are ever enough, but in order to get to some of those actions, we need clear regulations passed by the electoral commission. people need to be educated but you can't do all of the educating until you know exactly what we need to tell people. so that is, first and foremost, the national of london's commission is also understaff and has been followed to publish the regulations to implement the electorial act. ..

so many americans appreciate your contributions. likewise, your observations about darfur. what are the prospects for the many groups within darfur, many of them have been involved in contests of their own, for authority or at least for turf, as the case may be, leaving aside the rest of sudan within darfur. what are the prospects for unity and for at least a healthy darfur, even if the rest of the world would leave it alone at this point? >would you respond? >> yeah. to me, i have been working as an american doctor and an activist,

and we as a group if darfur, we are working with different affiliations and different groups and tribal groups to come together, and we have formulated what's known as darfur in civil society. we think that we are living in the same atmosphere and we continue living in that -- in the same darfur, so that's our vision, to face the problem of darfur together, and then to go further, to find the solution of peace in darfur, as a group, as a civil society and not just tribal parties or political parties, so that's the civil society, we are now building in, but we are finding difficulties from the government.

our meetings are prohibited, our movements are restricted and that's one of the problems. we are looking for the peace and we are trying to persuade everybody that peace is the only solution for darfur and sudan. >> that's encouraging, the progress among groups in darfur, so look for unity, but that suggests to you on occasion, this is obstructed by the government, and these meetings and these reconciliation attempts are frustrated. >> that's what we are trying to do, because even the people of -- and the refugees, they have their leaders and we always negotiate together to pave the way for the peace process. that's the ultimate goal is for the people in darfur and we are really trying for peace. >> professor, i was intrigued with your thought that neighbors

of sudan, even recognizing the referendum that are about to occur, as well as other phenomenon, all things considered, would like to see one sudan, one united sudan as opposed to a southern function or some other splitup. and you even suggested in the worst case analysis, i suppose that there might be more than two sudans. there could be fractionated country. first of all, i'm just curious, why would other countries worry about that? why does this affect their foreign policy one way or another, and furthermore, this unified feeling of the neighbors, or do other countries have various agendas perhaps

that work better with the fractionated sudan 7? can you illuminate that situation more? >> i think of the nine countries that border sudan, i think i could make a strong case that at least six of them would prefer a unified sudan when all of this is over with. i would have some question marks on kenya and uganda, who may see some economic advantages in having a southern sudan that looks south and the situation in chad is so confusing now that it's hard to decipher what they might want. normally they would want a unified sudan, because you have the same problems of bifurcation in chad that you have in sudan and that's not a good precedent for them, but the bad relations between kartun may complicate that. in egypt, it's nile water related, they don't want to deal with one or more additional

countries that they have to negotiate quotas for use of nile water. they'd rather just deal with kartum and be done with it. in a case of a country like ethopia, they find it easier to deal with one neighboring capital, not two or three or more, and i've had these conversation on a number of times with the prime minister and he has made very, very clear that the preference is for a unified sudan. they will obviously accept independence in that comes. your more interesting part of the question that you raise is perhaps are some countries interested in having a division in sudan in order to make sudan weaker, perhaps, and work to their advantage, and that is a possibility, and that's why i leave chad particularly in a separate category. i would argue that they're the one country that might fall into this situation. i'm not sure that would be the case anywhere else, even with the democratic republic of the congo or simple african

republic. i think the precedent of division, along ethnic lines or otherwise, is more overriding than wanting to take advantage of smaller entities. and interns of u.s. interests, i think the last thing we would want to see would be a series of countries that are land locked and poor and dependent upon outside aid, even those that may have oil. >> thank you very much, sir. >> thank you. senator lugar. thank you all for being here. i appreciate it very, very much. dr. mohammed, what -- how would you describe, we had that little discussion here about what's going on in darfur today and what the situation is on the ground. you may have already addressed this and i apologize, if so, but i would like to hear your description of that. how would you describe what is happening on the ground today in darfur? >> thank you. i think what's happening in darfur and i've been living

