So, who said this in July?

KERRY: I'd just like to focus on one quickly in my opening comments, if I can, and that is the issue of port security, specifically management of the grant program and the status of national prevention and contingency plans.

In January, the DHS inspector general issued a report you're well familiar with saying that the current design of the grants program compromises DHS's ability to direct resources to the nation's highest priorities.

In assessing the administration of the program, the I.G. found that only one staff person at TSA managed the distribution of 811 grants in 2003; found that 82 of 86 grant applications transferred from TSA to the Office of Domestic Preparedness lacked merit but still received funding; and most importantly, found that of the $564 million that was awarded through 2004, only $106 million was actually spent to improve port security.

This is a fairly amazing statistic, as well as reality, when you measure what experts have told us about ports and the potential threat, which you're well familiar with.

I know that you and DHS concurred with most of the recommendations, but it's never been set forth, sort of precisely, how that's going to ultimately be implemented.

Last week, on the homeland security appropriations bill, I submitted an amendment to require the inspector general and others to report within 90 days detailing how that implementation is taking place, will take place. So, obviously, I hope you'll cooperate in that effort.

But, more importantly, I am really concerned, and I think others are, that we remain ill prepared.

Now, I heard your comments the other day, and I respect the distinction you're trying to draw. I would concur that we can't prevent everything, and there are certain limits and there are certain realities we have to live with.

But the department still has not finished a national maritime security plan mandated by the Maritime Transportation Security Act. The country still has no plan to reroute commerce should a port be attacked. And that lack of planning could prove destructive to our economy if there were a major port being closed, especially if oil or natural gas deliveries were stopped. So I would urge you to tackle this. Obviously, I have some questions on it when the question period comes.

I hope we never need it, but there's no doubt in my mind that railroads, highways and cities are all impacted by what does or doesn't happen with respect to port security itself, because they're so interconnected.

And I look forward to having a chance to explore this with you a little bit.

Third, Congress can't responsibly continue to ignore the global climate change issue. Higher temperatures threaten serious consequences. I met the other day with our top experts from NASA. How many Senators realize that it is now not a question of whether; it is a certainty. Nothing we do today is going to stop this. To show you how far behind the curve we are, it is a certainty that the Arctic ice sheet is going to melt. If the Arctic ice sheet melts completely, that exposes the Greenland sheet. Nobody can tell you with certainty what is going to happen to Greenland. But any policymaker ought to stop and shiver at the prospect that it is a certainty the Arctic ice sheet will melt. The Greenland ice sheet will be exposed. And if it were to melt, with catastrophic consequences, say goodbye to Florida, goodbye to the port of Boston, and New York, and a bunch of other places. That would be a catastrophic event. There is nothing in this bill that tries adequately to deal with that reality.

What is going to happen with respect to drought, disease, floods, lost ecosystems? And from sweltering heat to rising seas, global warming effects have already begun. Sit down with the top scientists. Sit down with Nobel Prize winners and listen to them tell you about the certainty of what is already happening, not a matter of scientific speculation. The seas are rising. It is getting warmer. They will tell you what is happening. This bill doesn't deal with it.

We tried, on this bill, to pass an economywide cap-and-trade bill, a bill that uses the marketplace to be able to work effectively. Didn't get enough votes. The compromise was, they passed the language that didn't require anything, and they even took out of this bill the language that didn't require anything. This is the most obtuse, head-in-the-sand ostrich policy I have ever seen in my life. A bunch of responsible people in the Senate and House of Representatives, ignoring scientists all across the globe, turning their backs on foreign ministers, trade ministers, environmental ministers, prime ministers, presidents of countries, all of whom have embraced, at political risk, the reality of that science, and only the United States of America stands apart and alone, ignoring that reality. Where is the leadership?