dependent on tourism and remittances to sustain their economy.  Meanwhile, Anoop Singh, Director of the IMF's Asia and Pacific Department said that overall, Asian nations were faring relatively well in the worldwide economic downturn.  Singh confessed that this had not always been the case in the past when coming out of recessions or challenging economic times.  "It's also interesting to note that Asia's faster recovery, relative to the rest of the world, seems to mark a break from the past. This is the first time that Asia's contribution to a global recovery has outstripped that of other regions," he added.  Additionally, Asia's past recoveries were driven by export demand, but this time strong domestic demand for goods and services was also fuelling growth.  The discussions this weekend were designed to prepare the agenda for a meeting G-20 leaders (Group of Twenty), including US President Barack Obama, which will take place in Canada in June.  Among the changes triggered by the deep global recession, the G-20 has taken over as the key agenda-setting group for the global economy, a role before played by the G-7.  ===============  Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: info@aparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory.  APTN (Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) AP-NY-04-24-10 1929EDT< ------------------- END -- OF -- ITEM -------------------

Aerial panning shot of damaged houses and trees in city on sunny day - Aerial shot of destroyed architecture

Aerial forward shot of destructed buildings in city, drone flying over cityscape - Damaged architecture in city

SENATE FLOOR DEBATE: The Senate will reesume consideration of S.1932, the Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation bill. 18:00:07.2 have a very hard time, if not impossible time, putting up the 30% match to keep our children and our poorest citizens, as well as those that are vulnerable, in health care for the year. 18:00:21.8 so we come here, 65 days after the storm, when we're spending money on everything we can imagine, from new programs, expansion of programs, tax cuts, to say please consider a basic service of health care, not just 18:00:38.7 for the parishes that were affected and the counties in mississippi, but for the whole state of louisiana and mississippi who are struggling, and particularly in louisiana's case. we were harder hit. 18:00:52.2 we had more levees break. our major city was flooded. jackson was not flooded. new orleans was flooded. our major economic base from our ports to our energy industry 18:01:04.1 have been directly impacted and revenues have fallen off precipitously. let me just share one other statistic, and then i'm going to wrap up. i tried to say to my staff, give me something that i can explain to people what the losses are. 10 they went become and went 18:01:21.2 back to 2003. now, this is only two years. this is an average of people that are unemployed in louisiana. we work hard, just like everyone else. we average about 135,000 people in june of 2003. 18:01:38.4 let's pick june of 2004. we had 119,000 people receiving unemployment. let's go to january 2005. we had 119,000 people. right before the storm in august of 2005, we had 122,000 people 18:01:55.7 unep employed. so i think from this you can say over the last two years we've had roughly an average of 120,000 people unemployed. 34r president, in one month -- one month -- our number jumped from 122,000 to 227,000 people.ñ 18:02:17.3 100,000 people in one month are seeking unemployment. that is how desperate people are. it's never happened in these two years, and i bet you if we went back and looked at that time for 18:02:27.1 the last 20 years, the only spike that you would find like this is maybe in the 1980's when the oil industry collapsed and almost everybody in louisiana lost their livelihood. we've not seen this in so long, we don't remember a time like 18:02:43.4 this. i don't know why we're having a hard time explaining this to an administration and to the majority about how desperate the situation is. we are not ungrateful for the steps that have been taken. 18:03:00.3 we are not ungrateful for the fema money that is slowly getting to us. what we're saying is, we need to do better. today how do you think i felt watching the president of the united states stand up and tell 18:03:16.9 everybody that he was going to allocate $8 billion for the avian flu? now, i don't know where he's getting the $8 billion for the avian flu. all we're asking for is $6.2 billion to keep a health care 18:03:31.8 system of the whole state standing up until we can just figure out what we might need to do. because we don't have all the answers. it's only been a few weeks. our system has basically collapsed. 18:03:45.2 it's going to take us a little bit more time to figure out what the long-term solution is. but i can tell you, for the people that senator lincoln talked about that stayed on their refrigerator for three days, for mr. albert bass, who was a painter in the 9th ward who went to the hospital with 104-degree fever. 18:04:03.7 his medicaid application has been denied. he needs help now. for miss stewart who flifz jefferson parish. she was a teacher. she's been denied medicaid. she's 51. she's married. 18:04:19.2 her husband receives social security. she was diagnosed with cancer. her cancer is back. her health situation is worsening. she has no more income. i need to tell, mr. president, mrs. stewart what her outlook is. 18:04:34.3 and what i'm going to tell her is, we're going to find money for the avian flu, we're finding money for iraq, we're finding money for a tax cut, we're finding money for this -- you know, we're going to raise $4 billion more for a spectrum. we're selling off spectrum and 18:04:50.7 we're going to raise $4 billion. but i'm sorry, we can't get you into a hospital. so maybe the majority, this is the final thing i'm going to say, maybe they just don't like that it's a government program. so senator lincoln, senator 18:05:07.7 baucus, senator grassley come up and say, well, let's have some way that -- for the businesses that had people on unemployment -- i mean, in insurance, the businesses have collapsed but 18:05:21.6 these businesses are valiantly trying to keep people on their insurance program. because they know the desperate situation of their employees. i can't tell you what most businesses are going through. business owners taking money out of their own pocket, going into 18:05:38.5 their own savings account trying to keep paying their employees with no money coming in the front door because they've been in business 30 years, these employees have been loyal to them, they have showed up for work every day. we talk about public-private 18:05:53.8 partnerships. in this amendment is an $800 million fund that's not a new program, it goes to our insurance commission to her try 18:06:02.3 to help work with small businesses and businesses so that people can keep their health insurance, so that they don't fall onto the government payroll, so they don't become wards of the state. this is self-help. this is partnership. 18:06:17.7 this is self-reliance. and with all of that, we've been told no, come back later. well, let me tell you, mr. president, we're going to continue to come back. because while we are grateful for the $1.8 billion, we are grateful it is so far short of 18:06:33.5 what we need to stabilize our health care system for a state that's 4.5 billion people, that has literally been punched in the gut and is rolling back this administration -- rolling back, this administration has got to do better by the people of 18:06:49.6 louisiana, mississippi and the gulf coast. you know, charity starts right here at home. strength begins right here at home. our war is right here at home in the gulf coast states. when you're fighting cancer, it's about as tough as it gets. 18:07:08.2 when you have your son or your daughter dying of a fatal disease, it's about as tough as it gets. that is a private war that people are going through. and we keep walking away from it, pretending that it's just 18:07:20.6 going to go away. well, it's not going to go away. i'm not going to go away. the louisiana delegation's not going to go away. and finally, we'll realize that this is not your regular hurricane. this was an unprecedented catastrophe that's taken a major economic center to its knees and 18:07:37.9 it's going to take more than whitewashing and press conferences and a little bit of money drabd here and there to stand -- drabbed here and there to stand us up so that we can continue to be the great region that we are, pay taxes into this country and to contribute to the economic benefit. 18:07:52.4 as i said, we're not a charity case. we've contributed billions of dollars to this government and we'll continue to. and in our hour of need -- in our hour of need, we have to come and ask for pennies on the dollar. so i hope that we can do better, we must, we can. 18:08:09.8 there's most certainly room in this budget on the spending side or the tax side to do better. and we are grateful for the $1.8 billion but question need senator lincoln's amendment, we need the leadership of senator baucus, and i thank senator grassley, who has been a 18:08:25.0 champion. the senator from iowa, a republican leader of this finance committee, has been a champion on this issue. and if he just had a little more support from his caucus and from the administration, we might get more than a banned-aid because we're really hemorrhaging -- 18:08:43.2 more than a band-aid because we're really hemorrhaging. thank you, mr. president. mr. baucus: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from montana. mr. baucus: mr. president, i don't know who is controlling time here -- the presiding officer: excuse me, the senator from arkansas controls the time. mrs. lincoln: mr. president, what is the time remaining on 18:08:57.2 our side, please? the presiding officer: the senator has 18 minutes remaining. mr. lott: mr. president, could i inquire also, particle pacialtion about the time remaining on -- parliamentary inquiry, about the time remaining on this side of the aisle on this issue? the presiding officer: the 18:09:12.2 senator has 51 minutes remaining. mr. lott: has the senator from montana spoke own this subject? mr. baucus: i plan to speak now. mr. lott: mr. president, i would want to speak on this subject too but i would defer to the ranking member of the committee and then hopefully can speak 18:09:28.7 right after that. mrs. lincoln: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from arkansas. mrs. lincoln: i yield time to the senator from montana. the presiding officer: the senator from montana is recognized. mr. baucus: mr. president, nine weeks ago yesterday, hurricane katrina hit the gulf killing over a thousand people, 18:09:49.6 displacing over a million people, leaving the region with a cleanup bill that might reach $200 billion. katrina left a gaping need in the health care -- needed health care in the affected states and 18:10:05.2 those that are in mosting states. i don't know how to say it in any other way but it is biblical. the devastation is biblical. i visited the area five or six weeks ago. 18:10:21.6 other senators did too. and i don't think there's any senator who actually visited who could come up with any other feeling, belief that it is biblical. unfortunately, very few members of this body have actually been there. unfortunately, very few members 18:10:37.3 of this body have actually seen the area, seen what's left. and it's not much. whether it's in louisiana, new orleans, whether it's in gulf states. it is incredible how much there has been just destroyed. 18:10:54.5 how people don't -- who are alive don't have jobs, don't have homes, don't have schools, 18:11:01.9 don't have their lives. it is absolutely incredible and it is devastating and it is biblical. and i do believe firmly if every senator in this institution were to see the areas affected, see the people, see what's 18:11:17.4 happening, there would be a different result here. we've become too academic around here. we read too many memos. we talk too much among ourselves. there's too much sort of theory, 18:11:33.2 not enough actual on-the-ground what really is going on. if senators were to see it, feel it, taste it, smell it, there is no doubt in my mind that this amendment offered by the senator from arkansas would pass and 18:11:47.6 it would pass unanimously and we would not be debating it, we would be probably asking for more, how can we help some more. so in the meantime, how has this congress? 18:12:01.6 to be fair, it has not. incredibly, it has not. in the hurricane's wake, the chairman of the finance committee and i drafted the bill to cover evacuees under medicaid for a short period of time, just five months, to help provide health care to low-income people who don't have their jobs 18:12:18.6 anymore, who don't have health insurance anymore, who don't have a place to put their kids in schools, don't have homes, just temporary health care. five months temporary. that was the bill we offered. it was a bill that senator grassley and i put together. 18:12:35.3 who supported it? everybody in the affected states, republicans, democrats, senators, governors. everyone in the affected states supported it. did we get it passed? no. we would cover evacuees below the poverty level of $9,500. 18:12:51.3 just think of that. $9,500 level of income. people who earn that level of income really need help, particularly in the circumstances faced by the people in the aftermath of the 18:13:06.4 destruction of the hurricane. our amendment would also cover pregnant women and kids at twice that income level. and that's not a lot of money, mr. president. that's about $19,000 a year. that's all. pregnant women and kids with 18:13:23.0 incomes above that much wouldn't get covered with our amendment. but up to that level, $19,000 a year, that's all, pregnant women who only earn $19,000 a year. we say, let's help them out. help them out for just five 18:13:37.8 months. but at least help them out. that bill did not pass here. what else did we provide for? senator grassley and i? well, $00 million fund for health care providers -- $800 million fund for health care 18:13:53.7 providers' uncompensated care. now, what's that all about? uncompensated care, that's a fancy term. what does that mean? that means help to those hospitals, those doctors who gave free medical care just out of the goodness of their hearts, free medical care to people, regardless of what it would 18:14:11.2 cost, they just gave it. it's uncompensated care because those folks didn't have insurance cover arjs they didn't have ways to play the bills. so it's free care. so we're saying hey, those are good samaritans, those hospitals. those are good samaritans, those doctors. 18:14:26.4 they weren't compensated at all for their care so let's give them a little bit, $800 million. that's all. and i know that the true uncompensated care cost is many, many, many times that. but we're just saying, help a little bit. help those good samaritans show that we care. and who is "we" mr. president? 18:14:46.7 "we" are the american people. "we" are the american people who pay taxes. we are members of the senate here saying okay, we represent our people back home. those of us offering this 18:14:58.5 amendment say we believe that our people in our states want to help out, they want to help these people, help people who don't have health care, who've lost their jobs, lost their health insurance, help the people who are in desperate need of help. 18:15:15.7 for indefinitely? no. just for five months. for a long, long time? no -- and for a huge amount? no, just a little bit. this is the american people we think want to help give some care, some help to those people 18:15:30.2 who need it. and who are good samaritans. but this body so far has said no, no, we're not going to help those good people, those good samaritans, we're going to leave them out in the cold. we also, senator grassley and i, suggested giving 16 months of full federal funding for the 18:15:46.7 beleaguered medicaid programs of the affected states. what does that mean? that just means for 16 months that we as americans are going to help those states meet their medicaid bills for 16 months. 18:15:59.9 but our bill has been blocked, mr. president. it's been blocked by a small group of senators on the other side aisle.ñ what do these senators on the other side of the aisle say. say.(?><$>.ecl) 18:16:12.2 what's their reason for blocking this bill? this little small way that helps them a bit for a small period of time? what do they say? they say our bill provides for open-ended expansion of medicaid. it is the camel's nose under the tent. it is a theoretical, ideological argument. 18:16:31.2 they argue also that the government -- that is h.h.s., the department of health and human services -- can take care of this crisis without congressional action. they say you don't need that congress. we the administration can take care of this. they also argue that our 18:16:45.9 legislation sun necessary spending. and they're making those same arguments in effect today. let me take those points on one by one. on the first, the amendment before us, just as provided in the bill that senator grassley and i offered, provides only 18:17:02.6 temporary five-month medicaid coverage. it is not indefinite. it's temporary, five months. we also suggest that the president can renew that coverage for an additional how long, long period of time? no, just an additional five months. 18:17:17.4 but that's it. it's not an open-ended medicaid expansion. it is getting help to those who need it. not down the road. not forever, but not. people need health care now. that is not something they can postpone. you need health care, you need it right now. 18:17:32.8 what about the argument that the administration, h.h.s. can take care this have problem without congressional action? if the administration can take care of katrina health needs through something called medicaid waivers. simply put, that is not true. flatly not true. 18:17:49.4 they can't do that under the law. they need a change in the law to do that. they can't do that on their own. just last week in the finance committee, h.h.s. testified that they do need legislation to provide additional funds for states to meet katrina health needs. 18:18:05.8 they admit it had before the finance committee. they also said the plan to provide about only -- million in new funds. well, that 100 is a paltry pittance compared to what's needed in the state of louisiana alone. 18:18:22.5 i must say too that legislation is needed to address those needs for the president still hasn't asked congress to pass legislation to make that happen. we provide in this amendment, but they don't. and finally, senators on the other side of the aisle argue 18:18:38.6 that this bill constitutes wasteful spending. they say since we've already appropriated $60 billion to fema, two-thirds of which is unspent, we should use those funds for first. that's what the argument was when we offered this amendment not too long ago. these same senators arrest tkpwaoup we should scale back -- 18:18:55.8 argue we should scale back the bill's price tag. mr. president, i have listened to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. senator lincoln has listened to them. senator landrieu has listened to them. we want to get legislation passed, want to help people in some way. so guess what? in the spirit of compromise, 18:19:12.5 we've scaled back our bill, off setting it with unspent fema funds. that is we're doing just what the senators want us to do. the amendment before us reduces the cost of the katrina health care package by giving 12 months of relief instead of 16 months, 18:19:27.1 removes the provision to prevent reduction of 29 state medicaid programs. that bothered them. we removed that part. by using unspent fema funds to offset its cost the amendment does just what the white house advocated last week. 18:19:41.3 as you know, last week the white house proposed redirecting $17 billion in unspent fema funds to help rebuild the gust coast. let's look at that $17 billion. of that $17 billion, $3.3 billion would go to reconstruct 18:19:57.5 military bases. not health care needs, but military bases. $2.3 billion would be spent on highways and bridge construction. i perhaps am speaking a little out of place here, mr. president. i visited, i think the bases, military bases, the subject of 18:20:15.9 this amendment here. yeah, there is damage here, but it does not begin to compare with the other damage of the homes, the roads and the bridges and the lost homes and lost jobs and health care needs. 