there from -- for more than 20 years in darfur, it is a question of oppression, africa. second, darfurans don't have equality in sharing in power or wealth. and they are really marginalized and are all indicators, which showed the situation, i think it's a very dire situation. now what's happening after the war, i think the people are now in more than 100 displaced camps and you have seen what's happening. that's not a camp. for me, that's not a camp. anyhow, they are living in that very dire situation, but the question is that everybody in

darfur wants to go home. that's a very -- even if not -- but there are preconditions which should be fulfilledped the question of the land which is occupied by other citizens. the government brought other citizens and they now occupy the land of the displaced people. they tried to go home. they can't go there because they are armed. >> and the government. >> the government of sudan. >> the second problem, we need to implement its mandate in sudan and the janjaweed military should be immobilized, so it will produce a conducive environment for people to go home. i know they are coming from very

good areas and nobody is liking to live in that difficult situation. so to me, i think it is very difficult to see, and i have seen catastrophes, but let me say that within today, there are raids continuously going on, there are killings continuously going on and you can't get out of the camps to go anywhere and the problem with that, we want the international community to understand that in darfur we don't have infrastructures. >> you don't have what? >> infrastructures. so we need that, that is very basically needed and we think that the question of helicopters or other mechanisms should have the upper hand to control the situation. >> in terms of the current

dynamic of the principal rebel groups, they're certainly not engaged the way they were in the kind of confrontations that are going on, but the question you mentioned, one of the senators mentioned with one of the three or four envoys, i think senator menendez ex-we've gone through a number of getting close to agreements, we've gone through a number of agreement and within hours or days even of the agreement, people have walked away and it's fallen apart and so forth. is there something that is alive today that is in this moment that you think is different that we can capitalize on, or are we stuck in the same sort of dynamic where we go around, we'll get, you know, we'll go through the sort of meaningless

agreement process? >> i think it's a question, it's not a matter of how much agreements people do. it's a question of is there a political will to implement and to make things easy. >> and the political will has to be by all the parties? >> the rebel taxes, and this is what i stated before, the implementation of cpa is very mandatory so that it gives us the confidence that the coming peace will be implemented. now, -- >> what's your judgment about that will? is the will there in you were judgment? >> to -- in your judgment. >> to me, what is happening in the sudan government, the sudan government has never determined to make a political will to solve the problem of darfur and the political mechanism, but it wants to continue. the military option is another option. >> ambassador shin, what do you say about that?

>> it's very hard to keep obviously the minds of the people who are running the government in kartum. i do see a willingness to reach out to governments like the american government for perhaps the first time if a long time and i think that ought to be pursued rather than rejected. it may not lead anywhere. it's unfortunate if it doesn't, but i think the general is on the right track by reaching out, seeing what is there, and seeing if there can't be further moves by the government in khartoum to do what has to be done to resolve not just the problem in darfur, but implementing the cpa and i am a little bit optimistic on this. not real optimistic, but a little bit. >> so am i actually. i think it is possible to put

the dynamics together. very, very tough big issues. miss page, maybe you want to comment on how you see the north-south process within the cpa and the bigies of citizenship, borders, and wealth sharing. >> thank you, senator kerry. i believe actually that some of the suggestions outlined by ambassador shin are quite right. i think the region really has to be considered. africa has does not have a long track record of appreciating other independent states on its borders. and especially the fact that sudan if the south votes to cede, to help the north and the south put in place the mechanisms that would make that happen, so what the general talks about, whether it's unity

or a peaceful coexistence, a peaceful separation, how do we do that? and i think that we have to help -- it's partly through elections and the other political processes, but we have to make it less of a zero sum game, so that it's only a winner and a loser and that's what they saw with the ruling, that both sides saw that they won something. and that's part of why it has been accepted without any violence so far. >> but do you -- well, how do you explain the rise in violence in the south? there is increased violence there in certain areas. do you view that as localized tribal confrontation or is it north-south? >> mr. skwrao: i would say it's a little bit of both, but ethnic tensions are very much on the rise. in one quote, it states that there were more deaths in southern sudan from ethnic violence than there was in darfur. that's a scary statistic.

