[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 168 (Tuesday, November 10, 2009)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11313-S11320]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, VETERANS AFFAIRS, AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2010

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume consideration of H.R. 3082, which the clerk will report by 
title.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 3082) making appropriations for military 
     construction, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and related 
     agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and 
     for other purposes.

  Pending:

       Johnson/Hutchison amendment No. 2730, in the nature of a 
     substitute.
       Udall (NM) amendment No. 2737 (to amendment No. 2730), to 
     make available from Medical Services, $150,000,000 for 
     homeless veterans comprehensive service programs.
       Johnson amendment No. 2733 (to amendment No. 2730), to 
     increase by $50,000,000 the amount available for the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs for minor construction 
     projects for the purpose of converting unused Department of 
     Veterans Affairs structures into housing with supportive 
     services for homeless veterans, and to provide an offset.
       Franken/Johnson amendment No. 2745 (to amendment No. 2730), 
     to ensure that $5,000,000 is available for a study to assess 
     the feasibility and advisability of using service dogs for 
     the treatment or rehabilitation of veterans with physical or 
     mental injuries or disabilities.
       Inouye amendment No. 2754 (to amendment No. 2730), to 
     permit $68,500,000, as requested by the Missile Defense 
     Agency of the Department of Defense, to be used for the 
     construction of a test facility to support the Phased 
     Adaptive Approach for missile defense in Europe, with an 
     offset.
       Coburn amendment No. 2757 (to amendment No. 2730), to 
     require public disclosure of certain reports.
       Durbin amendment No. 2759 (to amendment No. 2730), to 
     enhance the ability of the Department of Veterans Affairs to 
     recruit and retain health care administrators and providers 
     in underserved rural areas.
       Durbin amendment No. 2760 (to amendment No. 2730), to 
     designate the North Chicago Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 
     Illinois, as the ``Captain James A. Lovell Federal Health 
     Care Center''.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Dakota.
  Mr. JOHNSON. Madam President, I look forward to making progress on 
the MILCON-VA bill today so we can reach agreement on a finite list of 
amendments and vote on them next Monday, followed by final passage of 
the bill. I wish we were in that position today, but since that is not 
possible, I hope we can at least arrive at a roadmap to final passage 
next week.
  This bill is too important to our military troops and their families 
and to our Nation's veterans to allow it to become caught up in petty 
politics. We do not need grandstanding on this bill or message 
amendments or delaying tactics driven by a political agenda. We just 
need to get the job done and get this bill to the President.
  We will be working throughout the day to try to clear and dispose of 
noncontroversial amendments and to try to come up with a short, finite 
list of amendments that can be voted on next Monday so we can clear the 
way for final passage of the bill that same day.
  I know the leaders and the cloakrooms, as well as the committee 
staff, are working hard to clear amendments. I hope we will be at a 
point to dispose of some of those amendments soon.
  I do not need to remind my colleagues that tomorrow is Veterans Day. 
If we cannot complete this bill today, let us at least return home with 
a plan to finish the bill next Monday.
  Madam President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.


                Amendment No. 2752 to Amendment No. 2730

  Mr. JOHANNS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
pending amendment, if there is one, be set aside and that amendment No. 
2752 be called up.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will report the amendment.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Nebraska [Mr. Johanns] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 2752 to amendment No. 2730.

  Mr. JOHANNS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: Prohibiting use of funds to fund the Association of Community 
                 Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN))

       On page 60, after line 24, insert the following:
       Sec. 6__.  None of the funds made available under this Act 
     may be distributed to the Association of Community 
     Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) or its subsidiaries.

  Mr. JOHANNS. Madam President, this is an amendment I have offered on 
several appropriations bills. Each time, it has passed with 
overwhelming bipartisan support. Additionally, the continuing 
resolution includes similar language. But, of course, the CR runs out 
on December 18.
  We need to continue passing this amendment; therefore, I need to 
continue to offer it. It basically says we are blocking all Federal 
funding under this bill to ACORN. I do have a piece of legislation 
pending that would take care of this across the Federal system, but 
that has not come to a vote yet. So I am offering today this amendment 
on ACORN. This amendment will continue to protect taxpayer dollars.
  I do want to indicate to the manager of the bill that, of course, I 
am happy to work with my colleagues on a voice vote whenever the 
appropriate time arises for that to occur.
  With that, Madam President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.


                       Honoring Our Armed Forces

  Mr. BEGICH. Madam President, I rise today on the eve of Veterans Day 
to honor all those who have and are now serving to protect our 
freedoms, especially the service men and women of my State who have 
such a vital role in our Nation's defense.
  At trouble spots across the world--from Afghanistan to Korea, Iraq to 
Kosovo--Alaskan servicemembers are on the front lines.
  Today, I welcome the opportunity to praise Alaska's service men and 
women, their families who are such a key part of our communities, and 
the thousands of veterans who have chosen to live in the 49th State.

[[Page S11314]]

  Nearly 75 years ago, Air Force GEN Billy Mitchell testified before 
Congress and famously said:

       Alaska is the most strategic place in the world.