18:20:29.5 there is no comparison, mr. president. i don't know why we're spending 3.3 to go to reconstruct a military base but not spending money to help people's health care needs. $410 million would help farmers and ranchers remove debris and rehabilitate their land. 18:20:45.1 those are worthy causes. the president's request does not ask for increased health care funding. it does not help those hospitals and those doctors who are good 18:20:57.7 samaritans by providing uncompensated care relief. it does not help states caring for evacuees through their overburdened medicaid programs. it does not cover patients who need help now. i might say, mr. president, this amendment does, to remind my 18:21:14.6 colleagues, just what one of the opponents on the other side argued for about a month ago. what that? on september bill when -- september 30 when i was trying to move this bill through the senate, a senator on the other side said -- and i quote -- "the question is not whether we 18:21:29.7 should or want to provide assistance, but we want to make sure we do it in a way that assures resources get where they are most needed and in a way that takes advantage of the $45 billion or so that has already been appropriated that is not yet been committed." well, guess what? 18:21:46.7 that's what this amendment does. it uses unspent funds to meet the urgent health care needs of the katrina victims. more than nine weeks after this major national disaster hit our shores, we are still waiting for this congress and the president to act on katrina health care 18:22:03.3 needs. the reconciliation bill we are considering provides some help for victims. but the $1.8 billion in the bill is not enough. it's been called a down payment. mr. president, it is not a down payment. it's an end payment in the minds 18:22:18.4 of the administration and those on the other side of the aisle. it's a last payment. it's not a down payment. they just -- why is it not a down payment? because they are saying no to extra funds being suggested here. so it is not that down payment. 18:22:32.1 that is just flatly inaccurate. sounds nice but it is inaccurate. we need to provide more federal funds to help affected states. louisiana is in very dire financial straits. it will have to cut its medicaid program by an estimated 40% if 18:22:49.8 that state doesn't get funds by the end of this year. just think of that. it has to cut medicaid by a huge amount if it doesn't get the needed funds. we also need to provide funds for uncompensated health care costs to assure the providers, 18:23:05.0 doctors, hospitals, health centers and good samaritans are recognized. and we need to ensure that low-income survivors get the health care they need, whether or not they meet medicaid's rigid eligibility rules. in louisiana alone, half of 18:23:19.0 those who have applied for medicaid have been turned away because they don't meet those standards. think of that. half of the people in louisiana have been turned away -- turned away, mr. president. they got health care needs. there's diabetics, there's cancer patients, there are people with dire needs turned 18:23:34.9 away. and we're mott talking about high income levels, mr. president -- we're not talking about high income levels, mr. president. currently a single mom who makes more than $2,500 a year would not get covered. think of that. 18:23:52.1 and we're raising that to $9,500 a year. just think of that, mr. president. right now under the view taken by the other side of the aisle, a single mom who makes more than $2,500 a year would not get 18:24:08.9 covered. she wouldn't get any help. what are we saying? let's raise that up to $9,500, at least. and that's not a lot of money, mr. president. $9,500 a year, we're saying at least let's raise it to that level so if she makes more than 18:24:24.3 that she doesn't get help. if she makes up to that level, she does get some help. this is just not right, mr. president. this amendment is not being passed. it will not be passed. it is clear by the tone of this debate here. the amendment from louisiana said we're going to keep working 18:24:40.1 until we get something passed. why? because it is the right thing to do. i see the chairman of the budget committee sitting there deeply pondering his chin on his hand there. and i'm saying to the chairman, that is way to do this. the way to do it is to pay for 18:24:57.6 it on unspent katrina -- appropriated dollars. there's a way to do this. i know the chairman's very concerned about total costs. he should be concerned about total costs. that's his job. but there's a way to do this, and that's through this 18:25:11.8 amendment. it is through the already appropriated dollars that are unspent. it is not -- it does not add to the deficit. it does not add to the budget woes that the chairman is worried about. that is way to do this. i'm calling upon all of us in the senate, mr. president, to 18:25:27.9 find a way to do this. we all know this is the right thing to do. we all know it's the right thing to give temporary health care assistance to people in the affected areas. we all know that. we all know it's the right thing to do to help some of these hospitals and doctors who have 18:25:43.3 been good samaritans to get a little bit of help. because all of america wants to help. we all know that. all america wants to help those doctors and those hospitals just a little bit. i say to my good friend from new 18:25:56.5 hampshire, to find it in his head and in his heart to help make this thing work. because it is so important to so many people who are counting on us to recognize them, give them a little bit of hope. 18:26:11.4 that's the very least that we can do, and support the amendment offered by the senator from arkansas. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: who yields time? mr. gregg: i yield to the 18:26:25.7 senator from mississippi such time as he may take off the amendment. the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi. mr. lott: mr. president, i want to thank the senator from new hampshire, the manager, of this very important legislation for yielding me this time. he has been very patient as this amendment has been discussed, and the distinguished senator 18:26:42.1 from oklahoma certainly has been patient, thinking he was going to have to wait five or ten minutes and then he could go with his amendment. so i'll try to be brief. let me just say that there's no question in my mind about what our needs are in mississippi and louisiana. 18:26:58.2 the people i love the most -- my neighbors, my family -- you know, and constituents that i've represented for 33 years are hurting. they need lots of help. right across the hall now are 12 superintendents from south mississippi saying help us, 18:27:14.7 please, and do it quickly, because fema's not delivering trailers for our employees. we are open because we want to get our children back in school. we need operating expenses. we need help right away. not just rebuilding. 18:27:30.5 we need help to keep operating because the tax base has been destroyed. no ad valorem tax, no sales tax. nothing in some of the counties that are affected. so look, i know firsthand how bad this situation is. and every time i go home, it breaks my heart again. 18:27:47.6 fortunately, the people there are resilient and determined to come back, and they appreciate any help we give them. and they don't whine a lot from my neck of the woods. they just keep working. but i agree with what's been said here in a lot of areas. first of all, this senate has 18:28:03.0 not done enough to help the people. and what we have done is being slow rolled by the office of management and budget and fema. the list of horror stories, if i put them in the record, it would stagger my colleagues here. 18:28:19.7 so a good job is not being done yet. the money we passed, $63 billion almost, probably -- maybe $40 billion of it has been spent. meanwhile, subcontractors are 18:28:34.8 not -- have not been reimbursed. schools haven't gotten a nickel. the mississippi department of transportation is not being reimbursed for the money that they've already spent. the horror stories of what congress has not yet done in terms of changing the law -- and there's a bill pending right now 18:28:50.3 at the desk from the government affairs and homeland security committee, s. 1777, that would do an awful lot to help our people in a lot of areas by changing laws, by removing caps. it wouldn't necessarily cost a lot more money, would extend the time of unemployment benefits 18:29:07.7 from 26 weeks to 39 weeks and so on and so on. there is a lot more we could be doing. we ought to be doing it. but what is this bill we're working on? this is the deficit-reduction legislation, i thought. i thought this is where we found places where we could make 18:29:24.2 savings, where money is not being properly spent or spent to the best effect. several committees have worked to come up with the savings we have. and by the way, gee whiz, we came up with more money than the budget required, so, gee, we can spend it. 18:29:41.4 and, yes, i'm one of the ones that's trying to do that. i supported the effort of chairman grassley and ranking member baucus to get a bill through, i don't know, six weeks ago that would have provided $8.5 billion, i think it was, 18:29:55.9 for medicaid. i didn't cosponsor it because there were things in there that i was uncomfortable with. but i thought we needed to take action quickly. and so, how do we -- you know, we came down to this. now it's 1.8. how do we get $1.8 billion for 18:30:13.3 katrina in the deficit-reduction bill? i don't want to brag too much, i'm not even particularly proud of it, but basically i said if you don't put that in there, i won't vote for the bill. and if i didn't vote for it, it wouldn't have passed. because unfortunately, we had to 18:30:27.3 do it with all republican votes. the democrats wouldn't help us at all. and that's why it's in here. hey, it isn't enough. it's not all we need. but, i mean, hey, the plate has been passed. and we got a little help. now i'm going to come back and 18:30:43.6 say give me another $2 billion, $3 billion, $billion that's going to, depending on how we do it can add to the deficit. this is not all it's going to 18:30:55.0 be, but this is a good start. $1.8 billion. i've gotten to the point where i'm saying, you know, i don't want it all. just help me a little.ñ this is responsible what we've done here, $is 1.8 billion to increase the federal match for 18:31:11.2 medicaid in the fema disaster counties -- in the fema disaster counties. that's an important differentiation. one of my problems i keep argue about, look i got people in northwest mississippi that are not in the disaster area. we shouldn't increase the eligibility for them. 18:31:26.4 they weren't hit by the hurricane. now, i'd be perfectly willing to just say, governors of louisiana, mississippi, arkansas, we're going to give you "x" dollars for medicaid and you make sure it gets to the people who really need it. i haven't been able to say all. 18:31:42.6 that a lot of people can be done -- a lot it can be done by o.m.b. without us doing a thing and they can take it out of the $60 billion plus that we passed, but i don't think we should use deficit reduction or the need for medicaid help immediately to 18:31:58.2 increase eligibility. i don't think we ought to provide 100% to recall of mississippi and louisiana, including those areas that were not affected. we may need to increase eligibility, but this is supposed to be to help people 18:32:12.4 hit by the disaster that were displaced by the disaster or live in the area and lost everything. i tried to make the point to some of my colleagues when they say, we have to be fiscally responsible. i say, help me explain to the people in hancock, mississippi, that lost their house, their 18:32:28.4 job, their car, their truck, their boat and their dog that we've got to make sure that we're fiscally responsible. i'm not going to do that. we're going to help that person. that person has a slab, a mortgage and no job, we're going to help them or i'm not going to be a part of an institution or 18:32:44.7 government that will not help people in america that are hurting like that. so look, i can get just as passionate. i lost my house. so i, you know, i'm emotional about this. everybody around me lost their houses. and people that worked all their lives and saved everything, 18:33:00.3 they've lost it all. not just low income. held, this -- hell -- strike that from the record, but this hurricane is great equalizer. if you're poor and lost 18:33:15.2 everything, you got nothing. if you're middle income and lost everything, you got nothing. if you're a rich, retired doctor and you lost your home and your car, you ain't got much left. we need to do more. there is no question about that. but we do the right thing here by giving -- we do raise the 18:33:34.7 fmat100% for those areas that are affected. we do need to do more in this uncompensated care area. and we're going to do more. but i ask my colleagues here, i know how heart felt this is for 18:33:48.5 my colleague from louisiana and if t senator from arkansas. they're trying to do the right thing. but i'm just saying, look, let's don't pursue the perfect at the expense of the good. i was part of the deal. 18:34:03.6 i got aural i could -- i got all i could. ly come back at the next round in conference and try to get more. when we get true there we'll be back trying to get what we need. here's one thing to my colleagues in the affected states and those who want to help us, i want to remind them, 18:34:19.7 when you ask for more than you're really entitled to or when you ask for things not in the hurricane-affected area or for people not in the affected area, you hurt your credibility. when you ask for a huge number 18:34:38.0 and include things that maybe are not in the area, and i could do that, then our colleagues say, wait a minute, wait a minute now, we got to make sure we help those people that really need it. 18:34:49.6 but we don't do things under the cover of the hurricane that can't be justified on behalf of the american taxpayer. now, i haven't been critical about the recovery. let me just say to everybody, to volunteers, to the military, to 18:35:05.2 the private sector, to the faith-based groups, to this institution, to so many people that have helped us when we've been on our knees, we appreciate it. and we have to do a lot more. 18:35:23.4 but i don't think we're in a position to be looking a gift horse in the mouth. let's do this now and let's keep working. we have a long way to go. this hurricane is so 18:35:38.1 overwhelming, the damage so monumental that it has overwhelmed federal agencies. nobody really can appreciate what we're dealing with here. it's more than we ever dreamed, including people like me who has 18:35:51.9 been three six hurricanes, two 18:35:54.2 towards, an ice storm and a flood. i've never seen anything like. this we're not going to fix this tonight or in a week or a monoor many months. it's going to take years. i want to make sure, my colleagues, that i can come back to you again and again and say, we need this help. i've done my homework, it's 18:36:10.0 justified and we need you to do it on behalf of these people. thank you very much. the presiding officer: who yields time? a senator: mr. president, what is the time remaining? the presiding officer: the 18:36:25.5 senator from arkansas has no time remaining. and there are r50 minutes remaining in opposition. mrs. lincoln: 50? the presiding officer: 50. mr. gregg: mr. president? 18:36:42.0 the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire. mr. gregg: under the unanimous consent agreement, the understanding is we would move on to the inhofe amendment, and then we would move to the nelson amendment, and although it wasn't agreed to, i believe it now can be agreed to that the amendment in order after the nelson agreement will be the lott amendment except if we end 18:36:59.8 up going into tomorrow, the first two amendments to be recognized will be the cantwell amendment, senator cantwell's amendment followed by senator grassley's amendment. so if that were the case, nor lott or senator nelson, if they didn't come up tonight would 18:37:15.9 follow those two amendments. is that a correct reflection of where we are? mr. conrad: the chairman, as always, has it exactly right. mr. gregg: i would ask unanimous consent that that be the order of business. the presiding officer: without objection. 18:37:30.4 mr. gregg: we were going to -- for the -- 18:37:46.7 mr. conrad: for the information of our colleagues, we have on this side a half dozen senators or more who have asked to have time to speak on the bill. let me just send a message in this way if i could to our colleagues offices to the staffs 18:38:01.9 who are listening. obviously the events of this afternoon have blown a hole in the budget for the time on this bill, and what was the game plan before this afternoon has clearly been altered. 18:38:20.1 and now we have tried to lay out a schedule of amendments as the chairman has just indicated. next we'll go to senator inhofe. could we inquire, senator inhofe, could you give us a picture of how long you might 18:38:35.7 inquire? mr. inhofe: yes, i'd respectfully say i could do mine in probably 15 minutes. mr. conrad: all right. so then there may be some discussion on the inhofe amendment on this side. then we would go to senator nelson. so that would be in approximately 20 minutes perhaps 18:38:52.2 for the -- mr. gregg: if you could ask the same question of senator nelson. mr. conrad: yes, senator nelson. so 20 minutes until we get to senator nelson. then senator nelson, how long would you require? mr. nelson: ten minutes. mr. conrad: ten minutes? 18:39:08.0 mr. gregg: and we'll have some response, i presume. that's another 20 minutes. mr. conrad: then we got to senator lott. so maybe that helps for the information of our colleagues as we try to manage this bill with some efficiency as we get toward the end of this day. 18:39:23.0 we will close by prior agreement at 8:00 p.m. mr. nelson: mr. president, may i inquire, there are two amendments thatly be offering in tandem. what is the procedure that the senators would like me to use in 18:39:40.9 offering those amendments? they deal with the same subject. mr. gregg: senator, i don't think the agreement reflected two amendments. it reflected one amendment. but let's take a look at it while the amendment from senator inhofe is going forward and we 18:39:56.4 can see if we can work it out. the presiding officer: the ?an con agreement is for one amendment. -- the unanimous consent agreement is for one amendment. the senator from oklahoma is recognized next under the unanimous consent. mr. inhofe: thank you, 18:40:12.5 mr. president. i ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside for the purpose of considering amendment number 2355. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. inhofe: it's at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from oklahoma, mr. inhofe, for himself and mr. chambliss -- 18:40:30.1 mr. inhofe: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dissuspensioned with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. inhofe: mr. president,ly make this fast. i want to make a couple observations, though. i know -- i happen to be one of the very first members of the senate to go down after katrina to both louisiana and to 18:40:48.5 mississippi. in fact, we actually in a helicopter went all the way from 18:40:52.8 new orleans all the way up to alabama. it's incredible the devastation that takes place. it reminds me a little bit of the tornadoes we've seen so many of in oklahoma. the difference is in a tornado normally will affect about five 18:41:08.6 square miles, as opposed to a couple thousand square miles. so i certainly wouldn't want anything that i would say to imply that we're not deeply sympathetic to the problems of the people in louisiana, mississippi and to a lesser 18:41:23.9 degree in alabama. but i would have to observe that as i've been listening to this debate, that you can always pour more money on a problem, and this is something we have seen in government forever. the senator from montana, he 18:41:40.3 outlined a lot of things we need to spend h.r. money on, as did many others over here. you can always do that. i would question whether or not it's the federal government's responsibility to take care of everything that happens when a disaster occurs. we didn't expect that in 18:41:55.2 oklahoma, and i don't think it should be expected. for one thing, we couldn't do it. the other day there was an op-ed piece by the seen jor senator from alaska, senator ted stevens, and he talked about the 1964 earthquake and the 18:42:11.7 devastation there. he actually had to go out and repair his own house and do a lot of this work, and not even 10% of it was taken care of by the federal government. we have a mindset now that somehow the federal government has deep enough pockets it can 18:42:28.5 take care of all these problems. frankly, it's just not right. it's not true. it can't happen. we're going to have to get a handle on this thing. i have a couple things i want to say, and i can say them in a relatively short period of time. i have been working on a solution to this problem with an 18:42:44.7 amendment for quite some time. i've actually offered it or wanted to offer it previously on appropriation bills, but to do that, i would have to initiate program negating paragraph 4 of rule 16 of the rules to do this. 18:43:04.1 i don't think that's appropriate. i know it's been done three times in the last couple weeks by three of the democrat senators. i don't criticize them for it. but i think if i did that on the republican side, it would be the first time that procedure would have been exercised, and it would not be appropriate. so last thursday or friday 18:43:20.9 toward the end of the week, i had a colloquy on the floor with senator frist, and we specifically discussed bringing up the amendment that i have in mind on the budget reconciliation bill. i'm not naive. it could be there will be a budget point of order against 18:43:36.9 it. it doesn't really make any difference. we're going to get a vote on this bill. and this is a very simple solution to a very complex problem. let me mention, i understand a bill is going to be introduced that's going to eliminate all earmarks. 