i think if the international community doesn't sort of rally around to try to take out some of the, again, that zero sum game, making it an all win or lose, all or nothing situation, then we don't take away the incentives for the government to put spoilers in the mix. that's how governments around the world, it's nothing unique to the government of sudan, but if we don't take away some of those possibilities, by giving them some real thoughts of how they can work through some of these processes, so that the outcome of the election hes will be respected, the outcome of the referendum, will be respected and respected without violence. so i think if we could get international supporters together, people with different experience, as ambassador shinn

has suggested, i think that that's -- it's worth a try to again, you know, what do you do, the pipeline is not in southern sudan. the oil is there but the pipeline isn't. there has to be some sort of mechanism, what are they going to do with the revenue, post-2011. >> unfortunately, we are running up against the clock here, folks, which i regret enormously, because we could obviously go on publicly here for some time. we're going to need to again leave the record open so we can follow up with you, but let me just try to close out a couple of quick questions if i can. dr. mohammed, the darfur peace agreement, as well as the cpa, many people felt, lacked a sufficient civil process input. could you just share with me very quickly what -- how can we make sure that the civil society is properly heard in the process

of this initiative or effort with respect to darfur? >> i think -- >> ambassador shinn, i would like you to also. >> yeah. i think the darfur peace agreement failed because the civil society was not incorporated and we think now, the civil society is almost ready, and apart from the obstruction by the government of sudan. but we think that the situation is more there now. everybody is longing for peace. this is a good momentum, we have to make use of it. the other thing, even the taxes i think they are just waiting to see, a suitable momentum, where they can continue the negotiation.

they feel that the government of sudan is really looking for a solution for darfur. let the international organizing go back to help the idp's, let the civil society move together to find a solution for it and to make their position for the peace come together for peace. let the rebels, the civil -- the civil society is ready and those that are displaced are ready, then they have no choice except to accept that and i think the united states, as a trusted country with the aid, with the international community, for sure we'll reach peace very soon. >> mr. ambassador. >> mr. chairman, i don't mean to

sound to too polyanna-ish. the car tune government, how it receives darfurans into civil society, how they bring them into the process, they have to be convinced this is in the interest of sudan and darfur generally. i think it is incumbent on the international community, certainly the united states, but not just the united states, to use this opening that we -- that the u.s. and the international community seems to have to press this point. and to make it clear to khartoum and the ncp that this is the occasion to turn a new leaf, to bring more darfurian civil owe site in to this. i agree it's critically important to do that. i don't think the other groups would disagree with that and the splm component, the government of national unity, would probably be supportive of this,

so again, i think there's an opening to do something here. >> i think that's a good note. both of you in your comments, unless, miss page, you wanted to add to that, but i think that's a good note to pull this together on. a little optimism in the sense of what is possible. i personally believe that. i think some of those rebel groups frankly, it was my perception over there, are taking advantage of their toyota land cruisers and their guns and some money that flows their way and there's not a lot of liberation theology driving many of them these days, so i think we need to really call things as we see them, and press the opportunities here to bring people together to try to resolve this. and we are greatly admiring dr. mohammed, as you know, with your efforts over all these years. thank you so much for your courage and your leadership and thank you, all of you, the national democratic institution, susan, we greatly appreciate what you're doing.

as i said, we will leave the record open. i know there will be some questions submitted and if you could help us complete the record, that would be trek. so thank you -- terrific. so thank you, it's been very helpful to anybody. senator lugar? thank you. we stand adjourned. thank you. [inaudible conversations] >> how is span funded? >> publicly funded. >> donations. i have no idea. >> c-span gets its funding through the taxes. >> federal funding. >> sort of a public funding thing. >> maybe. i don't know. >> how is c-span funded? america's cable companies created c-span as a public

certificate vest, a private busy initiative. no government mandate, no government money. >> the senate gavels in in a few minutes. for work on agriculture spending. yesterday, tennessee senator lamar alexander became the sixth republican to announce that he'll vote for supreme court nominee sonia sotomayor. his remarks are about five minutes. >> i have a statement to make about the president's nomination of judge sonia sotomayor to be associate justice of the united states supreme court. even though judge sotomayor's political and judicial philosophy may be different than mine, especially regarding second amendment rights, i will vote to confirm her because she is well qualified by experience, temperment, character and intellect to serve as an associate justice of the united states supreme court. in 2005, i said on this floor