  General Mitchell's pronouncement might have been an eye-opener for 
Members of Congress in 1935, but the importance of Alaska's strategic 
location has been well known to Alaskans for centuries.
  Shortly after Alaska's purchase from Russia in 1867, the U.S. Army 
was dispatched to help administer the new American territory. Within 10 
years, a significant presence was established in Alaska by both the 
Navy and the Reserve Service, which later became the U.S. Coast Guard.
  The Army helped maintain law and order during the turn of the century 
Gold Rush, which saw thousands scramble north in search of fame and 
fortune.
  With the buildup to World War II, Alaska's vital role in the Nation's 
defense grew dramatically. Alaska's Aleutian Islands were the only 
American territory occupied by the Japanese during the war. Dislodging 
them in brutal conditions cost American and Japanese troops more than 
6,000 casualties combined.
  Servicing Alaska's strategic military needs during the war required 
construction of the 1,400-mile Alaskan-Canadian Highway, known as the 
ALCAN. This road was built largely by three African-American regiments, 
and their success helped spur the Army to end segregation among its 
ranks.
  Some of the Nation's most essential eyes and ears during the war were 
soldiers of the Alaska Territorial Guard. These Eskimo volunteers, 
capable of living off the land as they guarded against invasion, knew 
every nook and cranny of Alaska's coastline. Today, some two dozen of 
these scouts are still with us--most in their eighties and still living 
largely off the land through subsistence hunting and fishing.
  As a member of the Armed Services Committee and working with my 
colleague, Senator Murkowski, we guaranteed in next year's military 
budget bill that these brave guardsmen will receive proper Federal 
benefits and recognition for their service.
  Today Alaska is home to some 30,000 Active-Duty service men and 
women. Another 30,000 Alaskans are the family members of these soldiers 
and airmen.
  Alaska's major military installations include Elmendorf, Eielson, and 
Clear Air Force Bases, Army Forts Richardson, Wainwright, and Greely, 
and Kulis Air National Guard Base. Through these bases, about one in 
five Alaskans has a personal tie to the military.
  To maintain these vital posts, the Department of Defense spends in 
excess of $1.5 billion a year in our State. That is a huge part of 
Federal spending in Alaska, which constitutes about 18 percent of the 
State economy.
  Alaska is also proud to have the highest per capita population of 
veterans of any State. The more than 75,000 veterans who call our State 
home comprise 11 percent of our population.
  Alaska's bases support the latest and greatest in the military's 
arsenal: from the F-22, the Air Force's latest fifth generation fighter 
aircraft; the C-17 cargo aircraft; the Army's Stryker vehicle; and the 
Ground-Based Midcourse element of missile defense.
  Today more than 4,000 servicemembers stationed in Alaska are 
supporting overseas contingency operations around the world.
  Just last month, we welcomed home the 1st Stryker Brigade Combat Team 
of the 25th Infantry Division based at Fort Wainwright. This brigade 
spent 12 months in Iraq's Diyala Province doing a remarkable job 
protecting the people of Iraq.
  Still in Iraq is the 545th Military Police Company of the Arctic 
Military Police Battalion that continues to patrol the streets of Baji.
  The Alaska National Guard also has a vital role in that theater. The 
Guard's 207th Aviation Regiment continues to fly C-23 Sherpa military 
aircraft missions, delivering more than 1 million pounds of cargo 
throughout Iraq.
  Back home, the Guard plays a significant role in the defense of our 
Nation around the clock. At Fort Greely, they staff the operations 
center for the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense system, protecting the 
United States from ballistic missile threats from countries such as 
North Korea and Iran.
  The Guard also provides invaluable search and rescue support and 
other vital missions to ensure the safety of our citizens in our vast 
State.
  Alaskans continue to serve in harm's way in Afghanistan and Iraq. The 
4th Airborne Brigade Combat Team of the 25th Infantry Division operates 
in Afghanistan's Regional Command-East in support of the International 
Security Assistance Force.
  These soldiers are bravely serving on the front lines, hunting down 
al-Qaida terrorists, securing the border, and trying to establish 
governance in this vital part of the world.
  Since their arrival in February, the 4-25 BCT has suffered 
significant casualties. In fact, since the 9/11 attacks on America, 143 
servicemembers from Alaskan units deployed in support of the global war 
on terror have paid the ultimate sacrifice.
  Madam President, I would like to honor those based in Alaska who were 
killed in action since September 11, 2001.
  The pictures beside me which I show in the Chamber are of those who 
have fallen in the past year, just since Veterans Day 2008.
  Just 2 weeks ago, a lifelong Alaskan paid the ultimate sacrifice. On 
October 23, in Afghanistan's Helmand Province, two U.S. aircraft 
collided in midair in the predawn dark. Marine Corps Cpl Gregory Fleury 
was the crew chief aboard one of those aircraft.
  Corporal Fleury was just 23 years old, a graduate of Anchorage's 
Service High School. He had already served two tours of duty in Iraq as 
a combat helicopter mechanic and gunner.
  The helicopter crash that took the young corporal's life was a bad 
one. But the Marines were able to recover one item that belonged to 
him--an Alaskan flag.
  I spoke to Corporal Fleury's grandfather last week to thank him for 
his grandson's service on behalf of this proud Nation.
  Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the names of all the 
Alaskan troops who have made the ultimate sacrifice since September 11, 
2001, be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:
  Following is a list of Alaskan, or Alaska-based, soldiers who have 
died since 2003. They are presented chronologically.

     2009-11-04: Spc. Julian Berisford
     2009-10-26: Cpl. Gregory Fleury
     2009-09-19: Spc. Michael S. Cote
     2009-09-11: Pfc. Matthew M. Martinek
     2009-09-08: Pfc. Zachary T. Myers
     2009-09-08: Pfc. Thomas F. Lyons
     2009-09-08: Staff Sgt. Shannon M. Smith
     2009-09-06: Staff Sgt. Michael C. Murphrey
     2009-09-04: Second Lt. Darryn Andrews
     2009-08-26: Staff Sgt. Kurt R. Curtiss
     2009-08-18: Pfc. Morris L. Walker
     2009-08-18: Staff Sgt. Clayton P. Bowen
     2009-07-29: Staff Sgt. Anthony S. Schmachten-
         berger
     2009-07-06: Pfc. Nicolas H.J. Gideon
     2009-07-04: Pfc. Justin A. Casillas
     2009-07-04: Pfc. Aaron E. Fairbairn
     2009-06-25: 1st Lt. Brian N. Bradshaw
     2009-06-03: Spc. Jarrett P. Griemel
     2009-03-15: Staff Sgt. Timothy Bowles
     2009-03-09: Pfc. Patrick DeVoe II
     2009-02-23: Spc. Michael B. Alleman
     2009-02-23: Spc. Cpl. Michael L. Mayne
     2009-02-23: Spc. Zachary F. Nordmeyer
     2009-01-25: Spc. Cody L. Lamb
     2008-11-28: Lt. William K. Jernigan
     2008-11-15: CWO Donald V. Clark
     2008-11-15: CWO Christian P. Humphreys
     2008-10-24: Pfc. Cody J. Eggleston
     2008-10-16: Pfc. Heath Pickard
     2008-10-09: Cpl. Jason A. Karella
     2008-09-15: Sgt. 1st Class Daniel R. Sexton
     2008-02-02: Sgt. Naquan Reinaldo Williams,
         Jr.
     2007-11-05: Staff Sgt. Carletta S. Davis
     2007-11-05: Sgt. Derek T. Stenroos
     2007-10-14: 1st Lt. Thomas M. Martin
     2007-10-09: Sgt. Jason Lantieri
     2007-08-01: CWO Jackie L. McFarlane Jr.
     2007-08-14: Spc. Steven R. Jewell
     2007-08-14: Staff Sgt. Stanley B. Reynolds
     2007-08-14: Staff Sgt. Sean P. Fisher
     2007-08-14: Christopher C. Johnson
     2007-08-04: Pfc. Jaron D. Holliday
     2007-08-04: Cpl. Jason K. LaFleur
     2007-08-04: Sgt. Dustin S. Wakeman
     2007-07-31: Sgt. Bradley W. Marshall
     2007-07-31: Spc. Daniel F. Reyes
     2007-07-23: Pfc. Jessy S. Rogers
     2007-07-22: Sgt. Shawn G. Adams
     2007-07-05: Michelle R. Ring
     2007-06-25: Sgt. Trista L. Moretti
     2007-06-10: Spc. Adam Herold
     2007-05-22: Sgt. Robert J. Montgomery
     2007-05-21: Cpl. Michael W. Davis
     2007-05-21: Sgt. Brian D. Ardron
     2007-05-21: Staff Sgt. Shannon Weaver