18:43:54.2 well, that sounds real good, and there's a big population out there that thinks this is going to solve the problem, but it doesn't solve the problem. i mentioned that the other day when my junior senator brought up a bill to do away with a bridge up in alaska, and i said, look, you're looking at 18:44:11.3 something where with a few things that really works well in washington is the way we handle the transportation bill. what we do, mr. president, is we determine by a formula that takes -- that no one thinks is fair because you always want more in your own state, you take 18:44:27.6 into consideration highway mortality, all these things, a number of road miles, your donee status and all of this, and then you come up with a formula. and that formula will allocate to the states an amount of money to each state from all this money. 18:44:41.9 this money, i might add, is money that has been paid in taxes at the pumps so that it goes to improving our transportation system. well, when you do this, if you send that to the states and they say, all right, you and the states -- you in the states, you 18:44:58.1 determine the priorities you have in the state of florida, in the state of new hampshire, what you think is the proper thing. and then that's either done by the elected representatives or by the local people there. in my state of oklahoma, we have the transportation commission, eight commissioners in eight geographic areas of the state. 18:45:15.4 they prioritize projects and it's done very well. and so we do have earmarks to lock in these projects so that these can be done and these decision were made locally. now, isn't it a little bit arrogant for us in washington -- 18:45:30.1 there is a mentality in washington that if a decision isn't made in washington it's not a good decision. i think it's a little bit arrogant for us to say, well, yeah, the money's gone out to these states, but we in our wisdom don't think it should be spent on those projects that they think it should be spent on 18:45:46.2 in the state, this this case it was the state of alaska, the well-known bridge, so-called 18:45:52.4 bridge to nowhere, when, in fact, that bridge was a bridge that was put there for economic development. according to the alaska department of transportation, they said out of 100 projects, that was number four from the top because they wanted to 18:46:06.0 develop that area. they can't develop the area because people can't get to that area. well, you know, i'm not sure i agree or don't agree, but i don't really care because that was their decision, not our decision in washington to make. now, if we were to pass a bill to eliminate all earmarks, we 18:46:22.0 would -- it's not going to save money in the transportation bill. almost all of that was below the line in formulas. all it would say, is all right, if you eliminate that earmark, then you're going to have to go back and decide, what do you want to spend that money for. 18:46:36.2 the money's not going to be saved. the money cease going to still go to some project. but we will have dictated that from washington, d.c.ñ i'm not saying this critically because some of my closest friends and good conservatives really feel if you eliminate 18:46:53.5 earmarks you are going to resolve a problem. you are not going to resolve but there is a way to do it. i have a very simple amendment that will do. that i know the white house has been looking at ways to cut unnecessary spending. to their credit they proposed a package of $2.3 billion in cuts. 18:47:12.6 october 24, 2005, scott mcclellan briefed the press recording -- regarding the white house's efforts saying an area we've been looking at is rescinding spending increases. the congressional leadership has 18:47:25.3 been looking at this for a long time. you know, i think sometimes we look at solutions in overly complicated -- i think there's a simple solution to this. i have a one sentence bill that -- amendment that i'm going 18:47:42.9 to offer to the reconciliation bill. i might -- a lot of people think you have to get long and involved verbiage before you can do something good. when i was in the other body in 1994 on the issue that ended up being considered the greatest 18:48:00.1 single reform in the house of representatives that was my amendment. and it was one sentence. you don't have to have long, complicated sentences. i'm going to read you the one sentence in this bill. i know one of the cosponsors of this is the presiding officer. he it says, "beginning with the 18:48:17.0 fiscal year seven and -- 2007 and thereafter all nontrust fund nondecember correctionary spending shall not exceed fiscal year levels without a two-thirds vote." 18:48:31.3 why a two-thirds vote? something like katrina comes along, something unanticipated, sure two-thirds may decide we shouldn't do something. that isn't going to happen very often, mr. president. i heard a statement, not a 18:48:48.8 misquote but certainly taken out of context, one of the republican senators saying that all senators are big spenders and we need to -- they are all big spender is -- spenders equally. frankly, mr. president, that just isn't right. and yet we do have a lot -- 18:49:07.3 there's a solution to this problem, but i want to at least show that spending is a partisan issue. and here it is right here. these are the democrat amendments that we've seen so 18:49:20.6 far, and can i update this. the bottom line here is that there's -- it's $530 billion, that's a half a trillion dollars. democrat amendments, stabenow, 18:49:37.5 byrd, akaka, harkin, kennedy, dayton, dorgan, biden, byrd, clinton. it goes on and on. these are amendments that were offered. these are amendments that were defeated, most of them but all 18:49:53.2 were considered. if you add up all the democrats -- amendments by democrats in this body you get half a trillion dollars. over a ten year heard in is over $10 trillion. those are specific amendments 18:50:07.4 that were offered. and i don't even criticize them, but i just think if someone -- we stood on the floor a few minutes ago and listened to several senators talk about how much more money we should be spending on these programs and we're going to hear it i'm sure 18:50:23.5 tonight and tomorrow. but nonetheless that is a fact. now, my solution is one that is going to -- sure it doesn't get into entitlements. that's going to be addressed with reconciliation. there are other ways of doing that. of course, right now the defense 18:50:38.0 spending is going to have to stay up because we went down in our defense spending during the 1990's. we have to rebuild the military. we all understand. i think most people feel the primary two -- at least i've 18:50:50.9 felt the primary top functions that should be performed by government would be national defense and infrastructure. now in the case of infrastructure, of course, that's money that people have paid, and think there's -- i think there's a moral issue here that most people feel when they 18:51:07.3 go up and pay the high taxes at the pumps that somehow that is going to get into building roads and repairing roads, and it should. unfortunately, the highway trust fund has been robbed. the aviation trust fund and other trust funds have been 18:51:22.2 robbed and i think they need to be kept in fact. -- in tact. however, this very simple solution is one that should pass this body. it might take because of a procedural vote, it might be a budget point of order and have 60 votes to pass. 18:51:39.5 however, if you look at what many of the -- my colleagues on the democrat side have said, senator biden said specifically want more spending cuts. if we designed a deficit reduction plan, i would have done it differently but we need to make spending cuts. 18:51:55.5 senator dorgan, who is in here says, specifically that we need to provide spending cuts in a significant manner. senator feingold says, "weigh also need to continue to cut spending in federal programs." 18:52:12.0 senator levin, he talks about how he we need to cut spending. and the last thing that he says, and this was in -- well, i don't have the date on here -- 1993. in the 1993 reconciliation act, 18:52:29.2 the same thing that we're talking about today. he said y discretionary spending is frozen for five years." he is advocating freezing discretionary spending. that's what my amendment does. 18:52:45.0 it says all nondefense, trust fund december correctionary spending shall not exceed the previous fiscal year's level without a two-thirds majority vote. it's very simple, very cut and dried, it's something that can 18:52:59.9 pass. i will say, mr. president, there will be a vote on this, whether it's a procedural vote or a vote on the content. i would hope that those individuals who have a more complicated approach to this would look at this and recognize this is something that is 18:53:14.5 doable. i've had the unfortunate experience this year of trying to find every bill that comes up that is over either the budget or last year's spending, and i have a-- i have opposed that because i think this is the only 18:53:32.9 way we're going to get this thing back in order. i recognize this is a time of deficits. i think the american people understand. that we do know that we had a rebuilding job to do in the military. then along came 9/11. so we're in the middle of a war. we have to prosecute this war. 18:53:48.8 then katrina and some of the other disasters have taken place. so we recognize these are difficult times, but i think this is one area in discretion mary spending that we can do something and i'll be looking forward to getting a vote on 18:54:04.7 this i say to the ranking member and the chairman of the committee? mr. conrad: mr. president? the presiding officer: who yields time. mr. conrad: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from north dakota. mr. conrad: mr. president, the charge that -- chart that the j gentleman has put up here 18:54:20.8 labeled democrat spend-o-meter is a complete fabrication, tote call concoction. that chart suggests democrats have offered amendments costing $460 billion this year. 18:54:37.7 false. absolutely false. i know the senator has borrowed that chart from somebody else. he didn't prepare the chart, but he has used the chart and the chart is just wrong. first the spend-o-meter ignores the fact that many of those 18:54:54.1 democratic amendments were offset. in fact, because they included additional deficit reduction, the net effect of all democrat amendments to the 2006 budget resolution would have reduced 18:55:10.7 deficit business $58 billion -- $57 billion. the spendo meter also double counts democratic amendments because it treats them as if they were were a package instead of offered individually. 18:55:26.5 many of the democratic amendments covered the same subject area as an earlier amendment that was defeated and would never have been offered if the earlier amendment had been adopted. the spend-o-meter also overstates the cost of 18:55:42.7 democratic amendments in the most egregious way, by transferring one-year amendments 18:55:49.8 into five-year amendments. now, that really strains credibility. to convert amendments that were offered for one year on appropriations bill and make them into five-year amendments into cost is a complete 18:56:08.7 concoction. mr. president, the fact is on the budget resolution democratic amendments would have reduced the deficit by $57 billion. 18:56:25.3 the net cost republican amendments was $79 billion. they would have increased the deficit by $79 billion. our colleague says it's a partisan issue, spending. he's right. 18:56:38.6 during the democratic administration, spending went down as a share of gross domestic product, and that the economists say is the best way to measure it. spending went down each and every year during a democratic administration from 22% of 18:56:56.4 g.d.p. down to 18.4% of g.d.p. democrats when they were in charge cut spending. let's look at the republican record. because here is what has happened under the bush administration. 18:57:10.2 each and every year spending has gone up with one exception of the time that they have been in control. we went from 18.4% the last year democrats were in control. we're up to 20.2% of g.d.p. now 18:57:28.2 that republicans have been in control. mr. president, the story doesn't end there because the bottom line is what has happened to the debt. our republican dleegs -- colleagues took over the debt of the country was $5.7 trillion. 18:57:44.3 they've increased the debt each and every year by five or $600 billion. you can see they've gone from $5.7 trillion this year, the end 18:57:57.2 of 2005, the debt was up to $7.9 trillion. and under the budget that is before us now, they are going to take the debt up to over $11 trillion. 18:58:12.2 that's the record of our colleagues on the either side -- other side. they are in control. they control the house. they control the senate. they control the white house and they are leaving this country a legacy of debt, debt, debt. mr. president here is the 18:58:31.3 reality: when they came in and they took control of everything, the debt of this country was $5.7 trillion. today they've increased it to $8 trillion, and this is, by the 18:58:45.8 way, when the president said he was going to have maximum pay down of the debt. but look at where it's headed. under the budget that is on the floor now, they are going to raise the debt over the next five years to $11 trillion -- 18:59:05.4 $11 trillion. i mean you add it up, this is unbelievable. they are approaching $6 trillion of added debt while they've been in control and they are out here claiming we're the spenders. hello. we're not in control. they are in control. 18:59:20.8 they are the ones running up the debt. they are the ones running up the debt. and it doesn't end -- it doesn't end there because the package they got out here that they claim is deficit reduction, not deficit reduction. 18:59:38.4 you read all the chapters of the book before you reach a conclusion of what the message is. and the message of our friends on the other side is debt on top of debt. first chapter is the one we've got before us now, slices spending a little bit over five 18:59:57.8 years. then they come back, cut taxes even more, add to the deficit. but the third chapter is they are going to increase the debt limit by $781 billion for one year alone that brings their four-year total to over $3

Aerial forward shot of damaged trees and houses in city, drone flying over landscape - Damaged architecture in city

SENATE FLOOR DEBATE: The Senate will reesume consideration of S.1932, the Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation bill. 18:00:07.2 have a very hard time, if not impossible time, putting up the 30% match to keep our children and our poorest citizens, as well as those that are vulnerable, in health care for the year. 18:00:21.8 so we come here, 65 days after the storm, when we're spending money on everything we can imagine, from new programs, expansion of programs, tax cuts, to say please consider a basic service of health care, not just 18:00:38.7 for the parishes that were affected and the counties in mississippi, but for the whole state of louisiana and mississippi who are struggling, and particularly in louisiana's case. we were harder hit. 18:00:52.2 we had more levees break. our major city was flooded. jackson was not flooded. new orleans was flooded. our major economic base from our ports to our energy industry 18:01:04.1 have been directly impacted and revenues have fallen off precipitously. let me just share one other statistic, and then i'm going to wrap up. i tried to say to my staff, give me something that i can explain to people what the losses are. 10 they went become and went 18:01:21.2 back to 2003. now, this is only two years. this is an average of people that are unemployed in louisiana. we work hard, just like everyone else. we average about 135,000 people in june of 2003. 18:01:38.4 let's pick june of 2004. we had 119,000 people receiving unemployment. let's go to january 2005. we had 119,000 people. right before the storm in august of 2005, we had 122,000 people 18:01:55.7 unep employed. so i think from this you can say over the last two years we've had roughly an average of 120,000 people unemployed. 34r president, in one month -- one month -- our number jumped from 122,000 to 227,000 people.ñ 18:02:17.3 100,000 people in one month are seeking unemployment. that is how desperate people are. it's never happened in these two years, and i bet you if we went back and looked at that time for 18:02:27.1 the last 20 years, the only spike that you would find like this is maybe in the 1980's when the oil industry collapsed and almost everybody in louisiana lost their livelihood. we've not seen this in so long, we don't remember a time like 18:02:43.4 this. i don't know why we're having a hard time explaining this to an administration and to the majority about how desperate the situation is. we are not ungrateful for the steps that have been taken. 18:03:00.3 we are not ungrateful for the fema money that is slowly getting to us. what we're saying is, we need to do better. today how do you think i felt watching the president of the united states stand up and tell 18:03:16.9 everybody that he was going to allocate $8 billion for the avian flu? now, i don't know where he's getting the $8 billion for the avian flu. all we're asking for is $6.2 billion to keep a health care 18:03:31.8 system of the whole state standing up until we can just figure out what we might need to do. because we don't have all the answers. it's only been a few weeks. our system has basically collapsed. 18:03:45.2 it's going to take us a little bit more time to figure out what the long-term solution is. but i can tell you, for the people that senator lincoln talked about that stayed on their refrigerator for three days, for mr. albert bass, who was a painter in the 9th ward who went to the hospital with 104-degree fever. 18:04:03.7 his medicaid application has been denied. he needs help now. for miss stewart who flifz jefferson parish. she was a teacher. she's been denied medicaid. she's 51. she's married. 18:04:19.2 her husband receives social security. she was diagnosed with cancer. her cancer is back. her health situation is worsening. she has no more income. i need to tell, mr. president, mrs. stewart what her outlook is. 18:04:34.3 and what i'm going to tell her is, we're going to find money for the avian flu, we're finding money for iraq, we're finding money for a tax cut, we're finding money for this -- you know, we're going to raise $4 billion more for a spectrum. we're selling off spectrum and 18:04:50.7 we're going to raise $4 billion. but i'm sorry, we can't get you into a hospital. so maybe the majority, this is the final thing i'm going to say, maybe they just don't like that it's a government program. so senator lincoln, senator 18:05:07.7 baucus, senator grassley come up and say, well, let's have some way that -- for the businesses that had people on unemployment -- i mean, in insurance, the businesses have collapsed but 18:05:21.6 these businesses are valiantly trying to keep people on their insurance program. because they know the desperate situation of their employees. i can't tell you what most businesses are going through. business owners taking money out of their own pocket, going into 18:05:38.5 their own savings account trying to keep paying their employees with no money coming in the front door because they've been in business 30 years, these employees have been loyal to them, they have showed up for work every day. we talk about public-private 18:05:53.8 partnerships. in this amendment is an $800 million fund that's not a new program, it goes to our insurance commission to her try 18:06:02.3 to help work with small businesses and businesses so that people can keep their health insurance, so that they don't fall onto the government payroll, so they don't become wards of the state. this is self-help. this is partnership. 