that it was wrong for then senator obama and half the democratic senators to vote against john roberts. a superbly qualified nominee, solely because they disagreed with what senator obama described as robert's "over arching police cool philosophy and his work in the white house and the solicitor general's office that consistently sided with the strong if opposition to the weak." today it would be equally wrong for me to vote against judge sotomayor solely because she's not on my side on some issues. courts were never intended to be political bodies composed of judges on your side. who would reliably tilt your way in controversial cases. courts are supposed to do just the opposite. decide difficult cases with

impartiality. the oath that judge sotomayor has taken twice and will take again when she's sworn in as associate justice of the supreme court, says it best, and i quote it. i will administer justice with respect to persons and do equal right to the poor and to the rich. and i will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all duties incumbent upon me under the constitution and the laws of the united states. end of quote. now during her confirmation hearings, madam president, judge sotomayor expressly rejected then senator obama's view that a certain percentage of judicial decisions -- that in a certain percentage of judicial decisions "the critical ingredient is supplied by what's in a judge's heart."

and the depth and breadth of one's empathy, unquote. if answer to a question from senator kyl, she said in her confirmation hearing, and i will quote that as well "i can only explain what i think judges should do, which is judges can't rely on what's in their heart." this is judge sotomayor speaking. "they don't determine the law. congress makes the laws. the job of a judge is to apply the law "and so it's not the heart that compels conclusions in cases, it's the law, and the judge applies the law to the facts before that judge. that was judge sotomayor's answer to senator kyl. giving broad senate approval to obviously well-qualified nominees, helps to increase the prestige of the supreme court and to confirm its impartiality. for that reason, until the last

few years, republican and democratic senators, after rigorous inquiries into the fitness of nominees, usually have given those well-qualified nominees an overwhelming vote of approval. for example, no justice on the supreme court that john roberts joined in 2005 had received more than nine negative votes. four were confirmed unanimously. all but three republican senators voted for justice ginsberg, a former general counsel of the american civil liberties union. every single democratic senator voted to confirm justice scalia. now, in truly extraordinary cases, senators of course reserved the prerogative as i do, to vote no. or even to vote to deny an up or down vote. during the eight years i was governor of tennessee, madam president, i appointed about 50 junction. in doing -- judges. in doing so, i looked for the

same qualities that justice roberts and judge sotomayor have demonstrated -- intelligence, good character, restraint, respect for law, and respect for those who came before the court. i did not ask one applicant how he or she would rule on abortion or immigration or taxation. i appointed the first female circuit judge in our state and the first african-american court chancellor and the first african-american state supreme court justice. i appointed both democrats and republicans. that process served our state well. and helped to build respect for the independence and fairness of our judiciary. in the same way, it is my hope that my vote now will not only help to confirm a well-qualified nominee, but will help to return the senate to the practice only recently lost of inquiring diligently into qualifications of a nominee and then accepting

that elections have consequences, one of which is to confer upon the president of the united states the constitutional right to nominate justices of the supreme court. madam president, i ask unanimous consent that my floor remarks in support of judge john roberts on september 27, 2005, be printed in the record following these remarks. >> without objection. >> madam president, i notice the absence of a quorum. >> senate majority leader harry reid said the full senate should begin debate on the nomination of judge sotomayor on tuesday. watch the recent senate judiciary confirmation hearings, read the list of senators who have said how they'll vote on the nomination, read news articles and get information on the supreme court, all that at c-span.org. now the u.s. senate is convening to consider the $124.5 billion

agriculture spending bill for fiscal year 2010. senate majority leader reid said he's aiming to finish the measure on monday, clearing the way tore debate to begin tuesday on the nomination of judge sotomayor. with a final vote on that later next week of before the senate leaves for its august recess. now, live senate coverage on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. our father god, author of liberty, who has made and

preserved us as a nation, bless today our lawmakers who are called to serve the republic by bringing order out of chaos and peace out of strife. may they lift the shield of their integrity against the enemies of justice and truth at this time when the world's hopes depend on character. lord, guide them with your providence until this nation shall gleam undimmed by tears of want and woe. mairveg our lawmakers worthy of the

sacrifices of those who, day by day, give their all to keep us free. help them to forgive and forget any memories of strained relationships or debilitating differences. we pray in your loving name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington, d.c, july 31, 2009.