[[Page S11315]]

     2007-05-19: Cpl. Ryan D. Collins
     2007-05-18: Sgt. Ryan J. Baum
     2007-05-17: Pfc. Victor M. Fontanilla
     2007-05-17: Sgt. 1st Class Jesse B. Albrecht
     2007-05-17: Spc. Coty J. Phelps
     2007-05-03: Spc. Matthew T. Bolar
     2007-05-03: First Lt. Colby J. Umbrell
     2007-04-28: Staff Sgt. Michael R. Hullender
     2007-04-12: Spc. James T. Lindsey
     2007-04-12: Spc. John G. Borbonus
     2007-04-12: Cpl. Cody Putman
     2007-04-09: Cpl. Clifford A. Spohn
     2007-04-08: Sgt. Adam P. Kennedy
     2007-04-03: Staff Sgt. Shane R. Becker
     2007-03-23: Spc. Lance C. Springer II
     2007-03-16: Sgt. 1st Class Christopher R.
         Brevard
     2007-03-11: Sgt. Daniel E. Woodcock
     2007-02-19: Pfc. Adare W. Cleveland
     2007-02-11: Sgt. Russell A. Kurtz
     2007-01-22: Staff Sgt. Jamie D. Wilson
     2007-01-20: Spc. Jeffrey D. Bisson
     2007-01-20: Spc. Toby R. Olsen
     2007-01-20: 1st Lt. Jacob N. Fritz
     2007-01-20: Pfc. Shawn Patrick Falter
     2007-01-20: Sgt. Phillip D. McNeill
     2007-01-20: Pfc. Johnathon M. Millican
     2007-01-20: Sgt. Sean Patrick Fennerty
     2007-01-20: Sgt. Johnathan Bryan Chism
     2007-01-15: Cpl. Jason J. Corbett
     2007-01-05: Cpl. Jeremiah J. Johnson
     2007-01-04: Staff Sgt. Charles D. Allen
     2006-12-31: Pfc. Alan R. Blohm
     2006-12-28: Spc. Dustin R. Donica
     2006-12-26: Spc. Douglas L. Tinsley
     2006-12-26: Spc. Joseph A. Strong
     2006-12-20: Staff Sgt. Jacob McMillan
     2006-12-20: Sgt. Scott Dykman
     2006-12-10: Pfc. Shawn M. Murphy
     2006-12-10: Sgt. Brennan C. Gibson
     2006-12-10: Spc. Philip C. Ford
     2006-12-07: Staff Sgt. Henry Linck
     2006-12-07: Spc. Micah Gifford
     2006-11-04: Spc. James L. Bridges
     2006-11-02: Cpl. Michael H. Lasky
     2006-10-30: Sgt. Kraig Foyteck
     2006-10-11: Sgt. Nicholas Sowinski
     2006-10-03: Sgt. Jonathan Rojas
     2006-09-17: Sgt. David J. Davis
     2006-09-10: Spc. Alexander Jordan
     2006-09-02: Staff Sgt. Eugene H.E. Alex
     2006-08-21: Master Sgt. Brad A. Clemmons
     2006-08-09: Spc. Shane Woods
     2006-07-12: Sgt. Irving Hernandez
     2006-06-29: Sgt. Bryan C. Luckey
     2006-06-07: 2nd Lt. John Shaw Vaughan
     2006-05-31: Sgt. Benjamin Mejia
     2006-05-29: Spc. Jeremy Loveless
     2006-05-09: Spc. Aaron P. Latimer
     2006-04-27: Staff Sgt. Mark Wall
     2006-04-25: Pfc. Raymond Henry
     2006-04-11: Cpl. Kenneth D. Hess
     2006-04-09: Spc. Joseph I. Love-Fowler
     2006-04-08: Spc. Shawn Creighton
     2006-04-06: Spc. Dustin James Harris
     2006-02-26: Spc. Joshua M. Pearce
     2006-02-06: Spc. Patrick W. Herried
     2006-02-05: Spc. Jeremiah J.Boehmer
     2006-02-05: Staff Sgt. Christopher R.
         Morningstar
     2006-01-22: Staff Sgt. Brian McElroy
     2006-01-22: Tech. Sgt. Jason L. Norton
     2006-01-07: 1st Lt. Jaime Lynn Campbell
     2006-01-07: Spc. Michael Ignatius Edwards
     2006-01-07: Spc. Jacob Eugene Melson
     2006-01-07: CWO Chester William Troxel
     2005-11-19: Pvt. Christopher Alcozer
     2005-11-11: Staff Sgt. Stephen Sutherland
     2005-10-19: Spc. Daniel D. Bartels
     2005-10-18: Spc. Lucas Frantz
     2005-10-02: Staff Sgt. Timothy J. Roark
     2005-09-11: Sgt. Kurtis Dean Kama-O-Apelila
         Arcala
     2005-09-05: Sgt. Matthew Charles Bohling
     2005-08-16: Lance Cpl. Grant Fraser
     2005-04-04: Lance Cpl. Jeremiah Kinchen
     2004-08-29: A1C Carl Anderson, Jr.
     2003-04-07: Capt. Eric Das
     2003-07-17: Sgt. Mason Douglas Whetston