18:06:17.7 this is self-reliance. and with all of that, we've been told no, come back later. well, let me tell you, mr. president, we're going to continue to come back. because while we are grateful for the $1.8 billion, we are grateful it is so far short of 18:06:33.5 what we need to stabilize our health care system for a state that's 4.5 billion people, that has literally been punched in the gut and is rolling back this administration -- rolling back, this administration has got to do better by the people of 18:06:49.6 louisiana, mississippi and the gulf coast. you know, charity starts right here at home. strength begins right here at home. our war is right here at home in the gulf coast states. when you're fighting cancer, it's about as tough as it gets. 18:07:08.2 when you have your son or your daughter dying of a fatal disease, it's about as tough as it gets. that is a private war that people are going through. and we keep walking away from it, pretending that it's just 18:07:20.6 going to go away. well, it's not going to go away. i'm not going to go away. the louisiana delegation's not going to go away. and finally, we'll realize that this is not your regular hurricane. this was an unprecedented catastrophe that's taken a major economic center to its knees and 18:07:37.9 it's going to take more than whitewashing and press conferences and a little bit of money drabd here and there to stand -- drabbed here and there to stand us up so that we can continue to be the great region that we are, pay taxes into this country and to contribute to the economic benefit. 18:07:52.4 as i said, we're not a charity case. we've contributed billions of dollars to this government and we'll continue to. and in our hour of need -- in our hour of need, we have to come and ask for pennies on the dollar. so i hope that we can do better, we must, we can. 18:08:09.8 there's most certainly room in this budget on the spending side or the tax side to do better. and we are grateful for the $1.8 billion but question need senator lincoln's amendment, we need the leadership of senator baucus, and i thank senator grassley, who has been a 18:08:25.0 champion. the senator from iowa, a republican leader of this finance committee, has been a champion on this issue. and if he just had a little more support from his caucus and from the administration, we might get more than a banned-aid because we're really hemorrhaging -- 18:08:43.2 more than a band-aid because we're really hemorrhaging. thank you, mr. president. mr. baucus: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from montana. mr. baucus: mr. president, i don't know who is controlling time here -- the presiding officer: excuse me, the senator from arkansas controls the time. mrs. lincoln: mr. president, what is the time remaining on 18:08:57.2 our side, please? the presiding officer: the senator has 18 minutes remaining. mr. lott: mr. president, could i inquire also, particle pacialtion about the time remaining on -- parliamentary inquiry, about the time remaining on this side of the aisle on this issue? the presiding officer: the 18:09:12.2 senator has 51 minutes remaining. mr. lott: has the senator from montana spoke own this subject? mr. baucus: i plan to speak now. mr. lott: mr. president, i would want to speak on this subject too but i would defer to the ranking member of the committee and then hopefully can speak 18:09:28.7 right after that. mrs. lincoln: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from arkansas. mrs. lincoln: i yield time to the senator from montana. the presiding officer: the senator from montana is recognized. mr. baucus: mr. president, nine weeks ago yesterday, hurricane katrina hit the gulf killing over a thousand people, 18:09:49.6 displacing over a million people, leaving the region with a cleanup bill that might reach $200 billion. katrina left a gaping need in the health care -- needed health care in the affected states and 18:10:05.2 those that are in mosting states. i don't know how to say it in any other way but it is biblical. the devastation is biblical. i visited the area five or six weeks ago. 18:10:21.6 other senators did too. and i don't think there's any senator who actually visited who could come up with any other feeling, belief that it is biblical. unfortunately, very few members of this body have actually been there. unfortunately, very few members 18:10:37.3 of this body have actually seen the area, seen what's left. and it's not much. whether it's in louisiana, new orleans, whether it's in gulf states. it is incredible how much there has been just destroyed. 18:10:54.5 how people don't -- who are alive don't have jobs, don't have homes, don't have schools, 18:11:01.9 don't have their lives. it is absolutely incredible and it is devastating and it is biblical. and i do believe firmly if every senator in this institution were to see the areas affected, see the people, see what's 18:11:17.4 happening, there would be a different result here. we've become too academic around here. we read too many memos. we talk too much among ourselves. there's too much sort of theory, 18:11:33.2 not enough actual on-the-ground what really is going on. if senators were to see it, feel it, taste it, smell it, there is no doubt in my mind that this amendment offered by the senator from arkansas would pass and 18:11:47.6 it would pass unanimously and we would not be debating it, we would be probably asking for more, how can we help some more. so in the meantime, how has this congress? 18:12:01.6 to be fair, it has not. incredibly, it has not. in the hurricane's wake, the chairman of the finance committee and i drafted the bill to cover evacuees under medicaid for a short period of time, just five months, to help provide health care to low-income people who don't have their jobs 18:12:18.6 anymore, who don't have health insurance anymore, who don't have a place to put their kids in schools, don't have homes, just temporary health care. five months temporary. that was the bill we offered. it was a bill that senator grassley and i put together. 18:12:35.3 who supported it? everybody in the affected states, republicans, democrats, senators, governors. everyone in the affected states supported it. did we get it passed? no. we would cover evacuees below the poverty level of $9,500. 18:12:51.3 just think of that. $9,500 level of income. people who earn that level of income really need help, particularly in the circumstances faced by the people in the aftermath of the 18:13:06.4 destruction of the hurricane. our amendment would also cover pregnant women and kids at twice that income level. and that's not a lot of money, mr. president. that's about $19,000 a year. that's all. pregnant women and kids with 18:13:23.0 incomes above that much wouldn't get covered with our amendment. but up to that level, $19,000 a year, that's all, pregnant women who only earn $19,000 a year. we say, let's help them out. help them out for just five 18:13:37.8 months. but at least help them out. that bill did not pass here. what else did we provide for? senator grassley and i? well, $00 million fund for health care providers -- $800 million fund for health care 18:13:53.7 providers' uncompensated care. now, what's that all about? uncompensated care, that's a fancy term. what does that mean? that means help to those hospitals, those doctors who gave free medical care just out of the goodness of their hearts, free medical care to people, regardless of what it would 18:14:11.2 cost, they just gave it. it's uncompensated care because those folks didn't have insurance cover arjs they didn't have ways to play the bills. so it's free care. so we're saying hey, those are good samaritans, those hospitals. those are good samaritans, those doctors. 18:14:26.4 they weren't compensated at all for their care so let's give them a little bit, $800 million. that's all. and i know that the true uncompensated care cost is many, many, many times that. but we're just saying, help a little bit. help those good samaritans show that we care. and who is "we" mr. president? 18:14:46.7 "we" are the american people. "we" are the american people who pay taxes. we are members of the senate here saying okay, we represent our people back home. those of us offering this 18:14:58.5 amendment say we believe that our people in our states want to help out, they want to help these people, help people who don't have health care, who've lost their jobs, lost their health insurance, help the people who are in desperate need of help. 18:15:15.7 for indefinitely? no. just for five months. for a long, long time? no -- and for a huge amount? no, just a little bit. this is the american people we think want to help give some care, some help to those people 18:15:30.2 who need it. and who are good samaritans. but this body so far has said no, no, we're not going to help those good people, those good samaritans, we're going to leave them out in the cold. we also, senator grassley and i, suggested giving 16 months of full federal funding for the 18:15:46.7 beleaguered medicaid programs of the affected states. what does that mean? that just means for 16 months that we as americans are going to help those states meet their medicaid bills for 16 months. 18:15:59.9 but our bill has been blocked, mr. president. it's been blocked by a small group of senators on the other side aisle.ñ what do these senators on the other side of the aisle say. say.(?><$>.ecl) 18:16:12.2 what's their reason for blocking this bill? this little small way that helps them a bit for a small period of time? what do they say? they say our bill provides for open-ended expansion of medicaid. it is the camel's nose under the tent. it is a theoretical, ideological argument. 18:16:31.2 they argue also that the government -- that is h.h.s., the department of health and human services -- can take care of this crisis without congressional action. they say you don't need that congress. we the administration can take care of this. they also argue that our 18:16:45.9 legislation sun necessary spending. and they're making those same arguments in effect today. let me take those points on one by one. on the first, the amendment before us, just as provided in the bill that senator grassley and i offered, provides only 18:17:02.6 temporary five-month medicaid coverage. it is not indefinite. it's temporary, five months. we also suggest that the president can renew that coverage for an additional how long, long period of time? no, just an additional five months. 18:17:17.4 but that's it. it's not an open-ended medicaid expansion. it is getting help to those who need it. not down the road. not forever, but not. people need health care now. that is not something they can postpone. you need health care, you need it right now. 18:17:32.8 what about the argument that the administration, h.h.s. can take care this have problem without congressional action? if the administration can take care of katrina health needs through something called medicaid waivers. simply put, that is not true. flatly not true. 18:17:49.4 they can't do that under the law. they need a change in the law to do that. they can't do that on their own. just last week in the finance committee, h.h.s. testified that they do need legislation to provide additional funds for states to meet katrina health needs. 18:18:05.8 they admit it had before the finance committee. they also said the plan to provide about only -- million in new funds. well, that 100 is a paltry pittance compared to what's needed in the state of louisiana alone. 18:18:22.5 i must say too that legislation is needed to address those needs for the president still hasn't asked congress to pass legislation to make that happen. we provide in this amendment, but they don't. and finally, senators on the other side of the aisle argue 18:18:38.6 that this bill constitutes wasteful spending. they say since we've already appropriated $60 billion to fema, two-thirds of which is unspent, we should use those funds for first. that's what the argument was when we offered this amendment not too long ago. these same senators arrest tkpwaoup we should scale back -- 18:18:55.8 argue we should scale back the bill's price tag. mr. president, i have listened to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. senator lincoln has listened to them. senator landrieu has listened to them. we want to get legislation passed, want to help people in some way. so guess what? in the spirit of compromise, 18:19:12.5 we've scaled back our bill, off setting it with unspent fema funds. that is we're doing just what the senators want us to do. the amendment before us reduces the cost of the katrina health care package by giving 12 months of relief instead of 16 months, 18:19:27.1 removes the provision to prevent reduction of 29 state medicaid programs. that bothered them. we removed that part. by using unspent fema funds to offset its cost the amendment does just what the white house advocated last week. 18:19:41.3 as you know, last week the white house proposed redirecting $17 billion in unspent fema funds to help rebuild the gust coast. let's look at that $17 billion. of that $17 billion, $3.3 billion would go to reconstruct 18:19:57.5 military bases. not health care needs, but military bases. $2.3 billion would be spent on highways and bridge construction. i perhaps am speaking a little out of place here, mr. president. i visited, i think the bases, military bases, the subject of 18:20:15.9 this amendment here. yeah, there is damage here, but it does not begin to compare with the other damage of the homes, the roads and the bridges and the lost homes and lost jobs and health care needs. 18:20:29.5 there is no comparison, mr. president. i don't know why we're spending 3.3 to go to reconstruct a military base but not spending money to help people's health care needs. $410 million would help farmers and ranchers remove debris and rehabilitate their land. 18:20:45.1 those are worthy causes. the president's request does not ask for increased health care funding. it does not help those hospitals and those doctors who are good 18:20:57.7 samaritans by providing uncompensated care relief. it does not help states caring for evacuees through their overburdened medicaid programs. it does not cover patients who need help now. i might say, mr. president, this amendment does, to remind my 18:21:14.6 colleagues, just what one of the opponents on the other side argued for about a month ago. what that? on september bill when -- september 30 when i was trying to move this bill through the senate, a senator on the other side said -- and i quote -- "the question is not whether we 18:21:29.7 should or want to provide assistance, but we want to make sure we do it in a way that assures resources get where they are most needed and in a way that takes advantage of the $45 billion or so that has already been appropriated that is not yet been committed." well, guess what? 18:21:46.7 that's what this amendment does. it uses unspent funds to meet the urgent health care needs of the katrina victims. more than nine weeks after this major national disaster hit our shores, we are still waiting for this congress and the president to act on katrina health care 18:22:03.3 needs. the reconciliation bill we are considering provides some help for victims. but the $1.8 billion in the bill is not enough. it's been called a down payment. mr. president, it is not a down payment. it's an end payment in the minds 18:22:18.4 of the administration and those on the other side of the aisle. it's a last payment. it's not a down payment. they just -- why is it not a down payment? because they are saying no to extra funds being suggested here. so it is not that down payment. 18:22:32.1 that is just flatly inaccurate. sounds nice but it is inaccurate. we need to provide more federal funds to help affected states. louisiana is in very dire financial straits. it will have to cut its medicaid program by an estimated 40% if 18:22:49.8 that state doesn't get funds by the end of this year. just think of that. it has to cut medicaid by a huge amount if it doesn't get the needed funds. we also need to provide funds for uncompensated health care costs to assure the providers, 18:23:05.0 doctors, hospitals, health centers and good samaritans are recognized. and we need to ensure that low-income survivors get the health care they need, whether or not they meet medicaid's rigid eligibility rules. in louisiana alone, half of 18:23:19.0 those who have applied for medicaid have been turned away because they don't meet those standards. think of that. half of the people in louisiana have been turned away -- turned away, mr. president. they got health care needs. there's diabetics, there's cancer patients, there are people with dire needs turned 18:23:34.9 away. and we're mott talking about high income levels, mr. president -- we're not talking about high income levels, mr. president. currently a single mom who makes more than $2,500 a year would not get covered. think of that. 18:23:52.1 and we're raising that to $9,500 a year. just think of that, mr. president. right now under the view taken by the other side of the aisle, a single mom who makes more than $2,500 a year would not get 18:24:08.9 covered. she wouldn't get any help. what are we saying? let's raise that up to $9,500, at least. and that's not a lot of money, mr. president. $9,500 a year, we're saying at least let's raise it to that level so if she makes more than 18:24:24.3 that she doesn't get help. if she makes up to that level, she does get some help. this is just not right, mr. president. this amendment is not being passed. it will not be passed. it is clear by the tone of this debate here. the amendment from louisiana said we're going to keep working 18:24:40.1 until we get something passed. why? because it is the right thing to do. i see the chairman of the budget committee sitting there deeply pondering his chin on his hand there. and i'm saying to the chairman, that is way to do this. the way to do it is to pay for 18:24:57.6 it on unspent katrina -- appropriated dollars. there's a way to do this. i know the chairman's very concerned about total costs. he should be concerned about total costs. that's his job. but there's a way to do this, and that's through this 18:25:11.8 amendment. it is through the already appropriated dollars that are unspent. it is not -- it does not add to the deficit. it does not add to the budget woes that the chairman is worried about. that is way to do this. i'm calling upon all of us in the senate, mr. president, to 18:25:27.9 find a way to do this. we all know this is the right thing to do. we all know it's the right thing to give temporary health care assistance to people in the affected areas. we all know that. we all know it's the right thing to do to help some of these hospitals and doctors who have 18:25:43.3 been good samaritans to get a little bit of help. because all of america wants to help. we all know that. all america wants to help those doctors and those hospitals just a little bit. i say to my good friend from new 18:25:56.5 hampshire, to find it in his head and in his heart to help make this thing work. because it is so important to so many people who are counting on us to recognize them, give them a little bit of hope. 18:26:11.4 that's the very least that we can do, and support the amendment offered by the senator from arkansas. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: who yields time? mr. gregg: i yield to the 18:26:25.7 senator from mississippi such time as he may take off the amendment. the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi. mr. lott: mr. president, i want to thank the senator from new hampshire, the manager, of this very important legislation for yielding me this time. he has been very patient as this amendment has been discussed, and the distinguished senator 18:26:42.1 from oklahoma certainly has been patient, thinking he was going to have to wait five or ten minutes and then he could go with his amendment. so i'll try to be brief. let me just say that there's no question in my mind about what our needs are in mississippi and louisiana. 18:26:58.2 the people i love the most -- my neighbors, my family -- you know, and constituents that i've represented for 33 years are hurting. they need lots of help. right across the hall now are 12 superintendents from south mississippi saying help us, 18:27:14.7 please, and do it quickly, because fema's not delivering trailers for our employees. we are open because we want to get our children back in school. we need operating expenses. we need help right away. not just rebuilding. 18:27:30.5 we need help to keep operating because the tax base has been destroyed. no ad valorem tax, no sales tax. nothing in some of the counties that are affected. so look, i know firsthand how bad this situation is. and every time i go home, it breaks my heart again. 18:27:47.6 fortunately, the people there are resilient and determined to come back, and they appreciate any help we give them. and they don't whine a lot from my neck of the woods. they just keep working. but i agree with what's been said here in a lot of areas. first of all, this senate has 18:28:03.0 not done enough to help the people. and what we have done is being slow rolled by the office of management and budget and fema. the list of horror stories, if i put them in the record, it would stagger my colleagues here. 18:28:19.7 so a good job is not being done yet. the money we passed, $63 billion almost, probably -- maybe $40 billion of it has been spent. meanwhile, subcontractors are 18:28:34.8 not -- have not been reimbursed. schools haven't gotten a nickel. the mississippi department of transportation is not being reimbursed for the money that they've already spent. the horror stories of what congress has not yet done in terms of changing the law -- and there's a bill pending right now 18:28:50.3 at the desk from the government affairs and homeland security committee, s. 1777, that would do an awful lot to help our people in a lot of areas by changing laws, by removing caps. it wouldn't necessarily cost a lot more money, would extend the time of unemployment benefits 18:29:07.7 from 26 weeks to 39 weeks and so on and so on. there is a lot more we could be doing. we ought to be doing it. but what is this bill we're working on? this is the deficit-reduction legislation, i thought. i thought this is where we found places where we could make 18:29:24.2 savings, where money is not being properly spent or spent to the best effect. several committees have worked to come up with the savings we have. and by the way, gee whiz, we came up with more money than the budget required, so, gee, we can spend it. 18:29:41.4 and, yes, i'm one of the ones that's trying to do that. i supported the effort of chairman grassley and ranking member baucus to get a bill through, i don't know, six weeks ago that would have provided $8.5 billion, i think it was, 18:29:55.9 for medicaid. i didn't cosponsor it because there were things in there that i was uncomfortable with. but i thought we needed to take action quickly. and so, how do we -- you know, we came down to this. now it's 1.8. how do we get $1.8 billion for 18:30:13.3 katrina in the deficit-reduction bill? i don't want to brag too much, i'm not even particularly proud of it, but basically i said if you don't put that in there, i won't vote for the bill. and if i didn't vote for it, it wouldn't have passed. because unfortunately, we had to 18:30:27.3 do it with all republican votes. the democrats wouldn't help us at all. and that's why it's in here. hey, it isn't enough. it's not all we need. but, i mean, hey, the plate has been passed. and we got a little help. now i'm going to come back and 18:30:43.6 say give me another $2 billion, $3 billion, $billion that's going to, depending on how we do it can add to the deficit. this is not all it's going to 18:30:55.0 be, but this is a good start. $1.8 billion. i've gotten to the point where i'm saying, you know, i don't want it all. just help me a little.ñ this is responsible what we've done here, $is 1.8 billion to increase the federal match for 18:31:11.2 medicaid in the fema disaster counties -- in the fema disaster counties. that's an important differentiation. one of my problems i keep argue about, look i got people in northwest mississippi that are not in the disaster area. we shouldn't increase the eligibility for them. 18:31:26.4 they weren't hit by the hurricane. now, i'd be perfectly willing to just say, governors of louisiana, mississippi, arkansas, we're going to give you "x" dollars for medicaid and you make sure it gets to the people who really need it. i haven't been able to say all. 18:31:42.6 that a lot of people can be done -- a lot it can be done by o.m.b. without us doing a thing and they can take it out of the $60 billion plus that we passed, but i don't think we should use deficit reduction or the need for medicaid help immediately to 18:31:58.2 increase eligibility. i don't think we ought to provide 100% to recall of mississippi and louisiana, including those areas that were not affected. we may need to increase eligibility, but this is supposed to be to help people 18:32:12.4 hit by the disaster that were displaced by the disaster or live in the area and lost everything. i tried to make the point to some of my colleagues when they say, we have to be fiscally responsible. i say, help me explain to the people in hancock, mississippi, that lost their house, their 18:32:28.4 job, their car, their truck, their boat and their dog that we've got to make sure that we're fiscally responsible. i'm not going to do that. we're going to help that person. that person has a slab, a mortgage and no job, we're going to help them or i'm not going to be a part of an institution or 18:32:44.7 government that will not help people in america that are hurting like that. so look, i can get just as passionate. i lost my house. so i, you know, i'm emotional about this. everybody around me lost their houses. and people that worked all their lives and saved everything, 18:33:00.3 they've lost it all. not just low income. held, this -- hell -- strike that from the record, but this hurricane is great equalizer. if you're poor and lost 18:33:15.2 everything, you got nothing. if you're middle income and lost everything, you got nothing. if you're a rich, retired doctor and you lost your home and your car, you ain't got much left. we need to do more. there is no question about that. but we do the right thing here by giving -- we do raise the 18:33:34.7 fmat100% for those areas that are affected. we do need to do more in this uncompensated care area. and we're going to do more. but i ask my colleagues here, i know how heart felt this is for 18:33:48.5 my colleague from louisiana and if t senator from arkansas. they're trying to do the right thing. but i'm just saying, look, let's don't pursue the perfect at the expense of the good. i was part of the deal. 18:34:03.6 i got aural i could -- i got all i could. ly come back at the next round in conference and try to get more. when we get true there we'll be back trying to get what we need. here's one thing to my colleagues in the affected states and those who want to help us, i want to remind them, 18:34:19.7 when you ask for more than you're really entitled to or when you ask for things not in the hurricane-affected area or for people not in the affected area, you hurt your credibility. when you ask for a huge number 18:34:38.0 and include things that maybe are not in the area, and i could do that, then our colleagues say, wait a minute, wait a minute now, we got to make sure we help those people that really need it. 18:34:49.6 but we don't do things under the cover of the hurricane that can't be justified on behalf of the american taxpayer. now, i haven't been critical about the recovery. let me just say to everybody, to volunteers, to the military, to 18:35:05.2 the private sector, to the faith-based groups, to this institution, to so many people that have helped us when we've been on our knees, we appreciate it. and we have to do a lot more. 18:35:23.4 but i don't think we're in a position to be looking a gift horse in the mouth. let's do this now and let's keep working. we have a long way to go. this hurricane is so 18:35:38.1 overwhelming, the damage so monumental that it has overwhelmed federal agencies. nobody really can appreciate what we're dealing with here. it's more than we ever dreamed, including people like me who has 18:35:51.9 been three six hurricanes, two 18:35:54.2 towards, an ice storm and a flood. i've never seen anything like. this we're not going to fix this tonight or in a week or a monoor many months. it's going to take years. i want to make sure, my colleagues, that i can come back to you again and again and say, we need this help. i've done my homework, it's 18:36:10.0 justified and we need you to do it on behalf of these people. thank you very much. the presiding officer: who yields time? a senator: mr. president, what is the time remaining? the presiding officer: the 18:36:25.5 senator from arkansas has no time remaining. and there are r50 minutes remaining in opposition. mrs. lincoln: 50? the presiding officer: 50. mr. gregg: mr. president? 18:36:42.0 the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire. mr. gregg: under the unanimous consent agreement, the understanding is we would move on to the inhofe amendment, and then we would move to the nelson amendment, and although it wasn't agreed to, i believe it now can be agreed to that the amendment in order after the nelson agreement will be the lott amendment except if we end 18:36:59.8 up going into tomorrow, the first two amendments to be recognized will be the cantwell amendment, senator cantwell's amendment followed by senator grassley's amendment. so if that were the case, nor lott or senator nelson, if they didn't come up tonight would 18:37:15.9 follow those two amendments. is that a correct reflection of where we are? mr. conrad: the chairman, as always, has it exactly right. mr. gregg: i would ask unanimous consent that that be the order of business. the presiding officer: without objection. 18:37:30.4 mr. gregg: we were going to -- for the -- 18:37:46.7 mr. conrad: for the information of our colleagues, we have on this side a half dozen senators or more who have asked to have time to speak on the bill. let me just send a message in this way if i could to our colleagues offices to the staffs 18:38:01.9 who are listening. obviously the events of this afternoon have blown a hole in the budget for the time on this bill, and what was the game plan before this afternoon has clearly been altered. 18:38:20.1 and now we have tried to lay out a schedule of amendments as the chairman has just indicated. next we'll go to senator inhofe. could we inquire, senator inhofe, could you give us a picture of how long you might 18:38:35.7 inquire? mr. inhofe: yes, i'd respectfully say i could do mine in probably 15 minutes. mr. conrad: all right. so then there may be some discussion on the inhofe amendment on this side. then we would go to senator nelson. so that would be in approximately 20 minutes perhaps 18:38:52.2 for the -- mr. gregg: if you could ask the same question of senator nelson. mr. conrad: yes, senator nelson. so 20 minutes until we get to senator nelson. then senator nelson, how long would you require? mr. nelson: ten minutes. mr. conrad: ten minutes? 18:39:08.0 mr. gregg: and we'll have some response, i presume. that's another 20 minutes. mr. conrad: then we got to senator lott. so maybe that helps for the information of our colleagues as we try to manage this bill with some efficiency as we get toward the end of this day. 18:39:23.0 we will close by prior agreement at 8:00 p.m. mr. nelson: mr. president, may i inquire, there are two amendments thatly be offering in tandem. what is the procedure that the senators would like me to use in 18:39:40.9 offering those amendments? they deal with the same subject. mr. gregg: senator, i don't think the agreement reflected two amendments. it reflected one amendment. but let's take a look at it while the amendment from senator inhofe is going forward and we 18:39:56.4 can see if we can work it out. the presiding officer: the ?an con agreement is for one amendment. -- the unanimous consent agreement is for one amendment. the senator from oklahoma is recognized next under the unanimous consent. mr. inhofe: thank you, 18:40:12.5 mr. president. i ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside for the purpose of considering amendment number 2355. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. inhofe: it's at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from oklahoma, mr. inhofe, for himself and mr. chambliss -- 18:40:30.1 mr. inhofe: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dissuspensioned with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. inhofe: mr. president,ly make this fast. i want to make a couple observations, though. i know -- i happen to be one of the very first members of the senate to go down after katrina to both louisiana and to 18:40:48.5 mississippi. in fact, we actually in a helicopter went all the way from 18:40:52.8 new orleans all the way up to alabama. it's incredible the devastation that takes place. it reminds me a little bit of the tornadoes we've seen so many of in oklahoma. the difference is in a tornado normally will affect about five 18:41:08.6 square miles, as opposed to a couple thousand square miles. so i certainly wouldn't want anything that i would say to imply that we're not deeply sympathetic to the problems of the people in louisiana, mississippi and to a lesser 18:41:23.9 degree in alabama. but i would have to observe that as i've been listening to this debate, that you can always pour more money on a problem, and this is something we have seen in government forever. the senator from montana, he 18:41:40.3 outlined a lot of things we need to spend h.r. money on, as did many others over here. you can always do that. i would question whether or not it's the federal government's responsibility to take care of everything that happens when a disaster occurs. we didn't expect that in 18:41:55.2 oklahoma, and i don't think it should be expected. for one thing, we couldn't do it. the other day there was an op-ed piece by the seen jor senator from alaska, senator ted stevens, and he talked about the 1964 earthquake and the 18:42:11.7 devastation there. he actually had to go out and repair his own house and do a lot of this work, and not even 10% of it was taken care of by the federal government. we have a mindset now that somehow the federal government has deep enough pockets it can 18:42:28.5 take care of all these problems. frankly, it's just not right. it's not true. it can't happen. we're going to have to get a handle on this thing. i have a couple things i want to say, and i can say them in a relatively short period of time. i have been working on a solution to this problem with an 18:42:44.7 amendment for quite some time. i've actually offered it or wanted to offer it previously on appropriation bills, but to do that, i would have to initiate program negating paragraph 4 of rule 16 of the rules to do this. 18:43:04.1 i don't think that's appropriate. i know it's been done three times in the last couple weeks by three of the democrat senators. i don't criticize them for it. but i think if i did that on the republican side, it would be the first time that procedure would have been exercised, and it would not be appropriate. so last thursday or friday 18:43:20.9 toward the end of the week, i had a colloquy on the floor with senator frist, and we specifically discussed bringing up the amendment that i have in mind on the budget reconciliation bill. i'm not naive. it could be there will be a budget point of order against 18:43:36.9 it. it doesn't really make any difference. we're going to get a vote on this bill. and this is a very simple solution to a very complex problem. let me mention, i understand a bill is going to be introduced that's going to eliminate all earmarks. 18:43:54.2 well, that sounds real good, and there's a big population out there that thinks this is going to solve the problem, but it doesn't solve the problem. i mentioned that the other day when my junior senator brought up a bill to do away with a bridge up in alaska, and i said, look, you're looking at 18:44:11.3 something where with a few things that really works well in washington is the way we handle the transportation bill. what we do, mr. president, is we determine by a formula that takes -- that no one thinks is fair because you always want more in your own state, you take 18:44:27.6 into consideration highway mortality, all these things, a number of road miles, your donee status and all of this, and then you come up with a formula. and that formula will allocate to the states an amount of money to each state from all this money. 18:44:41.9 this money, i might add, is money that has been paid in taxes at the pumps so that it goes to improving our transportation system. well, when you do this, if you send that to the states and they say, all right, you and the states -- you in the states, you 18:44:58.1 determine the priorities you have in the state of florida, in the state of new hampshire, what you think is the proper thing. and then that's either done by the elected representatives or by the local people there. in my state of oklahoma, we have the transportation commission, eight commissioners in eight geographic areas of the state. 18:45:15.4 they prioritize projects and it's done very well. and so we do have earmarks to lock in these projects so that these can be done and these decision were made locally. now, isn't it a little bit arrogant for us in washington -- 18:45:30.1 there is a mentality in washington that if a decision isn't made in washington it's not a good decision. i think it's a little bit arrogant for us to say, well, yeah, the money's gone out to these states, but we in our wisdom don't think it should be spent on those projects that they think it should be spent on 18:45:46.2 in the state, this this case it was the state of alaska, the well-known bridge, so-called 18:45:52.4 bridge to nowhere, when, in fact, that bridge was a bridge that was put there for economic development. according to the alaska department of transportation, they said out of 100 projects, that was number four from the top because they wanted to 18:46:06.0 develop that area. they can't develop the area because people can't get to that area. well, you know, i'm not sure i agree or don't agree, but i don't really care because that was their decision, not our decision in washington to make. now, if we were to pass a bill to eliminate all earmarks, we 18:46:22.0 would -- it's not going to save money in the transportation bill. almost all of that was below the line in formulas. all it would say, is all right, if you eliminate that earmark, then you're going to have to go back and decide, what do you want to spend that money for. 18:46:36.2 the money's not going to be saved. the money cease going to still go to some project. but we will have dictated that from washington, d.c.ñ i'm not saying this critically because some of my closest friends and good conservatives really feel if you eliminate 18:46:53.5 earmarks you are going to resolve a problem. you are not going to resolve but there is a way to do it. i have a very simple amendment that will do. that i know the white house has been looking at ways to cut unnecessary spending. to their credit they proposed a package of $2.3 billion in cuts. 18:47:12.6 october 24, 2005, scott mcclellan briefed the press recording -- regarding the white house's efforts saying an area we've been looking at is rescinding spending increases. the congressional leadership has 18:47:25.3 been looking at this for a long time. you know, i think sometimes we look at solutions in overly complicated -- i think there's a simple solution to this. i have a one sentence bill that -- amendment that i'm going 18:47:42.9 to offer to the reconciliation bill. i might -- a lot of people think you have to get long and involved verbiage before you can do something good. when i was in the other body in 1994 on the issue that ended up being considered the greatest 18:48:00.1 single reform in the house of representatives that was my amendment. and it was one sentence. you don't have to have long, complicated sentences. i'm going to read you the one sentence in this bill. i know one of the cosponsors of this is the presiding officer. he it says, "beginning with the 18:48:17.0 fiscal year seven and -- 2007 and thereafter all nontrust fund nondecember correctionary spending shall not exceed fiscal year levels without a two-thirds vote." 18:48:31.3 why a two-thirds vote? something like katrina comes along, something unanticipated, sure two-thirds may decide we shouldn't do something. that isn't going to happen very often, mr. president. i heard a statement, not a 18:48:48.8 misquote but certainly taken out of context, one of the republican senators saying that all senators are big spenders and we need to -- they are all big spender is -- spenders equally. frankly, mr. president, that just isn't right. and yet we do have a lot -- 18:49:07.3 there's a solution to this problem, but i want to at least show that spending is a partisan issue. and here it is right here. these are the democrat amendments that we've seen so 18:49:20.6 far, and can i update this. the bottom line here is that there's -- it's $530 billion, that's a half a trillion dollars. democrat amendments, stabenow, 18:49:37.5 byrd, akaka, harkin, kennedy, dayton, dorgan, biden, byrd, clinton. it goes on and on. these are amendments that were offered. these are amendments that were defeated, most of them but all 18:49:53.2 were considered. if you add up all the democrats -- amendments by democrats in this body you get half a trillion dollars. over a ten year heard in is over $10 trillion. those are specific amendments 18:50:07.4 that were offered. and i don't even criticize them, but i just think if someone -- we stood on the floor a few minutes ago and listened to several senators talk about how much more money we should be spending on these programs and we're going to hear it i'm sure 18:50:23.5 tonight and tomorrow. but nonetheless that is a fact. now, my solution is one that is going to -- sure it doesn't get into entitlements. that's going to be addressed with reconciliation. there are other ways of doing that. of course, right now the defense 18:50:38.0 spending is going to have to stay up because we went down in our defense spending during the 1990's. we have to rebuild the military. we all understand. i think most people feel the primary two -- at least i've 18:50:50.9 felt the primary top functions that should be performed by government would be national defense and infrastructure. now in the case of infrastructure, of course, that's money that people have paid, and think there's -- i think there's a moral issue here that most people feel when they 18:51:07.3 go up and pay the high taxes at the pumps that somehow that is going to get into building roads and repairing roads, and it should. unfortunately, the highway trust fund has been robbed. the aviation trust fund and other trust funds have been 18:51:22.2 robbed and i think they need to be kept in fact. -- in tact. however, this very simple solution is one that should pass this body. it might take because of a procedural vote, it might be a budget point of order and have 60 votes to pass. 18:51:39.5 however, if you look at what many of the -- my colleagues on the democrat side have said, senator biden said specifically want more spending cuts. if we designed a deficit reduction plan, i would have done it differently but we need to make spending cuts. 18:51:55.5 senator dorgan, who is in here says, specifically that we need to provide spending cuts in a significant manner. senator feingold says, "weigh also need to continue to cut spending in federal programs." 18:52:12.0 senator levin, he talks about how he we need to cut spending. and the last thing that he says, and this was in -- well, i don't have the date on here -- 1993. in the 1993 reconciliation act, 18:52:29.2 the same thing that we're talking about today. he said y discretionary spending is frozen for five years." he is advocating freezing discretionary spending. that's what my amendment does. 18:52:45.0 it says all nondefense, trust fund december correctionary spending shall not exceed the previous fiscal year's level without a two-thirds majority vote. it's very simple, very cut and dried, it's something that can 18:52:59.9 pass. i will say, mr. president, there will be a vote on this, whether it's a procedural vote or a vote on the content. i would hope that those individuals who have a more complicated approach to this would look at this and recognize this is something that is 18:53:14.5 doable. i've had the unfortunate experience this year of trying to find every bill that comes up that is over either the budget or last year's spending, and i have a-- i have opposed that because i think this is the only 18:53:32.9 way we're going to get this thing back in order. i recognize this is a time of deficits. i think the american people understand. that we do know that we had a rebuilding job to do in the military. then along came 9/11. so we're in the middle of a war. we have to prosecute this war. 18:53:48.8 then katrina and some of the other disasters have taken place. so we recognize these are difficult times, but i think this is one area in discretion mary spending that we can do something and i'll be looking forward to getting a vote on 18:54:04.7 this i say to the ranking member and the chairman of the committee? mr. conrad: mr. president? the presiding officer: who yields time. mr. conrad: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from north dakota. mr. conrad: mr. president, the charge that -- chart that the j gentleman has put up here 18:54:20.8 labeled democrat spend-o-meter is a complete fabrication, tote call concoction. that chart suggests democrats have offered amendments costing $460 billion this year. 18:54:37.7 false. absolutely false. i know the senator has borrowed that chart from somebody else. he didn't prepare the chart, but he has used the chart and the chart is just wrong. first the spend-o-meter ignores the fact that many of those 18:54:54.1 democratic amendments were offset. in fact, because they included additional deficit reduction, the net effect of all democrat amendments to the 2006 budget resolution would have reduced 18:55:10.7 deficit business $58 billion -- $57 billion. the spendo meter also double counts democratic amendments because it treats them as if they were were a package instead of offered individually. 18:55:26.5 many of the democratic amendments covered the same subject area as an earlier amendment that was defeated and would never have been offered if the earlier amendment had been adopted. the spend-o-meter also overstates the cost of 18:55:42.7 democratic amendments in the most egregious way, by transferring one-year amendments 18:55:49.8 into five-year amendments. now, that really strains credibility. to convert amendments that were offered for one year on appropriations bill and make them into five-year amendments into cost is a complete 18:56:08.7 concoction. mr. president, the fact is on the budget resolution democratic amendments would have reduced the deficit by $57 billion. 18:56:25.3 the net cost republican amendments was $79 billion. they would have increased the deficit by $79 billion. our colleague says it's a partisan issue, spending. he's right. 18:56:38.6 during the democratic administration, spending went down as a share of gross domestic product, and that the economists say is the best way to measure it. spending went down each and every year during a democratic administration from 22% of 18:56:56.4 g.d.p. down to 18.4% of g.d.p. democrats when they were in charge cut spending. let's look at the republican record. because here is what has happened under the bush administration. 18:57:10.2 each and every year spending has gone up with one exception of the time that they have been in control. we went from 18.4% the last year democrats were in control. we're up to 20.2% of g.d.p. now 18:57:28.2 that republicans have been in control. mr. president, the story doesn't end there because the bottom line is what has happened to the debt. our republican dleegs -- colleagues took over the debt of the country was $5.7 trillion. 18:57:44.3 they've increased the debt each and every year by five or $600 billion. you can see they've gone from $5.7 trillion this year, the end 18:57:57.2 of 2005, the debt was up to $7.9 trillion. and under the budget that is before us now, they are going to take the debt up to over $11 trillion. 18:58:12.2 that's the record of our colleagues on the either side -- other side. they are in control. they control the house. they control the senate. they control the white house and they are leaving this country a legacy of debt, debt, debt. mr. president here is the 18:58:31.3 reality: when they came in and they took control of everything, the debt of this country was $5.7 trillion. today they've increased it to $8 trillion, and this is, by the 18:58:45.8 way, when the president said he was going to have maximum pay down of the debt. but look at where it's headed. under the budget that is on the floor now, they are going to raise the debt over the next five years to $11 trillion -- 18:59:05.4 $11 trillion. i mean you add it up, this is unbelievable. they are approaching $6 trillion of added debt while they've been in control and they are out here claiming we're the spenders. hello. we're not in control. they are in control. 18:59:20.8 they are the ones running up the debt. they are the ones running up the debt. and it doesn't end -- it doesn't end there because the package they got out here that they claim is deficit reduction, not deficit reduction. 18:59:38.4 you read all the chapters of the book before you reach a conclusion of what the message is. and the message of our friends on the other side is debt on top of debt. first chapter is the one we've got before us now, slices spending a little bit over five 18:59:57.8 years. then they come back, cut taxes even more, add to the deficit. but the third chapter is they are going to increase the debt limit by $781 billion for one year alone that brings their four-year total to over $3

SENATE FLOOR DEBATE: The Senate will reesume consideration of S.1932, the Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation bill. 18:00:07.2 have a very hard time, if not impossible time, putting up the 30% match to keep our children and our poorest citizens, as well as those that are vulnerable, in health care for the year. 18:00:21.8 so we come here, 65 days after the storm, when we're spending money on everything we can imagine, from new programs, expansion of programs, tax cuts, to say please consider a basic service of health care, not just 18:00:38.7 for the parishes that were affected and the counties in mississippi, but for the whole state of louisiana and mississippi who are struggling, and particularly in louisiana's case. we were harder hit. 18:00:52.2 we had more levees break. our major city was flooded. jackson was not flooded. new orleans was flooded. our major economic base from our ports to our energy industry 18:01:04.1 have been directly impacted and revenues have fallen off precipitously. let me just share one other statistic, and then i'm going to wrap up. i tried to say to my staff, give me something that i can explain to people what the losses are. 10 they went become and went 18:01:21.2 back to 2003. now, this is only two years. this is an average of people that are unemployed in louisiana. we work hard, just like everyone else. we average about 135,000 people in june of 2003. 18:01:38.4 let's pick june of 2004. we had 119,000 people receiving unemployment. let's go to january 2005. we had 119,000 people. right before the storm in august of 2005, we had 122,000 people 18:01:55.7 unep employed. so i think from this you can say over the last two years we've had roughly an average of 120,000 people unemployed. 34r president, in one month -- one month -- our number jumped from 122,000 to 227,000 people.n 18:02:17.3 100,000 people in one month are seeking unemployment. that is how desperate people are. it's never happened in these two years, and i bet you if we went back and looked at that time for 18:02:27.1 the last 20 years, the only spike that you would find like this is maybe in the 1980's when the oil industry collapsed and almost everybody in louisiana lost their livelihood. we've not seen this in so long, we don't remember a time like 18:02:43.4 this. i don't know why we're having a hard time explaining this to an administration and to the majority about how desperate the situation is. we are not ungrateful for the steps that have been taken. 18:03:00.3 we are not ungrateful for the fema money that is slowly getting to us. what we're saying is, we need to do better. today how do you think i felt watching the president of the united states stand up and tell 18:03:16.9 everybody that he was going to allocate $8 billion for the avian flu? now, i don't know where he's getting the $8 billion for the avian flu. all we're asking for is $6.2 billion to keep a health care 18:03:31.8 system of the whole state standing up until we can just figure out what we might need to do. because we don't have all the answers. it's only been a few weeks. our system has basically collapsed. 18:03:45.2 it's going to take us a little bit more time to figure out what the long-term solution is. but i can tell you, for the people that senator lincoln talked about that stayed on their refrigerator for three days, for mr. albert bass, who was a painter in the 9th ward who went to the hospital with 104-degree fever. 18:04:03.7 his medicaid application has been denied. he needs help now. for miss stewart who flifz jefferson parish. she was a teacher. she's been denied medicaid. she's 51. she's married. 18:04:19.2 her husband receives social security. she was diagnosed with cancer. her cancer is back. her health situation is worsening. she has no more income. i need to tell, mr. president, mrs. stewart what her outlook is. 18:04:34.3 and what i'm going to tell her is, we're going to find money for the avian flu, we're finding money for iraq, we're finding money for a tax cut, we're finding money for this -- you know, we're going to raise $4 billion more for a spectrum. we're selling off spectrum and 18:04:50.7 we're going to raise $4 billion. but i'm sorry, we can't get you into a hospital. so maybe the majority, this is the final thing i'm going to say, maybe they just don't like that it's a government program. so senator lincoln, senator 18:05:07.7 baucus, senator grassley come up and say, well, let's have some way that -- for the businesses that had people on unemployment -- i mean, in insurance, the businesses have collapsed but 18:05:21.6 these businesses are valiantly trying to keep people on their insurance program. because they know the desperate situation of their employees. i can't tell you what most businesses are going through. business owners taking money out of their own pocket, going into 18:05:38.5 their own savings account trying to keep paying their employees with no money coming in the front door because they've been in business 30 years, these employees have been loyal to them, they have showed up for work every day. we talk about public-private 18:05:53.8 partnerships. in this amendment is an $800 million fund that's not a new program, it goes to our insurance commission to her try 18:06:02.3 to help work with small businesses and businesses so that people can keep their health insurance, so that they don't fall onto the government payroll, so they don't become wards of the state. this is self-help. this is partnership. 18:06:17.7 this is self-reliance. and with all of that, we've been told no, come back later. well, let me tell you, mr. president, we're going to continue to come back. because while we are grateful for the $1.8 billion, we are grateful it is so far short of 18:06:33.5 what we need to stabilize our health care system for a state that's 4.5 billion people, that has literally been punched in the gut and is rolling back this administration -- rolling back, this administration has got to do better by the people of 18:06:49.6 louisiana, mississippi and the gulf coast. you know, charity starts right here at home. strength begins right here at home. our war is right here at home in the gulf coast states. when you're fighting cancer, it's about as tough as it gets. 18:07:08.2 when you have your son or your daughter dying of a fatal disease, it's about as tough as it gets. that is a private war that people are going through. and we keep walking away from it, pretending that it's just 18:07:20.6 going to go away. well, it's not going to go away. i'm not going to go away. the louisiana delegation's not going to go away. and finally, we'll realize that this is not your regular hurricane. this was an unprecedented catastrophe that's taken a major economic center to its knees and 18:07:37.9 it's going to take more than whitewashing and press conferences and a little bit of money drabd here and there to stand -- drabbed here and there to stand us up so that we can continue to be the great region that we are, pay taxes into this country and to contribute to the economic benefit. 18:07:52.4 as i said, we're not a charity case. we've contributed billions of dollars to this government and we'll continue to. and in our hour of need -- in our hour of need, we have to come and ask for pennies on the dollar. so i hope that we can do better, we must, we can. 18:08:09.8 there's most certainly room in this budget on the spending side or the tax side to do better. and we are grateful for the $1.8 billion but question need senator lincoln's amendment, we need the leadership of senator baucus, and i thank senator grassley, who has been a 18:08:25.0 champion. the senator from iowa, a republican leader of this finance committee, has been a champion on this issue. and if he just had a little more support from his caucus and from the administration, we might get more than a banned-aid because we're really hemorrhaging -- 18:08:43.2 more than a band-aid because we're really hemorrhaging. thank you, mr. president. mr. baucus: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from montana. mr. baucus: mr. president, i don't know who is controlling time here -- the presiding officer: excuse me, the senator from arkansas controls the time. mrs. lincoln: mr. president, what is the time remaining on 18:08:57.2 our side, please? the presiding officer: the senator has 18 minutes remaining. mr. lott: mr. president, could i inquire also, particle pacialtion about the time remaining on -- parliamentary inquiry, about the time remaining on this side of the aisle on this issue? the presiding officer: the 18:09:12.2 senator has 51 minutes remaining. mr. lott: has the senator from montana spoke own this subject? mr. baucus: i plan to speak now. mr. lott: mr. president, i would want to speak on this subject too but i would defer to the ranking member of the committee and then hopefully can speak 18:09:28.7 right after that. mrs. lincoln: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from arkansas. mrs. lincoln: i yield time to the senator from montana. the presiding officer: the senator from montana is recognized. mr. baucus: mr. president, nine weeks ago yesterday, hurricane katrina hit the gulf killing over a thousand people, 18:09:49.6 displacing over a million people, leaving the region with a cleanup bill that might reach $200 billion. katrina left a gaping need in the health care -- needed health care in the affected states and 18:10:05.2 those that are in mosting states. i don't know how to say it in any other way but it is biblical. the devastation is biblical. i visited the area five or six weeks ago. 18:10:21.6 other senators did too. and i don't think there's any senator who actually visited who could come up with any other feeling, belief that it is biblical. unfortunately, very few members of this body have actually been there. unfortunately, very few members 18:10:37.3 of this body have actually seen the area, seen what's left. and it's not much. whether it's in louisiana, new orleans, whether it's in gulf states. it is incredible how much there has been just destroyed. 18:10:54.5 how people don't -- who are alive don't have jobs, don't have homes, don't have schools, 18:11:01.9 don't have their lives. it is absolutely incredible and it is devastating and it is biblical. and i do believe firmly if every senator in this institution were to see the areas affected, see the people, see what's 18:11:17.4 happening, there would be a different result here. we've become too academic around here. we read too many memos. we talk too much among ourselves. there's too much sort of theory, 18:11:33.2 not enough actual on-the-ground what really is going on. if senators were to see it, feel it, taste it, smell it, there is no doubt in my mind that this amendment offered by the senator from arkansas would pass and 18:11:47.6 it would pass unanimously and we would not be debating it, we would be probably asking for more, how can we help some more. so in the meantime, how has this congress? 18:12:01.6 to be fair, it has not. incredibly, it has not. in the hurricane's wake, the chairman of the finance committee and i drafted the bill to cover evacuees under medicaid for a short period of time, just five months, to help provide health care to low-income people who don't have their jobs 18:12:18.6 anymore, who don't have health insurance anymore, who don't have a place to put their kids in schools, don't have homes, just temporary health care. five months temporary. that was the bill we offered. it was a bill that senator grassley and i put together. 18:12:35.3 who supported it? everybody in the affected states, republicans, democrats, senators, governors. everyone in the affected states supported it. did we get it passed? no. we would cover evacuees below the poverty level of $9,500. 18:12:51.3 just think of that. $9,500 level of income. people who earn that level of income really need help, particularly in the circumstances faced by the people in the aftermath of the 18:13:06.4 destruction of the hurricane. our amendment would also cover pregnant women and kids at twice that income level. and that's not a lot of money, mr. president. that's about $19,000 a year. that's all. pregnant women and kids with 18:13:23.0 incomes above that much wouldn't get covered with our amendment. but up to that level, $19,000 a year, that's all, pregnant women who only earn $19,000 a year. we say, let's help them out. help them out for just five 18:13:37.8 months. but at least help them out. that bill did not pass here. what else did we provide for? senator grassley and i? well, $00 million fund for health care providers -- $800 million fund for health care 18:13:53.7 providers' uncompensated care. now, what's that all about? uncompensated care, that's a fancy term. what does that mean? that means help to those hospitals, those doctors who gave free medical care just out of the goodness of their hearts, free medical care to people, regardless of what it would 18:14:11.2 cost, they just gave it. it's uncompensated care because those folks didn't have insurance cover arjs they didn't have ways to play the bills. so it's free care. so we're saying hey, those are good samaritans, those hospitals. those are good samaritans, those doctors. 18:14:26.4 they weren't compensated at all for their care so let's give them a little bit, $800 million. that's all. and i know that the true uncompensated care cost is many, many, many times that. but we're just saying, help a little bit. help those good samaritans show that we care. and who is "we" mr. president? 18:14:46.7 "we" are the american people. "we" are the american people who pay taxes. we are members of the senate here saying okay, we represent our people back home. those of us offering this 18:14:58.5 amendment say we believe that our people in our states want to help out, they want to help these people, help people who don't have health care, who've lost their jobs, lost their health insurance, help the people who are in desperate need of help. 18:15:15.7 for indefinitely? no. just for five months. for a long, long time? no -- and for a huge amount? no, just a little bit. this is the american people we think want to help give some care, some help to those people 18:15:30.2 who need it. and who are good samaritans. but this body so far has said no, no, we're not going to help those good people, those good samaritans, we're going to leave them out in the cold. we also, senator grassley and i, suggested giving 16 months of full federal funding for the 18:15:46.7 beleaguered medicaid programs of the affected states. what does that mean? that just means for 16 months that we as americans are going to help those states meet their medicaid bills for 16 months. 18:15:59.9 but our bill has been blocked, mr. president. it's been blocked by a small group of senators on the other side aisle.n what do these senators on the other side of the aisle say. say.(?><$>.ecl) 18:16:12.2 what's their reason for blocking this bill? this little small way that helps them a bit for a small period of time? what do they say? they say our bill provides for open-ended expansion of medicaid. it is the camel's nose under the tent. it is a theoretical, ideological argument. 18:16:31.2 they argue also that the government -- that is h.h.s., the department of health and human services -- can take care of this crisis without congressional action. they say you don't need that congress. we the administration can take care of this. they also argue that our 18:16:45.9 legislation sun necessary spending. and they're making those same arguments in effect today. let me take those points on one by one. on the first, the amendment before us, just as provided in the bill that senator grassley and i offered, provides only 18:17:02.6 temporary five-month medicaid coverage. it is not indefinite. it's temporary, five months. we also suggest that the president can renew that coverage for an additional how long, long period of time? no, just an additional five months. 18:17:17.4 but that's it. it's not an open-ended medicaid expansion. it is getting help to those who need it. not down the road. not forever, but not. people need health care now. that is not something they can postpone. you need health care, you need it right now. 18:17:32.8 what about the argument that the administration, h.h.s. can take care this have problem without congressional action? if the administration can take care of katrina health needs through something called medicaid waivers. simply put, that is not true. flatly not true. 18:17:49.4 they can't do that under the law. they need a change in the law to do that. they can't do that on their own. just last week in the finance committee, h.h.s. testified that they do need legislation to provide additional funds for states to meet katrina health needs. 18:18:05.8 they admit it had before the finance committee. they also said the plan to provide about only -- million in new funds. well, that 100 is a paltry pittance compared to what's needed in the state of louisiana alone. 18:18:22.5 i must say too that legislation is needed to address those needs for the president still hasn't asked congress to pass legislation to make that happen. we provide in this amendment, but they don't. and finally, senators on the other side of the aisle argue 18:18:38.6 that this bill constitutes wasteful spending. they say since we've already appropriated $60 billion to fema, two-thirds of which is unspent, we should use those funds for first. that's what the argument was when we offered this amendment not too long ago. these same senators arrest tkpwaoup we should scale back -- 18:18:55.8 argue we should scale back the bill's price tag. mr. president, i have listened to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. senator lincoln has listened to them. senator landrieu has listened to them. we want to get legislation passed, want to help people in some way. so guess what? in the spirit of compromise, 18:19:12.5 we've scaled back our bill, off setting it with unspent fema funds. that is we're doing just what the senators want us to do. the amendment before us reduces the cost of the katrina health care package by giving 12 months of relief instead of 16 months, 18:19:27.1 removes the provision to prevent reduction of 29 state medicaid programs. that bothered them. we removed that part. by using unspent fema funds to offset its cost the amendment does just what the white house advocated last week. 18:19:41.3 as you know, last week the white house proposed redirecting $17 billion in unspent fema funds to help rebuild the gust coast. let's look at that $17 billion. of that $17 billion, $3.3 billion would go to reconstruct 18:19:57.5 military bases. not health care needs, but military bases. $2.3 billion would be spent on highways and bridge construction. i perhaps am speaking a little out of place here, mr. president. i visited, i think the bases, military bases, the subject of 18:20:15.9 this amendment here. yeah, there is damage here, but it does not begin to compare with the other damage of the homes, the roads and the bridges and the lost homes and lost jobs and health care needs. 18:20:29.5 there is no comparison, mr. president. i don't know why we're spending 3.3 to go to reconstruct a military base but not spending money to help people's health care needs. $410 million would help farmers and ranchers remove debris and rehabilitate their land. 18:20:45.1 those are worthy causes. the president's request does not ask for increased health care funding. it does not help those hospitals and those doctors who are good 18:20:57.7 samaritans by providing uncompensated care relief. it does not help states caring for evacuees through their overburdened medicaid programs. it does not cover patients who need help now. i might say, mr. president, this amendment does, to remind my 18:21:14.6 colleagues, just what one of the opponents on the other side argued for about a month ago. what that? on september bill when -- september 30 when i was trying to move this bill through the senate, a senator on the other side said -- and i quote -- "the question is not whether we 18:21:29.7 should or want to provide assistance, but we want to make sure we do it in a way that assures resources get where they are most needed and in a way that takes advantage of the $45 billion or so that has already been appropriated that is not yet been committed." well, guess what? 18:21:46.7 that's what this amendment does. it uses unspent funds to meet the urgent health care needs of the katrina victims. more than nine weeks after this major national disaster hit our shores, we are still waiting for this congress and the president to act on katrina health care 18:22:03.3 needs. the reconciliation bill we are considering provides some help for victims. but the $1.8 billion in the bill is not enough. it's been called a down payment. mr. president, it is not a down payment. it's an end payment in the minds 18:22:18.4 of the administration and those on the other side of the aisle. it's a last payment. it's not a down payment. they just -- why is it not a down payment? because they are saying no to extra funds being suggested here. so it is not that down payment. 18:22:32.1 that is just flatly inaccurate. sounds nice but it is inaccurate. we need to provide more federal funds to help affected states. louisiana is in very dire financial straits. it will have to cut its medicaid program by an estimated 40% if 18:22:49.8 that state doesn't get funds by the end of this year. just think of that. it has to cut medicaid by a huge amount if it doesn't get the needed funds. we also need to provide funds for uncompensated health care costs to assure the providers, 18:23:05.0 doctors, hospitals, health centers and good samaritans are recognized. and we need to ensure that low-income survivors get the health care they need, whether or not they meet medicaid's rigid eligibility rules. in louisiana alone, half of 18:23:19.0 those who have applied for medicaid have been turned away because they don't meet those standards. think of that. half of the people in louisiana have been turned away -- turned away, mr. president. they got health care needs. there's diabetics, there's cancer patients, there are people with dire needs turned 18:23:34.9 away. and we're mott talking about high income levels, mr. president -- we're not talking about high income levels, mr. president. currently a single mom who makes more than $2,500 a year would not get covered. think of that. 18:23:52.1 and we're raising that to $9,500 a year. just think of that, mr. president. right now under the view taken by the other side of the aisle, a single mom who makes more than $2,500 a year would not get 18:24:08.9 covered. she wouldn't get any help. what are we saying? let's raise that up to $9,500, at least. and that's not a lot of money, mr. president. $9,500 a year, we're saying at least let's raise it to that level so if she makes more than 18:24:24.3 that she doesn't get help. if she makes up to that level, she does get some help. this is just not right, mr. president. this amendment is not being passed. it will not be passed. it is clear by the tone of this debate here. the amendment from louisiana said we're going to keep working 18:24:40.1 until we get something passed. why? because it is the right thing to do. i see the chairman of the budget committee sitting there deeply pondering his chin on his hand there. and i'm saying to the chairman, that is way to do this. the way to do it is to pay for 18:24:57.6 it on unspent katrina -- appropriated dollars. there's a way to do this. i know the chairman's very concerned about total costs. he should be concerned about total costs. that's his job. but there's a way to do this, and that's through this 18:25:11.8 amendment. it is through the already appropriated dollars that are unspent. it is not -- it does not add to the deficit. it does not add to the budget woes that the chairman is worried about. that is way to do this. i'm calling upon all of us in the senate, mr. president, to 18:25:27.9 find a way to do this. we all know this is the right thing to do. we all know it's the right thing to give temporary health care assistance to people in the affected areas. we all know that. we all know it's the right thing to do to help some of these hospitals and doctors who have 18:25:43.3 been good samaritans to get a little bit of help. because all of america wants to help. we all know that. all america wants to help those doctors and those hospitals just a little bit. i say to my good friend from new 18:25:56.5 hampshire, to find it in his head and in his heart to help make this thing work. because it is so important to so many people who are counting on us to recognize them, give them a little bit of hope. 18:26:11.4 that's the very least that we can do, and support the amendment offered by the senator from arkansas. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: who yields time? mr. gregg: i yield to the 18:26:25.7 senator from mississippi such time as he may take off the amendment. the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi. mr. lott: mr. president, i want to thank the senator from new hampshire, the manager, of this very important legislation for yielding me this time. he has been very patient as this amendment has been discussed, and the distinguished senator 18:26:42.1 from oklahoma certainly has been patient, thinking he was going to have to wait five or ten minutes and then he could go with his amendment. so i'll try to be brief. let me just say that there's no question in my mind about what our needs are in mississippi and louisiana. 18:26:58.2 the people i love the most -- my neighbors, my family -- you know, and constituents that i've represented for 33 years are hurting. they need lots of help. right across the hall now are 12 superintendents from south mississippi saying help us, 18:27:14.7 please, and do it quickly, because fema's not delivering trailers for our employees. we are open because we want to get our children back in school. we need operating expenses. we need help right away. not just rebuilding. 18:27:30.5 we need help to keep operating because the tax base has been destroyed. no ad valorem tax, no sales tax. nothing in some of the counties that are affected. so look, i know firsthand how bad this situation is. and every time i go home, it breaks my heart again. 18:27:47.6 fortunately, the people there are resilient and determined to come back, and they appreciate any help we give them. and they don't whine a lot from my neck of the woods. they just keep working. but i agree with what's been said here in a lot of areas. first of all, this senate has 18:28:03.0 not done enough to help the people. and what we have done is being slow rolled by the office of management and budget and fema. the list of horror stories, if i put them in the record, it would stagger my colleagues here. 18:28:19.7 so a good job is not being done yet. the money we passed, $63 billion almost, probably -- maybe $40 billion of it has been spent. meanwhile, subcontractors are 18:28:34.8 not -- have not been reimbursed. schools haven't gotten a nickel. the mississippi department of transportation is not being reimbursed for the money that they've already spent. the horror stories of what congress has not yet done in terms of changing the law -- and there's a bill pending right now 18:28:50.3 at the desk from the government affairs and homeland security committee, s. 1777, that would do an awful lot to help our people in a lot of areas by changing laws, by removing caps. it wouldn't necessarily cost a lot more money, would extend the time of unemployment benefits 18:29:07.7 from 26 weeks to 39 weeks and so on and so on. there is a lot more we could be doing. we ought to be doing it. but what is this bill we're working on? this is the deficit-reduction legislation, i thought. i thought this is where we found places where we could make 18:29:24.2 savings, where money is not being properly spent or spent to the best effect. several committees have worked to come up with the savings we have. and by the way, gee whiz, we came up with more money than the budget required, so, gee, we can spend it. 18:29:41.4 and, yes, i'm one of the ones that's trying to do that. i supported the effort of chairman grassley and ranking member baucus to get a bill through, i don't know, six weeks ago that would have provided $8.5 billion, i think it was, 18:29:55.9 for medicaid. i didn't cosponsor it because there were things in there that i was uncomfortable with. but i thought we needed to take action quickly. and so, how do we -- you know, we came down to this. now it's 1.8. how do we get $1.8 billion for 18:30:13.3 katrina in the deficit-reduction bill? i don't want to brag too much, i'm not even particularly proud of it, but basically i said if you don't put that in there, i won't vote for the bill. and if i didn't vote for it, it wouldn't have passed. because unfortunately, we had to 18:30:27.3 do it with all republican votes. the democrats wouldn't help us at all. and that's why it's in here. hey, it isn't enough. it's not all we need. but, i mean, hey, the plate has been passed. and we got a little help. now i'm going to come back and 18:30:43.6 say give me another $2 billion, $3 billion, $billion that's going to, depending on how we do it can add to the deficit. this is not all it's going to 18:30:55.0 be, but this is a good start. $1.8 billion. i've gotten to the point where i'm saying, you know, i don't want it all. just help me a little.n this is responsible what we've done here, $is 1.8 billion to increase the federal match for 18:31:11.2 medicaid in the fema disaster counties -- in the fema disaster counties. that's an important differentiation. one of my problems i keep argue about, look i got people in northwest mississippi that are not in the disaster area. we shouldn't increase the eligibility for them. 18:31:26.4 they weren't hit by the hurricane. now, i'd be perfectly willing to just say, governors of louisiana, mississippi, arkansas, we're going to give you "x" dollars for medicaid and you make sure it gets to the people who really need it. i haven't been able to say all. 18:31:42.6 that a lot of people can be done -- a lot it can be done by o.m.b. without us doing a thing and they can take it out of the $60 billion plus that we passed, but i don't think we should use deficit reduction or the need for medicaid help immediately to 18:31:58.2 increase eligibility. i don't think we ought to provide 100% to recall of mississippi and louisiana, including those areas that were not affected. we may need to increase eligibility, but this is supposed to be to help people 18:32:12.4 hit by the disaster that were displaced by the disaster or live in the area and lost everything. i tried to make the point to some of my colleagues when they say, we have to be fiscally responsible. i say, help me explain to the people in hancock, mississippi, that lost their house, their 18:32:28.4 job, their car, their truck, their boat and their dog that we've got to make sure that we're fiscally responsible. i'm not going to do that. we're going to help that person. that person has a slab, a mortgage and no job, we're going to help them or i'm not going to be a part of an institution or 18:32:44.7 government that will not help people in america that are hurting like that. so look, i can get just as passionate. i lost my house. so i, you know, i'm emotional about this. everybody around me lost their houses. and people that worked all their lives and saved everything, 18:33:00.3 they've lost it all. not just low income. held, this -- hell -- strike that from the record, but this hurricane is great equalizer. if you're poor and lost 18:33:15.2 everything, you got nothing. if you're middle income and lost everything, you got nothing. if you're a rich, retired doctor and you lost your home and your car, you ain't got much left. we need to do more. there is no question about that. but we do the right thing here by giving -- we do raise the 18:33:34.7 fmat100% for those areas that are affected. we do need to do more in this uncompensated care area. and we're going to do more. but i ask my colleagues here, i know how heart felt this is for 18:33:48.5 my colleague from louisiana and if t senator from arkansas. they're trying to do the right thing. but i'm just saying, look, let's don't pursue the perfect at the expense of the good. i was part of the deal. 18:34:03.6 i got aural i could -- i got all i could. ly come back at the next round in conference and try to get more. when we get true there we'll be back trying to get what we need. here's one thing to my colleagues in the affected states and those who want to help us, i want to remind them, 18:34:19.7 when you ask for more than you're really entitled to or when you ask for things not in the hurricane-affected area or for people not in the affected area, you hurt your credibility. when you ask for a huge number 18:34:38.0 and include things that maybe are not in the area, and i could do that, then our colleagues say, wait a minute, wait a minute now, we got to make sure we help those people that really need it. 18:34:49.6 but we don't do things under the cover of the hurricane that can't be justified on behalf of the american taxpayer. now, i haven't been critical about the recovery. let me just say to everybody, to volunteers, to the military, to 18:35:05.2 the private sector, to the faith-based groups, to this institution, to so many people that have helped us when we've been on our knees, we appreciate it. and we have to do a lot more. 18:35:23.4 but i don't think we're in a position to be looking a gift horse in the mouth. let's do this now and let's keep working. we have a long way to go. this hurricane is so 18:35:38.1 overwhelming, the damage so monumental that it has overwhelmed federal agencies. nobody really can appreciate what we're dealing with here. it's more than we ever dreamed, including people like me who has 18:35:51.9 been three six hurricanes, two 18:35:54.2 towards, an ice storm and a flood. i've never seen anything like. this we're not going to fix this tonight or in a week or a monoor many months. it's going to take years. i want to make sure, my colleagues, that i can come back to you again and again and say, we need this help. i've done my homework, it's 18:36:10.0 justified and we need you to do it on behalf of these people. thank you very much. the presiding officer: who yields time? a senator: mr. president, what is the time remaining? the presiding officer: the 18:36:25.5 senator from arkansas has no time remaining. and there are r50 minutes remaining in opposition. mrs. lincoln: 50? the presiding officer: 50. mr. gregg: mr. president? 18:36:42.0 the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire. mr. gregg: under the unanimous consent agreement, the understanding is we would move on to the inhofe amendment, and then we would move to the nelson amendment, and although it wasn't agreed to, i believe it now can be agreed to that the amendment in order after the nelson agreement will be the lott amendment except if we end 18:36:59.8 up going into tomorrow, the first two amendments to be recognized will be the cantwell amendment, senator cantwell's amendment followed by senator grassley's amendment. so if that were the case, nor lott or senator nelson, if they didn't come up tonight would 18:37:15.9 follow those two amendments. is that a correct reflection of where we are? mr. conrad: the chairman, as always, has it exactly right. mr. gregg: i would ask unanimous consent that that be the order of business. the presiding officer: without objection. 18:37:30.4 mr. gregg: we were going to -- for the -- 18:37:46.7 mr. conrad: for the information of our colleagues, we have on this side a half dozen senators or more who have asked to have time to speak on the bill. let me just send a message in this way if i could to our colleagues offices to the staffs 18:38:01.9 who are listening. obviously the events of this afternoon have blown a hole in the budget for the time on this bill, and what was the game plan before this afternoon has clearly been altered. 18:38:20.1 and now we have tried to lay out a schedule of amendments as the chairman has just indicated. next we'll go to senator inhofe. could we inquire, senator inhofe, could you give us a picture of how long you might 18:38:35.7 inquire? mr. inhofe: yes, i'd respectfully say i could do mine in probably 15 minutes. mr. conrad: all right. so then there may be some discussion on the inhofe amendment on this side. then we would go to senator nelson. so that would be in approximately 20 minutes perhaps 18:38:52.2 for the -- mr. gregg: if you could ask the same question of senator nelson. mr. conrad: yes, senator nelson. so 20 minutes until we get to senator nelson. then senator nelson, how long would you require? mr. nelson: ten minutes. mr. conrad: ten minutes? 18:39:08.0 mr. gregg: and we'll have some response, i presume. that's another 20 minutes. mr. conrad: then we got to senator lott. so maybe that helps for the information of our colleagues as we try to manage this bill with some efficiency as we get toward the end of this day. 18:39:23.0 we will close by prior agreement at 8:00 p.m. mr. nelson: mr. president, may i inquire, there are two amendments thatly be offering in tandem. what is the procedure that the senators would like me to use in 18:39:40.9 offering those amendments? they deal with the same subject. mr. gregg: senator, i don't think the agreement reflected two amendments. it reflected one amendment. but let's take a look at it while the amendment from senator inhofe is going forward and we 18:39:56.4 can see if we can work it out. the presiding officer: the ?an con agreement is for one amendment. -- the unanimous consent agreement is for one amendment. the senator from oklahoma is recognized next under the unanimous consent. mr. inhofe: thank you, 18:40:12.5 mr. president. i ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside for the purpose of considering amendment number 2355. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. inhofe: it's at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from oklahoma, mr. inhofe, for himself and mr. chambliss -- 18:40:30.1 mr. inhofe: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dissuspensioned with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. inhofe: mr. president,ly make this fast. i want to make a couple observations, though. i know -- i happen to be one of the very first members of the senate to go down after katrina to both louisiana and to 18:40:48.5 mississippi. in fact, we actually in a helicopter went all the way from 18:40:52.8 new orleans all the way up to alabama. it's incredible the devastation that takes place. it reminds me a little bit of the tornadoes we've seen so many of in oklahoma. the difference is in a tornado normally will affect about five 18:41:08.6 square miles, as opposed to a couple thousand square miles. so i certainly wouldn't want anything that i would say to imply that we're not deeply sympathetic to the problems of the people in louisiana, mississippi and to a lesser 18:41:23.9 degree in alabama. but i would have to observe that as i've been listening to this debate, that you can always pour more money on a problem, and this is something we have seen in government forever. the senator from montana, he 18:41:40.3 outlined a lot of things we need to spend h.r. money on, as did many others over here. you can always do that. i would question whether or not it's the federal government's responsibility to take care of everything that happens when a disaster occurs. we didn't expect that in 18:41:55.2 oklahoma, and i don't think it should be expected. for one thing, we couldn't do it. the other day there was an op-ed piece by the seen jor senator from alaska, senator ted stevens, and he talked about the 1964 earthquake and the 18:42:11.7 devastation there. he actually had to go out and repair his own house and do a lot of this work, and not even 10% of it was taken care of by the federal government. we have a mindset now that somehow the federal government has deep enough pockets it can 18:42:28.5 take care of all these problems. frankly, it's just not right. it's not true. it can't happen. we're going to have to get a handle on this thing. i have a couple things i want to say, and i can say them in a relatively short period of time. i have been working on a solution to this problem with an 18:42:44.7 amendment for quite some time. i've actually offered it or wanted to offer it previously on appropriation bills, but to do that, i would have to initiate program negating paragraph 4 of rule 16 of the rules to do this. 18:43:04.1 i don't think that's appropriate. i know it's been done three times in the last couple weeks by three of the democrat senators. i don't criticize them for it. but i think if i did that on the republican side, it would be the first time that procedure would have been exercised, and it would not be appropriate. so last thursday or friday 18:43:20.9 toward the end of the week, i had a colloquy on the floor with senator frist, and we specifically discussed bringing up the amendment that i have in mind on the budget reconciliation bill. i'm not naive. it could be there will be a budget point of order against 18:43:36.9 it. it doesn't really make any difference. we're going to get a vote on this bill. and this is a very simple solution to a very complex problem. let me mention, i understand a bill is going to be introduced that's going to eliminate all earmarks. 18:43:54.2 well, that sounds real good, and there's a big population out there that thinks this is going to solve the problem, but it doesn't solve the problem. i mentioned that the other day when my junior senator brought up a bill to do away with a bridge up in alaska, and i said, look, you're looking at 18:44:11.3 something where with a few things that really works well in washington is the way we handle the transportation bill. what we do, mr. president, is we determine by a formula that takes -- that no one thinks is fair because you always want more in your own state, you take 18:44:27.6 into consideration highway mortality, all these things, a number of road miles, your donee status and all of this, and then you come up with a formula. and that formula will allocate to the states an amount of money to each state from all this money. 18:44:41.9 this money, i might add, is money that has been paid in taxes at the pumps so that it goes to improving our transportation system. well, when you do this, if you send that to the states and they say, all right, you and the states -- you in the states, you 18:44:58.1 determine the priorities you have in the state of florida, in the state of new hampshire, what you think is the proper thing. and then that's either done by the elected representatives or by the local people there. in my state of oklahoma, we have the transportation commission, eight commissioners in eight geographic areas of the state. 18:45:15.4 they prioritize projects and it's done very well. and so we do have earmarks to lock in these projects so that these can be done and these decision were made locally. now, isn't it a little bit arrogant for us in washington -- 18:45:30.1 there is a mentality in washington that if a decision isn't made in washington it's not a good decision. i think it's a little bit arrogant for us to say, well, yeah, the money's gone out to these states, but we in our wisdom don't think it should be spent on those projects that they think it should be spent on 18:45:46.2 in the state, this this case it was the state of alaska, the well-known bridge, so-called 18:45:52.4 bridge to nowhere, when, in fact, that bridge was a bridge that was put there for economic development. according to the alaska department of transportation, they said out of 100 projects, that was number four from the top because they wanted to 18:46:06.0 develop that area. they can't develop the area because people can't get to that area. well, you know, i'm not sure i agree or don't agree, but i don't really care because that was their decision, not our decision in washington to make. now, if we were to pass a bill to eliminate all earmarks, we 18:46:22.0 would -- it's not going to save money in the transportation bill. almost all of that was below the line in formulas. all it would say, is all right, if you eliminate that earmark, then you're going to have to go back and decide, what do you want to spend that money for. 18:46:36.2 the money's not going to be saved. the money cease going to still go to some project. but we will have dictated that from washington, d.c.n i'm not saying this critically because some of my closest friends and good conservatives really feel if you eliminate 18:46:53.5 earmarks you are going to resolve a problem. you are not going to resolve but there is a way to do it. i have a very simple amendment that will do. that i know the white house has been looking at ways to cut unnecessary spending. to their credit they proposed a package of $2.3 billion in cuts. 18:47:12.6 october 24, 2005, scott mcclellan briefed the press recording -- regarding the white house's efforts saying an area we've been looking at is rescinding spending increases. the congressional leadership has 18:47:25.3 been looking at this for a long time. you know, i think sometimes we look at solutions in overly complicated -- i think there's a simple solution to this. i have a one sentence bill that -- amendment that i'm going 18:47:42.9 to offer to the reconciliation bill. i might -- a lot of people think you have to get long and involved verbiage before you can do something good. when i was in the other body in 1994 on the issue that ended up being considered the greatest 18:48:00.1 single reform in the house of representatives that was my amendment. and it was one sentence. you don't have to have long, complicated sentences. i'm going to read you the one sentence in this bill. i know one of the cosponsors of this is the presiding officer. he it says, "beginning with the 18:48:17.0 fiscal year seven and -- 2007 and thereafter all nontrust fund nondecember correctionary spending shall not exceed fiscal year levels without a two-thirds vote." 18:48:31.3 why a two-thirds vote? something like katrina comes along, something unanticipated, sure two-thirds may decide we shouldn't do something. that isn't going to happen very often, mr. president. i heard a statement, not a 18:48:48.8 misquote but certainly taken out of context, one of the republican senators saying that all senators are big spenders and we need to -- they are all big spender is -- spenders equally. frankly, mr. president, that just isn't right. and yet we do have a lot -- 18:49:07.3 there's a solution to this problem, but i want to at least show that spending is a partisan issue. and here it is right here. these are the democrat amendments that we've seen so 18:49:20.6 far, and can i update this. the bottom line here is that there's -- it's $530 billion, that's a half a trillion dollars. democrat amendments, stabenow, 18:49:37.5 byrd, akaka, harkin, kennedy, dayton, dorgan, biden, byrd, clinton. it goes on and on. these are amendments that were offered. these are amendments that were defeated, most of them but all 18:49:53.2 were considered. if you add up all the democrats -- amendments by democrats in this body you get half a trillion dollars. over a ten year heard in is over $10 trillion. those are specific amendments 18:50:07.4 that were offered. and i don't even criticize them, but i just think if someone -- we stood on the floor a few minutes ago and listened to several senators talk about how much more money we should be spending on these programs and we're going to hear it i'm sure 18:50:23.5 tonight and tomorrow. but nonetheless that is a fact. now, my solution is one that is going to -- sure it doesn't get into entitlements. that's going to be addressed with reconciliation. there are other ways of doing that. of course, right now the defense 18:50:38.0 spending is going to have to stay up because we went down in our defense spending during the 1990's. we have to rebuild the military. we all understand. i think most people feel the primary two -- at least i've 18:50:50.9 felt the primary top functions that should be performed by government would be national defense and infrastructure. now in the case of infrastructure, of course, that's money that people have paid, and think there's -- i think there's a moral issue here that most people feel when they 18:51:07.3 go up and pay the high taxes at the pumps that somehow that is going to get into building roads and repairing roads, and it should. unfortunately, the highway trust fund has been robbed. the aviation trust fund and other trust funds have been 18:51:22.2 robbed and i think they need to be kept in fact. -- in tact. however, this very simple solution is one that should pass this body. it might take because of a procedural vote, it might be a budget point of order and have 60 votes to pass. 18:51:39.5 however, if you look at what many of the -- my colleagues on the democrat side have said, senator biden said specifically want more spending cuts. if we designed a deficit reduction plan, i would have done it differently but we need to make spending cuts. 18:51:55.5 senator dorgan, who is in here says, specifically that we need to provide spending cuts in a significant manner. senator feingold says, "weigh also need to continue to cut spending in federal programs." 18:52:12.0 senator levin, he talks about how he we need to cut spending. and the last thing that he says, and this was in -- well, i don't have the date on here -- 1993. in the 1993 reconciliation act, 18:52:29.2 the same thing that we're talking about today. he said y discretionary spending is frozen for five years." he is advocating freezing discretionary spending. that's what my amendment does. 18:52:45.0 it says all nondefense, trust fund december correctionary spending shall not exceed the previous fiscal year's level without a two-thirds majority vote. it's very simple, very cut and dried, it's something that can 18:52:59.9 pass. i will say, mr. president, there will be a vote on this, whether it's a procedural vote or a vote on the content. i would hope that those individuals who have a more complicated approach to this would look at this and recognize this is something that is 18:53:14.5 doable. i've had the unfortunate experience this year of trying to find every bill that comes up that is over either the budget or last year's spending, and i have a-- i have opposed that because i think this is the only 18:53:32.9 way we're going to get this thing back in order. i recognize this is a time of deficits. i think the american people understand. that we do know that we had a rebuilding job to do in the military. then along came 9/11. so we're in the middle of a war. we have to prosecute this war. 18:53:48.8 then katrina and some of the other disasters have taken place. so we recognize these are difficult times, but i think this is one area in discretion mary spending that we can do something and i'll be looking forward to getting a vote on 18:54:04.7 this i say to the ranking member and the chairman of the committee? mr. conrad: mr. president? the presiding officer: who yields time. mr. conrad: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from north dakota. mr. conrad: mr. president, the charge that -- chart that the j gentleman has put up here 18:54:20.8 labeled democrat spend-o-meter is a complete fabrication, tote call concoction. that chart suggests democrats have offered amendments costing $460 billion this year. 18:54:37.7 false. absolutely false. i know the senator has borrowed that chart from somebody else. he didn't prepare the chart, but he has used the chart and the chart is just wrong. first the spend-o-meter ignores the fact that many of those 18:54:54.1 democratic amendments were offset. in fact, because they included additional deficit reduction, the net effect of all democrat amendments to the 2006 budget resolution would have reduced 18:55:10.7 deficit business $58 billion -- $57 billion. the spendo meter also double counts democratic amendments because it treats them as if they were were a package instead of offered individually. 18:55:26.5 many of the democratic amendments covered the same subject area as an earlier amendment that was defeated and would never have been offered if the earlier amendment had been adopted. the spend-o-meter also overstates the cost of 18:55:42.7 democratic amendments in the most egregious way, by transferring one-year amendments 18:55:49.8 into five-year amendments. now, that really strains credibility. to convert amendments that were offered for one year on appropriations bill and make them into five-year amendments into cost is a complete 18:56:08.7 concoction. mr. president, the fact is on the budget resolution democratic amendments would have reduced the deficit by $57 billion. 18:56:25.3 the net cost republican amendments was $79 billion. they would have increased the deficit by $79 billion. our colleague says it's a partisan issue, spending. he's right. 18:56:38.6 during the democratic administration, spending went down as a share of gross domestic product, and that the economists say is the best way to measure it. spending went down each and every year during a democratic administration from 22% of 18:56:56.4 g.d.p. down to 18.4% of g.d.p. democrats when they were in charge cut spending. let's look at the republican record. because here is what has happened under the bush administration. 18:57:10.2 each and every year spending has gone up with one exception of the time that they have been in control. we went from 18.4% the last year democrats were in control. we're up to 20.2% of g.d.p. now 18:57:28.2 that republicans have been in control. mr. president, the story doesn't end there because the bottom line is what has happened to the debt. our republican dleegs -- colleagues took over the debt of the country was $5.7 trillion. 18:57:44.3 they've increased the debt each and every year by five or $600 billion. you can see they've gone from $5.7 trillion this year, the end 18:57:57.2 of 2005, the debt was up to $7.9 trillion. and under the budget that is before us now, they are going to take the debt up to over $11 trillion. 18:58:12.2 that's the record of our colleagues on the either side -- other side. they are in control. they control the house. they control the senate. they control the white house and they are leaving this country a legacy of debt, debt, debt. mr. president here is the 18:58:31.3 reality: when they came in and they took control of everything, the debt of this country was $5.7 trillion. today they've increased it to $8 trillion, and this is, by the 18:58:45.8 way, when the president said he was going to have maximum pay down of the debt. but look at where it's headed. under the budget that is on the floor now, they are going to raise the debt over the next five years to $11 trillion -- 18:59:05.4 $11 trillion. i mean you add it up, this is unbelievable. they are approaching $6 trillion of added debt while they've been in control and they are out here claiming we're the spenders. hello. we're not in control. they are in control. 18:59:20.8 they are the ones running up the debt. they are the ones running up the debt. and it doesn't end -- it doesn't end there because the package they got out here that they claim is deficit reduction, not deficit reduction. 18:59:38.4 you read all the chapters of the book before you reach a conclusion of what the message is. and the message of our friends on the other side is debt on top of debt. first chapter is the one we've got before us now, slices spending a little bit over five 18:59:57.8 years. then they come back, cut taxes even more, add to the deficit. but the third chapter is they are going to increase the debt limit by $781 billion for one year alone that brings their four-year total to over $3

Aerial shot of damaged buildings in city, drone flying backward over residential district - Damaged architecture in city

Aerial panning shot of damaged buildings and trees in city, drone flying over residential district - Damaged architecture in city

Aerial shot of damaged buildings against sky in city, drone flying over residential district - Damaged architecture in city

Aerial forward shot of fallen trees and damaged houses in city, drone flying over residential district - Drone shot of destruction in city

Aerial forward shot of damaged buildings in city, drone flying over houses - Damaged buildings in city

Aerial forward shot of damaged buildings against sky in city - Aerial shot of destroyed architecture

Aerial shot of people by damaged houses and trees in city - Damaged architecture in city

Aerial shot of damaged houses in city, drone flying over residential district - Damaged architecture in city