to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable mark warner, a senator from the commonwealth of virginia, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: robert c. byrd, president pro tempore. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: mr. president, following leader remarks, if any, the senate will resume consideration of the agriculture appropriations bill. there will be no roll call votes during today's session. however, the two managers, senator kohl and brownback, will inform all members that they will accept amendments and people that have amendments should be ready to offer them today or on monday. mr. president, s. 1552 is at the desk and due for a second reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 15 2k5e, a bill to reauthorize the d.c. opportunity scholarship program and for other purposes. mr. reid: i would ask further reading be waived. the presiding officer: without objection.

the bill will be placed on the calendar. mr. reid: i have a cloture motion at the desk and i would ask that i before i file the cloture, we need to have a bill reported. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. the senate will resume consideration of 2997. the clerk: h.r. 29 the 7, an act making appropriation for agriculture, ruler development, food and drug administration, and related agencies and so forth and for other purposes. mr. reid: i would ask now that that cloture motion which is at the desk be stated. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on substitute amendment 2998 to the agriculture appropriations act signed by 16 senator senators as follows: rockefeller, udall of new mexico, pryor, kaufman, lincoln,

conrad, hagan, begich, dorgan, baucus, nelson of nebraska, kohl, inouye, bennett of colorado, landrieu, and schumer. mr. reid: mr. president, i ask consent that the cloture vote on the substitute occur at 5:30 p.m. monday, august 3. if cloture is invoked, postcloture time be considered to have begun as if cloture had been invoked at 11:00 a.m. on monday morning. further, mr. president, i have a cloture motion at the desk on the bill itself. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on h.r. 299, the agriculture appropriations act for fiscal year 2010 signed by 17 senators as follows: mr. reid: i ask that reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: again, you renew my request, mr. president, that the

cloture vote occur on the substitute a 5:30 on monday, august 3. and if cloture is invoked, postcloture time be considered to have begun as if cloture had been invoked a 111:00 a.m. further, that the mandatory quorums required be waive and the tw first tw amendments at te desk be filed by 3:30 p.m. on monday. the presiding officer:without o. -- without objection. colorado mr. president?

the presiding officer: the senator from wisconsin. d. mr. kohl: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from wisconsin. mr. kohl: i'd like to talk about something that's happening down at the usda now. secretary vilsack is announcing changes to the dairy product price support program. i'd like to commend him for his diligence and persistence and his willingness to keep pushing on this. wisconsin is home to more dairy farms than any other state in the union. we produce 2.1 billion pounds of milk each month, about half the state's $51 billion agriculture economy is directly tied to dairy. when the dairy sector hurts, wisconsin hurtds. and i will say that the pain in dairy across america is very, very acute right now. from january through angers the price of milk paid to dairy farmers has been about $4.80 per 1-weight below the cost of production. dairy producers have lost $3.9

billion in equity in five months. at risk is the long-term stability of the descrirks the nation's milk production infrastructure, and thousands of rural communities. with senator leahy and a number of our colleagues, we have pushed to confront these challenges. in the last farm bill we extended the basic safety net for dairy producers, and we strengthened it with something called a fee-cost adjustor. in the economic recovery bill, we added credit to help producers survive. at the same time, the secretary has worked to boost exports and provide more dairy products for nutrition programs. all of these are critical steps. together they reflect literally a billion dollar effort to address a crisis that has hurt dairy producers in every corner of the country. but over the past several weeks in hearings and letters and personal consultations that i have been a part of, there is a growing appreciation at that more needs to be done. and today the is take the next

step. august through october he is adjusting the dairy product price support program in a way that will yield an estimated $243 million in revenue increases for dairy producers. i want to commend our secretary of agriculture for working with intensity and persistence. i want to commend our president for appointing a secretary of agriculture that works with intensity and persistence. and i want to reassure dairy farmers all across america that although we don't have all the answers, we are committed to pressing forward in their behalf. i yield the floor. mr. brownback: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from kansas. mr. brownback: mr. president, i want to urge my colleagues, particularly on my side of the aisle, to get thearmts and bring them forward this morning. it would be my hope that we could get this bill done on monday early evening so that we could move to the sotomayor