  Mr. BEGICH. In addition to these fallen heroes, hundreds more 
servicemembers will forever contend with the physical and mental wounds 
suffered in service to our Nation.
  I have had the honor to visit several of these brave soldiers at 
Walter Reed Army Medical Center and at the Elmendorf Warrior Transition 
Unit also. It is critical that the transition of our servicemembers 
from the care of the Defense Department to Veterans Affairs is as 
smooth and as comprehensive as possible. We must ensure the VA is 
funded to meet the current demands of this generation of veterans.
  I am proud to have been one of the original cosponsors with Senator 
Akaka on a bill signed into law by the President last month which will 
ensure 2-year advance funding for the VA. This allows the VA to focus 
on providing care for our veterans instead of worrying annually about 
their funding.
  Today's veteran population is much different from all previous wars. 
Thanks to improvements in protective gear and equipment, many survive 
serious wounds which previously would have been fatal. We also have a 
much greater population of female veterans who have unique needs and 
require specialized care. Today's veterans often have families with 
exceptional needs.
  In World War II, nearly one in five Americans served in the armed 
services. Today less than 1 percent of our population currently serves. 
Still, some 25 million veterans live among us, representing every 
conflict since World War II. Our commitment to each and every one of 
these veterans must be full, honorable, and proud.
  We honor Veterans Day this week on the anniversary of the armistice 
that ended World War I. In my State, we also celebrate Women Veterans 
Day on November 9.
  On these occasions, let us rededicate ourselves to our commitment to 
our Nation's veterans and service men and women so their sacrifice is 
never taken for granted or forgotten.
  Thank you, Madam President. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Begich). The Senator from New York is 
recognized.
  Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
order for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Health Care Reform

  Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of health 
care reform and on behalf of greater access to health care for all 
Americans. This weekend, the House took a historic step, passing a 
health care reform bill that ensures affordable, quality care for all, 
including a public plan that will bring real competition to the market 
and drive down costs. Passing this bill in the House represents a 
monumental step toward the goal of achieving meaningful reform this 
year and is the furthest we have come in the decades-long fight for 
health care reform in this country.
  However, there is one aspect of the House bill about which I wish to 
voice my strong disagreement--the Stupak-Pitts amendment.
  While proponents of the measure say this is a continuation of current 
Federal law, this amendment will, in fact, bring about significant 
change and dramatically limit reproductive health care in this country. 
This is government invading the personal lives of many Americans, 
establishing, for the first time, restrictions on people who pay for 
their own private health insurance. We all agree it is important to 
reduce abortions in this country and I have and will continue to work 
on many ways to reduce unintended pregnancies and to promote adoption. 
However, the Stupak amendment prohibits the public plan as well as 
private plans offered through the exchange, if they accept any 
subsidized customers, from covering abortion services, effectively 
banning abortion coverage in all health insurance plans in the new 
system, whether they be public or private. This ban puts the health of 
women and young girls at grave risk.
  Proposing that women instead purchase a separate abortion rider is 
not only discriminatory but ridiculous. It would require women to 
essentially plan for an event that occurs in the most unplanned and 
sometimes emergency situations.
  There are currently five States that require a separate rider for 
abortion coverage, and in these five States it is nearly impossible to 
find such a private insurance policy. In one State, North Dakota, one 
insurance company holds 91 percent of the State's health insurance 
market and refuses to even offer such a rider. A lack of access to full 
reproductive health care puts the lives of women and girls at grave 
risk.
  This anti-choice measure poses greater restriction on low-income 
women and those who are more likely to receive some kind of subsidy and 
less likely to be able to afford a supplemental insurance policy. 
Denying low-income women reproductive coverage in this way is 
discriminatory and dangerous.
  Without proper coverage, women will be forced to postpone care while 
attempting to find the money they need to pay for it--a delay that can 
lead to increased costs and graver health risks, particularly for 
younger girls, or these women will be forced to turn to dangerous, 
back-alley providers. Women and girls deserve better.
  In fact, this amendment represents the only place in the entire 
health care bill where the opponents are actually correct: It limits 
access to medical care by giving the government, not the

[[Page S11316]]

patient and the doctor, the power to make medical decisions.
  The Senate bill already ensures that no Federal tax dollars may be 
used to pay for reproductive services in any public or private 
insurance plan beyond cases of rape, incest, and life endangerment. The 
House language goes much further and should be removed from the final 
bill.
  This health care package must move us forward, toward quality, 
affordable health care for all Americans. I ask my colleagues to oppose 
any similar amendment in the Senate and work to end disparities among 
race and gender in our health care system.
  Thank you. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. MERKLEY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Gillibrand). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. MERKLEY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                        omnibus health services

  Mr. MERKLEY. Madam President, I rise today in support of our Nation's 
veterans and in support of their families.
  Ninety years ago tomorrow, our Nation marked the very first Armistice 
Day in recognition of the end of World War I. In 1954, Armistice Day 
became Veterans Day, and every year since, we have marked the occasion 
through ceremonies, pageants, parades, and other events designed to 
honor the men and women who have served this Nation so selflessly in 
the Armed Forces. I encourage all Americans to use the opportunity of 
Veterans Day to let those around you who have served our Nation, those 
in your community, know how thankful we are for their contributions.
  I know that across our Nation there will be remembrances of those we 
have lost and honors to those who have served in the past or who are 
serving today, but we can and should do more to honor our Nation's 
veterans. We should make sure they have access to the health care we 
have promised. We should make sure their caregivers are given the 
support they need to assist our wounded warriors. We should expand 
health services for female veterans. We should do more for veterans in 
hard-to-reach rural areas. We should increase our mental health 
services for veterans because injuries to the brain deserve the same 
attention as injuries to the body.
  These programs--access to health care, support to caregivers, 
services for female veterans, services to rural veterans, improved 
mental health services--are all included in the bills that have been 
put into the veterans package, the Caregiver and Veterans Omnibus 
Health Services Act of 2009. I have cosponsored a number of these bills 
and will passionately support this package. Our servicemembers stand up 
for America when on duty. America must stand up for our servicemembers 
when they return home.
  The legislation before us has wide bipartisan support. It has been 
endorsed by organizations, including the Disabled American Veterans and 
the Paralyzed Veterans of America. It has been endorsed by the American 
Legion. It has been endorsed by the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of 
America. It has been endorsed by the Veterans of Foreign Wars. It has 
been endorsed by the Wounded Warrior Project. Each of these groups 
wants to see a vote on this omnibus package of support for our veterans 
and to see that vote happen now. But we in the Senate are not here 
debating this package, we are not here preparing to vote on this bill 
because a single Senator has objected to having an up-or-down vote. Our 
veterans deserve to have this Chamber debate this bill. They deserve to 
have this Chamber vote up or down on this bill.
  Tomorrow we will honor our veterans through ceremonies across this 
Nation. But we should do more than simply honor our veterans; we should 
act to stand up for our veterans. We need to stand with them and their 
families as they have stood up for us when on duty. We should move 
expeditiously, and I encourage all Senators to support the effort to 
quickly have this bill before us for a debate and an up-or-down vote.
  Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. KAUFMAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. KAUFMAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


