[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 131 (Monday, September 15, 2014)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5581-S5582]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NOMINATION OF STEPHEN G. BURNS TO BE A MEMBER OF THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the nomination.
The legislative clerk read the nomination of Stephen G. Burns, of
Maryland, to be a Member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for the
term of five years expiring June 30, 2019.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
Ms. MIKULSKI. May I ask a question? Has the Senate returned to
legislative session?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. We are in executive session postcloture on the
Burns nomination.
Ms. MIKULSKI. I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning
business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Paycheck Fairness
Ms. MIKULSKI. Well, there is the Senate. There they go again.
Whenever we women fight for fair pay, we are either sidelined,
redlined, or pushed aside.
We, moving for paycheck fairness, feel the way women feel every
single day in the workplace. When they are trying to get equal pay for
equal work, they are either not listened to or there is some kind of
reason to make sure the discussion never comes up. Once again, because
of eight votes separating, we could not debate paycheck fairness.
The Paycheck Fairness Act is a bill that would finish the job we
started with Lilly Ledbetter.
This is not right. When women are out there trying to earn equal pay
for equal work, they should have the opportunity to do so. Now they
feel stymied. In Lilly Ledbetter, we took the first step to right this
wrong, but it was not the only step.
Paycheck fairness closes the innumerable loopholes that prevent women
from being able to get equal pay for equal work. All we wanted to do
was bring up the bill to debate it, to amend it, and then vote on final
passage. We could not get cloture on the filibuster. Those are wonky
parliamentary words that said we could have unlimited debate.
If we had gotten cloture under our rules, that would have been 30
hours of debate. I think that is enough time. There could have been
amendments but, guess what, they had to be germane; that is, pertinent
to the bill, or they had to be relevant or pertinent to the bill. What
is wrong with that? That is not a gag rule. That is not muzzling
anybody.
No, no, it wasn't good enough. Do you know why we didn't get cloture?
They didn't want to bring up this bill for a final vote or amendments.
They are hiding behind parliamentary procedure.
Do you know what. Our paycheck fairness bill was so simple and stayed
straightforward. Do you know what it would have done? It would have
prevented retaliation against workers for sharing information about
their wages. Right now, the most secret thing in our country is not
only our national security, but what you make. You can't discuss your
wages with the person next to you. So if a woman was trying to figure
out what the guy next to her was making, and he wanted to tell her--men
of quality always support us women as we seek equality. If he wanted to
tell her, both could have been fired--her for asking and him for
telling. We wanted to close that loophole.
The other thing the bill would do, it would prevent employers from
being able to use almost any reason to justify paying a woman less. For
years, employers have exploited loopholes in the Equal Pay Act,
inventing any number of reasons why a woman should be paid less. It
would also prevent women from being limited to just back pay when they
are discriminated against. Those are the three major issues.
In the United States of America, when we said all men and women were
created equal, we have to be able to be equal, and one of the most
important places you are equal is in the workplace. So if women are
doing the same job, we ought to get the same pay. That is the American
way. But once again we were stymied. Once again they tried to push us
back.
I am going to say this today on behalf of myself, the majority of the
women in the Senate, and many of the great guys in the Senate: They
want to make sure that today's vote doesn't say we are stopping this
fight. Once again, we are going to reach out to the grassroots,
particularly to the women of America, to join in the fight to change
the Federal law books so women can get change in the family checkbooks.
They can try to stop us on the floor, but they cannot stop our
movement.
Once again, as I have said before, when we have had a setback, we are
going to fight. We are going to fight on the Senate floor, we are going
to take this to the people in the country, we are going to fight it
through the elections, and we are going to fight it through the
community. I am going to say to every single person in the United
States of America: Be part of this movement.
[[Page S5582]]
A special message to the women: Let's suit up. Let's square our
shoulders. Let's put our lipstick on and fight for equal pay that won't
be stopped. We are going to do it. We are going to fight today, and we
are going to fight tomorrow, and I am combat ready.
I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Donnelly). The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
TESLA
Mr. REID. Mr. President, a week ago last Thursday, Tesla, a major
company in America, announced that Nevada would be the new home to its
gigafactory, which would produce lithium batteries for Tesla's electric
cars. Just a few days later, Nevada's State legislature unanimously
approved the incentive package to finalize a new economic boost for
Nevada.
Tesla's gigafactory will spur economic development in Nevada. All
told, the state-of-the-art manufacturing center is expected to pump
$100 billion into Nevada's economy and create up to 22,000 jobs.
This development is good news for Nevada, but it didn't happen by
accident. It is the direct result of public-private partnerships and
smart Federal and State policies. It is the result of Nevada being seen
as a hub for renewable energy and innovative technologies. This
project, as big as it is, will be powered with solar and geothermal.
Nothing else will power this big project.
I have worked here in the Senate to promote legislation that
encourages investment in clean energy and transportation innovation at
all levels. In 2007, we passed the Energy Independence and Security
Act, which created the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing
Program. Under this program, the Department of Energy awarded a $465
million loan guarantee to Tesla for the construction of a manufacturing
facility in California. The question everyone has is: Was that loan a
successful investment in Tesla?
The facts speak for themselves. Tesla repaid the loan in full 9 years
early. Tesla is the company it is today because of this loan.
The availability of lithium, which ultimately helped attract Tesla to
Nevada, also has its roots in Federal legislation. In 2009, with the
economy in a deep recession and thousands of Nevadans losing their
jobs, we passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act--better
known as the stimulus. There were many good things for Nevada and the
country in that stimulus legislation. For example, millions for
education, millions for renewable energy development, and tax breaks
for the middle class.
Also in the stimulus was a program to incentivize advanced battery
manufacturing. Through this program, a $28.4 million grant was awarded
to Rockwood Lithium of Nevada, which would help to expand and improve
the only operating domestic lithium facility in the country. It is
located near the historic mining town of Goldfield, a place called
Silver Peak. Nevada only has 17 counties. Esmeralda County, where this
is located, has less than 1,000 people. So this mine is really
important for our country. We are the only lithium mining facility in
America.
Because of the stimulus, Tesla will have access to lithium mined in
Nevada, as I indicated, for production of these batteries. But in order
to truly promote innovation, we must as a Congress create opportunities
for consumers to invest in new, advanced technologies, and we haven't
done that. We need more tax incentives for that.
In 2008, we encouraged Americans to invest in the growth of the
electric car industry through a tax credit of up to $7,500 for the
purchase of qualified electric vehicles. We expanded that credit in the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009 to ensure that while
Americans recovered from the recession, we did so by investing in new
technology that would produce lasting economic growth.
Tesla's investment in Nevada shows what is possible when public-
private partnerships and smart Federal and State policies are
encouraged. In the 21st century, this is how public-private
partnerships should work, and it is so important to realize that
through these grants, loans, and the private sector, working with
States such as Nevada and California and the Federal Government, we
were able to accomplish this.
This is a blueprint for success. Federal, State, and local leaders
must clear obstacles that stymie innovation and incentivize cleaner
technologies. We must make it easier for industry to invest in our
communities, not just in Nevada but all across America.
As Elon Musk, the genius who has done SpaceX, PayPal, Tesla, and so
many other things, said just the other day:
What the people of Nevada created is a state where you can;
where you are very agile, where you can do things quickly and
get things done. It's a real get-things-done state.
I want the Record to be spread with my public appreciation on behalf
of all Nevadans to Governor Sandoval. His patience and diligence made
this possible. I congratulate him because the work he did here was
terrific.
Mr. President, I yield the floor and 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. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________