discussion and debate on the floor. i think most members want to speak about sotomayor, and so it is going to take a lot of time. with next week being the last week before we go on break, i would hope we could start that as soon as possible and finish this quickly. this is not a perfect bill but it is one that we have done a lot of work on and i don't see the issues outstanding here to the degree that i think it would merit us putting off the discussion and debate on sotomayor. so i'm hopeful we can get those amendments coming forward. i would ask unanimous consent that melanie benning from my office have floor privileges during the full extent of this bill's debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. brownback: thank you very much, mr. president. mr. president, i have discussed with the majority about bripg an amendment to deal with the issue of neglected and rare diseases. the f.d.a. funding is in this bill, and we've negotiated an amendment with the proper

authorizing committee. so with that, mr. president, i would ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment to call up amendment number 2229 and ask for its immediate consideration. the presiding officer: without objection, the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from kansas, mr. brownback, proposes an amendment numbered 2229 to amendment number 1908. mr. brownback: mr. president, i ask that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. brownback: thank youvestment mr. president and colleagues, this amendment goes at a critical problem in the world, and within that we hold the key to answering. there is a lot of work that needs to be done on disease, treatment, and drug development. unfortunately, what we've seen taking place is the cost of developing a pharmaceutical product to treat particular diseases continues to go up and up and up into in some cases the billions of dollars to develop a

particular drug for - -- treatmt for particular individuals. when you look at disease categories where you may have a group of, say, 50,000 have a particular disease or in a neglected disease that's in a third world country where you have millions, even more than that, that are affected by disease but there's not a marge marketplace to support the -- a large marketplace to support the research to develop a cure. what we've put forward is a review process to try to establish a new system for neglected and rare diseases so that drug delivery can proceed and it can proceed on an expedited, expeditious and reduce the cost of doing it, so we can start to develop drug treatments for rare diseases and neglected diseases that happen in poorer parts of the world where the economy doesn't support that level of research. the amendment establishes two review groups within the food and drug administration that would recommend solutions for

the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of diseases. more than one billion people -- nearly one in every six worldwide -- are affected by at least one neglected disease. we have a billion people in this category of having a disease that there's little to no research being done on. examples include malaria, tuberculosis, and cholera. africa certainly bears the brunt of this, as nearly 90% of the world's neglected diseases afflict people in this continent. while this is the target category, it is my hope that what this will lead to is us developing systems and ways where we can reduce the cost an time for drug delivery development so we can use that in this country and use that on rare diseases where you don't have the population pool to support as much of the research. neglected diseases claim roughly 500,000 lives each year. they disproportionately affect

very low-income populations in developing countries. unfortunately, less than 1% of the roughly 1,400 drugs registered between 1975 and 1999 treelted such diseases. one% of them. -- one percent of them. streamlining the f.d.a. process to treat these diseases is not only in our country's national interest but it's consistent with our long-standing tradition of caring for those who are less fortunate around the world. i might point out that the fub opinion standing of the -- the public opinion standing of the united states, a big continent where we have the highest public opinion standing of the population is not even north america. it is africa, where we're helping people with pepfar program with malaria, with food and people tend to like you if you're helping them stay alive. and this continues so it's good foreign policy to do as well as long -- as well as also helping us in drug delivery and development for our rare diseases.

this amendment also addresses rare diseases or those diseases for which little market exists since so few patients are fean affected. if this happened to be a person in your family, you don't care how many people fracted. you want somebody to be developing cures for it. rare diseases can be especially lethal since few treatments may exist for individual patients and time is not on their side. for these reasons, i strongly urge my colleagues to support this amendment, 2229, which would allow experts to identify ways to improve the food and drug administration's ability to review treatments for rare and nevada tkpwebgted diseases -- neglected decembers. this proposal we worked carefully with a number of individuals. dr. francis collins whorbgs heads the human genome project, one of the great scientific breakthroughs of the last 25 years, was also headed by former f.d.a. officials and a number of