              Recognition of Sergeant Major Gregory Symes

  Mr. KAUFMAN. Madam President, 90 years ago this Wednesday, President 
Wilson signed a proclamation marking the first anniversary of the 
Armistice that ended World War I. At the time, many believed the 
cruelty experienced by the combatants and civilian victims of that war 
would never be surpassed. Unfortunately, as we learned later, they were 
mistaken. But it was the tragedy of that conflict and the harrowing 
stories brought back from the trenches that led to the establishment of 
a day honoring America's veterans.
  Veterans Day is a moment of pause to remember the sacrifices made by 
those who wore our Nation's uniform. It also presents an opportunity to 
reflect on the dual nature of our Federal Government.
  When average Americans hear ``Federal employees,'' they usually think 
of the 1.8 million civilian government employees. However, it is all 
too often forgotten that the 1.4 million men and women serving in 
uniform are also Federal employees. Our Federal workforce has two 
legs--the civilian and the military. But they march together in step, 
because we depend on both and they depend on one another.
  Without the military, we could not remain free and secure. Without 
the civilian Federal workforce, we could not keep America on the path 
toward prosperity and the continued pursuit of happiness. Civilian 
Federal employees work closely with the military not only to craft 
strategies and policies but also to pay, arm, and care for our troops.
  While some choose to serve in uniform and others in civilian roles, 
there are many who do both. According to the 2006 study by the Office 
of Personnel Management, one out of every four civilian Federal 
employees is a military veteran. Moreover, a fifth of these are 
disabled veterans. And that is just in the executive branch. This 
number doesn't even include those who currently serve in the National 
Guard or the many veterans working right here on Capitol Hill and in 
the Federal Judiciary. They work in nearly every department and agency.
  Not surprisingly, some of the agencies with the highest percentage of 
veterans are those that relate to law enforcement. The Pentagon too 
employs many veterans, as does the Department of Homeland Security. 
Almost half of the civilian employees in the Veterans Benefits 
Administration are veterans themselves. However, many Americans do not 
realize that roughly one in every three employees at the Department of 
Transportation is a veteran. The same is true of the Mine Safety and 
Health Administration at the Department of Labor. Over a third of those 
working at the U.S. Mint are veterans. I bet most Americans would be 
surprised to learn veterans make up a quarter of those who work at the 
Smithsonian's National Gallery of Art.
  It would take me a long time to read through all the departments and 
agencies with large numbers of veterans on staff. But the point I 
emphasize is that so many of our Federal employees share a tradition of 
national service that began with their service in the military.
  Today, I wish to continue my weekly tradition of recognizing an 
outstanding Federal employee by sharing the story of a man from my home 
State of Delaware. Not only does he fill a full-time job as a Federal 
technician for the Delaware National Guard, but he also recently 
completed a year of active-duty service.

[[Page S11317]]

  CSM Gregory Symes had already served in the Delaware Army National 
Guard for 7 years when he started working as a Federal technician for 
the Guard in 1989. A graduate of John Dickinson High School in 
Wilmington, Gregory trained as an automotive mechanic. While he began 
his Federal employment in that role, he studied telecommunications and 
in 2001 became a telecommunications specialist for the Delaware Guard's 
Director of Information Management.
  Gregory has served truly as a mentor to those working alongside him 
and he has risen to become the senior enlisted adviser to the battalion 
commander for the 722nd Troop Command. In this capacity, he is often 
given the task of looking after the well-being of other soldiers in the 
battalion.
  Last month, Gregory completed a 1-year deployment on active duty with 
the 261st Signal Brigade, and he was stationed at Fort Bliss, NM, in 
support of Iraqi Freedom. Decorated for his service, Gregory has 
received the Meritorious Service Medal, the Army Service Ribbon, and 
the Noncommissioned Officers Professional Development Ribbon, among 
others.
  He continues to serve with dedication and distinction in his Federal 
role with the Guard, staying in the forefront of ever-changing 
telecommunications technology. For Gregory and all the other veterans 
and National Guard members who work as Federal employees, sacrifice and 
service are a life's pursuit. They are a constant reminder of why 
Veterans Day is so important.
  While on Memorial Day we remember those who never made it home, on 
Veterans Day we dedicate ourselves to the task of caring for those who 
did. Care and gratitude for our veterans remains a sacred 
responsibility, and one that was as relevant to those who fought at 
Bunker Hill as it is to those stationed in Baghdad today.
  George Washington once said:

       The willingness with which our young people are likely to 
     serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly 
     proportional as to how they perceive the veterans of earlier 
     wars were treated and appreciated by their country.

  I hope all Americans will take the opportunity this week to express 
their appreciation of all our veterans, especially those who continue 
to serve in the public as Federal employees. I invite my colleagues to 
join me in thanking Command Sergeant Major Symes, the Federal employee 
of the Delaware National Guard, and all who have served our Nation in 
uniform. They continue to make us all proud.


                      Remembering Samuel J. Heyman

  Madam President, I cannot let this occasion pass without also noting 
with sadness the passing yesterday of Samuel J. Heyman. Each week, I 
have been speaking from this desk about our excellent Federal 
employees. I continue to do so because I believe that Americans need to 
hear more about the outstanding men and women who serve in government, 
and we need to do more to encourage our graduates to consider careers 
in public service.
  Samuel J. Heyman was a champion of this cause. Mr. Heyman attended 
Yale University and Harvard Law School, and he felt called to public 
service as a young law graduate in 1963. Working at the Justice 
Department under then Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, Mr. Heyman 
served as chief assistant U.S. attorney for his native Connecticut.
  After 5 years, he left government service to take over his family's 
real estate development business, but he would never forget the sense 
of duty and pride he felt as a Federal employee. Mr. Heyman knew that 
Federal employees were those who shared his level of determination and 
work ethic. He knew that the men and women who choose to spend their 
careers working for the American people not only deserve more credit 
than they typically receive, but he understood as well that they have 
the benefit of looking back on their careers with the great 
satisfaction of having made a difference.
  It is for that reason that, in 2001, Mr. Heyman founded the 
Partnership for Public Service, which promotes Federal employment, and 
he received the Presidential Citizen Medal last year for his work as 
its chairman. The partnership also awards annual Service to America 
Medals in several categories, which have affectionately been called 
``Sammie'' in his honor. I have been privileged to be able to share the 
stories of Sammie winners from this desk.
  It is with deep regret that I share with my colleagues this news of 
Mr. Heyman's passing. A respected business leader, philanthropist, and 
a champion of public service, Mr. Heyman will be truly missed. My 
thoughts are with his wife Ronnie, their four children, and their nine 
grandchildren, as well as his mother, who also survives him.
  I also extend my condolences to the Partnership for Public Service 
family. I know they will continue working to carry on Mr. Heyman's 
legacy. I hope my colleagues will join me in remembering Samuel J. 
Heyman and his tireless efforts to inspire a new generation to pursue 
careers in public service and to celebrate the enormous contribution 
made by Federal employees to our great Nation.
  Madam President, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business for up to 10 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                        Health Care Disparities

  Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, this Congress has taken a giant step 
forward in our effort to reform the Nation's health care system. 
Saturday evening, the House of Representatives passed its bill, which 
is estimated by the Congressional Budget Office to provide affordable 
health coverage to 96 percent of Americans while reducing our deficit 
by $109 billion over the next 10 years.
  On behalf of the 760,000 uninsured Marylanders and the countless more 
who are underinsured or facing huge premium increases next year, I am 
encouraged by my colleagues' success, and I look forward to debating 
this most important issue here in the Senate in the weeks ahead.
  Today, I rise to discuss an issue that has received scant attention 
on the floor of the Senate, and that is health disparities. It is an 
issue directly affecting 1 out of every 3 Americans: the 45 million 
Latinos, 37 million African Americans, 13 million Asians, 2.3 million 
Native Americans and Alaskan Natives, and 400,000 Hawaiians and Pacific 
Islanders in our Nation. While they represent one-third of our Nation's 
population, they are fully one-half of the uninsured. So when we enact 
legislation that expands access to millions of uninsured Americans, it 
will make a difference in minority communities, in overall minority 
health, and in the health of our Nation.
  But it is not enough to just get people health insurance coverage. 
Research tells us that even after accounting for those who lack health 
insurance, minority racial and ethnic groups face inequities in access 
and treatment, and they have adverse health care outcomes at higher 
rates than Caucasians.
  That is right, even when insurance status, income, age, and severity 
of conditions are comparable, racial and ethnic minorities tend to 
receive lower quality health care, so coverage is not enough.
  Despite many attempts over the years by health policymakers, 
providers, researchers, and others, wide disparities still persist in 
many facets of health care. When it comes to equitable care for 
minorities, low income, geographic, cultural and language barriers, and 
racial bias have been found to be common obstacles. These inequities 
carry a high cost in terms of life expectancy, quality of life, and 
efficiency.
  And they cost our Nation billions of dollars each year. Researchers 
from Johns Hopkins University and the University of Maryland found that 
between 2003 and 2006, racial and ethnic disparities cost the Nation 
more than $229 billion in excess direct medical costs.
  Adding in indirect costs reveals a staggering $1.24 trillion from 
lost wages and premature and preventable deaths and disabilities. By 
elevating the focus on health disparities, we can bring down these 
costs and improve the quality of care across the board. So health 
disparities should matter to us

[[Page S11318]]

all, in terms of improved value for our health care dollars, both 
public and private.
  If we are to improve the health care status of America, we must focus 
on these inequities and make a concerted effort to eliminate them. 
There is no better place to commit ourselves to that effort than in the 
health reform legislation that we are about to consider. There is no 
better time to begin than right now.
  Examples of grim health disparities are found in all racial and 
ethnic minority groups and across a broad range of diseases and 
conditions. The overall life expectancy for African Americans is 5.3 
years less than Whites, but as the Kaiser Family Foundation has 
reported, health disparities begin even before birth.
  The use of prenatal care varies widely by race, with 88 percent of 
White mothers receiving care in the first trimester of a pregnancy, but 
only 76 percent of Black mothers and 77 percent of Latino mothers.
  This disparity is evident at birth, when Black women experience 
preterm births at a rate 50 percent higher than White women--18.5 
percent compared to 11.7 percent, and the rates of low-birth weight 
babies are also higher among Black babies--14 percent, compared to the 
8.3 percent national average.
  In August of 1967, 8 months before his assassination, Martin Luther 
King addressed the Southern Christian Leadership Conference's Tenth 
Anniversary Convention in a speech entitled, ``Where Do We Go from 
Here?''
  He said that to answer that question:

       We must first honestly recognize where we are now. When the 
     Constitution was written, a strange formula to determine 
     taxes and representation declared that the Negro was sixty 
     percent of a person. Today another curious formula seems to 
     declare that he is fifty percent of a person. ``Of the good 
     things in life, the Negro has approximately half those of 
     whites. Of the bad things in life, he has twice those of 
     whites.