people interested and concerned about what's taking place here, about the expanded costs of developing drugs, and the smaller economic category that they have to hit in. and i think this really is in the best traditions of the united states and is very helpful to us as a country to address. me and my colleagues have traveled to some of the third world areas. malaria hits 60% of the children in sub-sahara africa. 60%. tuberculosis, as well, is rampant. you've got other diseases that we haven't thought of here for a long time: sleeping sickness, river blindness, that affect a large cross section of individuals with just little to no effort going into it. and to the degree that we can help out here, i think it will be a massive good we do. it's my fundamental belief that we're blessed to be a blessing, and this country has been

blessed. we certainly have our difficulties, no question about that. but here's an area where we can help and it helps us too. so i would hope that my colleagues can see fit to support this amendment. and i will ask at the proper time that it be supported and that we vote on it. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? mr. kohl: as we said before this morning, we intend to complete action on this bill monday. we're here today to work with senators if they have amendments. we need to move this bill along so we can complete all of our work as we know we wish to do before the august recess. and so if any senators have amendments to the bill, they should come to the floor so that they can be offered, debated, and considered. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

quorum call:

you brownback mr. president, i ask that further proceedings of the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. brownback: mr. president, while we're waiting on members here to come and present their amendments, i want to talk about something that is asoabted with agriculture -- associated with arks certainly in my state, and san issue that will come up in this body after the break. that's on energy legislation. in our state, energy is

inextricably linked to agriculture. it is also an industry that derives a lot of income for agriculture. the industry itself has moved from a food-and-fiber industry to a food, fiber, and fuels industry with eth follow and biodiesel. this is a bit after sidebar but a connection on wind energy. it's providing income to those regions in our state. i want to talk about the energy policy of this country, particularly as it associate ass with easmght i think we need to look at the agriculture industry. i'm hopeful -- a number of us are -- that we can over time up the ethanol standard from a 10% to a higher mixed blend. i'd like to see us get to 15%, 20% in the current vehicle fleevment i think it is doable. i think the technology is there and it is not harmful to anybody

or any of the ought motives in the automobile industry. a number of us signed on to a letter asking that that fuel blend be upped and that also the refineries be held harmless in any up-mixture of blending that might be considered. a number of refineries are sensitive about the mtbe problem when they were pushed by congress to put in mtbe and then later held responsible for difficulties associated with mtbe. i think we ought to hold the refinery industry harmless but allow that mixture to go frup 10%. in -- to go up from 10%. a number of ethanol plants have been built in my state. they continue to operate well. it is a dual-commodity business where you are looking at both the commodity price of oil and the commodity price of corn. if both of them move in your favor, you can do very well. if they move against you, you can do they poorly. right now we have the capacity to move it up from 10% to a 15%

or 20% level. it would be my hope that down the road that would be a consideration. been a big part of the agriculture policy in this country, something that's been supported in the agriculture appropriations bill through increased research on ethanol and making the next generation of ethanol out of cellulose. so you can mix those methods of making ethanol as being an important thing we can do. on the energy bill that cleared through the energy committee, there's a renewable energy standard that was put in, not the cap-and-trade bill. and i would urge my colleagues to, let's work on the renewable energy where we can get a good, strong bipartisan support and not montana a cap-and-trade system -- and not on a cap-and-trade system where it is going to hurt a number of states that are high energy using and producing states particularly like others in the midwest who

are very dependent on energy and this is seen and is a major tax on us. it taxes our electric production that's coal-based. and our state is in the 60% to 70% coal electric production. so if you're taxing that, you're taxing people's utility bills. but if we go with a renewable energy standard, what we can do is we can seed and develop the e wind energy business or biomass which is very helpful to agriculture and not raise utility rates and not do it by taxing and regulating but, rather, we do it by innovation and investment. i met earlier this week a number of people from the wind energy business and said, well, we've had a good run but it's not going very well now with this economy and without a renewable energy standard. the one we put forward in the energy committee has a 15%

renewable energy standard. 4% of that can be met by conservation, 11% by biomass, wind, even things like algae biofuel production, which is very much in the experimental stage but quite an interesting and developing technology. if we could consider that and do the renewable energy standard portfolio, a separate and distinct and not blend it with the cap and trade, i think we could come forward with a good, bipartisan bill that moves us forward off of our energy reliance on foreign fuels into a cleaner environment but it doesn't -- the tax and regulatory structure of a cap-and-trade system that's really hard and harmful on a state like mine. senator bingaman chairs the energy committee, and he did a markup over a period of four weeks that was one of the most impressive markups i've seen where he worked with everybody to get this pulled together on