  He goes on to discuss housing, income, and employment rates, before 
saying, ``the rate of infant mortality among Negroes is double that of 
whites.'' Today, in 2009, the Kaiser Family Foundation reports that the 
overall rate of infant mortality in the United States is 6.9 deaths per 
1,000 live births, a white infant mortality rate is at 5.7 deaths, but 
African Americans have an infant mortality rate more than twice that of 
Whites at 13.6 infant deaths per 1,000 live births.
  So 46 years after Dr. King's ``I Have a Dream'' speech, and 41 years 
after his death, we have not made progress in closing the gap in infant 
mortality.
  There is no other way to put it: this is a crisis, it has been a 
crisis for decades, we have known it, and we have failed in our 
response.
  Health disparities continue through life, and the data cut across 
diagnoses and conditions. These are just a few of the statistics:
  African-American children have a 60 percent higher rate of asthma 
than White children and visited the emergency room for asthma related 
services 4.5 times more often than White children in 2004.
  The incidence of diabetes is nearly twice as high in African 
Americans as in Whites. Complications from diabetes and death from the 
disease are also higher in African Americans, and the rate of hospital 
admissions for uncontrolled diabetes for African Americans and Latinos 
is nearly 5 and 3 times, respectively, the rate for Whites and Asians.
  High blood pressure accounts for 18 percent of the Nation's overall 
death rate, but 41 percent of deaths in African-American women and 50 
percent of deaths in African-American men are attributed to 
hypertension.
  Regarding early detection of colon cancer, African Americans, Asians, 
Native Americans and Latinos over age 50 all have lower rates than 
Whites when it comes to receiving any form of colon cancer screening. 
This disparity increased between 1999 and 2006.
  Incidence of, and death rates from, kidney cancer in Native Americans 
and Alaska Natives are higher than in any other racial or ethnic group.
  Native Americans and Alaska Natives die from heart disease much 
earlier than the overall population--36 percent are under age 65 
compared with only 17 percent for the U.S., according to the American 
Heart Association's data.
  Perhaps the greatest disparities are in the rates of HIV and AIDS. 
African Americans experience an AIDS case rate nearly 10 times that of 
Whites: 60.1 per 100,000 adults and adolescents, compared to 6. per 
100,000 for Whites. Latinos and Native Hawaiians and other Pacific 
islanders have an AID case rate nearly 3 times that of Whites, at 20.4 
per 100,000.
  Disparities also affect oral health care, which--as I have discussed 
on the floor before--is an integral part of overall health care--and 
without which, patients cannot have good overall health. Regardless of 
age, minorities are less likely than Whites to have visited a dentist 
in the past year. The percentage of people who had untreated dental 
disease is substantially higher for African Americans and Latinos than 
for Whites, and the prevalence of periodontal disease is 2.5 times 
greater for Native Americans and Alaskan Natives than for Whites. We 
know that periodontal disease leads to heart disease, brain infections, 
and other serious illnesses.
  Last year, the American Journal of Public Health published research 
showing the vast disparities in mortality rates. Using data for the 
decade between 1991 and 2000 from the National Center for Health 
Statistics, the researchers, including Dr. David Satcher, the 16th 
Surgeon General of the United States, found that the mortality rate for 
African-American infants and adults aged 25 to 54 years was more than 
double that of Whites.
  Had the mortality rates of the two races been comparable during that 
decade, the researchers calculate that 886,202 deaths could have been 
averted.
  Let me repeat that--the lives of nearly 900,000 African Americans 
could have been lengthened and the quality of life improved for many 
more if we had been able to close the gaps in health disparities.
  This chart illustrates the higher death rate observed among African 
Americans across Maryland and the United States, based on Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention data, for the years 1999 to 2003. The 
striped bar shows that in the U.S., African Americans had a 31.5 
percent higher death rate from all causes of disease than Whites.
  Maryland has a comparable discrepancy at 30.8 percent, shown by the 
red bar. The number of excess deaths varies by county, with the lowest 
discrepancy in death rates in Charles County--4.1%--and the highest 
discrepancy in Talbot County--64.5%.
  We cannot afford to wait. We need action at every level: local, 
State, and Federal, but the leadership must come from the Secretary of 
Health and Human Services. HHS will need a strengthened institutional 
capacity to achieve these goals.
  Codifying the Office of Minority Health and elevating it to report 
directly to the Secretary will empower the agency to continue its 
important work--protecting and improving the health of racial and 
ethnic minority populations, advising the Secretary of HHS on the needs 
of minority communities, coordinating and supporting research and 
demonstration programs, and supporting the community organizations that 
enhance outreach and education efforts. These offices will be able to 
promote activities related to disease prevention, wellness, access to 
care, and research related to racial and ethnic minorities with the 
goal of reducing and eliminating disparities.
  The offices will be authorized to administer grant programs and also 
help train health professionals to care for diverse populations. The 
bill passed by the House on Saturday includes a provision to codify the 
Office of Minority Health.
  I will be working to expand that provision in the Senate bill so that 
it reflects concerns echoed by many health advocates and provider 
groups across the nation who know that we must marshal the resources 
necessary to eliminate disparities.
  The bill reported by the HELP Committee contains many important 
provisions, including section 221, which would codify and increase the 
authority of the Office of Women's Health across several agencies in 
HHS. I believe strongly that the Office of Minority Health should 
receive the same prioritization that the Office of Women's Health is 
set to receive, particularly in light of the vast amount of data 
documenting racial and ethnic

[[Page S11319]]

disparities. This is really an issue of equality in the efforts to 
achieve health equity. As we champion efforts to achieve equity in 
women's health, let us also do the same for minority health.
  I will also be working to ensure the codification of the Office of 
Minority Health at HHS and the network of minority health offices 
throughout the Department's various agencies.
  I will close with another quote from Dr. King, who said that ``of all 
the forms of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking 
and inhuman.'' As with other forms of inequality in America, it is 
within our power to change it, and I ask my colleagues to join me in 
the quest to do so without further delay.
  Mr. TESTER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Fort Hood Victims

  Mr. TESTER. Madam President, I rise today in honor of those killed 
last week at Fort Hood. They died serving their country, and that means 
they died as heroes.
  Tomorrow, as we honor the service and sacrifice of the brave men and 
women of America's military on Veterans Day, I ask all Americans to say 
a prayer for these 13 folks who gave the ultimate sacrifice and the 30 
who were injured. Remember them and their families, their friends and 
the places they called home as we pay our respects.
  Today, flags are flying at halfstaff across Montana in honor of the 
13 victims killed and 30 wounded. One of the men who died was a veteran 
of Montana's Army National Guard. Michael Grant Kahill worked 
throughout Montana for many years as a guardsman and as a physician's 
assistant. To Michael's wife Joleen and to all of his loved ones, 
Montana joins the rest of the Nation in saying that our thoughts and 
prayers are with you.
  What happened at Fort Hood doesn't make sense. It never will. But 
working together, we need to focus on keeping something such as this 
from happening again. What can we do right now? We can keep working 
together to live up to the promises we make to all of our troops while 
serving our country in the field or after they come home, and we can 
improve access to health care and mental health care that they deserve.
  I join in mourning the lives lost at Fort Hood. I ask all Americans 
to keep those 13 heroes in their thoughts and prayers, and I urge my 
colleagues to keep working together to better serve all the men and 
women who have worn our country's uniform, and their families and their 
communities.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.


                           The Climate Change

  Mr. VITTER. Madam President, I rise to talk about the Kerry-Boxer 
climate change bill which, sadly, was reported out of the EPW 
Committee, contrary to its rules and precedents, without any discussion 
or amendment.
  First of all, let me underscore that I think it is very unfortunate 
that a 1,000-page bill, a bill with enormous potential impact on our 
economy--indeed, on our way of life--was pushed out of committee with 
no Republicans being present, with not a single amendment being 
considered, and, in my opinion, directly contrary to the very rules and 
precedents of the committee. But I want to focus on specific provisions 
of the bill that are particularly troubling to me that underscore how 
serious a matter this is and what an enormous impact it could have on 
our economy and, indeed, on our way of life.
  I guess in many ways the title of the presentation is ``Why Carbon 
Credits Don't Matter.'' So many folks, so many companies, so many 
people particularly within the beltway are concerned about their 
allocation of carbon credits. But because of these significant sections 
in the bill which also exist word-for-word in the Waxman-Markey bill, 
the carbon credits will not matter because sections 705 and 707 will 
shut down significant economic activity, no matter what carbon credits 
certain people and certain companies have.
  Let me explain what I am talking about. Section 705(e) and section 
707 are very important in the bill. Basically, section 705(e) says that 
we are to track the global measurement of greenhouse gas emissions and 
specifically to see if they are held below a threshold set in the bill, 
a goal set in the bill of 450 parts per million carbon dioxide 
equivalent. Then section 707 says that, beginning July 1, 2015, if the 
global concentrations are above this 450 parts per million line, then:

       . . . the President shall direct relevant Federal agencies 
     to use existing statutory authority to take appropriate 
     actions identified in the reports submitted under sections 
     705 and 706 and to address any shortfalls identified in such 
     reports.

  What does that mean? That means if you bust this 450 parts per 
million line, the President does not have authority to take action; he 
is mandated to take every administrative action possible, to use every 
agency in the Federal Government under him--he shall direct them to 
address whatever shortfalls there are between that 450 parts per 
million line and where the measurements are.
  One significant factor in all of this, whether we can ever reach that 
goal of limiting greenhouse gases to 450 parts per million, is what 
other countries, particularly the developing world, are going to do.
  One thing that is really problematic with this entire plan is the G5 
developing countries and Russia have made it crystal clear that they 
will not accept any hard caps. I cite here a clear quote from a top 
Chinese Foreign Ministry official, a clear quote from the Minister of 
State for Environment of India and the top economic adviser of Russia's 
President about that issue. All of these statements and many more make 
it crystal clear that the G5 and Russia will not accept any such hard 
cap.
  This is a pretty significant issue. Because of this, I wrote to the 
EPA on July 15 and asked several questions. One is basic to this issue: 
What does your modeling say if the G5 and Russia reject hard caps? That 
is a pretty significant scenario because it seems pretty clear that it 
is the scenario that will happen based on the statements of those 
countries. The EPA answered that it has not even analyzed that 
scenario. These other countries have made it clear they are going to 
reject hard caps. The EPA has not analyzed this scenario.
  Because of that, I then went to the Department of Energy's Pacific 
Northwest National Laboratory. That is the leading modeling expert in 
these matters that Federal Government agencies, starting with the EPA, 
depend upon. In fact, the EPA helped direct us to this laboratory. I 
asked the same question: What does the modeling say if the G5 and 
Russia reject hard caps as they have absolutely promised to do? The 
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory answered that none of the models 
they use--and they use 10 models--none of those models, under this 
scenario, produced global concentrations at or below 450 ppm of CO-
equivalent greenhouse gases. So under all of those models we break 
through this goal set in the bill.
  This chart shows what DOE's specific Northwest National Laboratory 
model predicts when the G5 and Russia reject all hard caps. Already we 
are in the four hundreds. In about 1 year we break through the 450 
limit--451. Then it goes up from there.
  What does that mean in the context of this legislation and, 
specifically, the sections I talked about a minute ago? Well, the 
legislation says that on July 1, 2015, if this green line is above 450, 
then the President is mandated to take whatever action is necessary: 
Use all tools available to get us back to this 450 limit.
  Under this scenario, the G5 and Russia rejecting hard caps, which is 
an absolute certainty based on their clear pronouncements, this 
mandate, under those significant sections of the legislation, both 
Kerry-Boxer and Waxman-Markey, exactly the same language in both, this 
mandate goes into effect and would absolutely go into effect.
  What does that mean? Well, the first thing it means is carbon 
credits, which everybody is so focused on, so many people and companies 
are fixated on, carbon credits will not matter if your project, if your 
economic activity takes any discretionary Federal permit because, 
beginning July 1, 2015, the President will be mandated, not authorized, 
not encouraged, nothing is suggested, he will be mandated to take

[[Page S11320]]

any action possible to get us down to that limit. That would include 
denying all discretionary permit requests.
  What else does it mean? It means, under that mandate in the law, you 
can bet that every leftwing environmental group in the world, much less 
in this country, will sue to block all economic activity that requires 
discretionary permits. Quite frankly, they will have a very compelling 
case. They will point to this legislative language, if it is enacted, 
and say: Time out. The President is not just authorized to do this, the 
President is not just encouraged to do this, the President is mandated 
to take every action he can, which clearly would include denying all 
discretionary permits to push that curve, that green curve, back down 
to 450 or as low as it can go.
  So what does that mean? That means carbon credits are meaningless if 
you need a discretionary permit for certain economic activity or for 
any new economic project. This is a very important aspect of the bill. 
Again, it is in Kerry-Boxer. Exactly the same language is also in 
Waxman-Markey as it passed the full House of Representatives.
  This gives an enormous mandate to the President of the United States 
to absolutely take action once those global greenhouse gas emissions 
get above 450. So my message is clear, particularly to the companies 
that have supported this legislation because they have been assured 
certain carbon credits.
  The message is clear: Carbon credits will not matter if any of your 
activities, if any of your new projects or proposed projects requires 
any discretionary Federal permit. To deliver that message, crystal 
clear, to those companies, in particular, tomorrow I am writing to a 
significant leading handful of those companies that so far have 
supported the legislation, pointing out the enormous impact of those 
sections, 705 and 707, and asking them to focus very clearly on what it 
means to their projects, to their economic activity, to their bottom 
line because, again, carbon credits will not matter once this enormous 
mandate and authority of the President goes into effect.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time is 12:35 p.m.
  Mr. VITTER. I yield the floor.

                          ____________________