renewable energy standard and as such we came out with a bipartisan energy bill on a renewable energy standard. not everybody got what they wanted. nobody ever does. but it was bipartisan and it was in the cap-and-trade bill that just really sends -- and it wasn't the cap-and-trade bill that really sends the bells office for a lot of high-energy-using states. it's what we ought to do rather than what the house did on cap-and-trade legislation which passed by the thinnest of margins, was -- it was basically done completely on democrat votes without republican votes, whereas the renewable energy standard we passed in committee had a mixture of republican, democrat votes and there were even democrats that voted against the bill in committee. but it is a bipartisan process and one that we can do and that we can move forward with. not to mention other things -- and i just met with a refinery group that's doing petroleum products, pavement, and others

in the united states, and they look to really get hit with the cap-and-trade legislation to the point that they will be driven out of business but we're still going to need senate -- still going to need asphalt. big plants are being built there anticipating that we'll be doing cap-and-trade legislation. they won't so that their co2 emissions are not counted, ours are and then they sills the products. that defeats the purpose of any sort of co2 mitigation. just driving the industry overseas. it is going to be more polluting there than here. the co2 emissions affect everybody. that's a really bad idea for us to cause that to happen. in our own legislation. and industries are planning on doing that now, just building and moving the industries to china and india and importing the products back to the united

states. that hurts us. that hurts our people and job formation. it doesn't hurt the environment and we have another way and we have a way through this renewable energy standard that can actually work. i would ask really that as we consider the agriculture bills and as we look at these, that we really keep an eye on energy, because it's one of the key cost drivers within the industry. it's also one of the key possibilities for us to grow it in the future and grow it for our country. and that's why we put some things in this ag appropriations bill that are supportive of the energy industry in agriculture. personally -- i know others have different opinions on this -- i would ask we don't hurt it with legislation later on that's not complementary towards it. mr. president, i yield the floor

and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from kansas. mr. brownback: mr. president, i ask further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. brownback: while we've got time and waiting to clear

amendments, i'm chairman of the joint economic committee and today is the last dade serving on the committee staff with dr. robert talaver. retiring after many years of valuable years in the congress. congressman jim saxton when he was chairman per swa*eut sueded him to join the staff in 1996 as chief macro economist. his mind made him a critical component of the staff for many years. before joining the committee staff, he served with president reagan's chief counsel of economic advisors in 1985 and 1986, the head of macro and international economics of the federal reserve bank in atlanta and federal reserve board governors vice chairman emanuel johnson. i think under anybody's standard that is a very successful career as. economist. bob's contribution to the

committee was valuable particularly on his work on the issues of inflation, targeting represents the body of analysis from 1997 to 2006. he conducted research on the classic principles of economics to tax policy. his research emphasized the important effects of marginal tax rates have on economic behavior and particularly the positive effects of reducing personal marginal rates have on creating incentives for healthy economic growth. we'd be wise to take bob's research findings to heart. the person's work career is not the only thing that defines him. bob's work was valuable. his character only added to the reasons that he will be missed. mr. president, i know that my colleagues in the committee from the senate and house join me in extending a heart felt thanks to bob for his service and congratulating him upon his retirement. thank you, bob. we wish you and your family the

best. you've earned. godspeed. mr. president, i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the -- to set aside the pending amendment

and call up the following amendments at the desk. lay leigh 2234, murray 2225, and bill nelson of florida, 2226. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the atlanta from wisconsin, mr. -- the senator from wisconsin mr. kohl proposes 2225, 2226, 2224- mr. kohl: i ask that we dispense with further reading. the leahy amendment 2234. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. kohl: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. kohl: mr. president, the leahy amendment 2234 has been approved on both sides and i move its adoption. the presiding officer: is there further debate? if not, all in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the amendment is agreed to. mr. kohl: move to reconsider the vote. a senator: move to lay on the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. kohl: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. kohl: i ask that the quorum call be rescinded. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. kohl: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak up to 10 minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. kohl: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call: