[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 11]
[Issue]
[Pages 14687-14934]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]
[[Page 14687]]
VOLUME 158--PART 11
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES--Friday, September 21, 2012
The House met at 9 a.m. and was called to order by the Speaker.
____________________
PRAYER
The Chaplain, the Reverend Patrick J. Conroy, offered the following
prayer:
God of all Creation, we give You thanks for giving us another day.
On this day, the people's House concludes its business. Members
return to their congressional districts. An election to determine those
who would serve this Nation as Members of Congress lies before us all.
There are many energies which divide this House. There are many
voices throughout our Nation vying for the attention of any who would
listen.
Please bless our Nation and those who leave this Chamber for the
oncoming and ongoing campaign. Grant that there be more light than
heat, more charity than enmity, more graciousness than ugliness, more
wisdom than ignorance. Our great Nation has perdured for over two
centuries, with many fits and starts, but many triumphs as well.
In the weeks that come, may Your grace descend upon all citizens
engaged in the affairs of our time. May we be mindful of needs beyond
our own and united in a commitment to work together for a better future
for these United States.
Bless us this day and every day, and may all that is done be for Your
greater honor and glory.
Amen.
____________________
THE JOURNAL
The SPEAKER. The Chair has examined the Journal of the last day's
proceedings and announces to the House his approval thereof.
Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal stands approved.
____________________
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The SPEAKER. Will the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky) come
forward and lead the House in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY led the Pledge of Allegiance as follows:
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.
____________________
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER
The SPEAKER. The Chair will entertain up to five 1-minute requests on
each side of the aisle.
____________________
A TIME FOR CHOOSING
(Mr. WILSON of South Carolina asked and was given permission to
address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, as we enter the final
stages of this election cycle, the American people have a choice for
change--promoting limited government with expanded freedom or big
government with power to politicians. A key issue is job creation.
I support the bipartisan initiatives of John F. Kennedy's and Ronald
Reagan's of cutting taxes, which enable the private sector to create
jobs. President Obama has enacted failed policies of borrow, tax, and
spend, producing 43 months of unemployment of over 8 percent.
New jobs could be created with an all-of-the-above energy policy, but
President Obama promised skyrocketing energy costs--doubling gas
prices. A better course would be to develop the Keystone pipeline with
our number one ally, Canada. The contrast on national defense is
clear--that we should stand for peace through strength: Ronald Reagan.
President Obama's policies to hollow out our military reveal weakness.
My constituents are heartbroken at the Internet tragedy of our
Ambassador to Libya being murdered and his body desecrated by
terrorists.
In conclusion, God bless our troops, and we will never forget
September the 11th in the global war on terrorism.
____________________
THE FAILURE OF THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
(Mr. CICILLINE asked and was given permission to address the House
for 1 minute.)
Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, later today, the House is scheduled to
adjourn for 6 weeks with no plans to come back into session until
November.
On behalf of the hardworking Rhode Islanders whom I serve, I rise to
express my deep disappointment that the House Republican leadership is
choosing to adjourn and to abandon the middle class when so much work
is left to be done.
In my home State, nearly 60,000 men and women cannot find work. More
than 50,000 homes have mortgages that are under water, but instead of
working to pass a comprehensive jobs plan, provide relief to
homeowners, or strengthen families by passing the middle class tax
cuts, House Republicans want to take the next 6 weeks off.
Today's action by the Republican leadership is a failure of their
responsibility to lead, and I urge them to reconsider and agree to
remain here and commit to working together in a bipartisan way to
address the urgent issues facing our country.
____________________
LET'S STAY IN WASHINGTON AND FINISH THE JOB
(Mr. WITTMAN asked and was given permission to address the House for
1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. WITTMAN. Mr. Speaker, Americans continue to look for work, to put
food on the table, and to ensure their children have proper school
supplies as fall comes into full swing. Yet the House is set to leave
Washington today with many items on its to-do list.
While Congress finishes up the work to pass a budget to fund the
Federal Government, catastrophic cuts loom on the horizon, set to hit
in January of 2013. Leaving these cuts unresolved is unconscionable.
Not only is this the wrong message to send to the American people, it's
simply not the right
[[Page 14688]]
thing to do. Our all-volunteer force is at war, and these cuts threaten
our national security. Furthermore, they threaten over 200,000 jobs in
Virginia.
Nine days remain before the new fiscal year begins. Congress should
do the right thing and stay in Washington instead of ignoring the
reality and delaying tough decisions. It's time to put governing over
politics. Let's stay in Washington and finish the job that we were
elected and expected to do.
____________________
CONGRESS MUST STAND UP AGAINST UTILITY CUTS ACROSS THE MIDWEST
(Mr. KUCINICH asked and was given permission to address the House for
1 minute.)
Mr. KUCINICH. The Stop the War on Coal Act is up today. It is the
coal industry which is waging war on our mountains by leveling them,
war on our lungs by burning dirty fuel, war on healthy children by
being the single largest source of mercury exposure, war on our rivers
and streams by filling them with toxic waste, war on groundwater
through poisonous ash fills, war on its workers through conditions
which continue to kill, war on families by breaking unions and by
relentlessly reducing jobs, war on our national debt by taking in
billions of subsidies, and now war on ratepayers of municipal utilities
across the Midwest.
Time to stop this war.
Peabody Coal's Prairie State coal plant in southern Illinois has
brokered a series of shady deals that puts 217 local utilities here,
across the Midwest, on the hook for billions of dollars for energy they
may never even get while paying twice the market price--a corrupt
boondoggle that will raise utility rates and saddle many publicly owned
utilities with crushing debt obligations.
Congress must stand up for the utility cuts in this areas.
____________________
HONORING OUTSTANDING ATHLETE STEVEN FOX
(Mr. FLEISCHMANN asked and was given permission to address the House
for 1 minute.)
Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor an outstanding
student athlete from the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga.
Competing at the U.S. Amateur Championship in Colorado, UTC student
Steven Fox came from behind to win the first USGA Championship for the
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga.
Down by two holes on the par 5 17th hole, Steven made a clutch birdie
and managed to make a great par on the final hole, putting the match
into sudden death after 36 grueling holes. At the first playoff hole,
Steven sank a critical 18-foot putt to secure his victory. Steven's
victory is an inspiration to the entire UTC community and, indeed, to
all Tennesseans.
No mention of this victory is complete without mentioning the great
UTC golf team, which has achieved national success under the leadership
of Coach Mark Guhne. Thanks to his hard work and the support of former
Athletic Director Steve Sloan and Chancellor Roger Brown, UTC qualified
for this past year's NCAA championship in Los Angeles.
On behalf of all east Tennesseans, I extend my congratulations to
Steven Fox. I look forward to watching him roam the fairways at Augusta
National soon. I also look forward to many future successes at UTC.
Go Mocs!
____________________
{time} 0910
BIPARTISAN DEFICIT REDUCTION
(Ms. SCHWARTZ asked and was given permission to address the House for
1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Ms. SCHWARTZ. Our Nation is facing serious economic and fiscal
challenges. We have seen economic recovery over the last 4 years, but
we have work to do.
The fiscal policies that expire at the end of the year, known as the
``fiscal cliff,'' present a rare opportunity to set aside politics and
find common ground to reduce our Nation's deficit in a balanced and
fiscally responsible manner.
Actions we take must be based on our priorities and our values. It
means strengthening the middle class and building economic opportunity.
It means spending cuts and new revenues.
We will need to make tough choices, but there is a path forward if we
are fair, if we are committed to our obligations to our seniors and our
children, and if we recognize the importance of strategic investments
to grow our economy now and into the future.
I was proud to be one of just 38 Members to support a bipartisan
proposal by Representatives Cooper and LaTourette that included tax
reform and spending cuts to reduce the Nation's deficit.
Let's move our country forward by taking responsible, meaningful, and
timely action.
____________________
HOLD THE IRS' FEET TO THE FIRE
(Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas asked and was given permission to address
the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it's time for Americans to
know the truth about the abuse of their hard-earned taxpayer dollars,
especially at a time when the President is calling for tax increases.
The issue I'm talking about is IRS action that puts billions of
taxpayer dollars at risk. Currently, the IRS allows individuals without
a Social Security number to get cash benefits--like the $1,000
refundable child tax credit which is costing American taxpayers
billions of dollars--by obtaining an individual taxpayer identification
number, or ITIN.
A recent IG report revealed a shocking scandal within the IRS that
encouraged employees to fast track ITIN approval without regard to
preventing fraud. The ITIN has become a ticket to get cash from Uncle
Sam, and this is wrong.
I'm introducing the ITIN Reform Act to hold the IRS' feet to the fire
to better protect the American taxpayer, and I urge all my colleagues
to support this bill.
____________________
HONORING DR. DENTON A. COOLEY
(Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to address
the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on August 3, 1962, a life
changing decision was made by Dr. Denton Cooley in the founding of the
Texas Heart Institute.
As I listened to the words said this morning, he chose wisdom over
ignorance with respect to diagnosing cardiovascular disease, the most
devastating killer of Americans, killing a life every 33 seconds, 2,600
lives each day, and nearly 1 million lives each year.
Dr. Cooley was honored this past week with tributes from President
George Bush and President William Jefferson Clinton, joined by his wife
and extended family. Over the years, he has been able to help men and
women and children. He has done a magnificent job with respect to the
amount of surgeries that have been performed. He performed more than
118,000 open-heart operations, 258,000 cardiac catheterizations, and
1,270 heart transplants.
The Texas Heart Institute, along with St. Luke's Hospital, continues
to serve the world and continues to do research to improve the lives of
those who suffer from heart disease. Dr. James Willerson is the new
CEO. His demeanor and temperament, his research abilities, and his
leadership has taken this great institution to the 21st century.
What a great honor to be with those who honor Dr. Denton Cooley for
his wisdom and his ability to challenge medical profession science to
be able to save lives. Today, children live, families are reunited, and
we are stronger in our health because of the existence of the Texas
Heart Institute. It is my privilege to congratulate them for 50 years
of saving lives.
____________________
POW/MIA RECOGNITION DAY
(Mr. MILLER of Florida asked and was given permission to address the
[[Page 14689]]
House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the more
than 83,000 Americans still listed as missing in action or prisoners of
war. Today is National POW/MIA Recognition Day.
I would like to bring to the attention of my House colleagues the
efforts made by the joint POW/MIA Accounting Command to recover and
return home to their families our unaccounted for servicemembers.
Also, let us recognize groups such as Rolling Thunder, the Vietnam
Veterans of America, the American Ex-Prisoners of War, the National
League of POW/MIA Families, and numerous others who ensure those who
remain missing are never forgotten, and that our Nation remembers their
sacrifice.
This includes Army Private First Class Ithiel Whatley of Escambia
County, Florida, who was last seen on July 12, 1950, in Korea and who
is remembered every day of the year by his brother Nat.
We salute our POWs and MIAs who have given to this Nation more than
we can ever repay. The United States will not rest until each is home
and has received the proper burial on American soil they deserve.
Please offer a prayer for those who remain on the battlefields of the
past and of the present, and let us pledge that not one is left behind.
____________________
VOTER SUPPRESSION
(Ms. SCHAKOWSKY asked and was given permission to address the House
for 1 minute.)
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, this is Constitution Week, when we
celebrate our fundamental rights as Americans. Today, one of the most
cherished rights, the right to vote, is under serious attack.
Recent efforts to suppress voter participation are designed to
silence the voice of American voters, especially seniors, people of
color, the poor, and young adults.
In Florida, new restrictions on voter registration led the League of
Women Voters to suspend their efforts until the law was halted by the
court. Republican legislatures have passed strict voting requirements,
although Pennsylvania could not provide even one example of voter
fraud. Even elderly veterans, who risked their lives for our country,
may be turned away from the polls because they lack the proper IDs.
Five million Americans could be disenfranchised.
Anyone who values our Constitution should encourage voting, not erect
barriers based on false claims of voter fraud.
____________________
STOP THE WAR ON COAL ACT OF 2012
General Leave
Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on H.R. 3409.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Fleischmann). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from Kentucky?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 788 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill,
H.R. 3409.
Will the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Yoder) kindly take the chair.
{time} 0918
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of
the bill (H.R. 3409) to limit the authority of the Secretary of the
Interior to issue regulations before December 31, 2013, under the
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, with Mr. Yoder
(Acting Chair) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose on Thursday,
September 20, 2012, amendment No. 7 printed in House Report 112-680
offered by the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Harris) had been disposed
of.
{time} 0920
Amendment No. 8 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8
printed in House Report 112-680.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Strike section 503 of the committee print.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 788, the gentlewoman
from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, this is an amendment, I
believe, that common sense would allow us to work together and pass.
This amendment would simply maintain the current deadline that
existed under the previous administration of 90 days under the Clean
Air Act by striking section 503 of the bill which artificially limits
agency comment periods on water quality permits to 30 days with no
possibility of extension. This existed under President Bush's
administration.
Why, then, would my friends on the other side of the aisle not join
with me to say let's have regular order? Let's ensure that we give
everyone a reasonable opportunity for a response on their quality of
life.
On the surface, the intent of H.R. 3409 appears to be to prevent the
Interior Department from revising a Bush administration midnight
regulation that significantly weakened mountaintop protections on the
destructive practice of mountaintop removal mining. Let me remind you,
they did not alter the comment period. Mountaintop removal mining, as
many of us know, is a very challenging, environmentally difficult
process. For many, they say, it creates jobs.
What we are trying to do is to ensure that there is a balance between
that industry and, as well, the fairness of allowing those to be able
to comment. As it's presently drafted, this bill would reach, in fact,
it would make it much more difficult, if you will, to deal with the
question of rulemaking.
The people in the State of Texas and the city of Houston appreciate
the ability to drink cool, fresh water. So does everyone else. The idea
of not being able to comment on the impact of this particular process
is challenging.
I ask my colleagues to consider the importance of coming together and
extending, or going back to, the 90-day comment period to balance, if
you will, the timeframe and to ensure that all are heard on any aspects
that would impact the environment, impact the environment of this
particular procedure.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GIBBS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. GIBBS. Mr. Chairman, I object to the amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, may I ask how much time
remains.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Texas has 2\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Deutch).
Mr. DEUTCH. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the gentlelady's amendment
to yet another bill that will never become law, another bill that feeds
into the biggest problem we have here.
The 112th Congress has actually set a sad new low for our democracy.
We all know that President Harry Truman famously dubbed the 80th
Congress in 1948 as the ``do-nothing Congress.'' Yet the do-nothing
Congress of 1948 has
[[Page 14690]]
nothing on this one. That Congress passed over 900 laws, while the
112th Congress has passed just over 100.
Among the countless laws blocked by the Republican majority is the
American Jobs Act, which economists say would create over 2\1/2\
million jobs. It's a sad day when the main drag on America's economy is
the U.S. House of Representatives.
Most Americans actually have to earn their vacation days, Mr.
Chairman. The only thing the Congress has earned are abysmal approval
ratings. The 112th Congress puts Harry Truman's do-nothing Congress to
shame. At a time when our economy should come first, that, Mr.
Chairman, is shameful.
I rise in strong support of the gentlelady's amendment to a bill that
prevents us from actually accomplishing the real work the American
people expect from us.
Mr. GIBBS. I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, let me just clarify what is
happening with this legislation. It eliminates the EPA's authority to
apply minimum Federal water quality standards sufficient to protect
human and aquatic life, and it is weaker than State standards in many
places. It strips the EPA's authority to object to the State discharge
permits that fail to meet Clean Air Act requirements.
Now, this is not about creating jobs, Mr. Chairman. I ask, on the
names of our children yet unborn, to be able to have a quality of life,
quality of water and quality of air that the requirements that they are
trying to eliminate in this bill, the proponent of this bill, to the
extent that they will narrow the comment period to 30 days rather than
90 days.
Why is that not a simple request if my good friend could not say,
Congresswoman, we support the amendment. I hope that's what he will
say. The difficulty that I have is I would rather, Mr. Chairman, be
doing Medicare, tax breaks, jobs, urgent priorities that are needed.
I just ask for a little bit of consideration on recognizing that the
Nation is better when we have provided a quality of life for all
Americans. Who are we to speak of the needs of the people who have coal
in their region? What we have asked is that we put in the four
parameters of common sense and reasonableness.
My amendment is that. It expands back to its regular order the
existing comment period, Mr. Chairman, to 90 days. It strikes the
provision, and this bill that limits it to 30 days.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson
Lee amendment that speaks to the health and good quality of life for
all Americans and America's children.
I yield back the balance of my time.
CLEAN WATER ACT DEADLINE STUDY AMENDMENT
I rise today and ask my colleagues to support my amendment to H.R.
3409 which would simply maintain the current deadline of 90 days under
the Clean Water Act, by striking Section 503 of the bill which
artificially limits agency comment periods on water quality permits to
30 days with no possibility of extension.
On the surface the intent of H.R. 3409 appears to be to prevent the
Interior Department from revising a Bush Administration midnight
regulation that significantly weakened protections on the destructive
practice of Mountaintop Removal Mining. Mountaintop Removal Mining is
one the most environmentally destructive practices on earth, which has
fouled water quality and destroyed nearly 2,000 miles of Appalachian
streams since 1992.
However, H.R. 3409 is drafted so that its reach would in fact be much
broader than just this one rulemaking. The people in the State of Texas
and the city of Houston appreciate the ability to drink cool fresh
water which, at its core, is what the Clean Water Act is designed to
do. This legislation goes all the way back to 1948 because pollution of
the nation's surface waters was a very serious problem. And Mr.
Speaker, it still is today.
Title V of H.R. 3409 eliminates EPA's authority to apply minimum
federal water quality standards sufficient to protect human health and
aquatic life, if weaker state standards are in place. It strips EPA's
authority to object to state discharge permits that fail to meet Clean
Water Act requirements.
And it limits EPA's ability to protect waterways from harm from
mountaintop removal coal mining, repealing EPA's authority to veto a
``valley fill'' permit based on environmental concerns and limiting the
time environmental agencies have to comment to the Army Corps of
Engineers on the environmental impacts of a proposed valley fill.
H.R. 3409 would prevent the Secretary of the Interior from issuing
any regulation under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act
(SMCRA) through December 31, 2013, if the regulation would, among other
things, prohibit coal mining in any area, reduce employment in coal
mines, or reduce coal production.
The principal law governing pollution of the nation's surface waters
is the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, or Clean Water Act.
Originally enacted in 1948, it was totally revised by amendments in
1972 that gave the act its current shape. The 1972 legislation spelled
out ambitious programs for water quality improvement that have since
been expanded and are still being implemented by industries and
municipalities. In fact Mr. Chairman I would dare say that most
Americans take clean water for granted.
The Clean Water Act consists of two major parts, one being the
provisions which authorize federal financial assistance for municipal
sewage treatment plant construction. The other is the regulatory
requirements that apply to industrial and municipal dischargers. The
act has been termed a technology-forcing statute because of the
rigorous demands placed on those who are regulated by it to achieve
higher and higher levels of pollution abatement under deadlines
specified in the law.
Early on, emphasis was on controlling discharges of conventional
pollutants, for example, suspended solids or bacteria that are
biodegradable and occur naturally in the aquatic environment, while
control of toxic pollutant discharges has been a key focus of water
quality programs more recently.
My colleagues Mr. Markey of Massachusetts and Mr. Waxman of
California have done an excellent job detailing many of the harms that
H.R. 3409 would do. It bears repeating though, that Title V of H.R.
3409 contains H.R. 2018, which severely limits EPA's authority to apply
minimum national standards to protect the nation's waters from
pollution.
Title V prevents EPA from strengthening weak state water quality
standards, unless the state concurs, even if the water quality standard
is insufficient to protect human health or aquatic life. It also strips
EPA's authority to enforce discharge limits by prohibiting the agency
from objecting to state discharge permits that fail to meet the
requirements of the Clean Water Act. According to EPA, this title would
``overturn almost 40 years of Federal legislation by preventing EPA
from protecting public health and water quality.''
In addition, the title limits EPA's ability to protect waterways from
the devastating effects of mountaintop removal coal mining. Mountaintop
removal coal mining involves removing mountaintops to expose coal seams
and disposing of the material in adjacent valleys, a process known as
valley fills. This bill removes EPA's authority to veto a valley fill
permit based on environmental concerns, unless the state concurs with
the veto. The bill also limits the amount of time EPA, the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, and other agencies have to provide comments to
the Army Corps of Engineers on the potential environmental impacts of a
proposed valley fill operation.
Under this act, federal jurisdiction is broad, particularly regarding
establishment of national standards or effluent limitations. Certain
responsibilities are delegated to the states, and the act embodies a
philosophy of federal-state partnership in which the federal government
sets the agenda and standards for pollution abatement, while states
carry out day-to-day activities of implementation and enforcement.
To achieve its objectives, the act is based on the concept that all
discharges into the nation's waters are unlawful, unless specifically
authorized by a permit, which is the act's principal enforcement tool.
The law has civil, criminal, and administrative enforcement provisions
and also permits citizen suit enforcement.
The people in the state of Texas have had a severe drought and water
has become an even more sensitive topic. Indeed, in the West,
Southwest, and Rocky Mountain states water management is a more
prominent issue than it is in many other parts of this great nation.
Given our situation in Texas I think that it is clear that we must be
very careful not to upset the careful balance which scientists,
engineers, and the American people have developed when managing our
nation's water.
The deadlines that the Majority would like to shorten are not
arbitrary but represent realistic, reasonable, and business-friendly
deadlines which prudent Americans have learned to adhere to and Mr.
Speaker, we do nothing
[[Page 14691]]
by modifying those deadlines today, so I ask my colleagues to support
the Jackson Lee Amendment, keeping the comment period deadlines at 90
days.
Mr. GIBBS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise in opposition to the gentlelady's amendment because it strikes
an important provision in the bill that streamlines the section 404
permit process, not just for coal operations, but also for billions of
dollars of economic activity in this Nation.
One of the loudest complaints we hear in Congress is how long it
takes the Federal Government to reach determination on permit requests.
The Army Corps of Engineers is the lead Agency responsible for
concluding the section 404 permit determinations. But the Clean Water
Act requires the Corps to seek consultation with other Agencies like
the National Marine Fisheries Service and the Fish and Wildlife
Service.
Sadly, all too often, this consultation is where the needless delays
occur, not because of the Corps' inaction, but because of the failure
of the other agencies to provide timely information. This section,
title V, simply sets a more reasonable timeframe for Federal agencies
to get information to the Corps so a permit decision can be made in a
timely manner.
To many of us, it is strange to see this amendment from those who
purport to extol the virtues of Big Government since this amendment
makes it clear they don't believe Big Government is competent enough to
reach a decision in a reasonable amount of time.
This section of title V, the language which has already passed the
House in a resounding bipartisan majority, will streamline the time for
the consuming permit application process and ensure that $220 billion
in annual economic activity associated with section 404 activities does
not grind to a halt. Time is money, and this is about jobs. The slower
the time it takes to get these permits done, it holds up economic job
activity and the creation of jobs all across America in all sectors. I
urge all Members to oppose the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Texas will
be postponed.
Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. McKinley
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9
printed in House Report 112-680.
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 75, line 8, before the closing quotation marks insert
the following:
``(3) Following the date of issuance of a permit by the
Secretary in accordance with this section, the Administrator
may not take any action under paragraph (1) to retroactively
invalidate the permit.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 788, the gentleman
from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from West Virginia.
{time} 0930
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, this amendment will prohibit the EPA from
retroactively invalidating permits after they have been issued. On
January 13, 2011, the EPA took unprecedented action by retroactively
revoking a lawfully issued section 404 permit for the Spruce No. 1
surface mine in Logan County, West Virginia. This permit had been
issued 4 years earlier after an extensive 10-year environmental review,
including a 1,600-page environmental impact statement in which the EPA
fully participated and agreed to all the terms and conditions included
in the authorized permit.
But this amendment is intended to address far more than coal mines.
If the EPA can retroactively revoke a water permit for this industry,
they can do the same to any other manufacturer, refinery, municipality,
farm, or other government agency. Imagine an entrepreneur contemplating
making an investment requiring an EPA permit but then stopping once
they learn that the EPA could first grant the permit, allow the
business to proceed, and then invalidate the permit, crushing the
investment. Or, imagine a lending institution contemplating whether or
not to loan money to someone subject to an EPA regulation. Should any
of us be critical of them for being reluctant once they, too, become
aware that their loan could go into default once the EPA retroactively
revokes the permit on which the loan was granted?
All of us in Congress should be concerned about the chilling effect
these actions by the EPA have had and will have if they continue this
threat to the creation of jobs by exceeding their statutory authority.
At a time when our country is facing economic uncertainty and our
families are struggling to make ends meet, I'm appalled by this
continued assault on American businesses and families that the EPA has
taken. Our job creators need a consistent and predictable regulatory
program that will protect jobs we have and create new ones in an
environmentally responsible manner. Remember, this amendment is not
just for coal mining but rather it addresses virtually every business
in America which requires certainty in their regulatory environment.
I urge your support, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition to Mr.
McKinley's amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. PALLONE. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment would take away the EPA's authority
under the Clean Water Act to retroactively deny permits to fill streams
and wetlands in order to protect drinking water supplies, recreational
waters, and fish and wildlife habitat. Now EPA has used this authority
to veto permits after they were issued responsibly only three times in
40 years. All of these were extremely rare cases and these vetoes were
necessary to protect critical water resources.
In 1981, EPA revoked a permit for a solid waste landfill because it
was leaking toxics into Biscayne Bay. In 1989, after objecting to a
permit before it was issued, it overturned a permit to destroy 1,200
acres of flood plain wetlands in Georgia. And in 2010, which Mr.
McKinley mentions, EPA denied a permit for one of the largest
mountaintop removal mines in Appalachia that would have buried more
than six miles of West Virginia streams and polluted downstream waters
with mining waste, causing permanent damage to ecosystems and streams.
The veto was not a surprise--and I stress that. EPA consistently
expressed its concerns about water quality impacts of this mine
beginning from 2002 to 2006, when the Corps issued the permit.
Let me stress this was an extremely rare action taken by EPA. And the
first time it was used, it used the Clean Water Act to overturn an
approved mining permit. The surface mining in the steep slopes of
Appalachia has disrupted the biological integrity of an area about the
size of Delaware, buried approximately 2,000 miles of streams with
mining waste, and contaminated downstream areas with toxic elements.
People have been drinking the byproducts of coal waste from mountaintop
removal for more than two decades. Rather than clean and clear water
running out of their faucets, the people of Appalachia are left with
orange or black liquid instead.
This is not just about the environment, Mr. Speaker; it's about
public health. The health problems caused by exposure to these
chemicals and heavy metals include cancer, organ failure, and learning
disabilities. Not only that, but there are multiple cases of children
suffering from asthma, headaches, nausea, and other symptoms
[[Page 14692]]
likely due to toxic contamination from coal dust. This is an
environmental justice issue. My colleagues on the other side of the
aisle will claim EPA is killing jobs. I disagree with Mr. McKinley.
What the EPA is doing is protecting the people of Appalachia from
exposure to toxic chemicals that are harming them.
Now to put this in perspective, each year the Army Corps of Engineers
processes about 60,000 permits to fill waters and grants 97 percent of
them. Over 40 years, the EPA has vetoed only three of these permits
retroactively. On the very rare occasion one of these permits threatens
to permanently destroy our Nation's critical water resources, the EPA
should have the authority to stop it. This is authority that the EPA
has used very rarely, and there is no evidence that the EPA has abused
this authority.
This amendment is completely unnecessary. I urge Members to oppose it
and to protect EPA's authority to safeguard our waters and our drinking
water sources.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I ask how much time remains.
The Acting CHAIR. Both gentlemen have 2 minutes remaining.
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Gibbs).
Mr. GIBBS. I rise in strong support of the amendment. I chair the
committee. We had the hearings on this issue. And let's get straight
what this issue is. His amendment stops a revocation of a permit after
it's been issued. And what the gentleman just referred to is a permit.
During the application process the law allows the EPA to veto a permit.
But after it's been approved, this amendment takes care of not being
able to revoke it years later, in the instance that it was done.
Keep in mind, the revocation that occurred was not because they were
in violation of the permit. It was nothing but political theater. There
was no violation of the permit. The State of West Virginia EPA stated
that and the Army Corps said there was no violation of permit. This is
revocation that sets a bad dangerous, precedent to economic growth in
our country.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I want to point out that, in addition to
this being a terrible amendment, it's also an amendment that's going
nowhere. And it really frustrates me that on the last day of the
session before the election, this do-nothing Congress continues to
bring up bills that are going nowhere--and they know are going nowhere.
For 2 years, the House Republicans have picked millionaires over
Medicare and the middle class. Now they plan to leave town today
without entering into law any responsible deficit reduction, any middle
class tax cuts, the American Jobs Act. They have no jobs bill. The farm
bill they have neglected. The Violence Against Women Act. These are all
urgent priorities that we should be working on right now rather than
trying to pass amendments or bills that are going nowhere.
The American people can't afford a do-nothing Republican Congress
that refuses to act on issues critical to middle class families, to
small businesses, to farmers, and to women. I urge the Republican
leadership to just stay in town and complete our work. Don't waste our
time on bills like this that are going nowhere. The Senate is never
going to take this up.
Now here are a few of the things that the do-nothing Republican
Congress has found time to do:
Voted to end Medicare as we know it and increase costs on seniors by
$6,400.
Republicans chose millionaires over the middle class, giving more tax
breaks to the wealthiest.
Republicans vote for corporations that ship jobs overseas over
passing the American Jobs Act.
Republicans voted to restrict women's access to health services.
It is amazing to me that we sit here hour after hour on the last day
because they refuse to continue to work and talk about bills going
nowhere, when all these other major priorities need to be addressed.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKINLEY. Do I have the right to close?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey has 30 seconds
remaining. The gentleman from West Virginia has 1\1/4\ minutes. The
gentleman from New Jersey has the right to close.
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, briefly, let me just underscore here how
people try to distract attention away from the argument. We've heard
all these other arguments. I've heard the opponents talk about this is
the first time or the third time or whatever that is. Let's go back to
what the courts have said. Perhaps we need to have on the other side a
little bit more education. Because the Federal courts have already
struck down that initial reading. Shame on you--anyone--for not having
read all this.
The Federal court said the EPA's interpretation of the act is not
reasonable. Neither the statute nor the memorandum of agreement between
the EPA and the Corps makes any provision for a post-permit veto, and
this agency was completely unable to articulate what the practical
consequences of its actions would be.
{time} 0940
In addition, the court went on to say that the Clean Water Act does
not give the EPA the power to render a permit invalid once it has been
issued by the Corps.
We ought to put this to rest, codify it, and move on.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I'm very much aware that the EPA's veto
was challenged by the mining company, and the EPA has appealed this
ruling. I'm hoping that the Court of Appeals will see the light and
understand that the EPA should be able to protect the health of the
people of Appalachia.
Again, this amendment is completely unnecessary, and it's part of a
process where this Republican House does absolutely nothing but waste
our time. We shouldn't be leaving today. We should be staying and doing
our work.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from West
Virginia will be postponed.
Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Markey
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10
printed in House Report 112-680.
Mr. MARKEY. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chairman.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the Rules Committee Print, add the following
new title:
TITLE VI--COMBINED EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY STANDARD
SEC. 601. COMBINED EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY
STANDARD.
(a) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
(1) Distributed renewable generation facility.--The term
``distributed renewable generation facility'' means a
facility that--
(A) generates renewable electricity;
(B) primarily serves 1 or more electricity consumers at or
near the facility site; and
(C) is no greater than 2 megawatts in capacity.
(2) Electric consumer.--The term ``electric consumer'' has
the meaning given that term in section 3 of the Public
Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2602).
(3) Electric utility.--The term ``electric utility'' has
the meaning given that term in section 3 of the Public
Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2602),
except that, for the purposes of this section, such term does
not include any agency, authority, or instrumentality of the
United States Government.
(4) Electricity savings.--The term ``electricity savings''
means reductions in electricity consumption, relative to
business-as-usual projections, achieved through measures
implemented after the date of enactment of this section.
[[Page 14693]]
(5) Federal renewable electricity credit.--The term
``Federal renewable electricity credit'' means a credit,
representing one megawatt hour of renewable electricity,
issued pursuant to subsection (e).
(6) Renewable electricity.--The term ``renewable
electricity'' means electricity generated (including by means
of a fuel cell) from a renewable energy resource.
(7) Renewable energy resource.--The term ``renewable energy
resource'' means each of the following:
(A) Wind energy.
(B) Solar energy.
(C) Geothermal energy.
(D) Renewable biomass.
(E) Biogas or biofuels derived from renewable biomass.
(F) Hydropower generated by a hydroelectric facility placed
in service after January 1, 2001.
(G) Marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy, as that term
is defined in section 632 of the Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007 (42 U.S.C. 17211).
(H) Such other energy resources as the Secretary determines
appropriate.
(8) Retail electric supplier.--The term ``retail electric
supplier'' means, for any given year, an electric utility
that sold not less than 1,000,000 megawatt hours of electric
energy to electric consumers for purposes other than resale
during the preceding calendar year.
(9) Retail electric supplier's base amount.--The term
``retail electric supplier's base amount'' means the total
amount of electric energy sold by the retail electric
supplier, expressed in megawatt hours, to electric customers
for purposes other than resale during the relevant calendar
year, excluding--
(A) electricity generated by a hydroelectric facility that
was placed in service prior to January 1, 2001;
(B) electricity generated by the combustion of municipal
solid waste;
(C) electricity generated by a nuclear generating unit
placed in service after the date of enactment of this
section; and
(D) the proportion of electricity generated by a fossil-
fueled generating unit that is equal to the proportion of
greenhouse gases produced by such unit that are captured and
geologically sequestered.
(10) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Energy.
(11) Total annual electricity savings.--The term ``total
annual electricity savings'' means electricity savings during
a specified calendar year from measures implemented since the
date of the enactment of this section, taking into account
verified measure lifetimes or verified annual savings
attrition rates, as determined in accordance with such
regulations as the Secretary may promulgate and measured in
megawatt hours.
(b) Annual Compliance Obligation.--
(1) In general.--For each of calendar years 2014 through
2040, not later than March 31 of the following calendar year,
each retail electric supplier shall submit to the Secretary
an amount of Federal renewable electricity credits and
demonstrated total annual electricity savings that, in the
aggregate, is equal to such retail electric supplier's annual
combined target as set forth in subsection (d), except as
otherwise provided in subsection (g).
(2) Demonstration of savings.--For purposes of this
subsection, submission of demonstrated total annual
electricity savings means submission of a report that
demonstrates, in accordance with the requirements of
subsection (f), the total annual electricity savings achieved
by the retail electric supplier within the relevant
compliance year.
(3) Renewable electricity credits portion.--Except as
provided in paragraph (4), each retail electric supplier must
submit Federal renewable electricity credits equal to at
least three quarters of the retail electric supplier's annual
combined target.
(4) State petition.--Upon written request from the Governor
of any State (including, for purposes of this paragraph, the
Mayor of the District of Columbia), the Secretary shall
increase, to not more than half, the proportion of the annual
combined targets of retail electric suppliers located within
such State that may be met through submission of demonstrated
total annual electricity savings, provided that such increase
shall be effective only with regard to the portion of a
retail electric supplier's annual combined target that is
attributable to electricity sales within such State.
(c) Establishment of Program.--Not later than 1 year after
the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall
promulgate regulations to implement and enforce the
requirements of this section.
(d) Annual Compliance Requirement.--
(1) Annual combined targets.--For each of calendar years
2014 through 2040, a retail electric supplier's annual
combined target shall be the product of--
(A) the required annual percentage for such year, as set
forth in paragraph (2); and
(B) the retail electric supplier's base amount for such
year.
(2) Required annual percentage.--
(A) In general.--For each of calendar years 2014 through
2040, the required annual percentage shall be as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required annual
Year percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014 8
2015 10
2016 12
2017 14
2018 16
2019 18
2020 20
2021 22
2022 24
2023 26
2024 28
2025 30
2026 32
2027 34
2028 36
2029 38
2030 40
2031 42
2032 44
2033 46
2034 48
2035 through 2040 50
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(B) Adjustments permitted.--The Secretary may adjust the
required annual percentages described in subparagraph (A) if
the Secretary finds that such percentages are not technically
or economically feasible or pose a threat to electric
reliability.
(e) Federal Renewable Electricity Credits.--
(1) In general.--The regulations promulgated under this
section shall include provisions governing the issuance,
tracking, and verification of Federal renewable electricity
credits. Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this
subsection, the Secretary shall issue to each generator of
renewable electricity, 1 Federal renewable electricity credit
for each megawatt hour of renewable electricity generated by
such generator after December 31, 2013. The Secretary shall
assign a unique serial number to each Federal renewable
electricity credit.
(2) Credit multiplier for distributed renewable
generation.--The Secretary shall issue 3 Federal renewable
electricity credits for each megawatt hour of renewable
electricity generated by a distributed renewable generation
facility.
(3) Trading.--The lawful holder of a Federal renewable
electricity credit may sell, exchange, transfer, submit for
compliance in accordance with subsection (b).
(4) Banking.--A Federal renewable electricity credit may be
submitted in satisfaction of the compliance obligation set
forth in subsection (b) for the compliance year in which the
credit was issued or for any of the 3 immediately subsequent
compliance years.
(f) Electricity Savings.--
(1) Standards for measurement of savings.--As part of the
regulations promulgated under this section, the Secretary
shall prescribe standards and protocols for defining and
measuring electricity savings and total annual electricity
savings that can be counted towards the compliance obligation
set forth in subsection (b).
(2) Reporting savings.--The regulations promulgated under
this section shall establish requirements governing the
submission of reports to demonstrate, in accordance with the
protocols and standards for measurement and verification
established under this subsection, the total annual
electricity savings achieved by a retail electric supplier
within the relevant year.
(g) Alternative Compliance Payments.--
(1) In general.--A retail electric supplier may satisfy the
requirements of subsection (b) in whole or in part by
submitting in accordance with this subsection, in lieu of
each Federal renewable electricity credit or megawatt hour of
demonstrated total annual electricity savings that would
otherwise be due, a payment equal to $25, adjusted for
inflation on January 1 of each year following calendar year
2014, in accordance with such regulations as the Secretary
may promulgate.
(2) Payments.--Payments made under this subsection shall be
deposited into the general fund of the Treasury and shall be
available, subject to appropriations, to the Secretary for
the administrative costs of implementing this section.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 788, the gentleman
from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
My amendment is going to call for 25 percent of the electricity in
the United States being generated by renewables by the year 2035.
The United States, excluding hydro, is already up to 7 or 8 percent
of all of our electricity generated by renewables here in 2012. So, 23
years from now, the goal would be to reach 25 percent.
Now, why do I feel compelled to bring this amendment out here? Well,
while the Republicans say that there's a war on coal, so far in this
first year and 9
[[Page 14694]]
months that they have controlled the United States Congress, they have
declared war on solar; they have declared war on wind; they have
declared war on all renewables. That's why I bring this amendment down
here to the House floor.
They are going to kill the production tax credit for wind energy that
is going to send the wind industry off a cliff next year.
Already, 2,367 jobs have been lost in the wind industry because of
Republican action. Forty thousand jobs will be lost next year because
of Republican action. They are out to deliberately kill these jobs. How
many will be lost? Three thousand to 4,000 jobs in Pennsylvania will be
lost; 4,000 to 5,000 jobs in Colorado will be lost; 5,000 to 6,000 wind
jobs will be lost in Ohio; 6,000 to 7,000 wind jobs will be lost in
Iowa if the Republican policy is allowed to be put on the books.
They have declared war on wind. They have declared war on solar, on
geothermal, on biomass.
Ladies and gentlemen, what my amendment does is say let's have a plan
for everything else because it's not going to be a part of the
Republican plan.
So, by the year 2035, 25 percent of all electricity in our country
must come from renewables.
Now, how do we know this is possible? There were 12,000 new megawatts
of wind installed in the United States this year; 3,200 new megawatts
of solar installed in the United States this year.
So, geothermal, biomass, it's all growing. What's their goal? Kill
it. That's their problem. Natural gas is rising. It hurts the coal
industry. It's the marketplace.
Wind and solar are growing, geothermal and biomass are growing. They
don't want a level playing field. They want to pick winners and losers.
They want to pick favorites. That's what it's all about.
So far in their control of the Congress in just a year and 9 months,
they have voted to slash research and development for wind and solar,
they have voted to end loan guarantees for wind and solar, they have
voted to kill the transmission wires to carry wind and solar to our
homes and our offices.
The Republicans are so opposed to Americans having access to clean
energy that even when it is built they don't even want to have the
transmission lines to get it to American homes.
It's a war on solar and wind. My amendment ensures that there is a
pathway to the future for the most abundant American energy source,
wind and solar, geothermal and biomass. It's all here in America.
At this point, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WHITFIELD. I rise to claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. WHITFIELD. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MARKEY. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Kentucky has the right to close.
The gentleman from Massachusetts has 1\1/4\ minutes remaining.
Mr. MARKEY. If I may inquire from the Chairman, is the majority
saying that there is only one speaker remaining on their side?
The Acting CHAIR. Yes.
Mr. MARKEY. Then I will yield myself the balance of my time.
Wind and solar is the most abundant source of energy in the United
States--when we capture it. Einstein won his Nobel Prize in 1921, the
only one he won, and that's on how to capture the power of the sun. And
now we're on the cusp of doing this successfully as the price per
kilowatt hour drops and drops--and then it's all American.
And who is now looming over our shoulder, even though we invented
these technologies, even though we're producing these technologies, are
the Chinese, the Indians, and others who will pounce on this global
opportunity to create the jobs here in the United States, to export
this technology around the world even as we deploy the technology here
in our country that backs out the energy sources from around the rest
of the world. This is what they fear.
They fear the innovation. They fear the change. They fear our ability
to capture wind and solar to be able to power the vehicles which we
drive in our country, to be able to send up a cleaner source of energy
up into the sky that does not pollute. That's what this battle is all
about.
We do not want special advantage. All we want is a level playing
field. The Republicans continue this war against wind and solar.
Vote ``aye'' for the Markey amendment, 25 percent renewable
electricity by the year 2035.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Chairman, we haven't declared war on wind or solar
or anything else. We simply don't believe that when you have a $16
trillion Federal debt that the Federal Government should use taxpayers'
money to serve as venture capital for risky ventures like Solyndra that
received $538 million and now is bankrupt. If this technology is so
good, let the free market develop it. It does not need taxpayer
support.
Yet, on the other hand, this administration has adopted policies that
you can't even build a new coal-powered plant in America because
there's no technology available to meet the new emissions standards of
the Obama EPA.
On this particular amendment, on page 7 of the amendment, it says
that by the year 2035 that 50 percent of the electricity would have to
be produced from renewables. The gentleman in his comments said 25
percent, but this amendment says 50.
{time} 0950
Mr. MARKEY. Will the gentleman yield? That is not accurate.
Mr. WHITFIELD. Well, I'm just reading from page 7.
Anyway, this amendment simply creates a national renewable
electricity standard. We've seen it before. It was in the Markey-Waxman
cap-and-trade bill in the last Congress, which was rejected by the
Congress.
This amendment does nothing more than determine for the American
people where their electricity will come from and that they are going
to be paying more for it.
So I urge people to vote against the Markey amendment, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Massachusetts will be postponed.
Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. DeFazio
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11
printed in House Report 112-680.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the Rules Committee Print, add the following
title:
TITLE VI--REPORT ON FUGITIVE COAL DUST
SEC. 601. REPORT.
Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
and the Secretary of Transportation shall submit to Congress
a joint report on the health, environmental, and public
safety impacts of fugitive dust emissions from coal
transport.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 788, the gentleman
from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Well, today, the do-nothing Congress will slink out of
town. It's going to be the earliest adjournment in an election year
since 1960; but, you know, I guess the Nation
[[Page 14695]]
has no problems and there's no work undone, so it's just time to go
home and campaign. It's pretty extraordinary. We've enacted one-quarter
the number of bills into law of Harry Truman's do-nothing Congress,
1947-48. So I guess this is the ``do-nothing-er'' Congress.
So here we are again today. We are going to consider today--the only
work today will be four bills that have previously passed the House.
Someone hasn't read their civics textbooks. If you pass a bill and send
it to the Senate, it's there; they'll consider it or they won't
consider it. If you pass it again and send it again, it doesn't make
any difference. In fact, it's somewhat repetitive and wasteful of
everybody's time when we could be doing postal reform to ensure the
future of the post office. We could be doing a farm bill; there are a
lot of people suffering a horrible drought. We could be dealing with
the sequestration, which there's concern on both sides of the aisle on
that. But we're not. We're considering four bills previously passed and
one new one.
Well, I have a reasonable amendment to an unreasonable bill, which is
now before us, which is the one new bill before us. My amendment would
ask that within 6 months--that's not very long--the Department of
Transportation and the EPA submit a report to Congress on fugitive coal
dust. Now, it seems a couple of extraordinary letters have been sent
out saying, my God, this will stop projects and exports that are going
forward--undue delay. I'm not aware of anything that would be delayed
by this. It says a study will be done; it doesn't delay any ongoing
applications or projects at all. But what it would do is potentially
avert a tremendous amount of litigation down the road. If we find that
fugitive coal dust is not a problem--which the coal industry says--then
that would relieve a lot of people in gateway ports and large cities in
the West where coal dust is being proposed to transit through those
cities, including cities in my district.
People are very concerned about this. They want to know, is it a
problem. How far from the loading point does fugitive coal dust get
emitted from the car? Are there ways to deal with the fugitive coal
dust? Does the surfactant work? Is that a solution? Should the cars be
covered? Is that a solution? What are the problems? What are the
problems at its destination in terms of whether or not there would be
coal dust at the port destinations? If the coal is stored outside, how
is it transported onto the ship? Et cetera, et cetera. So if we had
these answers, we could talk about the safe and clean transport and
allay a lot of concerns that are ultimately going to lead to a lot of
litigation unless we know.
Now, the industry says, oh, it's been studied. Well, no, it hasn't.
In fact, one railroad has pursued action against the coal industry
because fugitive coal dust has caused safety problems on the railroad.
It gets into the ballast; it blocks the ballast from draining. The
ballast destabilizes, the tracks destabilize, and trains can derail.
Now, that seems to me like a problem that should be dealt with. And
there may be some very, very simple ways to deal with it. Some say
surfactants; some say covered cars. There are other potential solutions
out there. Wouldn't it be good to know? Wouldn't it be good to know?
That's all I'm saying. A 6-month study and a report to Congress won't
delay anything at all. It just would give us some knowledge. And I
would hope that we legislate around here with a little bit of knowledge
and not just off the cuff.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. WHITFIELD. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Does that mean there's only one speaker on their side?
The Acting CHAIR. That is correct.
Mr. DeFAZIO. May I inquire of the Chair how much time I have
remaining.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon has 1 minute remaining.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Again, we will hear apocryphal denouncements from the
other side of the aisle--this will cost millions of jobs and billions
of dollars and stymie our exports. No, it's a study. It's a study that
would take 6 months. It's a study that, if it agrees with the
industry's conclusions, would assure the American public that there
won't be problems with these trains transiting through their hometowns.
It's something we should know. It's something the government should
look at. Apparently, there are some propriety studies that we aren't
allowed to see that say there's no problem. Well, if that's true, then
the railroads and the industry should let the American public see those
propriety studies. Really, not too many people are willing to take
someone at their word when it comes to an issue of public health.
So it's a very simple amendment. It won't delay anything; it will
take 6 months. It will cost very little, and it will give us the
information and knowledge we need to figure out how to safely transport
coal.
And with that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WHITFIELD. We have great respect for our friends on the other
side of the aisle. I think we all recognize that we do have basic
differences in our philosophy about the way energy is produced in
America. It's quite clear that many people on the other side of the
aisle are very much opposed to coal. Not only do they not want us to
burn coal in America; they don't want us to export coal to other
countries even though it would help our trade deficit and would
preserve jobs in the coal industry.
This particular amendment on fugitive dust is really unnecessary
because fugitive dust from the transport of coal is already regulated
at the Federal and State level under the Clean Air Act, as well as
State fugitive dust laws and regulations. EPA already is required to
study the environmental and health impacts from particulate matter from
all sources, including fugitive sources, and of all compositions,
including coal dust. The most recent summary of that science was
published by EPA in 2009 and supplemented in 2010. In fact, this week
the Army Corps of Engineers also announced that it will conduct an
environmental assessment of the proposed coal terminal in the sponsor's
district.
So I would say that we already have adequate protection. There's no
need for this amendment, although I'm sure it's offered with the very
best of intentions.
So I would urge our Members to oppose this amendment and would yield
back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon will
be postponed.
{time} 1000
Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Flake
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12
printed in House Report 112-680.
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chair, I rise as the designee of the gentleman from
North Dakota to offer amendment No. 12 made in order by the rule
providing for consideration of H.R. 3409.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the Rules Committee Print, add the following
new title:
TITLE VI--REGIONAL HAZE REGULATORY RELIEF
SEC. 601. IMPLEMENTATION PLANS.
Section 110 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7410) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (c), by striking ``(c)(1) The
Administrator'' and all that follows through the end of
paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
``(c) Federal Plans.--
``(1) Plans.--
[[Page 14696]]
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (C),
unless the conditions described in subparagraph (B) are met,
the Administrator shall promulgate a Federal implementation
plan at any time after the date that is 2 years after the
date on which the Administrator--
``(i) finds that a State has failed to make a required
submission or finds that the plan or plan revision submitted
by the State does not satisfy the minimum criteria
established under subsection (k)(1)(A); or
``(ii) disapproves a State implementation plan submission.
``(B) Conditions.--The conditions described in this
subparagraph are that, before the date on which the
Administrator promulgates a Federal implementation plan--
``(i) a State corrects a deficiency in a State
implementation plan or plan revision submitted by the State;
and
``(ii) the Administrator approves the plan or plan
revision.
``(C) Visibility protection plans.--In the case of a
Federal implementation plan promulgated after the date of
enactment of this subparagraph in place of a State
implementation plan under section 169A--
``(i) the Administrator shall promulgate such Federal
implementation plan only if the Administrator makes a finding
that the State submitting the State implementation plan
failed to consider the factors described in paragraphs (1)
and (2) of section 169A(g) in preparing and submitting the
plan; and
``(ii) compliance with the requirements of such Federal
implementation plan shall not be required earlier than 5
years after the date of promulgation.''; and
(2) in subsection (k)--
(A) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
``(3) Full approval and disapproval.--
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraphs (B)
and (C), in the case of any submission for which the
Administrator is required to act under paragraph (2), the
Administrator shall approve the submission as a whole if the
submission meets all of the applicable requirements of this
Act.
``(B) Review.--In reviewing any State implementation plan
submitted pursuant to section 169A, the Administrator shall
limit the review only to a determination of whether the State
submitting the State implementation plan considered the
factors described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of section
169A(g) in preparing and submitting the plan.
``(C) Visibility plans.--The Administrator shall approve as
a whole any implementation plan submitted pursuant to section
169A that was prepared and submitted after consideration of
the factors described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of section
169A(g).''; and
(B) in paragraph (5)--
(i) in the first sentence, by striking ``Whenever'' and
inserting the following:
``(A) In general.--Whenever''; and
(ii) by adding at the end the following:
``(B) Visibility plans.--Notwithstanding subparagraph (A),
with respect to an implementation plan approved pursuant to
section 169A, the Administrator shall only find that such a
plan is substantially inadequate to meet standards for air
pollutants that cause or contribute to the impairment of
visibility, or any other applicable standard or requirement,
under that section if the Administrator makes a finding that,
in preparing the plan, the submitting State failed to
consider the factors described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of
section 169A(g).
``(C) Existing visibility plans.--
``(i) Request for revocation.--At any time after the date
of enactment of this subparagraph--
``(I) a State may request that the existing Federal or
State implementation plan for the State regarding visibility,
or any determination made in calendar year 2012 or 2013 of
best available retrofit technology pursuant to section 169A,
be revoked; and
``(II) upon receipt of such a request, the Administrator
shall revoke the implementation plan.
``(ii) Submission of new or revised plan.--Upon a
revocation under clause (i)(II), the State that requested the
revocation shall, not later than 2 years after such
revocation, submit to the Administrator a new or revised
visibility plan in accordance with this Act.''.
SEC. 602. VISIBILITY PROTECTION FOR FEDERAL CLASS I AREAS.
Section 169A of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7491) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(2), in the matter preceding
subparagraph (A), by striking ``as may be necessary'' and
inserting ``as the State determines, at the sole discretion
of the State after considering factors described in this
section and providing adequate opportunity for public
comment, may be necessary''; and
(2) in subsection (g)--
(A) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
``(1)(A) in determining reasonable progress, there shall be
taken into consideration--
``(i) the costs of compliance;
``(ii) the time necessary for compliance;
``(iii) the energy and nonair quality environmental impacts
of compliance;
``(iv) the remaining useful life of any existing source
subject to requirements under this section;
``(v) the degree of improvement in visibility that may
reasonably be anticipated to result from measures described
in the applicable implementation plan; and
``(vi) the economic impacts to the State (including people
of the State);
``(B) in consideration of costs of compliance pursuant to
subparagraph (A)(i), the State may use source-specific cost
estimations developed by a licensed professional engineer as
an alternate to other methods of estimation approved by the
Administrator; and
``(C) in consideration of the degree of improvement in
visibility pursuant to subparagraph (A)(v), the State may use
alternate modeling techniques or methods than those
prescribed by the Administrator in the Agency's `Guideline on
Air Quality Models' under appendix W to part 51 of title 40,
Code of Federal Regulations, and, where available, measured
emissions and monitoring data shall be used;'';
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) by striking ``(2) in determining best available
retrofit technology the State'' and inserting the following:
``(2) in determining the best available retrofit
technology--
``(A) the State'';
(ii) in subparagraph (A) (as designated by clause (i)), by
inserting ``the economic impacts to the State (including
people of the State),'' after ``life of the source,'';
(iii) by striking ``technology;'' and inserting
``technology; and''; and
(iv) by adding at the end the following:
``(B) in consideration of the costs of compliance pursuant
to subparagraph (A), the State may use source-specific cost
estimations developed by a licensed professional engineer as
an alternate to other methods of estimation approved by the
Administrator;
``(C) with respect to consideration of the degree of
improvement in visibility pursuant to subparagraph (A)--
``(i) the State may use alternate modeling techniques or
methods than those prescribed by the Administrator in the
Agency's `Guideline on Air Quality Models' under appendix W
to part 51 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations;
``(ii) the State may consider the degree of improvement in
visibility in the mandatory class I Federal area that is most
affected by emissions from the source without considering the
degree of improvement in visibility in any other such area;
and
``(iii) the Administrator (in any case in which the
Administrator has authority to determine emission limitations
which reflect such technology) may not consider the degree of
improvement in visibility in any area other than the
mandatory class I Federal area that is most affected by
emissions from the source; and
``(D) the determination of best available retrofit
technology by the State for any source shall be subject to
review by the Administrator, an administrative entity, or a
Federal or State court only pursuant to a clearly erroneous
standard of review;''; and
(C) in paragraph (4), by striking ``(or the date of
promulgation of such a plan revision in the case of action by
the Administrator under section 110(c) for purposes of this
section)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 788, the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Flake) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. FLAKE. I thank the Chair, and I'll immediately yield 1 minute to
the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Berg).
Mr. BERG. I thank the gentleman for yielding and joining me in this
amendment. I rise to support our amendment to ensure States continue to
have control over regional haze regulations.
When Congress first established EPA's Regional Haze Program, it
acknowledged that regional haze and visibility regulation has to do
purely with aesthetic value and not public health. For that very
reason, Congress emphasized that the States, not EPA, should be the
decisionmakers when it comes to regulations of regional haze.
Instead of empowering States to do what's best for their citizens,
the Obama administration has, again, imposed another costly one-size-
fits-all regulation for the producers of energy, who are the most
critical job creators in my State and across the country.
Our amendment will limit EPA's availability to override States'
management of regional haze, and it empowers States to implement their
own regional haze management plans, the plans that best fit their
individual needs.
It's time to stop the war on coal, and I urge my colleagues to
support our amendment on the underlying bill.
[[Page 14697]]
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I seek to claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman and my colleagues, I oppose this amendment.
It would make a terrible bill even worse.
Our Nation's environmental laws are founded on cooperative
federalism. This is how it works:
The Federal Government sets minimum standards to assure that every
American has a basic level of protection so no one is forced to breathe
dirty air or drink dirty water. Then the States decide how to meet
those standards, or set stronger standards if they choose. The States
also implement the programs they adopt. Finally, if a State fails to
act, EPA can step in and do the job itself.
This approach has worked well for over 40 years. It means that there
is a healthy give-and-take between the States and the Environmental
Protection Agency. The States receive Federal funds, and they run their
own programs. But EPA has the tools to encourage the States to do more,
where necessary.
Before Congress adopted the Clean Air Act in 1970 and the Clean Water
Act in 1972, both signed by President Nixon, it was up to the States to
control pollution. The problem was that many of them didn't do it. We
had rivers catch on fire, smog so thick you couldn't see nearby
mountains, and a tremendous toll on public health and lives.
It wasn't that States didn't want to clean up pollution, but if there
are no minimum standards, States are forced into a race to the bottom.
If a State wants to reduce pollution from oil refineries, the oil
industry can threaten to build its new refineries in another State with
looser requirements. The result is that States were afraid to require
industry to clean up to the levels needed to protect the public.
This amendment, like other provisions already in the bill, overthrows
the principles of cooperative federalism that have guided us for 40
years. Instead, it would leave various pollution control decisions
almost entirely up to the States.
The proponents of this amendment claim that it is about EPA's
Regional Haze Program. Every Member should understand that this
amendment is not limited to regional haze.
The first part of the amendment is remarkably broad. It applies to
all of the criteria air pollutants regulated by the States--smog,
NOX, fine particulates--and it applies in every area that is
not meeting the health-based air quality standards.
This amendment says that even when a State fails to act, fails to
control air pollution, EPA can no longer provide a backstop. EPA must
wait at least 2 years before they can fill in for the States' failures.
And there's no deadline for EPA ever to act, allowing unhealthy air
quality to persist indefinitely. Citizens of that State would no longer
have any recourse.
The second part of this amendment effectively eliminates minimum
national criteria to protect air quality in our national parks.
The Clean Air Act has special provisions to protect air quality in
the pristine lands that the Nation has set aside for all Americans to
enjoy--our national parks, national monuments, and wilderness areas.
After all, we go to the Grand Canyon to see the view. There's little
point in protecting these lands if we allow their air and water to be
polluted.
This amendment targets those Clean Air Act provisions. It says that
when it comes to protecting the air quality of the national parks that
belong to all Americans, the State where a park is located has sole
discretion to decide how much, if any, pollution control would be
required. EPA would no longer be able to require a minimum level of
pollution reductions, and if the State failed to act entirely, as some
have done, EPA would no longer be able to step in and set pollution
controls.
The practical effect of this amendment would be to allow some of the
oldest and dirtiest power plants in the country to continue polluting
without standard pollution controls. I urge my colleagues to oppose
this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FLAKE. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Gosar).
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I would like to support and thank my
colleagues, Congressmen Jeff Flake and Rick Berg, and support this
amendment.
I represent the areas where two of the Arizona plants threatened by
the EPA's heavy-handed regulations are located, the Coronado Generating
Station in St. Johns and the Cholla plant near Joseph City. The third
plant, the Apache Generating Station, near Wilcox, is just 100 miles
away and serves a good portion of my constituents in the southern part
of my district. These are bedrock to our local communities. They
provide high-paying jobs where unemployment is already over 10 percent.
Over the August recess, the Environmental Protection Agency held
public hearings in Phoenix, Holbrook, and Benson on their Federal plan.
Each of the hearings in rural Arizona had over 300 people present. That
is an incredible turnout in these relatively small towns. That is how
important this issue is to my constituents.
The EPA refused to hold a hearing in St. Johns, despite being a
community directly impacted by the regulations, so I hosted a meeting
to facilitate the submission of public comments. On a night where the
local high school had their first football game and the county fair was
taking place, we still had over 100 people show up.
Listen, everybody wants clean air and good-paying jobs. The fact of
the matter is the EPA is acting well beyond its authority and under
public law in my State and many others across the country.
Vote ``yes'' for our amendment.
Mr. WAXMAN. I urge Members to oppose this amendment and yield back
the balance of my time.
Mr. FLAKE. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr.
Lankford).
Mr. LANKFORD. Well, this is an interesting conversation when you deal
with how this all came about.
In January of 2009, the Sierra Club and several other organizations
sued the EPA to expand their authority, to expand what was the law. The
EPA ruled out of court in a settlement with them, and what was taken to
a judge is a consent decree to expand what was the policy, what was the
law.
So several questions have to be answered here. One is: Does the
executive branch have the authority to be able to change a law through
an agreement with the Sierra Club or any other organization?
Number 2 is: What is this all about? If you're dealing with
visibility issues, you're dealing not with health issues specifically
stated in the air quality--and all that happened with regional haze was
this is not about health; this is about visibility.
In my State, there's one of the national parks that will change 2
deciviews with the Federal implementation plan rather than the State
implementation plan.
{time} 1010
That will cost ratepayers in Oklahoma millions and millions of
dollars for something that cannot be seen by the human eye. This is
about jobs, and this is about who makes the decision. I do not like the
assumption that only people in Washington, D.C., care about the people
of Oklahoma. The people of Oklahoma care about the health and safety of
the people of Oklahoma.
I would vote ``yes'' for this amendment.
Mr. FLAKE. I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma, the gentleman from
Arizona, and the gentleman from North Dakota for cosponsoring this
amendment.
As the gentleman mentioned, what we are talking about here is
regional haze. This is not a health issue. It is a visibility issue.
As for the implementation plans being considered by the Federal
Government, let me just take the Navajo Generating Station in northern
Arizona. What is being considered is likely
[[Page 14698]]
an SCR fix, selective catalytic reduction, which would cost $1.1
billion. That would cause the owners of the Navajo Generating Station
to simply shut it down. They can't produce economically with these
kinds of burdens.
The benefits of that, we are told by the EPA, are that there would be
no perceptible improvements in visibility--none. Manmade sources make
up, at best, 5 percent of all regional haze in Arizona. This is 5
percent at best. So you require a fix costing $1.1 billion. For what?
For no perceptible improvement in visibility at the Grand Canyon.
Why are we doing this?
The costs to Arizona are immense: 85 percent of the power generated--
or used--by the Central Arizona Project to pump water for farmland and
whatever else comes from the Navajo Generating Station. If you shut
down that station, farmers will have to go back to groundwater where
they can. What does that do? That depletes our underground resources,
causing environmental havoc. This is madness what is going on.
What this amendment seeks to do is to force the EPA to actually
follow the law. The law requires that the EPA set the standard, and
then the State offers a State Implementation Plan, or a SIP. The
problem is that the EPA is ignoring what the State submits and then
entering into negotiations with third-party groups--environmental
groups or others--and ignoring the State.
We can't allow this to happen anymore. That's why this is a good
amendment. I urge its adoption.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will
be postponed.
Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Gosar
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 13
printed in House Report 112-680.
Mr. GOSAR. I have an amendment made in order under the rule.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the Rules Committee Print, add the following:
TITLE VI--NO REGIONAL HAZE REGULATION ON THE COAL-POWERED NAVAJO
GENERATING STATION
SEC. 601. LIMITATION ON AUTHORITY TO ISSUE REGULATIONS.
The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
shall not promulgate any Federal implementation plan pursuant
to section 169A or 169B of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7491,
7492; relating to visibility protection) that would--
(1) adversely impact employment at the coal-powered Navajo
Generating Station or other coal-fired power plants and coal
mines on tribal lands in northern Arizona;
(2) directly or indirectly diminish the revenue received by
the Federal Government or any State, tribal or local
government by reducing through regulation the amount of coal
that is available for mining on Navajo and Hopi Reservation
lands;
(3) cause a reduction in coal-based revenue to meet
financial obligations required by federally authorized Indian
water rights settlements, pursuant to section 403(f) of the
Colorado River Basin Project Act (43 U.S.C. 1543(f)):
(4) reduce the amount of coal, or increase the cost of
coal, available for the Navajo Generating Station's Federal
responsibility to deliver water and power, as authorized by
the Colorado River Basin Project Act (43 U.S.C. 1501 et
seq.); or
(5) expose the United States to liability for taking the
value of tribally-owned coal in northern Arizona through
regulation.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 788, the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Gosar) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Today, I am pleased to put forth an amendment to protect the
residents of Arizona from the EPA's attacks on the Navajo Generating
Station, which is located near Page, Arizona. The uncertainty
surrounding proposed EPA regulations and their effects on the Navajo
Generating Station were some of the first issues brought to my
attention when I was sworn into Congress.
The overreaching regulations would effectively shut down this
critical and unique plant. A closure would dramatically increase the
cost of water and power for my constituents, and it would eliminate
thousands of tribal and nontribal jobs--all for no discernible
improvement in visibility. Again, according to the Federal Government,
itself, no discernible improvement in visibility.
You see, this plant is unique because it is owned by six entities,
including the Federal Government. It was part of a plan created by
visionaries so that we could provide power to move water from the
Colorado River, through the largest aqueduct system ever constructed in
the United States, to the people of Arizona. You can see it across
here. In fact, the CAP delivers water to up to 80 percent of my State's
population. This includes 45 percent of Phoenix's water, which is the
fifth largest city in the United States, and 80 percent of the water to
the 32nd largest city in the United States, which is Tucson.
The Arizona we know today would, without a doubt, not exist if it
were not for this plant. The Navajo Generating Station and the
associated coal mine directly employ over 1,000 Arizonans, who are
mostly Native Americans. Additionally, according to an Arizona State
University study, the plant will indirectly account for more than $20
billion in gross State product and will indirectly provide for 3,000
jobs annually over the next 40 years.
I also want to point out a complicated but important part of this
issue. The Federal Government is actually working against itself with
these regulations. Revenues from the sale of excess power generated by
the plant are used to repay the Federal Government's debt for the
construction of the CAP project. They are also used to help pay for the
costs of congressionally authorized Indian water rights settlements
between the Federal Government, tribes, and entities within Arizona.
So, without these revenues, the Federal Government will be undermining
its own legal agreements with Native Americans and the people of
Arizona.
Let's put an end to this insanity. Vote for my amendment, and stop
the EPA from issuing far-reaching regulations that threaten jobs,
Arizona's water supply, affordable electricity, and tribal rights
established with Congress.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. WAXMAN. This amendment is narrower than many of the provisions in
this bill.
Instead of providing a blanket get-out-of-jail-free card for many
polluters, like most of the provisions in this bill, this amendment
provides a blanket get-out-of-jail-free card for one polluter--the
Navajo Generating Station in Arizona. The amendment prohibits EPA from
requiring pollution controls if it would adversely impact employment at
the Navajo Generating Station or at other coal plants or coal mines on
tribal lands in northern Arizona.
Now, if you listened to the debate on the last amendment, you might
have thought this is another dispute about whether EPA or the States
should set the standards; but Arizona has no authority to control air
pollution on tribal lands, and the tribe has not established its own
program to set the standards. That means, by barring EPA from requiring
pollution controls, this amendment would have the effect of ensuring
modern pollution controls are not installed on this plant.
And that's a problem.
The Navajo Generating Station is a huge power plant--over 2,000
megawatts. It's also old. The Navajo Generating Station began operating
almost 40 years ago, and it was built
[[Page 14699]]
without standard pollution controls. And it's dirty. This plant spews
almost 20,000 tons of nitrogen oxides, or NOX, each year.
This is a dangerous air pollutant. NOX forms small particles
that penetrate deep into the lungs, causing emphysema, bronchitis and
other respiratory diseases, heart attacks, and premature deaths.
The Navajo Generating Station is the fifth highest emitter of
NOX pollution in the United States, and this plant harms the
air quality at 11 national parks and wilderness areas. These are some
of our Nation's most treasured and popular national parks. Almost 12
million Americans visit these parks each year. They travel there
because it's part of our natural heritage of the Nation and because it
belongs to all of us--but not if this amendment passes.
This amendment says that polluters' interests in continuing to
pollute trumps Americans' interests in having clean air in their
national parks. This amendment would remove EPA's authority to protect
clean air in the national parks, so I urge my colleagues to stand up
for clean air and to oppose this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 90 seconds to my friend from Arizona
(Mr. Franks).
Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment is offered by Mr. Gosar from Arizona,
and it confronts a stunning example of environmentalism run amuck. If
the Navajo Generating Station is forced to close due to the EPA's
nonsensical actions, it would be devastating to the economies of the
surrounding region, including those of the Hopi and Navajo Tribes.
As the sole remaining buyer of coal from the Hopi Tribe, shutting
down the Navajo Generating Station would cut nearly 90 percent of the
tribe's income, and it would effectively shut down the Hopi Tribe as a
functioning government in addition to putting hundreds of Arizonans,
including hundreds of members of the Navajo Tribe, out of work and
affecting hundreds of thousands of Arizonans' current ability to
receive water and electricity.
{time} 1020
In exchange for all of the difficulties created, the only ``benefit''
yielded would be a slight change in visibility, so slight as to not
even be detectable without specialized equipment that is significantly
more sensitive than the human eye. In other words, Mr. Chairman, the
supposed environmental benefit is functionally nonexistent. This is far
beyond the pale of environmental stewardship.
Mr. Chairman, I commend Mr. Gosar for offering this amendment, and I
sincerely encourage my colleagues to support it.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, the EPA is not going to shut down the power
plant; but if this amendment passes, they can do nothing to get some
reductions in pollution and work with the power plant to accomplish
that goal.
I now yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr.
Lujan).
Mr. LUJAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
This amendment is being offered under the guise of protecting tribal
sovereignty when we have seen the complete opposite from the majority
during this Congress. We have seen time and time again the majority's
willingness to ignore tribal issues that are important to Indian
country. A case in point is a bill the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Gosar) sponsored, H.R. 1904, entitled the Southeast Arizona Land
Exchange. This was a giveaway of a sacred site of the San Carlos Apache
Tribe in Arizona to a copper mining company.
When the bill was considered, we heard desperate pleas from tribes
across the country asking us to stop a foreign-owned mining company
from bulldozing their sacred sites in the name of profit. I offered an
amendment to protect the sacred sites. It was straightforward and still
would have allowed the mining to take place, but it would have
protected those sacred sites. The Republican majority defeated the
amendment.
Another example is a refusal by some Members who are on the floor
today to cosponsor the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act. My bill
would address years of suffering by those negatively impacted by
uranium mining on the Navajo Nation. To this day, members of the Navajo
Nation are sick and suffering from the legacy of uranium mining:
cancer, kidney disease, and, in severe cases, even death. When I
visited with Navajo elders and talking with people impacted by
exposure, they asked me, Are people in Congress waiting for us to die
for the problem to go away? Maybe someone should answer that question.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentleman from New Mexico.
Mr. LUJAN. Mr. Chairman, my Republican colleagues come down here to
say they are supporting and protecting tribal sovereignty with this
amendment. Let's take a hard look at their track record on these
issues. They seem to only want to support tribal sovereignty when it's
convenient, as Mr. Gosar's amendment clearly demonstrates. Before
offering this amendment, did the gentleman from Arizona even consult
with the Navajo Nation on this amendment?
What we should be doing is encouraging government-to-government
consultation between the tribe and EPA to solve this issue, not by
forcing an amendment.
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to my good
friend, Mr. Schweikert, from Arizona.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.
This is one of those moments of wondering where you begin with some
of the absurdity that we hear. I think this might be one. I skipped the
last set of comments because they had nothing to do with this
amendment.
The agreement is already there to spend the $45 million to do the
high-temperature NOX incineration. As this is way outside of
my expertise, that's my understanding. The EPA is coming back and
pushing and pushing and pushing to spend $1.1 billion for an almost
statistically insignificant improvement.
What you're really observing here is the classic case that we see
over and over on this sort of issue of an environmental political
feeder up against reality. The math isn't reality.
I used to chair the Indian Affairs Committee at my State legislature.
I've spent more time on Native American lands in Arizona than I bet
anyone in this body. The fact of the matter is if the EPA gets their
way here, it's going to bust a number of the water compacts and a bunch
of our agreements with those Indian communities.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, this is an amendment that would do more
harm than good, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will
be postponed.
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on those amendments printed in House Report 112-680 on
which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
Amendment No. 1 by Mr. Markey of Massachusetts.
Amendment No. 3 by Mr. Waxman of California.
Amendment No. 4 by Mr. Kelly of Pennsylvania.
Amendment No. 5 by Mr. Markey of Massachusetts.
Amendment No. 8 by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas.
Amendment No. 9 by Mr. McKinley of West Virginia.
[[Page 14700]]
Amendment No. 10 by Mr. Markey of Massachusetts.
Amendment No. 11 by Mr. DeFazio of Oregon.
Amendment No. 12 by Mr. Flake of Arizona.
Amendment No. 13 by Mr. Gosar of Arizona.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for any
electronic vote after the first vote in this series.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Markey
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) on which further proceedings were postponed
and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 174,
noes 229, not voting 26, as follows:
[Roll No. 592]
AYES--174
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Becerra
Berkley
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gibson
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Kucinich
Lamborn
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKeon
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner (OH)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOES--229
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Fincher
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--26
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Bishop (UT)
Castor (FL)
Ellison
Farenthold
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Himes
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Marchant
Moore
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
Sullivan
{time} 1049
Messrs. HARPER, YOUNG of Indiana, and GARY G. MILLER of California
changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. THOMPSON of California, LoBIONDO, TOWNS, and RUSH changed
their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 592, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``aye.''
Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 592, had I been present, I
would have voted ``aye.''
Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chair, during today's vote on H.R. 3409, the Stop
the War on Coal Act, I inadvertently voted ``no'' on Congressman Ed
Markey's amendment No. 13, the first amendment voted on the bill. I
would have voted ``aye'' on Mr. Markey's amendment, rollcall No. 592.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chair, I inadvertently voted ``no'' on rollcall
592. I would like to be recorded as voting ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 592, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Waxman
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California
(Mr. Waxman) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 178,
noes 229, not voting 22, as follows:
[Roll No. 593]
AYES--178
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Barrow
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berkley
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
[[Page 14701]]
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gibson
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOES--229
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--22
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Landry
Lucas
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Sessions
Shimkus
Speier
Sullivan
{time} 1055
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 593, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``aye.''
Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chair, during rollcall vote No. 593, I mistakenly
recorded my vote as ``no'' when I should have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 593, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Kelly
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly) on which further proceedings were postponed
and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 242,
noes 168, not voting 19, as follows:
[Roll No. 594]
AYES--242
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Cuellar
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Towns
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (IN)
NOES--168
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Barrow
Barton (TX)
Becerra
Berkley
Bilbray
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
[[Page 14702]]
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Hayworth
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Labrador
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--19
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
Sullivan
{time} 1100
Mr. GUTIERREZ changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. PAUL, JONES, and BARTLETT changed their vote from ``no'' to
``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 594 I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 594, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Markey
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) on which further proceedings were postponed
and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 164,
noes 246, not voting 19, as follows:
[Roll No. 595]
AYES--164
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Becerra
Berkley
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOES--246
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Cuellar
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--19
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Bilirakis
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1104
Mr. SCHRADER changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 595, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 595, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
[[Page 14703]]
Amendment No. 8 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Texas
(Ms. Jackson Lee) on which further proceedings were postponed and on
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 164,
noes 247, not voting 18, as follows:
[Roll No. 596]
AYES--164
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Becerra
Berkley
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOES--247
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Cuellar
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Holt
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Walz (MN)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--18
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1110
Mr. LEVIN changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 596, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 596, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. McKinley
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from West
Virginia (Mr. McKinley) on which further proceedings were postponed and
on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 247,
noes 163, not voting 19, as follows:
[Roll No. 597]
AYES--247
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Culberson
DeFazio
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Hochul
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
[[Page 14704]]
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Walz (MN)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOES--163
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berkley
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Manzullo
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--19
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Landry
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
{time} 1113
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chair on rollcall No. 597, I inadvertantly voted
``no'' on Mr. McKinley's amendment. Had I voted correctly, I would have
voted ``aye.''
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 597, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 597, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``no.''
personal explanation
Mr. JOHNSON of Illinois. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 597, I was off
the floor and inadvertantly missed the vote. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``present.''
Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Markey
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) on which further proceedings were postponed
and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 160,
noes 250, not voting 19, as follows:
[Roll No. 598]
AYES--160
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berkley
Bilbray
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Green, Al
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Stark
Thompson (CA)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOES--250
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Hinojosa
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Maloney
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
[[Page 14705]]
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Sutton
Terry
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Walz (MN)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--19
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Gohmert
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
{time} 1119
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 598, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 598, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. DeFazio
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon
(Mr. DeFazio) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 168,
noes 243, not voting 18, as follows:
[Roll No. 599]
AYES--168
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Becerra
Berkley
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gibson
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOES--243
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Walz (MN)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--18
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1123
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 599, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 599, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Flake
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona
(Mr. Flake) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 228,
noes 183, not voting 18, as follows:
[[Page 14706]]
[Roll No. 600]
AYES--228
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gardner
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOES--183
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berkley
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gibson
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Hayworth
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Runyan
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--18
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1127
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 600, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 600, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Gosar
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona
(Mr. Gosar) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 226,
noes 181, not voting 22, as follows:
[Roll No. 601]
AYES--226
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gardner
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
Latta
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOES--181
Altmire
Amash
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Barrow
Becerra
Berkley
[[Page 14707]]
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Garamendi
Gerlach
Gibson
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiberi
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--22
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Black
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Harris
Herger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Speier
Wilson (SC)
{time} 1131
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 601, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chair, on rollcall 601, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``no.''
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. West). The question is on the amendment in the
nature of a substitute, as amended.
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Yoder) having assumed the chair, Mr. West, Acting Chair of the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 3409) to
limit the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to issue
regulations before December 31, 2013, under the Surface Mining Control
and Reclamation Act of 1977, and, pursuant to House Resolution 788, he
reported the bill back to the House with an amendment adopted in the
Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the amendment
reported from the Committee of the Whole?
If not, the question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a
substitute, as amended.
The amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
Motion to Recommit
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentlewoman opposed to the bill?
Mrs. CAPPS. Yes, I am opposed.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mrs. Capps moves to recommit the bill H.R. 3409 to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce with instructions to report
the same back to the House forthwith, with the following
amendment:
At the end of title II of the bill, insert the following
new section:
SEC. 203. ENSURING CONSUMERS PAY LESS FOR GAS AND THAT FUEL
EFFICIENT AUTOMOBILES CONTINUE TO BE MADE IN
AMERICA.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds as follows:
(1) The standards of the national program to improve fuel
efficiency and reduce pollution for light-duty cars and
trucks will provide major economic and consumer benefits to
the United States.
(2) The standards will save families more than $1.7
trillion in fuel costs and reduce America's dependence on oil
by more than 2 million barrels per day in 2025, which is
equivalent to one-half of the oil which our Nation currently
imports from OPEC countries each day.
(3) As a result of the standards, a family with a model
year 2025 vehicle will save more than $8,000 in fuel costs
over the life of the vehicle compared to a 2011 year vehicle.
(4) As a result of the standards, average net savings for
the owner of a 2025 vehicle will be equivalent to a drop in
fuel prices of $1 per gallon.
(b) Preservation of Rule.--Section 330 of the Clean Air
Act, as added by section 201 of this Act, shall not apply
with respect to the final rule issued by the Environmental
Protection Agency and the Department of Transportation on
August 28, 2012, relating to standards for pollution control
and fuel efficiency for model year 2017 and later light-duty
vehicles, and such rule shall take effect on the effective
date specified in the rule, if nullification of such rule
would result in--
(1) consumers, on average, paying more for gasoline over
the life of their motor vehicles; or
(2) the loss of jobs in the United States automobile
manufacturing industrial sector or a negative impact on the
overall United States economy.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from California is
recognized for 5 minutes.
{time} 1140
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, there are many times when we come to this
floor and engage in heated debate, and we've heard some heated debate
on this bill. But my final amendment offers us the opportunity to come
together to do something extraordinarily important, and that is to
ensure our constituents' hard-earned cash is redirected away from the
gas pump and back into their wallets. I want to be clear, the passage
of this amendment will not prevent the passage of the underlying bill.
If it's adopted, my amendment will be incorporated into the bill and
the bill will be immediately voted upon.
Now I make no apologies for opposing this bill. Regardless of how you
feel about the bill, my amendment should be something we could all
agree on.
My amendment preserves new fuel efficiency standards issued last
month if their repeal would mean higher prices at the pump for our
constituents or lost jobs for our workers. These new standards raise
fuel efficiency to 54.5 miles per gallon. That's roughly twice the
mileage our cars are getting today.
By 2025, these standards will save consumers $1.7 trillion at the gas
pump, and they will cut our oil imports by 2 million barrels per day.
That's one half our current imports for OPEC. They also represent a new
chapter for American ingenuity.
Mr. Speaker, if U.S. engineers made it possible for every car to
include a computer more powerful than the one that sent a man to the
Moon, then surely they can produce cars that go further on a gallon of
gas. The good news is they can and they are.
There are now 57 fuel-efficient models available in showrooms today,
up from 27 models in 2009. Car makers have retooled some of their most
popular models to boost efficiency, and the improvements keep coming.
The first half of this year set the record for highest-ever fuel
efficiency for new vehicles. Consumers are rewarding these
breakthroughs. Fuel efficiency is the top concern for car buyers by
far, and this is according to Consumer Reports.
Consumers support these new standards. Families will save an
estimated $8,000 in gasoline costs over the lifetime of their car, and
that's equivalent
[[Page 14708]]
to lowering the price of gasoline by $1 per gallon. These new standards
also provide something consumer trends cannot: long-term certainty. And
that's why three major automakers--General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler--
all support them.
Strong standards tell carmakers exactly what goal they need to reach
by when so they can invest in innovation, deploy new technologies, and
build cars right here in America. When they do that, they hire more
workers. More than 150,000 Americans have jobs making parts for and
assembling more efficient cars in America today. Car makers are moving
production to our shores also.
One car maker alone, Honda, recently announced plans to move all
global Civic hybrid manufacturing to Indiana from Japan, creating 300
jobs by the end of the year.
This onshoring of jobs is because of our commitment to making more
efficient cars and components in America. That's why GM's CEO, Dan
Akerson, called these standards, ``a win for American manufacturers for
the very first time.''
Mr. Speaker, everybody wins when more efficient cars hit the road.
American workers win, drivers win, and automakers. These standards
demonstrate the best of America, how creating jobs goes hand-in-hand
with protecting the environment and health, how drivers can save
billions in gasoline costs, how the American auto industry can compete
with any country in the world. That's why we must preserve these
historic standards and the enormous benefits that come with them by
voting for my final amendment.
Mr. Speaker, I respectfully ask that all colleagues weigh this simple
proposition: Do you want your constituents to pay less at the pump and
drive more efficient cars made in America? If your answer is yes, then
vote for my amendment. It ensures that our constituents will save
thousands of dollars every year at the gas pump, and it makes sure that
American workers will find jobs building the cars of the future right
here in America.
Today we have the opportunity to speak with one voice, to save these
landmark car efficiency standards. It's up to us. Support this final
amendment to the bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion
to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, this motion is nothing more than a
distraction from the underlying legislation that we're considering
today, and the journey that we began in January of 2011 to cut
government spending, to create jobs and, today, to stop the
administration's war on the coal industry.
We, all of us in this Chamber, sat here a little over a year ago, and
we heard an address by the Prime Minister of Australia. She started her
speech off by saying, you know, I remember being a young girl, sitting
on the floor of my living room watching as Neil Armstrong and Buzz
Aldrin landed on the Moon.
She went on to talk about that era of innovation in America, what
that meant and how that inspired the rest of the world. Do we need to
be reminded that it was the coal industry that fueled America's
innovative engine and powered America's innovative wheels during that
period of innovation? I don't think so. Today's underlying legislation,
it's about the thousands of jobs that have already been cut from the
coal industry, the thousands more that are in jeopardy to be cut from
the coal industry.
It's about the millions of Americans and America's businesses that
are paying skyrocketing prices, 23 million Americans underemployed, and
yet we've got an administration that wants to attack the very reliable
energy source that would fuel a resurgence in manufacturing and put
America back to work.
Ladies and gentlemen, I implore to you, defeat this motion to
recommit. Vote on the final passage of this legislation today. Let's
get America back to work and stop the administration's war on coal.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair
will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on
the question of passage.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 173,
noes 233, not voting 23, as follows:
[Roll No. 602]
AYES--173
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Barrow
Becerra
Berkley
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McIntyre
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOES--233
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
[[Page 14709]]
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--23
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Cohen
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Lujan
Mack
McGovern
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Shimkus
Smith (TX)
Speier
{time} 1159
Mr. HENSARLING changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall 602, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 602, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 233,
noes 175, not voting 21, as follows:
[Roll No. 603]
AYES--233
Adams
Aderholt
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Benishek
Berg
Berkley
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Costa
Costello
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Cuellar
Culberson
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holden
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Loebsack
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Rahall
Reed
Rehberg
Renacci
Ribble
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOES--175
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barber
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Bilbray
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gibson
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Hayworth
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Richmond
Rigell
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Wolf
Woolsey
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--21
Ackerman
Akin
Bass (CA)
Berman
Filner
Gallegly
Garrett
Granger
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Landry
Mack
Miller, Gary
Murphy (CT)
Pearce
Ross (AR)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Sessions
Shimkus
Speier
{time} 1208
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 603, I was unable to be in
attendance for this vote as I was attending the funeral of a family
member. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
Stated against:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall 603, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``no.''
Personal Explanation
Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I mistakenly voted ``aye'' on rollcall No.
603. My intention was to vote ``no.''
Personal Explanation
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, during the course of the week, I
was absent for legislative business; had I been present, I would have
cast the following votes:
Rollcall 585--H.R. 5044--On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as
Amended--``yes.''
Rollcall 586--H.R. 5912--On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as
Amended--``yes.''
Rollcall 587--H. Res. 788--On Ordering the Previous Question--
``yes.''
Rollcall 588--H. Res. 788--On Agreeing to the Resolution--``yes.''
[[Page 14710]]
Rollcall 591--H.R. 5987--On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as
Amended--``no.''
Rollcall 592--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``no.''
Rollcall 593--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``no.''
Rollcall 594--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``yes.''
Rollcall 595--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``no.''
Rollcall 596--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``no.''
Rollcall 597--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``yes.''
Rollcall 598--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``no.''
Rollcall 599--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``no.''
Rollcall 600--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``yes.''
Rollcall 601--H.R. 3409--On Agreeing to the Amendment--``yes.''
Rollcall 602--H.R. 3409--On Motion to Recommit with instructions--
``no.''
Rollcall 603--H.R. 3409--On Passage--``yes.''
____________________
ADJOURNMENT TO TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2012
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House
adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, September 25,
2012.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from North Carolina?
There was no objection.
____________________
VOICE OF TEXAS: PAM FROM LIBERTY, TEXAS
(Mr. POE of Texas asked and was given permission to address the House
for 1 minute.)
Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I have heard from many Texas business
owners who built their own business without government help. Here's
what Pam from Liberty, Texas, has to say:
We are college educated, taxpaying citizens who have a
lifetime of hard work under our belts. We have stayed up
nights trying to figure out how we were going to pay our
taxes, insurance, employees, and bank notes. We started from
scratch, owning convenience stores, car washes, mini storage
businesses, a clothing business, and also operated/owned two
small-town movie theaters that were built by my husband's
grandparents and parents. The latest is a real estate
business.
There's not much that anyone can tell us about the
sacrifices that have to be made when you start up your own
business. We have done it all, including working full-time
jobs for someone else to make ends meet. No government agency
has ever helped us with one thing, but the government
certainly has made our work harder and more expensive to run/
operate our businesses.
Mr. Speaker, people--not the government--make America's businesses
successful.
And that's just the way it is.
____________________
CONGRESS SHOULD STAY AND WORK
(Mr. LARSON of Connecticut asked and was given permission to address
the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, one of my constituents wrote
very emphatically: How could Congress possibly leave when they know
that we the people face the deep, dark abyss of uncertainty--
uncertainty about our unemployment, uncertainty about the jobs that we
need, the uncertainty that comes when your mortgage is under water, the
uncertainty that comes when you know that you have to educate your
children, and yet Congress leaves without addressing the basic needs of
the people that we're sworn to serve.
For the last week, we've heard an awful lot about work requirements.
The primary work requirement that should be asked is of this United
States Congress, for it to stay and do the work of the people. There is
a jobs bill that's out there. There are tax cuts that can be achieved.
Let's stay and do that work.
____________________
STAND UP FOR COAL
(Mr. STUTZMAN asked and was given permission to address the House for
1 minute.)
Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the men and
women who have worked tirelessly to make Indiana the best place to do
business in the Midwest.
Coal produces the electricity that powers everything from
manufacturing mainstays to small business startups. Mr. Speaker, coal-
fired electric power plants provided 83 percent of Indiana's net
electricity generation in 2011.
Rising energy prices are squeezing small businesses, entrepreneurs,
and families. Unfortunately, President Obama's EPA has waged a war on
coal. Unelected bureaucrats have proposed a series of sweeping
regulations that would destroy jobs and decrease domestic energy
production. As a result of Washington's overregulation, the Energy
Information Administration expects the pace of coal-fired power plant
shutdowns to increase fourfold in the next 5 years.
Today we have an opportunity to stand up for the American coal
industry and the families and businesses that rely on the electricity
it provides. We can ensure that regulations are sensible and not
overbearing. We can make sure that coal keeps lighting homes, stores
and factories in Indiana.
____________________
CONGRATULATING HOLLIS F. PRICE MIDDLE COLLEGE
(Mr. COHEN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I want to take this moment to congratulate a
high school in my district, the Hollis F. Price Middle College, for
receiving the U.S. News & World Report Bronze recognition as one of
2012's Best High Schools in the country.
U.S. News & World Report ranked nearly 22,000 public high schools
across the country, and I'm proud that one of Memphis City Schools was
recognized. This school was named after the fourth president of
LeMoyne-Owen College, an Historically Black College and University in
Memphis. Hollis-Price is a collaborative effort between Memphis City
Schools and LeMoyne-Owen to improve graduation rates and provide
accessibility for students to attend college.
I want to commend Principal Daphne Beasley, all the faculty, and the
staff for their hard work and dedication. And surely the students I
want to congratulate, too, and their parents on their great
achievement. I was proud to speak at their graduation a few years ago.
It's a great school. Continue to make Memphis proud.
____________________
PUTTING PEOPLE BEFORE POLITICS
(Mr. DOLD asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. DOLD. Mr. Speaker, from day one my focus in Congress has been on
jobs and the economy. I believe that the best thing Congress can do is
to find common ground to move our country forward. This week, I'm happy
to say, we did just that.
On Wednesday evening, the House of Representatives passed a
bipartisan jobs bill--which I am pleased to say I championed--which
would encourage global investment here in our country. This means jobs
in our local communities. Companies in the 10th District like Astellas
and Takeda and Siemens are able to invest here in America and put
people to work.
This bill passed with broad bipartisan support. And I certainly want
to thank Representatives Roskam, Peters, and Barrow for reaching across
the aisle and coming together and helping to pass a commonsense bill
that helps businesses to grow right here at home. When we put people
before politics and progress before partisanship, we can get things
done for the American people.
____________________
{time} 1220
RECOGNIZING THE BRAVE DISSIDENTS IN CUBA
(Mr. RIVERA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
[[Page 14711]]
Mr. RIVERA. Mr. Speaker, last week I took to this floor to discuss
the brave dissidents inside Cuba that went on a hunger strike to
protest the jailing of one of their own. The end of that hunger strike
came this week when the Castro dictatorship announced the pending
release of that dissident. This was a victory for the heroes of the
opposition movement inside Cuba, but there is still much to be done.
The international community must continue to denounce the human
rights abuses occurring inside Cuba, the lack of civil liberties and
democratic rights, and continue to support the heroic opposition
struggling for a free and democratic Cuba inside the island.
____________________
WE WILL NOT SUPPORT RADICALISM
(Mr. BURTON of Indiana asked and was given permission to address the
House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, recently we passed a continuing
resolution to take care of the funding of the government until next
March. And one of the things that concerned a lot of us was: Is any of
that money in that continuing resolution going to go to help the
Government of Egypt or Libya or any of the other countries where we see
all that civil unrest and all the horrible acts of murder taking place?
And I never did get an answer, so I would just like to say to my
colleagues who are going to be here--I'm retiring at the end of this
year--we should not give one dime, not one penny, to any country that
tries to undermine the United States' interests around the world, and
we should not give one penny to anybody that constantly tries to spread
radical fundamentalist Muslim beliefs in this world.
Shari'a law is something we can't live with, and we need to let them
know very clearly that if they want to work with the United States,
fine, but they're not getting any money from us if this continues.
This world is in a terrible state because of these radicals, and we
must not let them win this battle.
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Reed). The Chair would remind Members to
refrain from trafficking the well while a Member is under recognition.
____________________
AMERICA SHOULD STOP TRYING TO RUN THE WORLD
(Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee asked and was given permission to address
the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, Americans do not want, forever,
permanent wars that last three or four times longer than World War II.
And they especially do not want to spend hundreds of billions on people
who hate or don't at least appreciate what we've done for them.
Probably half the spending we have done over the years in Iraq and
Afghanistan has been pure foreign aid. And we have poured many, many
billions into Egypt, Pakistan, and other countries throughout the
Middle East.
Our own Nation is $16 trillion in debt. We are borrowing all this
money to send to countries that are exploding with anti-American rage.
Fifty-one American soldiers have been murdered over the past several
months by Afghan police and soldiers who they were training. Now we
have had our Ambassador and three other Americans killed in Libya.
We should have gotten out of Afghanistan years ago. We need to get
out now and not take too long to do it.
We need to stop trying to run the whole world, creating so much
resentment, and start putting our own country first once again.
____________________
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will recognize Members for Special
Order speeches without prejudice to the resumption of legislative
business.
____________________
DO-NOTHING CONGRESS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 5, 2011, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) is recognized
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
Mr. HOYER. And so this 112th Congress convulses to an ugly end of its
time before the national elections. All of us must be sad, and the
American people are angry and sad that this Congress has been so
inattentive to the needs of the American people.
Mr. Speaker, today House Republicans are leaving town and will not
return until after the November elections.
Two very respected political scientists--not Democrats or
Republicans; one a representative of the more conservative think tank
and another a more liberal think tank--have written a book about the
dysfunction they have seen in this Congress. Mr. Mann and Mr.
Orenstein--quoted by many reporters from many journals, from all
different perspectives--they said this:
We have been studying Washington politics in Congress for more than
40 years, and never, never have we seen them as dysfunctional. In our
past writings, we have criticized both parties when we believed it was
warranted. Today, however, said these two respected political
scientists and observers of Washington, today, however, we have no
choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the
Republican Party.
They went on to say that the GOP has become an insurgent outlier in
American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise;
unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence, and science;
and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition. That is
the nub of the problem.
Our Republican colleagues are leaving without getting their work
done. I said, ``their work done.'' Without getting our work done, the
work of the American people.
Comprehensive jobs bills, middle class tax cuts have not been
extended, farmers are left on their own to face the worst drought in
decades--the worst drought in decades--and a farm bill reported out of
the Republican committee lays unconsidered by this floor. Reported out
of their committee, from their majority, and they haven't brought it to
the floor, while farmers remain in trouble. We've not reauthorized the
Violence Against Women Act, and we have not passed the postal reform
bill.
I am glad to take this Special Order, Mr. Speaker, to say to the
American people that we're prepared to stay. We're prepared to stay and
work on these bills. And I'm going to talk about some of these bills,
but my colleagues are here as well.
I first want to yield to the former president of the Senate of
Vermont for his observations as we leave this town, my friend, Mr.
Welch from Vermont.
Mr. WELCH. I thank the gentleman.
You know, on the farm bill, we've got the worst drought we've had in
50 years. We've got people who need nutrition programs. We've got
farmers who need certainty about what the price support programs are
going to be, what their future is going to be. We've got livestock
farmers that are in desperate straits because of the drought.
And we've got a Senate that's passed a farm bill. We've got a House
Agriculture Committee that's passed a farm bill, on a bipartisan basis,
Democrats and Republicans working together to pass that bill. And the
House leadership, who has the authority to bring this bill to the
floor, won't do it. That's the first time in the history of the House
of Representatives where a farm bill passed by the Agriculture
Committee has not been brought to the floor for a vote.
Mr. Speaker, we could defend, each and every one of us on both sides
of the aisle, a vote of conscience, whether it was ``yes'' or ``no,''
on the farm bill. None of us can defend not even taking a vote on the
farm bill.
That decision is not within the authority of any individual Member of
Congress. That is the decision that the
[[Page 14712]]
majority leader and the Speaker of the House have the authority to
make, and their refusal to bring this bill to the floor will be
absolutely an indictment of Congress' inability to do its job.
America needs a farm bill. This Congress needs to do its job. We've
got the time to do it. We should act. That bill should be brought to us
for a vote.
{time} 1230
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, that is a sample of the dysfunction and
inability and unwillingness to compromise on which Mr. Ornstein and Mr.
Mann spoke.
I now yield to my friend from New York (Mr. Tonko).
Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Minority Whip Hoyer. You have led us so
expertly well on this floor.
You cite the many failings of this do-nothing Republican Congress. It
is tragic that we will leave for home now and not get the work of the
people done and will not respond to the needs of America. That is such
an unjust outcome.
We know that a middle class tax cut has been passed in the Senate and
that the President has said he would sign it. We need that measure. We
need that measure done so as to provide for confidence in the American
economy. What we need right now is that sort of boost. That booster
shot can do a lot for growing sales for businesses out there. The
aggregate demand for goods and services, driven by relief for the
middle class via a tax cut, is important. The Violence Against Women
Act that was reauthorized in the Senate failed to come to this floor.
Postal reform--overwhelmingly approved by the Senate--fails to come to
this floor. There is also the farm bill, which is important to all of
upstate New York, and I know our members from the upstate delegation,
from the New York delegation, are greatly disturbed by the do-nothing
Republican Congress.
Minority Whip Hoyer, thank you for leading us in this discussion. We
have not earned a 6-week recess until election day without having done
the people's business. We need to stay here and get the people's work
done--build America's economy, go forward with progress--and provide
for the results that America so desperately needs. It's a shame that
this do-nothing Republican Congress has now called a halt to all
business on this floor for the next several weeks.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for his comments. He is absolutely
right.
Mr. Speaker, just for the knowledge of all of our Members, the Senate
did pass a middle class tax cut, making sure that 98 percent of our
taxpayers would not get any increase in their taxes on the 1st of
January. That bill is over here. It has not been brought to the floor,
notwithstanding the fact, I believe, that every one of us believes that
those taxpayers ought not get an increase. So there is overwhelming
support for that bill, bipartisan support, but it won't be brought to
the floor.
On the Violence Against Women Act, to ensure that women and families
are not subjected to dangerous domestic violence, it passed 68-31
through the United States Senate; not passed here. Postal reform passed
62-37 in a bipartisan vote in the United States Senate; not paid
attention to here. The farm bill, which passed with 64 votes--almost 2-
1 in the United States Senate on a bipartisan vote with 16 Republican
Senators voting for it--has not been brought to this floor. Yet we walk
away. We walk away from the American people.
I now yield to my friend from Illinois, the gentlelady from Illinois,
Jan Schakowsky.
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I thank the gentleman so much for yielding and for
pointing out how languishing in the House of Representatives are many
pieces of legislation that have passed the United States Senate in a
bipartisan way with a Democratic majority. Yet here in the House, where
we have a Republican majority--and as you pointed out, some of these
bills have actually passed their own committees led by Republicans--are
still not being considered on the floor today.
So we are going to adjourn and will not meet again for almost 2
months--the earliest adjournment before an election in over 50 years.
Republicans are going to turn off the lights in this Chamber, shutting
down debate on matters of serious consequence to Americans and the
economy. Shame on them. We should be staying and dealing with those
bills.
They have voted, for example, time after time to repeal ObamaCare and
to protect tax cuts for the wealthy and rich corporations, but have
taken no action on preserving tax cuts for the middle class--for 98
percent of American taxpayers.
They've not taken any action on the Violence Against Women Act, which
passed the Senate by a bipartisan vote of 68-31. For the many years
that the Violence Against Women Act has been enacted, it has always had
bipartisan support.
We haven't passed the wind production tax credit, which, again, would
mean jobs for Americans in an industry that has just been developing
right now and that is so important to our environment and for people,
for instance, in my State of Illinois as well as in Iowa and other
Midwestern States.
We haven't passed the doctor fix, making sure that Medicare
reimbursements to doctors don't drop by 27 percent.
We haven't dealt with sequestration, which would have a devastating
impact on investments that create jobs and protect low-income people.
There has been no action on the post office reform or the farm bill,
which has been mentioned. In southern Illinois, where we have a serious
drought, our farmers are waiting for some drought relief, but they're
not going to get it from this Congress.
Most importantly, while Republicans have found the time to vote again
and again to end the Medicare guarantee--making it harder for seniors
to choose their own doctors and raising the costs of health care for
seniors by over $6,000 a year--they still haven't found the time to
bring a comprehensive jobs bill to the floor or one that deals with
making it in America, which is an industrial policy that would actually
put Americans back to work right here at home.
Millions of hardworking American people are still looking for more
than just talk about jobs. Over a year ago, I introduced the Emergency
Jobs to Restore the American Dream Act in order to create more than 2
million jobs and to put people back to work in the most straightforward
of ways--by hiring them. My bill would put people to work in critical
areas to our communities and our economy--people like teachers, cops
and firefighters, health care workers, school construction and
maintenance workers.
Over a year ago, President Obama sent to Congress the American Jobs
Act, which incorporated parts of my bill and also would provide tax
credits to small businesses--yet another tax credit--and assistance to
State and local governments in order to prevent the layoffs of critical
workers. Independent experts estimate that President Obama's American
Jobs Act would create up to 2.6 million jobs.
But the Republican do-nothing Congress brought neither of these jobs
bills to the floor. No. They are, every day, sabotaging every effort to
actually help create jobs and to Make It in America. Democrats truly do
want to stay to fight for jobs, for the economy, for farmers, for
taxpayers, for battered women. It's time for the Republicans to join
us.
Thank you, Mr. Minority Whip, for leading us in this effort, and I
urge all of the Republicans to join us in staying here.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the distinguished Member from Illinois (Ms.
Schakowsky) for her comments. Nobody fights harder for working people
and seniors in this Congress than Jan Schakowsky, and no one is sadder
that we have been so lacking in attention to the issues of concern to
those folks.
I now want to recognize Allyson Schwartz from the State of
Pennsylvania, who has also been a great leader and a member of the Ways
and Means Committee and who is trying to work on behalf of jobs and
growing our economy. I yield to my friend from Pennsylvania.
[[Page 14713]]
Ms. SCHWARTZ. I thank you, Mr. Minority Whip.
You have spoken out every week both on the floor of Congress and
around this country. You've spoken out on the actions we ought to be
taking in order to strengthen our Nation, protect our seniors, grow our
economy, and make sure our children have a great future. You speak
eloquently about that every week, so I really am pleased to be able to
just join you in calling attention to the fact that we do have serious
economic and fiscal challenges in this Nation.
Instead of coming together and trying to find common ground--trying
to find that agreement so we can solve these problems that the American
people are asking us to do, which is to solve these problems--the
Republicans have been doing nothing. They're trying to roll us back,
move us backward. In fact, the Republicans, as we know, just decided to
recess and head home. We know the Republicans, yet again, have made
their choices, their priorities, their values very clear not only to us
and to our constituents but, really, to all Americans, who are seeing
more clearly what the Republicans' choices have been. They are
determined to dismantle the progress we have made. They continuously
try and roll back our accomplishments that we have made so as to take
our country back to a failed economic agenda that has hurt so many
Americans.
The Republicans' goals are stunning, and we have seen them every week
on the floor of Congress for the last year and a half, almost 2 years:
repealing health care reform and eliminating the benefits for seniors
and access to affordable coverage for millions of Americans; repealing
the financial regulatory system; eliminating those consumer protections
with regard to environmental regulations, thus threatening clean water
and clean air; ending Medicare as we know it. Reducing the Federal
Government at any cost, that has been their goal.
{time} 1240
I want to mention just quickly two things that you're going to talk
some more about and some of my colleagues. I fought so hard on
Medicare. We all have. The Republicans have been absolutely clear on
this, their willingness to undue Medicare for all seniors. I've said
this before that whether you're 65 and expecting Medicare and living
under Medicare right now, you'll see a reduction in your benefits.
Whether you're 55 or 45 or 35 and you're paying into Medicare and want
Medicare to be there in the future, they are threatening that promise
of Medicare. They are deliberately working and have voted to end
Medicare as we know it. We've seen that time and again. It's not just
the Republican leadership, not just Mr. Ryan. There are many. Most of
the Republicans, not all of them have voted for this. Rather than
guarantee benefits under Medicare, the Republicans will leave seniors
on their own to buy benefits that they can afford or not. The voucher
will be inadequate to buy Medicare benefits that exist now, costing our
seniors about $6,400 more per year.
They threaten our fellow seniors as well in nursing homes by voting
for a third of a cut in Medicaid that affects, really, the costs of our
seniors in nursing homes. Any of us who have loved ones or visit
nursing homes know that these are people who require a great deal of
care. This is the agenda of the Republicans.
Instead of tackling what we're willing to do together such as middle
class tax cuts, they're holding it hostage to tax breaks for the
wealthiest 1 percent or 2 percent. They won't move forward on that sort
of certainty or on many of the issues facing us at the end of the year
as we're on a fiscal cliff that many of us talk about and are really
not doing the kind of work that needs to get done to create that
certainty, to be able to protect Medicare, to be able to make the
strategic investments, to make sure the tax policy is fair, and we do
fiscal policy for our Nation in the right way, in a fair way, in a
responsible way, and an achievable way.
I thank you for this Special Order, and I'm calling on the
Republicans to meet these challenges for our Nation, and to do that
together.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentlelady for her comments. No one works
harder on health care and is more focused on the delivery of affordable
care to all of our people, but particularly concerned about health care
for our seniors. How ironic it is that the pledge that the Republicans
made was to repeal and replace. I'm going to talk a little bit about
that. But there has been no replacement. On the one hand, they want to
eliminate the guarantee that Medicare gives to people to have the
security that health care will be available to them; and on the other
hand they offer nothing to replace it, no alternative, except to
increase substantially the cost of those seniors when they are in need
of health care.
I thank the gentlelady for her work, and I thank her for her
leadership on this very critical issue.
I'm now pleased to yield to the distinguished minority leader, the
former Speaker of the House, who has been instrumental in ensuring
affordable health care is available to all of our people, Nancy Pelosi
of California.
Ms. PELOSI. Thank you very much, Mr. Hoyer. I appreciate your
yielding and your leadership in bringing us together on the floor of
the House. We are after-hours, and it is only 12:40, but it's after-
hours on a Friday afternoon. That is in the context that we left here
on August 3. We're not due back until November 14, and yet we have had
only 8 legislative days of work in that period of time.
I thank you for calling that dereliction of duty to the attention of
the American people because we have work to do. It's not as if our work
is finished. As you have indicated, there is critical legislation that
is expiring that has passed even in the Senate; yet Republicans have
blocked the vote in the House, whether it's middle income tax relief,
postal reform, violence against women, the farm bill and then, of
course, initiatives proposed by President Obama to create jobs for our
economy.
I was so pleased to hear what our colleague, Congresswoman Schwartz,
had to say about Medicare, because our names are all on the ballot in
this year's election. But what is really at stake is Medicare.
Medicare, Medicare, Medicare. As you said, Mr. Hoyer, they offered
nothing except to raise costs to seniors for getting less as they phase
out Medicare.
I wanted to talk about another subject because it's a larger issue as
I hear this question bandied about. You hear people say, Are you better
off now than you were 4 years ago? The Republicans have the nerve to
pose that question that when you look back to 4 years ago, this very
week, Mr. Speaker, you would know that we are indeed fundamentally and
unquestionably better off as a country today. This week, 4 years ago,
September 18 to be exact, but this week, there was a meeting in my
office when I was Speaker of the Democratic and Republican leadership
of the House and of the Senate gathered together to hear a report from
the administration that was very alarming.
Mind you, September 18, 2008, the Secretary of the Treasury, Hank
Paulson, described for us a financial system in imminent danger of
total collapse. Chairman Bernanke at that same meeting, the chairman of
the Fed, told us if we did not act immediately, we would not have an
economy by Monday. This was a Thursday evening. You remember, Mr.
Hoyer. You were there. If we do not act immediately, we will not have
an economy by Monday. How on Earth can people who perpetrated that
situation on our country have the nerve to turn around and ask that
question? At the end of the meeting, we all went out in a bipartisan
way and spoke to the press. I said at the time, Time is of the essence
and that Congress would act. I was trying to lift confidence in our
financial situation.
Despite there being a Presidential election 7 weeks away at that
time, it was no time for partisanship. The crisis demanded that
Democrats and Republicans work with President Bush to rescue our
economy from depression or, as Chairman Bernanke said, from our not
having an economy 4 days later.
[[Page 14714]]
In the days ahead, our country confronted the worst financial crisis
since the Great Depression. The costs were staggering: more than $8
trillion lost in household wealth, more than 8 million jobs lost, and
more than 4 million families losing their homes to foreclosure.
Nonetheless, the Democrats voted with President Bush to restore
confidence in our markets, and the Republicans even walked away from
their own President.
In the 2 years after that September 18 meeting, we continued to take
actions to reduce spending and to address what was inevitable from the
policies of the 8 years previous to the November 2008 election. When we
took the majority and with President Obama in office, we took action to
reduce spending, create jobs, keep people in their homes, and passed
Dodd-Frank, the toughest Wall Street reforms in generations. With it--
the most historic for the first time--protections for American
consumers in that bill. All of it was fought vigorously against by the
Republicans.
Now we have President Obama, and we have a Republican Congress. Under
President Obama's leadership, we have added private sector jobs for 30
straight months, compared to losing 700,000 jobs a month as he entered
office; the auto industry, which was facing extinction, and the loss of
over 1 million jobs in that industry is again competitive and hiring
and thriving; the Dow Jones average, which is one reflection of the
security of tens of millions of American investors and pension funds,
has already doubled; and housing prices are slowly rising again. We
need much more progress there. Imagine, from that time the Dow Jones
has doubled.
We still have work to do to continue the American recovery. If the
Republicans had cooperated at all with President Obama in the last 2
years, we would be much farther down the road to recovery. We
cooperated with President Bush; but they would not offer an ounce of
cooperation to President Obama, and our economy has paid the price. We
have reaped the benefits of some of what happened in the 2 years when
we were in the majority and President Obama was in the first 2 years of
his term. But so much more could have been done with some cooperation
from the Republicans.
We get back to the question: Are we better off this week in September
than we were this week 4 years ago? You be the judge.
{time} 1250
I know America's families are hurting. We want to do more to create
jobs, et cetera, and we have to have bipartisan cooperation to do that.
The Republicans have resisted that. From that standpoint, yes, we can
do better.
But from the standpoint of this country when there was a financial
crisis, we were on the verge of a total collapse where the chairman of
the Fed told us that if we did not act immediately, we wouldn't have an
economy by Monday. Yes, we are fundamentally as a country better off
and, therefore, the prospects for the future are better for all of
America's families, and that's what we are here to work on, the future.
Too bad our Republican colleagues have cut and run from town, but we
stand ready to welcome them back to work in a bipartisan way to make
concessions to get the job done for the American people.
I thank you, Mr. Hoyer, for giving us all the opportunity to express
our views on the subject today.
Mr. HOYER. Madam Leader, thank you for your comments and your
leadership.
You are so correct in studying the statistics of the Dow, having
doubled. It's actually up now probably about 105, 110 percent. The
Standard & Poor's is up more than double, and the NASDAQ is up more
than double over those years. In January of 2009, I'm sure most people
tragically remember, we lost 818,000 private sector jobs that month.
Last month we gained 92,000 jobs.
Is there anybody who could say a loss of 818,000 jobs isn't a lot
worse than the gain of 92,000 jobs--92,000 jobs is not enough. We need
to do more. The President offered a jobs bill. It has not been brought
to this floor, notwithstanding the fact in the Pledge to America they
said this is a transparent Congress that would be allowed to work its
will. That bill has not been brought to the floor.
For the last 30 months we have gained, straight, more jobs, 4.6
million jobs to be exactly correct, while 4.4 million jobs were lost in
2008 alone. Are we better off gaining 4.6 million as opposed to losing
4.4 million jobs?
We have had 12 straight quarters of economic growth. The last four
quarters of 2008 in the last administration was a net 13 percent
decrease in GDP. Yes, Mr. Speaker, the leader is correct. We're better
off today, but we could be much better off. We ought to be better off
if we hadn't walked away from a jobs bill, hadn't walked away from
investing in an infrastructure bill that gave certainty.
We didn't even bring that bill to the floor. We walked away from
making sure that the health care bill works properly, walked away--and
I'm going to recognize Mr. Costa--walked away from the farmers of
America, walked away this day as we have walked away in the past.
Mr. Costa is from farm country. He understands the pain being
experienced in farm country, and he knows how terrible it is to have
simply walked away, walked away from the House-passed bill out of
committee and walked away from a bipartisan Senate bill. My friend is
such a strong voice on this floor, such an active member of the
Agriculture Committee and such a proponent of farm country, not only
California, which he represents but through this country.
I yield to my friend.
Mr. COSTA. I thank the gentleman from Maryland for yielding, because
we ought to be about doing the people's business. Walking away as we
are for the next 46 days to focus on elections when we ought to be
focusing on the people's business is a very sad commentary, a very sad
commentary to the people of our land.
I appreciate all the good work that my colleague Congressman Hoyer
and my other colleagues do in trying to address the critical challenges
that we face in our Nation today. As was stated, our House Republican
colleagues have left town to focus on the election. In the meantime we
have unfinished business. We have unfinished business on comprehensive
jobs, big and balanced budget solutions to the deficit, tax cuts for
the middle class, the farm bill--which I want to speak to--and the
Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act, as a cochair of the
Victims' Rights Caucus, is especially disheartening.
Let me say that the folks who farm and put the food on America's
dinner table are wondering why, just why, we can't get a farm bill. It
is one of the most bipartisan things we ever do here in Congress.
In 2008 we had a bipartisan farm bill when we had the majority.
President Bush vetoed it, we overrode his veto twice. Today we have a
farm bill that passed with overwhelming bipartisan support in the
Senate by a vote of 64-35. It made cuts because we have to make cuts,
and we have to be fiscally responsible, $23.5 billion less than the
farm bill of 2008.
In the House, as a Member of the House Agriculture Committee, we
voted a comprehensive bill out, 35-11. We made cuts because we have to
make cuts. In a number of the areas we made similar cuts to the
Senate's, $20 billion in farm programs. We made additional cuts in
nutritional programs, which are part of what would normally be worked
out if regular order was allowed to take place.
Mr. HOYER. The gentleman may know this better than I because he works
so closely with the ag community, but over 70 farm organizations and
farmer-focused organizations came to town a week or two ago and all
said pass the Senate bill, not because they believed it was perfect,
but because they believed it was a bipartisan bill that would bring
relief to farm country and give some certainty to the farming
community. I think I'm correct on that.
Mr. COSTA. The gentleman is correct. We had over 70 farm
organizations from the American Farm Bureau, the National Farmers Union
to the, as we
[[Page 14715]]
say, the ``barnyard coalition'' that represents all of the poultry and
pork and dairy and beef cattle industries, because they understand that
a farm bill is a safety net. Without it, we don't have a farm policy,
we don't have a food policy for not just American farmers, ranchers,
and dairymen but for the consumers who, each night, enjoy the highest-
quality food produced with the safest quality anywhere in the world.
Let me just close by saying two things. The dairy industry is
hurting. We have had a drought in the Midwest that has devastated a
whole host of the farm country. And yet, what is one of the ways that
farmers, ranchers, and dairymen are able to produce next year's crops?
Well, they get loans. They get loans from banks and production credit
associations.
What are those loans made of? They are based upon the value of their
farm and how much they were leveraged, but they are also based upon a
farm bill, a farm bill that provides the ability to ensure that there
is a safety net and that there is crop insurance. Without any farm
bill, we don't have any crop insurance. Without a farm bill, we don't
have that safety net.
With the overwhelming bipartisan support that we have in the Senate,
the bipartisan bill that was voted out of the House Agriculture
Committee, it seems to me that we ought to let the process work. I
would urge my colleagues to come back. Come back and let's do the
people's business on all of these issues. The Violence Against Women
Reauthorization Act. The Victims' Rights Caucus every day is focusing
on protecting women and their families throughout this country, and
that is also a bipartisan piece of legislation that we always act on.
Again we're not doing the people's business.
The gentleman from Maryland, my colleague, is so correct in bringing
this to the attention of the House. Ladies and gentlemen, we ought to
be about doing the people's business.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman from California for his leadership,
not only for farm country but for all of the people in this country on
behalf of getting people back to work, making jobs available, and
making sure our farmers are secure, and particularly for making sure
that we address the epidemic of violence perpetrated against family
members. I thank the gentleman for his leadership.
I yield to somebody who is as strong a voice as we have in this House
on behalf of the working men and women in this country, the gentlewoman
from California, Lynn Woolsey.
Ms. WOOLSEY. I thank the gentleman for leading this Special Order.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday we were debating work requirements under the
TANF program. Well, after we've all listed the issues that the
Republicans have refused to address in this Congress, we can say that
we know a bunch of people who should be subjected to a work
requirement.
{time} 1300
They take home a lot of Federal dollars. They're actually on the
public dole, but they don't seem to be doing very much work. And I'm
talking about the do-nothing Republicans in this Congress. I don't
blame them for wanting to hurry home for their campaigns because a lot
of their jobs must be in jeopardy. On the other hand, when they get
there, they might find their constituents pretty frustrated that they
haven't done their jobs and they have not met their responsibilities.
Every single day that we're here, my colleagues across the aisle put
forward bills that have no hope of becoming law and exist only to
promote Republican talking points. Time and time again, they have
chosen gridlock and confrontation over progress and cooperation. They
haven't lifted a finger to pass the President's jobs package, even
though it contains many, many ideas that the Republicans supported in
the past. They want to destroy health care reform instead of building
on it. They have refused to work with Democrats on education issues,
failing to invest in our children, who are 100 percent of our future.
They haven't done a thing to support the middle class and give them
hope for the future. It's no wonder the Congress has record-low
approval ratings.
But, Mr. Speaker, most disappointing of all to me is the Republican
Congress's failure to lead on issues of national security and war and
peace. While we're on recess, the war in Afghanistan will turn 11 years
old. Eleven years--and more. More than 2,000 Americans are dead,
thousands more are wounded, and taxpayers are out more than half a
trillion dollars, all for a policy that continues to undermine our
national security goals instead of advancing them. The brave
servicemembers who are putting life and limb on the line in Afghanistan
don't get a recess.
When we adjourn, they will continue to be very much ``in session.''
Their ``district work period'' is in districts in Afghanistan, where
the Taliban is poised to strike--some at the most dangerous places
imaginable. The war isn't just morally reprehensible; it's fiscally
irresponsible. And the very same Members who want to cut every domestic
program to the bone have barely blinked an eye when it comes to
billions and billions of dollars in misplaced war appropriations.
When is the Congress going to catch up with the American people?
Certainly not between now and the election, because we've gone home.
The people we work for know that it makes no sense to continue military
occupation, that it's doing more harm than good, creating more
terrorists than it's defeating, making us less safe, not more. The
American people have made it abundantly clear: they want us to be here.
They want us to be debating this war. They're done with this war. They
want us to vote to bring our troops home safely.
The country faces huge challenges. Our people are crying out for
leadership, and the Majority wants to turn out the lights. Actually,
they have gone home. Americans desperately want the Congress to do
something to create jobs and jump-start the economy, something to
create peace and security; but the Republicans in Congress have gone
home. They have left the work site. They're gone.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentlelady for her comments, and I yield to my
friend, Suzanne Bonamici, who was such an effective State legislator.
She was overwhelmingly elected in a special election. And every day
since that election, she has been working hard on behalf of hardworking
men and women not only in Oregon, but throughout this country. And I
know that she's disappointed that we're walking away from our
responsibilities.
I yield to my friend.
Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you very much, Mr. Hoyer, for bringing to the
country's attention the work left undone.
When I arrived in Congress just a little more than 7 months ago, I
brought a pretty strong message from my constituents back in Oregon,
and that's that they want us to overcome the gridlock, they want us to
get our economy back on track and support policies that create new
jobs. Of course, no one expects this to be an easy task, but I was
really encouraged by so many people who said, That's why we're here.
Let's work together for job creation. Unfortunately, these
conversations have now been kicked down the road for another day--
actually, another month--while too many of our constituents back home
are facing unemployment, their homes are underwater, their child care
costs are rising.
Several of my colleagues have talked about the failure to pass the
farm bill. This typically bipartisan legislation became a staging
ground for a fight over nutrition assistance to people who are
struggling. Now the bipartisan Senate bill has some amendments that
were added that will help farmers in my district and across this
country. We should be able to vote on that bipartisan bill that passed
the Senate.
As others have mentioned, we're going to go back to our districts and
face our constituents, who are expecting so much from us. But we did
not extend the production tax credit for wind energy. Now, that's a
problem in my district. I have companies that are waiting for that.
They may now be facing additional layoffs. That policy has
[[Page 14716]]
long been a bipartisan policy supported by many to develop the wind
industry in this country. That's going to be hard for us to explain to
our constituents.
So, Mr. Hoyer, thank you. There's so much that we can do and should
be doing to get our economy back on track, but Congress is not doing
our job. This failure to pass bipartisan, commonsense legislation is
something everyone in America should know about. We should be staying
here representing the best interests of our constituents, helping to
put this country back to work.
So thank you again, Mr. Hoyer, for yielding and for bringing this
important issue to everyone's attention.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentlelady for her comments.
I want to now recognize the distinguished gentleman from Missouri
(Mr. Carnahan), who's been such a leader on so many of these issues.
Mr. CARNAHAN. Thank you. I want to thank the gentleman from Maryland
for his leadership on this issue as this Congress shuts down.
It was Harry Truman from Missouri who coined the term the ``do-
nothing Congress'' in 1948. But that Congress was 10 times more
productive than this Republican Congress of 2012. To call this Congress
a do-nothing Congress is an insult to the do-nothing Congress of 1948.
So we're leaving today, the earliest this Congress has ever left for a
campaign in an election year in 52 years.
Look at how disconnected this Congress has been from the urgent needs
of the American people. Thirty percent of the bills passed were for the
purpose of attaching someone's name to a building. We voted to repeal
the Affordable Care Act 33 times. The Republicans passed 30 jobs
message bills that didn't do a thing to create jobs. They voted so
often to restrict women's freedom and access to health care that one
female Republican lawmaker said, Are you kidding me? How many times are
we going to vote for this? And we have voted on the Romney-Ryan plan to
end the Medicare guarantee and increase cost to seniors by $6,400. It's
no wonder this Republican Congress has the lowest approval rating ever.
There are urgent priorities on the table that many have talked about
here today: the middle class tax cuts, the farm bill, the Violence
Against Women Act, responsible deficit reduction, and President Obama's
jobs bill. This Republican wall of obstruction is wreaking havoc on
this country. It's leaving a trail of dysfunction. And now Republicans
are running for the exit door to cut their own political losses.
They're shutting down this people's House without getting the work
done. This Congress should be here. Our Democratic leaders have made it
clear we're ready to do that work. People will be the judge.
I thank the gentleman from Maryland for his leadership on this order.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for his comments.
General Leave
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have
5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
include therein extraneous materials on the topic of this Special
Order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Maryland?
There was no objection.
Mr. HOYER. I yield to my friend from New Jersey (Mr. Holt), an
effective Member of this House.
Mr. HOLT. I thank the gentleman.
As we've heard the gentleman from Maryland say many times,
``Representative'' is not just a title. It's our job description. We
need to hear from our constituents. And our constituents have told us
over and over again this year what they want. They want middle class
tax relief.
{time} 1310
They want a farm bill. They want the postal service fixed so it can
pay its bills. They want passage of the Violence Against Women Act.
It's a long list of things that they feel we can do to help Americans.
We've had an opportunity to hear from people because the leadership
sent us home a month and a half ago where we could hold town meetings
while they allowed us to do nothing here. We heard from our
constituents very clearly--not just from a small segment, not just from
a few special interests, not just from a few percent for whom
everything seems just fine, thank you. But we heard from all sorts of
Americans who say, Help. Please. Get to work.
You've heard this is the least productive Congress in a generation,
in a long generation; and that's by design. The majority sets the
schedule. They scheduled very few days in session, very few committee
hearings, very few markups.
So even the do-nothing Congress, as my friend from Missouri said,
even the Congress that Harry Truman called the do-nothing Congress was
much more productive than this one.
So why did the majority close up shop and head home until after the
election? Well, the answer I think is pretty clear: they want to
campaign. They've decided with their dismal record they need a little
more time to campaign, a little time to explain why they cast 302 votes
to limit protections for clean air and clean water and good land. They
need a little more time to explain why the farm bill, to help the areas
that have been hit by drought, to help the farmers that need crop
insurance, hasn't been passed. To be sure, it's going to be hard to
campaign on the record that they've compiled, and maybe they need a
little extra time.
We don't need extra time to hear from our constituents about their
needs and what they want us to do.
I stand with my friend Mr. Hoyer and all of us on this side of the
aisle, to return to Washington any day, any night to do the work that
the American people hired us to do--to be their representatives.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for his very compelling comments.
I know that, Mr. Speaker, you've heard us speak and the Members have
heard us speak, and one might say, well, these are Democrats speaking
about the non-productivity and non-attention to the people's business
of this Congress.
But some years ago, just a few years ago, 4 years ago, the Republican
Party, our friends on that side of the aisle, nominated John McCain to
be their President. What does John McCain say of this Congress? ``The
worst since 1947 statistically, the worst ever as far as I'm
concerned,'' Senator John McCain told reporters Wednesday when asked to
assess this Congress. That was September 19, 2012, just a few days ago.
Bipartisan observation.
This walkaway Congress is the least effective in which I've served,
and I've been here for 31 years.
I want to yield to my friend who came to Congress the same year I
did, who unfortunately is leaving, one of the great leaders of this
Congress and responsible for putting the referee back on the field so
that we will not have another financial meltdown that plunged this
country almost into depression, the distinguished Member from
Massachusetts, Barney Frank.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I thank the Democratic whip, and I thank
him for the leadership he provided during his years as majority leader
when we were able to do some things.
You know, we're talking about what this Congress didn't do. I suppose
in some ways we ought to be happy because some of what they said they
wanted to do would have been totally destructive.
This is the party that let the financial community run riot for years
when they had both the White House and both Houses of Congress, did no
regulation, so that we got the worst recession in 80 years, a near
depression, because of their irresponsibility. They were threatening to
undo it. Unfortunately, they were able to accomplish one thing.
One of the things we did was to give the Federal regulatory agencies
the power to regulate derivatives, a serious, obscure, powerful
instrument that was a major cause of our crisis. While they were not
able to repeal the rules, they were able to reduce the funding of the
agencies that have to deal with this complex matter to a level where
they have not been very effective.
[[Page 14717]]
So that's one of the things they were able to do--undo by financial
stealth what we tried to get done.
But I want to come to their defense to some extent, Mr. Whip, because
there may be some implication that they're not willing to work hard.
No, let's be very clear. The reason we have such a dismal record here
is not because they are lazy, our Republican colleagues. It's more
because of a word that rhymes with ``lazy,'' which the House rules will
prohibit me from using.
The problem is this: in 2010, a significant number of Republicans
were elected who do not understand the importance of governance in a
free enterprise society in which there has to be a vigorous private
sector creating goods and services and a public sector that works with
it.
That's why we have no postal bill, although the Senate passed one;
why we have no agricultural bill; why they couldn't pass a highway bill
and had to be dependent on the Democratic Senate to pass one, so they
could catch on to it.
They simply do not understand the importance of our coming together
and doing things in this complex economic society that cannot be done
by the private sector.
It is an extremism. It is not laziness. It is extremism that grips
the Republican Party so they are not able to discharge the normal
functions of government.
By the way, there is one particular inaction that I want to stress.
It has to do with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. When my Republican
friends are out of power, they know exactly what to do about housing.
When they're in power, they forget. It's a peculiar form of amnesia.
From 1995 until 2006, they controlled the Congress and did nothing
about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. We came into office in 2007. At the
request of Henry Paulson, George Bush's Secretary of the Treasury, we
took action and put them in a conservatorship and stopped them from
losing money.
The next step was to go forward with replacing them. We said that we
would do that. We did financial reform first. The Republicans said, in
2009 and 2010, you must do reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and we
thought financial reform came first because we already stopped the
bleeding. Then they came to power in 2011, and they've done nothing.
The reason they've done nothing about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and
the reason they've done nothing about the post office and agriculture
and couldn't do anything about the highways is very simple: they are a
party torn between extremists and people who are afraid of extremists.
People who will not take them on. A Speaker who will not bring an
agriculture bill to the floor that might very well pass because he's
intimidated by his own Tea Party extremist wing which rules him.
They could not come forward with housing legislation because what a
majority knows should be done to put in some kind of Federal-private
cooperation without the mistakes we've made in the past, they couldn't
get the votes for it because their extremists had a veto over it.
Last point, Mr. Whip. I want to talk a little bit about
bipartisanship.
In 2007, things began to buckle in our financial system. I, as the
chairman of the committee, worked closely with Mr. Paulson to deal with
it. In 2008, the Bush administration came to us, and you know what they
wanted? You remember, a stimulus. That terrible word ``stimulus.''
George Bush, that radical, and Ben Bernanke, his appointee, the
Chairman of the Fed, and Hank Paulson, his Secretary of Treasury, said,
Let's do a stimulus.
This Democratic leadership worked with them. Then-Speaker Pelosi
negotiated with them. We did a bipartisan stimulus.
Then later on when the economy began to collapse because of financial
dissolution, Hank Paulson came to us and asked for cooperation, and we
gave him cooperation.
From 2007 through 2008, we had a very bipartisan approach in the
economic crisis. Then one thing happened: Barack Obama became President
and bipartisanship disappeared because extremism took over the
Republican Party, first when they were in the minority and now when
they are in the majority. That's why nothing has happened.
I thank the whip.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for his very cogent comments. I
would remind him the Leader talked about that, and he's talked about
it.
Mr. Speaker, I think you will recall--George Bush, Republican
President of the United States; Hank Paulson, Republican Secretary of
the Treasury; and Ben Bernanke, who I think is neither Republican nor
Democrat but appointed by the Republican President.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. He was a registered Republican but was
three times appointed by George Bush to high economic positions.
Mr. HOYER. President Bush came to us and said: The country's in
trouble, at risk of going into depression. We need you to act.
Who acted? The Democrats, in a bipartisan response to President Bush.
Who walked away? Two-thirds of the Republican Party, the President's
party. Two-thirds of them walked away. As a result, we failed the first
time. We came back and added another 30 Democrats, 172, and the
Republicans couldn't even get to 100 to support their own President to
keep this country out of depression.
Ladies and gentlemen, 2 years ago as the previous election
approached, Republicans unveiled a long list of pledges. Their Pledge
to America reads, and I quote:
A plan to create jobs, end economic uncertainty, and make
America more competitive must be the first urgent domestic
priority of our government. So, first we offer a plan to get
people working again.
That's what they said. We are still waiting for that plan, and we
have walked away.
{time} 1320
Twenty-one months later, Republicans have not offered a comprehensive
plan to create jobs and boost competitiveness. Nor have they allowed
Democrats to bring major items of our Make It in America--expand
manufacturing, create jobs, give good-paying jobs with good security to
Americans that will then redound to the benefit of all agencies and job
creators and small businesses that service those manufacturers.
When President Obama proposed his plan, the American Jobs Act--which
economists say would have expanded by 1 million or 1.5 million jobs--
Republicans blocked it outright, not brought to the floor, not given a
vote. Instead of making jobs their priority, it seems to have been last
on their to-do list, at a time when it remains the first concern for
millions and millions of Americans and for our side of the aisle.
Mr. Speaker, let me read another excerpt from the Republican pledge:
With common-sense exceptions for seniors, veterans, and our
troops, we will roll back government spending, putting us on
a path to balance the budget and pay down the debt.
However, over the last 21 months Republicans have torpedoed every
serious attempt to reach agreement on deficit reduction. Why? No
revenues from the very wealthy in America. Not because we don't like
the very wealthy, not because we want to penalize the very wealthy, but
because we need to keep our country on a financially secure path, and
those of us on this floor can contribute a little more to that effort.
Pushed to the extreme by their Tea Party wing, House Republicans
early on embraced an ``our way or no way'' that made compromise
impossible, refusing to accept any solution that included revenues or
that ended unnecessary tax breaks for the wealthiest in our country.
That's why the middle class tax cut passed overwhelmingly in the United
States--well, passed by a majority--in the United States Senate
languishes here unconsidered, which would keep 98 percent of America
from any concern about having their taxes increased on January 1. Why?
To protect the 2 percent. How sad.
In pursuit of their extreme budget agenda, they pushed our country to
the brink of default, leading to--for the first time ever in the
history of our Nation--the most creditworthy nation on
[[Page 14718]]
Earth being downgraded by the Standard & Poor's rating agency. To avert
that default, Republicans insisted on creating the sequester that so
many of them now lament. It was their creation. In fact, in their cap,
cut, and balance bill, what is the default position they take?
Sequester.
Meanwhile, led by Chairman Paul Ryan, Republicans passed two budgets
that would end Medicare as we know it, end the guarantee, end the
security that it gives to people who are seniors and going to be
seniors; guts social programs that keep millions out of poverty; and
doesn't balance over the next 30 years.
Susan Collins, Republican Member of the United States Senate--I
showed you John McCain, Mr. Speaker--she says:
It is very frustrating to have worked on legislation that
really matters to our country, like the cybersecurity bill
and legislation to save the postal service, and just have
them gather dust.
In other words, she worked in the Senate across the aisle with
Democrats and sent that bill here--both those bills--and we have not
acted. We have walked away.
Mr. Speaker, we have made our point: Walking away has been the
practice of this Congress. Not getting the work done has been the
practice of this Congress. How lamentable it is for the American
people. But as President Obama said: They have a choice. May they make
it well.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate
the Republican leadership in the House on their two greatest
accomplishments this Congress: 1) thanks to their leadership, we have
had the least productive Congress in modern history and 2) thanks to
their leadership Congress has the lowest approval rating ever.
Time and time again, the House Republicans showed Americans that they
would rather play politics by putting messaging bills on the Floor that
never stood a chance of passing in the Senate than work with us and the
Senate on legislation our country desperately needs.
House Republicans found time to vote to repeal the Affordable Care
Act 33 times but we can't find the time to extend the Farm Bill.
In fact, halfway through 2012, the House Majority Leader Eric Cantor
declared that ``serious legislating is all but done until after the
election.''
This is not what Americans want and the majority should be ashamed of
themselves for creating an environment where compromise is avoided at
all costs.
Mr. Speaker, I have served many years in the House of Representatives
and am proud of the fact that I often work with my colleagues across
the aisle to find solutions that make sense for my constituents,
industry and the environment.
But this Congress, it's been different. Their mentality is that
you're either with us or against us. But Mr. Speaker, that is no way to
lead a chamber that represents various constituencies around the
country.
____________________
PERSPECTIVE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 5, 2011, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) is recognized
for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, well, my head is spinning a bit after
hearing my friends across the aisle. I heard our former Speaker ask
about whether we're better off now than we were 4 years ago, and
actually ask how can people who perpetuated this economic disaster ask
that question. And it was amazing, because former Speaker Pelosi and I
were on exactly the same wavelength. She was asking: Are we better off
now than we were 4 years ago? And I was thinking the same thing that
she was: How could people who perpetuated this economic disaster ask
that question? But she asked it anyway.
You heard our friends talk about the economic disaster. Some of us
remember back into the early point of the 21st century when there was
an effort by first-term President Bush, George W. Bush, calling for
reform of Fannie and Freddie, and I seem to recall my friend from
Massachusetts who resisted such reform. In fact, there were people here
on the Democratic side of the aisle that resisted such reform; they
prevented such reform. There were Members on the Republican side--not
all of them, but there were Members who were calling for reform of
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but it didn't happen. In fact, our friends
across the aisle were in control of the House and Senate for 4 years.
In 2005 and 2006, as a freshman, I often heard our colleagues across
the aisle asking how we could do such a terrible, terrible thing of
spending $100 billion to $200 billion more than we had coming in. And
they were right, they were right: we should not have been spending $160
billion more than we had coming in. The Democrats were right. And
because Republicans did not stay true to what we had promised--our
leadership just wouldn't dig in and stop it, even though we had a
Republican President, you know, well, we've got a Republican President,
don't want to hurt his feelings--we spent $160 billion more than we had
coming in.
So, the American public sounded like they weren't thrilled with what
they heard from the Democrats, but they figured they'd give them a
chance. So, November 2006, Democrats--who had promised to end the
deficit spending--took over and the deficit spending, rather than
coming under control, went out of sight.
{time} 1330
They passed the Dodd-Frank bill. It has historic overregulation of
community banks.
Now, why would a group who is so upset with Wall Street pass
legislation that devastates community banks that are closest to the
community, know the borrowers the best, that have been the real
foundation of this country? Why would they strangle out community banks
with this massive overregulation that really doesn't hurt the massive,
big banks?
Well, someone said years ago, follow the money. And if you look at
the money that has been contributed to campaigns for many years, you
find out that the Wall Street executives and their immediate family
normally donate about four times more to Democrats than they do to
Republicans.
Now, the Wall Street executives have to endure being called fat cats
by a Democratic President, but they know, perhaps it's a wink and a
nod, I'll call you fat cats, but I'm going to destroy your competition.
We'll get rid of community banks. We'll strangle them with
overregulation. They can't make loans. We'll threaten them through the
FDIC and the regulators to prevent them from making loans that they
know are to good, reliable people who have never missed a payment.
We'll threaten them not to do that, and we'll choke them out. And the
only people to be left are the big investment banks on Wall Street that
got us into the big mess in the first place.
So if you follow the money and you follow the contributions, you find
out, gee, Democrats talk about Wall Street as if they're Republicans,
but there are four times more Democrats on Wall Street as executives
than there are Republicans. What a shock. Because they talk a good
game, I thought for so long that Wall Street executives must be
Republicans, the way the Democrats talk. Not so. President Obama got
four times more contributions from executives and their immediate
family than did a guy named John McCain.
So, we look on further. What about jobs?
How about when we have a disaster, by British Petroleum, who has been
allowed to operate in the gulf coast with 800 or so egregious safety
violations, but that's okay. According to the Obama administration,
they didn't want to step in.
I read an account that at the very time Deepwater Horizon had blown
out, and this administration, Obama administration, should have been
all over them, the executives of British Petroleum were negotiating
with the Democrats to be the one big oil company that rolled out
support in favor of cap-and-trade.
I said I wouldn't use the term ``crap-and-trade'' anymore, so I'll
avoid saying that.
[[Page 14719]]
But they had a big oil company that was willing to come out and
support cap-and-trade. So certainly this administration and the
Democrats in the House and Senate wouldn't want to do anything too
detrimental to British Petroleum because they're going to come out on
our side. That meant that they ended up actually believing BP when they
said, Oh, we'll get it under control.
Well, they didn't get it under control.
So then there was this bipartisan group of experts peer-reviewing
what was going on in the gulf coast, and they came back with a report
that made recommendations of what should be done. One of those
recommendations was not to have a moratorium on drilling, not only of
the deep water, but also the very shallow water. They didn't recommend
it. And yet this administration goes through and changes the report the
way it's printed and put out so that it makes it sound like these
experts recommended a moratorium. They did not. But that's the way this
administration wanted to manipulate what the American public believed
so that the President could sign off on a moratorium.
Other than those precious lives that were lost and those who were
harmed out there on the Deepwater Horizon rig because this
administration had allowed them to continue to operate, the biggest
damage to the people in the gulf area was from the President's
moratorium.
There were people who were making $75,000 in salary working on rigs--
and that was the minimum, basically, from what I was told by people
that worked on rigs--and that income stopped, and those families had
nothing because this President perverted a report into making people
believe that it said we should cut off drilling in the gulf coast, and
it devastated so many in the gulf coast region.
If you want to look at what the President really thinks about big oil
companies, it's very similar to what is said and done about Wall
Street. They call the Wall Street executives all kinds of names--wink,
wink, nod, nod. We're going to pass legislation that eliminates your
competition, and then you'll be in charge, and then maybe you can make
eight times as many contributions to Democrats as you do to Republicans
in both Wall Street and among Big Oil.
How would that happen?
Well, if you read the bill that President Obama put together--and it
was the second American Jobs Act that was filed, because I filed the
first one, because he ran around the country for weeks saying, Pass the
American Jobs Act. There wasn't one filed. I figure if he's going to
run around America saying, Pass the American Jobs Act, there ought to
be one. So I put a two-page bill together that would have eliminated
the 35 percent tariff we put on every American-made good by any company
in America.
If we eliminate that 35 percent tariff, also called a corporate tax,
you would see companies flocking into America. You would see people
with jobs. They wouldn't be standing in line trying to get food stamps,
standing in line trying to get more government help. They would have a
job and all the pride that comes from that, of doing a good job and
making your own money and making your own way.
But we have a group in this Congress, in both ends. They're in the
majority down in the Senate, in the minority down here; and it's
certainly not all of my Democratic friends, but they think the best way
to help a country is just to give away more of other people's money.
If you look at the President's proposal in his so-called American
Jobs Act, he told people, I'm going to just really take after Big Oil.
Well, I was one who actually read all 135 or 138 pages, whatever it
was, and in the last part is where he got around to Big Oil, except it
doesn't hurt Big Oil. It absolutely devastates and would eliminate all
the small independent oil companies operating in America. And those
small independent oil companies happen to drill and operate nearly 95
percent of all the oil and gas wells in America.
He takes away deductions of the normal cost of doing business that
anybody in business is allowed to take as a deduction. Why not? It's
the cost of doing business. It's not profit. That way, you only tax the
profit. And it eliminates deductions that actually do not help big oil
companies. They can't take those deductions. Only the small companies
can take that deduction.
So the President's plan, when you really look at it, instead of
looking at what he says, look at what he did. What he did was provide
the elimination of the independent oil and gas companies in America.
And you don't have to have been to an Ivy League school. In fact,
you're better off maybe in figuring this out if you didn't, because he
had a Harvard economic advisor at the time. And of course, Art Laffer,
I think the world of him. I think he's maybe the best economic advisor
any President's ever had, despite his Harvard education. But you don't
have to have an Ivy League education to understand that if this
President had been successful in eliminating every independent oil and
gas company, as his bill would have done, not only will you eliminate
millions of jobs, including those who derive jobs from the independent
oil and gas business as well as the business itself, not only would you
do that, you would eliminate most of the production in America.
What does that do? That drives the price of oil and gasoline way up,
dramatically up. Natural gas, oil, all of that goes dramatically up,
because the major oil companies in the world are not interested in
coming in and operating smaller wells. They go for the big ones.
{time} 1340
That means there is no competition to the massive oil and gas
companies in the world. I was shocked to find out in our Natural
Resources Committee that, if you look at all of the big oil companies
in the world and if you see them listed just by how much they've got in
reserves, the American companies like Exxon are way down the list. The
biggest oil companies are those operating as single companies in OPEC
nations.
And what would this President do?
He would do what he has done repeatedly--he would help foreign
countries. He would help the bigger folks, the bigger oil companies.
I'm sure it would have benefited the fat cats, as he calls them, on
Wall Street, but it would have put out of business 94, 95 percent of
the oil and gas wells in America. That meant everybody's price went up.
How sad is it that one of the few promises that he kept--I don't know,
it may be the main promise--was to drive up the cost of energy in
America. Boy, has he done that.
Now, I love having quotes from people who talk about the Congress
being the worst Congress that they can recall, especially Republicans,
when the body at the other end of the Hall has not fulfilled the
obligation that they are required by law to do, and that's to pass a
budget. Not in over 3 years. So how are we going to get anything done
in Congress?
We've got a Senate down there, controlled by Democrats, who say,
We're not going to do our job, and we're going to leave over and over
on recess, and we're never going to do our job because, if people saw
what our budget really is, they'd get mad at us, so we don't want a
budget. We just want to keep spending at these ridiculously high
levels. If we work through a budget, we might have to do like the House
did when they worked through a budget, and we may actually have to cut
some things.
How incredibly disingenuous for anyone in America to stand up and
say, Gee, we really want to bring down our spending, and yet everything
they propose, except for the military, creates more spending. How
disingenuous for anybody in America who stands up and says, These
Republicans want to cut Medicare; they're going to destroy Medicare, if
they've been awake during any of the actual bills that have been passed
by the Democrats, especially during that whole long ordeal when the
Democrats had the House and they had the Senate and they had the White
House, and when America made it clear
[[Page 14720]]
we do not want ObamaCare. They said, We don't care. We want it. It's
going to be more government control.
It really was about the GRE, the government running everything, not
just health care. By the passage of ObamaCare without one single
Republican vote--not a one; it was completely done with Democratic
votes, this $716 billion in cuts to Medicare--the Democrats voted that
in. The Democratic President signed it in. It devastates Medicare more
than anything that has ever been done to Medicare, and it was without
one single Republican vote.
So how in the world could somebody come in here or anywhere and blame
Republicans for wanting to cut Medicare? Now, I blame my leadership.
Anybody who is around can find it.
We should never have agreed with the Democrats to that stupid
supercommittee, deficit ceiling bill. We should not have. I was
assured, No, no, no. They don't want $300 billion or $400 billion-$500
billion in cuts in Medicare, which would be a sequester. They will come
together, and we'll reach an agreement. I pointed out that these are
the same people who cut $716 billion out of Medicare in ObamaCare. So,
of course. I pointed out, if they don't have this supercommittee
structure and refuse to let there be any agreement, then there is no
one in the country who can be blamed for cutting Medicare except the
Democrats.
But if they get this bill passed on the deficit-raising bill and if
it requires a supercommittee to reach an agreement--if they can get
that through and get us to go along with it, thinking that they're
going to actually reach an agreement--then they can stonewall and not
reach an agreement no matter what we offer, and then they get a twofer.
They get hundreds of billions in cuts to our national security at a
time when our national security has not been in this kind of jeopardy
since 9/11. Actually, on 9/11 it wasn't in the kind of jeopardy we are
in right now, today.
Under this administration, we have seen a win in Iraq turned into a
loss because of just the total abandonment of what we created in the
way of a friend in Iraq. Maliki--now, he's no friend of mine. He says I
can't come back in the country. Yet if I put myself in Maliki's
situation, who is the leader of Iraq--and I know Obama has said we're
leaving and we're not leaving anybody or anything; we're leaving--and
if you see America is pulling out and if you see all this radical stuff
going on across the border in Iran, well, you realize America is not
going to be around to keep any stability, and I'm going to have to
start doing what Iran says.
So what did we do?
We created a country. We had a victory. Even though President Obama,
as a Senator, was against the surge, everybody said it worked, that
we'd won. Then he pulled us out in such a way that he snatched defeat
out of the jaws of victory. Now you've got Iraq that is under heavy
influence by Iran. Thank you, President Obama. We've got Syria that is
run by a tyrant. Perhaps Syria was the only place we should have
intervened, and this President still hasn't gone in and helped there--
oh, no. Because the 57 States that make up the Organization of the
Islamic Conference were all for us going into Egypt and going into
Libya and taking out two people with whom this administration had
agreements. They loved the idea of America taking out and helping take
out people that were allies of ours. They loved that.
Some of us in this body were saying, Don't do this. We don't know
who's going to take over. These could be some radicals who will even
empower the radicals more. I mean, you look across at Tunisia and Libya
and Egypt and Iraq and Iran and Syria and Lebanon. You look at these
countries and come on over to Afghanistan--that this President is
losing as we speak--and Pakistan, which has been harming us all they
could while still taking our money. Thank you, Secretary of State
Clinton and President Obama. You look, and you go, oh, my gosh. This is
the makings. This is the massive beginning of a new Ottoman Empire that
President Obama can take great credit for. Yes, we're in big trouble
here in America, but, wow, look what he has helped do in the Middle
East. It's a new Ottoman Empire. Thank you, President Barack Hussein
Obama. This will be quite a legacy for you.
I'm not one of those who says he is not a Christian. All I know is
that's between him and God. What I do know is he has helped jump-start
a new Ottoman Empire and left our friend and ally Israel so vulnerable
in this sea of radicalism that he has helped bring to the surface.
How could any of us who were around in '79 not be reminded of
President Carter? He has got to be happy--thank you. Now I'm not the
worst President in the world. But at the time, he thought we'll just
turn our backs on the Shah--not a nice guy, but he was creating some
form of stability. When he was gone, President Carter called Ayatollah
Khomeini a man of peace.
What a welcome thing.
He came in, and he was the supreme leader when our Embassy was
attacked, which is an act of war--just as it was in Libya, just like it
is in Cairo. It's an act of war. Any commander would make it clear,
except President Carter and President Obama, that you've attacked
American soil. You've attacked us. Under everybody's form of
international law, you either straighten it out, or we're coming in
because we have a right under international law to protect ourselves,
and if it means taking your government out because of what you've done
or have allowed to be done or have helped foment, then we do it.
{time} 1350
In Egypt, this administration helped bring about what they thought
would be a great thing, an Arab Spring. It's turned into an American
winter. At the same time, this administration was blessing and loving
the Occupy Wall Street movement, even though they were clearly a bunch
of Democrats, a bunch of kids with iPads, iPhones out there. There was
rape, drugs, all kinds of illegality and immorality out there
abounding. This administration is saying this is a good thing.
You see the signs all over the place. Let me show you. At the Occupy
movement, you would see signs like this: ACAB, all cops are--some
people said ``bad,'' but I've been corrected. The B stands for
something to do with fatherless children. ACAB, that's at the Occupy
Oakland movement. You can look at pictures and see all these Occupy
movements and see ACAB everywhere.
Well, I was a little shocked when my staff points out, Look at that.
This was on a wall in Egypt, and I need somebody to explain how, among
all this Arabic writing by the radicals that have charged our Embassy
in Egypt, how in the middle of all this Arabic do we get ACAB? Who's
doing that? There were rumors of some type of collusion, but who among
those radicals in Egypt is writing ACAB, which is what you see at all
the Occupy movements in America? Somebody has got some explaining to
do, I would think, but not to this administration, because this
administration thinks both the Occupy movement and the Arab Spring are
a great thing, even though it's brought to power radicals who want to
destroy America, who want to destroy Israel. How frustrating for our
friend Israel.
When we had friends come in here in the last hour, they were talking
about Fannie and Freddie. On a personal basis, I like Barney Frank. He
is a brilliant guy. But it's not that hard to go back and find quotes
from him about the wonderful condition that Fannie and Freddie were in,
and it's not hard to find people here on Capitol Hill that can explain
how he stood in the way of the reforms that some here on Capitol Hill
wanted to do.
We also heard from him that in 2010, that there was a bunch elected
that don't understand Congress and a free society. They were called
``extremists.'' These freshmen that came in saying, You know what?
Everybody should pay their fair share. It shouldn't be 51 percent of
Americans paying for everybody else just because Democrats want to keep
people beholden to them so they'll keep voting for them. Once they get
more than half of all the voters who are getting more than they're
putting in, we've lost the country. It
[[Page 14721]]
will be in complete demise. It may be 10 years or so, but once we get
to that point, historically, you do not get that country back. We would
not either, absent a miracle of God.
We were told during the conventions that the Republicans do not have
a franchise on God. Everybody at the Democratic convention was saying,
We love God; we worship God; we love Israel; we like Jerusalem as a
capital. We heard all this stuff until there was a vote, and, holy cow,
we saw plain and clear that everybody in the Democratic convention does
not want God mentioned. They don't want to hear about God. They don't
want to hear about Jerusalem being the capital of Israel. They don't
want it. They apparently side more with the Palestinians than they do
those who were possessing and in that land 1,600 years before there was
a man ever talked about named Muhammad is all you can figure. King
David was there in Hebron, which now we're told, Oh, do the Israelis
have history in this land? It's where David ruled for 7 years, about 16
to 17 centuries before anybody had ever heard of Muhammad. How would
they not have a history in that land?
I was talking to Prime Minister Netanyahu about the history in the
land. He mentioned the story of Ben-Gurion, who led the ragtag forces
to fight their way back to Jerusalem after overwhelming forces had
driven them out. The story was--and this was the first I had heard it,
was when the Prime Minister mentioned it to me, but I've heard it a
number of times since. He said Ben Gurion was challenged with, What is
your voucher for claiming this land? And Prime Minister Netanyahu used
the word, ``Bible.'' I'm sure it was a Torah. He said that Ben Gurion
held up a Bible and yelled, This is my voucher.
Do they have a history in the land? How blind do you have to be to
not see it?
With cap-and-trade legislation, thankfully, we had just a handful of
enough friends on the Democratic side of the aisle that we were able to
stop that, or it would have tripled or quadrupled the price of
gasoline. It would have devastated industry. Industry would have had to
leave in even bigger numbers from this country.
We were told about the Bush stimulus, that they got bipartisan votes
on the Bush stimulus. I guess so. Any time either party talks about
giving away other people's money, we're going to get a bunch of
Democrats to go along with the Republicans that mistakenly agree to
that.
While standing right here in this aisle as he came by, I asked
President Bush a question. We had found out that $40 billion of the
$160 billion Bush stimulus was going to go to people as rebates, even
though they didn't pay an income tax. Standing right up there, that's
when I asked the question: Mr. President, how do you give a rebate to
somebody that didn't put any bait in? It's not a rebate. It's welfare.
Call it what it is.
My friends across the aisle in the last hour said they couldn't even
get 100 votes to support President Bush's effort to save the economy.
He's talking about TARP. I would have supported President Bush's
efforts to save the economy, but unfortunately that really good man,
smarter than most people around here give him credit for, witty,
clever, just a joy to be around, but the problem there was he listened
to Hank Paulson and his cronies who were going to bail out their
buddies who give four to one to Democrats over Republicans. That's what
happened.
Paulson did get his way, but we didn't have 100 people on the
Republican side of the aisle vote for that because there was a former
FDIC Chair named Isaac. He and a bunch of economists had some
recommendations. These were free market recommendations. The projection
was even then that we have at least $700 billion in banks overseas that
American companies and American individuals had earned overseas. They
know that if they bring it into the U.S. they'll have to pay 40 to 50
percent tax with all of the interest and penalties, so they just leave
it in banks overseas. They'd love to bring it in here, but we're the
only country that double taxes because we don't let people bring in
money without hammering the heck out of them, even though they've done
a favor, done a good thing and earned money overseas that they'd like
to bring here into America.
Proposal-wise, all you have to do is say that instead of borrowing 41
cents to 42 cents out of every dollar and coming up with $700 billion
to give away to Hank Paulson so he can enrich his friends under that
bill--I read it. It was a disaster. I couldn't vote for that, because I
read it. It would let him give money to anybody he wants to, loan money
to whoever he wants to, pay more than fair market value if, in his mind
somehow, some way, some day, it might have some possible way of helping
our economy.
We don't do that in America, and that bill did it. That's why you
didn't have 100 votes on this Republican side of the aisle for it. Our
leadership made a mistake in supporting it on that Friday. I just call
them like I see them. That was a mistake, but that's where we are.
{time} 1400
We heard, in the last hour, about Republicans who say my way or the
highway. Are you kidding me? We reached across the aisle during
ObamaCare, saying, look, there's a bunch of these things we can agree
on, insurance for people in your household under 26. We could do it for
insurance across State lines. There were a number of things we could
agree on.
Insurance companies shouldn't be able to punish people for having a
preexisting condition when the insured has acted in good faith all
along the way and the insurer messes them around. We were willing to
work things out. They said, we've got the votes. We don't need your
votes, we don't want them.
Well, the truth is we want Democratic votes on the Republican side,
but we don't want to keep taking other people's money to give it away.
I have heard in here so many times, well, you know, Jesus talked about
helping other people, the orphans and widows. Well, a lot of us belong
to churches, and we believe in doing that, that that is what Jesus said
to do.
But I can't find anywhere in the Bible where it says, go ye,
therefore, take somebody else's money--because you don't want to do
your own--take somebody else's money and help the widows and orphans
and other people. He said you do it, you help them. When you do that, I
can personally tell you, when you do that you're individually blessed.
That's why Jesus said he knew it would bless the giver more even than
the one who received the gift.
In fact, you want a real example, what did Zacchaeus do after he met
Jesus? He went and cut taxes. We don't even have to get into the fact
that he was going to give a 4-1 rebate, did, to the people that he had
wronged. You don't hear that around here.
To continue to hear our friends talk about ending Medicare as we know
it, that disastrous ObamaCare bill will end Medicare forever when you
cut $716 billion. When you create this ObamaCare monstrosity, it's a
government takeover of so many things, and it's disastrous.
Yes, we're having to leave here, and I'm not happy about it. I didn't
want another CR passed. We should have demanded that this Democratic
majority at the other end of the hall stick around until they got a
budget as the law requires them to do and don't leave until you do it,
and let's stay here and get it.
I can promise my friends across the aisle that all we have to hear is
any inclination that the Democrats, controlled by Harry Reid in the
Senate, as dictated by President Obama down Pennsylvania Avenue, if
they want to work a budget out together, and we can work these things
out together, we will come back in a heartbeat. We will be ready to go.
We saw with that supercommittee, just as I predicted in July of last
year, they didn't want an agreement. Apparently my friends who were
talking in the last hour didn't know, but Pat Toomey and some others
made a proposal that would have caused more
[[Page 14722]]
taxes to have to be paid by the wealthiest in the Nation. The top 1
percent paid 39 percent of the taxes. Well, if they get 39 percent of
the income they should, but they only get 13 percent of the income.
They wanted them to pay more. There was a proposal in good faith by
Republicans, we'll raise revenue, and it was reported here locally
that, gee, some of the Democrats said, you know, this may do the trick.
We may get to an agreement now. This is great. Thanks for doing this.
Since you're willing to raise revenue on the rich, we can reach an
agreement.
Then they go away, and they must have talked to Harry Reid and
President Obama, and you can see the game playing. You have got to go
back and tell them we're not going to reach an agreement because our
best hope for winning the Presidency again and having control in the
Senate is if we tell America the Republicans won't reach an agreement,
they are a do-nothing group. I hope and pray people will look beyond
that and see who really is the do-nothing.
We have got jobs bills down the hall. This ought to be a day of
renaissance. This ought to be a day when the economy is booming. We now
know we could be exporters of energy. We could be energy independent
and export energy. But this President has a war against all of the
below--that means all of the energy below the ground--that we could be
using and exporting. He has got a war against it. All he is in favor
of--as he said, he is for all of the above--that means wind and solar.
Well, guess what? The sun doesn't always shine, the wind doesn't
always blow. So if that's what you want for energy it means you are
going to have a coal plant, a natural gas plant, something, a
hydroelectric plant, and then you are going to have two or three times
as many transmission lines.
When you mandate wind and solar, and they don't provide energy all
the time, they can't, then you are going to have a source from
somewhere. Now we are doubling and tripling and going to force the
price of energy to go up because we're going to demand Solyndras and
that kind of thing so this administration can reward their cronies.
We're at trouble within and without. I just want to remind my
friends, this was reported in The New York Times, December 9, 2008, ``5
Charged in 9/11 Attacks Seek to Plead Guilty'':
At the start of what had been listed as routine proceedings
Monday, Judge Henley said he had received a written statement
from the five men dated November 4 saying they planned to
stop filing legal motions and ``to announce our confessions
to plea in full.''
They were pleading guilty. We got the transcript. Khalid Sheikh
Mohammed admitted guilt. He admitted. He confessed to all kinds of
heinous kinds.
Then this administration, President Obama and Eric Holder announced
they want a New York City show trial that would have endangered New
York yet again, as if they hadn't had enough trauma, and would have put
a trial in there. Immediately these guys withdraw their plea. We're not
going to plead guilty, we can get a show trial in New York. These guys
who are running things here don't know what they're doing. What a
disaster that would have been.
As far as the great contribution, the great work that's being done in
Afghanistan, we took a war where we were making progress, and here are
the actual DOD numbers. You see that under Commander in Chief Bush
there were 625 Americans, our precious, priceless men and women, who
were killed from October of 2001 to the end of 2008, 625 precious
lives.
Bush goes out, President Obama comes in, January of 2009, and by the
end of August there had been a subtotal of 1,474 additional American
men and women killed under Commander Obama. Not only that, 14,817
people had been wounded, Americans had been wounded, lose arms, lose
legs, disastrous disabilities, under Commander Obama as compared to the
2,638 terrible wounds that were inflicted on Americans under Commander
Bush.
Our President has been in command of 70 percent of the deaths in
Afghanistan, though he has been commanding half the time, and has 84
percent of the wounds.
The parents of one of the SEAL Team 6 that was killed on the Chinook
August 6 of 2011, they were in the briefing. They have said this
publicly, that's why I will say it again. One of the parents asked,
``If this was so terrible, this was such a hotbed, you knew it was a
hotbed, a lot of aircraft, American aircraft have been fired on
recently, why would you allow this Chinook to go in? Why wouldn't you
send in a drone?''
The answer from the general who was doing the briefing, they said
was, because we're trying to win the hearts and minds in Afghanistan.
You're letting our SEAL team be killed when you are trying to win the
hearts and minds? That's not the job of the military. The military's
job is to go in, defeat an enemy, and come out, and we've got to get
back to that.
This President has presided over 70 percent of the deaths in
Afghanistan, a disastrous job. It's time to bring the President home,
as well as bringing our military home. We could just say what President
Bush did in October of 2001. We are going to provide embedded troops.
We are going to let the enemy of our enemy be our friend. Not to this
administration; they are the enemy. The enemy of our enemy is our enemy
to Obama. But I have met with them a couple of times this year. They
are our friends.
{time} 1410
They're Muslim. They're our friends. They don't want to live under
the tyrannical rule of the Taliban. And they're willing to fight, as
they have, and die with Americans for that freedom. And so we don't let
a renegade group like the Taliban that wants to destroy America be out.
Make no mistake, the Blind Sheik was the object of release by a
candidate named Morsi in Egypt. He said, I want the Blind Sheik
released. When I'm elected president, I'm going to demand and I'm going
to get it.
Just a day before 9/11 this year, last week, you had the brother of
the al Qaeda leader, Zawahiri, saying he was ready to broker a deal
that would prevent lots of violence. He also knew the day before that
there was an obscure video nobody had ever seen and wasn't going to
inflame anybody, but he knew that his buddies, the Muslim Brotherhood,
the Egyptian Government, the Egyptian television stations would convert
that, translate that into a language that they would inflame people
that they would do violence in the Middle East. And they did. The
second day of that broadcasting here is Zawahiri saying, Hey, I can
broker a deal. Just release the Blind Sheik, some other murdering
thugs, and we'll work a deal out.
This administration has offered to release other murdering thugs of
the Taliban and to buy them an office in Qatar if they'll just sit down
and talk. That's not the way you do foreign diplomacy. You reward our
friends so others want to be our friends and you punish our enemies so
they don't want to be our enemies. This President has it backwards. He
said, They'll look at me different because I'm the first President to
have ever grown up in a Muslim country--the years he spent in
Indonesia. Well, I wonder if that might be true. Maybe they will. Maybe
they'll want to be friends.
Well, the proof is in. The approval rating of the United States in
those Muslim countries where we've been was 33 percent--which was
terrible--under President Bush in 2008. And now under this President we
see a report it's now 15 percent, under this guy who was going to be
our President and the Muslim countries would love us. They don't.
Because in Muslim countries the real people, the people that we really
need to reach out to, not the leaders that hate us and want to destroy
us but the real people, they respect a country who understands who's
their enemy and who's their friend. They have no respect for a country
that tries to do what would be the equivalent of a child--and I've been
there on the schoolyard, picked on by bullies. I was little growing up.
But I can tell you, I had my nose bloodied many a time. You don't win
respect nor love from a bully by giving him your lunch money or begging
him to be nice to you. Not only do they not love you, not respect you;
they gain even more contempt for
[[Page 14723]]
you. And that's what we're seeing happen.
This President is trying to buy affection from people who were
bullies, who are radical Islamists that want to destroy us. You're not
going to get love and affection. You get contempt. It helps other
people join in the fight against us. This President is doing great
damage to us. And it's time to bring his Presidency to a peaceful, law-
abiding end with the election.
Things look tragic around the world unless we have a new Commander in
Chief and a new leader who wants to rein in the spending. And one thing
I'll promise my colleagues across the aisle, if you want to go back to
that runaway spending that was too much in 2008, that Speaker Pelosi
presided over and Harry Reid had in the Senate and that ended in the
last day of September, you want to go right back to that total amount
being spent, I'm with you. I'll vote. I'll do it bipartisan and I'll
bring a bunch of people with us and we'll bring down a trillion dollars
a year in spending. How about that? That's pretty bipartisan, isn't it?
Go back to a Democratic budget of 2008. Well, I offer that. Let's see
how many Democrats are bipartisan enough to take us up on it.
I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________
RHETORIC VERSUS REALITY
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Duncan of South Carolina). Under the
Speaker's announced policy of January 5, 2011, the Chair recognizes the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks) for 30 minutes.
Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Speaker, nearly 4 years ago, Barack Obama
was swept into office by the strength of his rhetoric; but the profound
difference between Mr. Obama's rhetoric and the reality Americans have
actually lived under in his Presidency is something every American has
a profound responsibility to understand.
Mr. Obama's rhetoric on jobs and the economy 4 years ago was:
We have to have a President who understands that the
essence of the American Dream is a good job.
But the reality under Mr. Obama's Presidency is the highest sustained
unemployment since the Great Depression. The percentage of people
participating in America's labor market under this Presidency has
fallen to 63.5 percent. That is the lowest rate since Jimmy Carter was
President 31 years ago. Manufacturing unemployment has fallen to its
lowest levels since 1941. The number of unemployed Americans eclipsed
15 million for the first time in history. The number of people forced
to work part-time for economic reasons eclipsed 8 million for the first
time in history.
Under Mr. Obama's Presidency, the average time it takes Americans to
find a job reached the highest total in the history of the statistics
being measured. And for the first time in history, Mr. Speaker, over 4
million Americans have stopped looking for work altogether.
Mr. Obama's rhetoric on government spending and debt 4 years ago was:
America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.
That's irresponsible. That's unpatriotic.
But the reality under Mr. Obama's Presidency is that he had in the
first year he was in office the first $1 trillion deficit in history.
He's done that 4 years in a row now. Mr. Obama always loves to blame
his predecessor. However, the deficit for all of 2007 was $161 billion,
Mr. Speaker. Mr. Obama increased the debt by that much in just 1 month.
In 2007, America's debt to GDP ratio was 62 percent. According to IMF,
it will hit 100 percent this year.
Mr. Obama spent nearly $1 trillion on a failed stimulus bill shortly
after being reelected and then shoved a government takeover of our
health care industry down the throats of the American people, which is
now projected to cost well over $2 trillion. He spent $3 billion on a
Cash for Clunkers program that went bankrupt the first week. He spent
$29 million to bail out Bear Stearns, $300 to bail out Citigroup, $85
to bail out AIG, $10 billion to bail out union pension plans, and $50
billion to bail out General Motors.
Mr. Speaker, under the budgets Barack Obama has already submitted to
the Congress, he will add more to America's debt than all of the
outstanding debt of all of the other 43 Presidents in American history
combined. Mr. Speaker, I wonder if we all understand where America is
headed under this President.
Mr. Obama's rhetoric on health care 4 years ago was:
We'll work with your employer to lower your premiums by
$2,500 per family, per year.
But the reality under Mr. Obama's Presidency was that the cost of
American family health insurance per year has gone from $12,680 per
year to over $20,000 per year in 2012. And that's before the enormous
increases Americans will inevitably see under ObamaCare.
Mr. Speaker, the European socialist health care system is a
nightmare, a bureaucracy, rationing, and substandard health care. Yet
it is Mr. Obama's model for America.
Mr. Obama's rhetoric on energy 4 years ago was:
Creating a new energy economy isn't just a challenge to me,
it's an opportunity to seize--an opportunity that will create
new businesses, new industries, and millions of new jobs.
That sounded good, but the reality under Mr. Obama's Presidency is
that his much-touted green jobs economy never materialized. The
administration forced through a $535 million loan for Solyndra, a solar
company backed by a major Obama supporter and praised by Mr. Obama
himself. The company filed for bankruptcy 15 months later, after the
administration intervened on the company's behalf, leaving taxpayers on
the hook.
But far from learning his lesson, a few months later the
administration was again doling out billions more in loan guarantees to
more solar companies, many of which later held massive layoffs and went
bankrupt.
{time} 1420
All told, of the $9 billion the President has spent so far on green
jobs, 910 new, long-term jobs have been created. That's $9.8 million
per job charged to the American taxpayer, Mr. Speaker. So much for his
millions of green jobs.
Meanwhile, the President has opposed actual progress in the energy
sector, including his continued efforts to block new domestic drilling,
the administration's seizure and closing of millions of acres of
uranium-rich land in my own district and the Keystone Pipeline project
that would have immediately created 20,000 jobs, in addition to
attracting billions of dollars in new investments to a struggling Obama
economy.
Perhaps none of this should be surprising coming from a President
whose own Energy Secretary said:
Somehow, we have to figure out how to boost the price of
gasoline to the levels of Europe.
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Obama's rhetoric on poverty 4 years ago was:
Poverty is not an issue I just discovered for the purposes
of a campaign. It is the cause that led me to a life of
public service for almost 25 years.
But the reality under Mr. Obama's Presidency is that the income gap
between rich and poor reached its highest level in over 40 years. In
2008, just before the President took office, there were about 39.8
million Americans living in poverty. Today, that number is nearly 50
million. Under Mr. Obama's policies, the American poverty rate hit the
highest level in the 52-year history of the statistic being measured.
According to a report in the Washington Examiner, the number of able-
bodied adults on food stamps doubled since Mr. Obama suspended the work
requirement. More than 46 million Americans are now receiving food
stamps. That's an increase of 44 percent since January of 2009. And it
is higher than at any other time in American history.
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Obama seems to believe that a dependent population
will also be an obedient population. And so dependency and deception
have become the core essence of his Presidency.
President Obama's rhetoric on foreign policy and national security 4
years ago was many different things, but the reality, under Mr. Obama,
was that he has broken promises to trusted
[[Page 14724]]
allies and told the Kremlin that he will have more ``flexibility'' to
do what they want him to do after he's reelected, after the election.
Iran publicly proclaims their anxiousness to share the nuclear
technology that they are so rapidly working to develop. If Iran
successfully gains nuclear weapons, they will give them to terrorists
the world over, Mr. Speaker, and you and I and our children, and
perhaps our children's children, will live in the shadow of nuclear
terrorism. Yet President Obama is actively working against efforts to
secure even America's porous southern border, which is currently an
incredibly inviting target for terrorists looking to smuggle a weapon
of mass destruction into the United States.
Mr. Obama pledged ``unshakeable commitment'' to Israel's security.
Yet he turned down a meeting with the Prime Minister of Israel to
appear instead on David Letterman, and he refuses to even acknowledge
Jerusalem as Israel's capital.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad recently said Israel's existence is ``an insult
to all humanity,'' and Iran's Ayatollah Khamenei has called Israel a
``cancerous tumor'' that must be wiped out. Yet Mr. Obama has expressed
more open rebuke toward Israel for building houses in their own capital
city than he has toward Iran for building nuclear weapons with which to
threaten the entire human family.
Mr. Speaker, I literally don't have time to thoroughly cover all of
this administration's broken promises.
He promised to hold televised debate forums over ObamaCare. That
never happened. He promised lobbyists ``won't find a job in my White
House,'' but that happened at least a dozen times within the first
month of his administration. He appointed more czars in his
administration in America than all of the czars that ever existed in
the history of Imperial Russia.
He promised to eliminate income taxes for seniors making less than
$50,000. He never even tried.
He promised he wouldn't ``sign any nonemergency bill without giving
the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White
House Web site for 5 days.'' A little over a month into his term, that
section of the White House Web site was completely removed.
Mr. Obama said the Federal Government was ``not living up to its own
responsibilities,'' while his own campaign has actually sued to make it
more difficult for our men and women in uniform to even vote.
Mr. Obama gave lip service to enforcing immigration laws, and then
sued my State of Arizona for enforcing immigration laws his
administration refused to enforce.
While forcing through government loans to failed green energy
companies led by his friends like Solyndra, he has stood in the way of
domestic energy production, seizing hundreds of thousands of acres of
resource-rich land and blocking domestic drilling for oil, including in
areas that were already open to drilling.
The day he took office, a gallon of gas was $1.89. It is almost $4 a
gallon today.
Mr. Speaker, if America produced its own energy and did not buy so
much oil from the Middle Eastern countries, terrorists wouldn't have
enough money to buy a box of sparklers to hurt this country.
Mr. Speaker, I have tried to lay out the difference between the
rhetoric and the reality of this administration.
You know, I've often heard it said in recent days that America faces
a crossroads in the approaching election, but I'm afraid that's no
longer the case, Mr. Speaker. No, I'm afraid America took the wrong
fork in the road back when we elected Barack Obama 4 years ago, and we
are now heading rapidly in precisely the wrong direction.
He has nominated judges who contemptuously ignore the Constitution.
He has proudly served as the most pro-abortion President in history. He
has forced government-run healthcare down the throats of unwilling
Americans. He oversaw the first downgrade of America's AAA credit
rating. He has increased unemployment, increased the number of
Americans on food stamps. He has thrown hundreds of billions of dollars
at failed programs. He has weakened our military. He has blatantly
attacked religious freedoms in America. He has allowed Iran to advance
their nuclear weapons program; and while abroad, he has continually
apologized for America, betrayed our friends, and emboldened our
enemies. I'm afraid we see the results of some of that even in these
recent days.
I would suggest to you that his promise to fundamentally transform
America was no bluff, Mr. Speaker. If this is what Mr. Obama has done
in his first 4 years, how much more radical will his agenda be if he
secures a second term and no longer has to worry about reelection?
Mr. Speaker, for the sake of our children and our children's
children, and for all of America's most noble dreams and ideals, it is
absolutely vital that we elect a President who will stand up and arrest
this national freefall into which Mr. Obama and his radical leftist
ideology have hurled America.
May God give us all the wisdom and the courage to remember who we are
as Americans and that there is still hope and time to be all that we
were called by God to be as a Nation.
We must not fail, Mr. Speaker.
I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________
RECESS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the
Chair declares the House in recess subject to the call of the Chair.
Accordingly (at 2 o'clock and 31 minutes p.m.), the House stood in
recess
____________________
{time} 1610
AFTER RECESS
The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the
Speaker at 4 o'clock and 10 minutes p.m.
____________________
LEAVE OF ABSENCE
By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted to:
Mr. Berman (at the request of Ms. Pelosi) for today on account of
attending a funeral.
____________________
ADJOURNMENT
The SPEAKER. Without objection, the House stands adjourned until 10
a.m. on Tuesday next.
There was no objection.
Accordingly (at 4 o'clock and 11 minutes p.m.), under its previous
order, the House adjourned until Tuesday, September 25, 2012, at 10
a.m.
____________________
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC.
Under clause 2 of rule XIV, executive communications were taken from
the Speaker's table and referred as follows:
7963. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Flumioxazin; Pesticide Tolerances
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0593; FRL-9358-3] received September 20,
2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Agriculture.
7964. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Cyazofamid; Pesticide Tolerances [EPA-
HQ-OPP-2011-0906; FRL-9361-8] received September 20, 2012,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Agriculture.
7965. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Didecyl Dimethyl Ammonium Carbonate
and Didecyl Dimethyl Ammonium Bicarbonate; Exemption from the
Requirement of a Tolerance [EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0950; FRL-9359-5]
received August 21, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A);
to the Committee on Agriculture.
7966. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Pesticide Tolerance Crop Grouping
Program III; Revisions to General Tolerance Regulations [EPA-
HQ-OPP-2006-0766; FRL-9354-3] (RIN: 2070-AJ28) received
August 21, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Agriculture.
7967. A letter from the Associate General Counsel for
Legislation and Regulations, Department of Housing and Urban
Development, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Federal Housing Administration
[[Page 14725]]
(FHA): Section 232 Healthcare Facility Insurance Program-
Strengthening Accountability and Regulatory Revisions Update
[Docket No.: FR-5465 F-02] (RIN: 2502-AJ05) received
September 18, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Financial Services.
7968. A letter from the Acting Assistant General Counsel
for Regulatory Affairs, Consumer Product Safety Commission,
transmitting the Commission's final rule -- Revisions of
Safety Standards for Durable Infant or Toddler Products:
Infant Bath Seats and Full-Size Cribs received September 18,
2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
7969. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Divison, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- protection of Stratospheric Ozone:
Listing Substitutes for Ozone-Depleting Substances ---- Fire
Suppression and Explosion Protection [EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0111;
FRL-9729-5] received September 18, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7970. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; State of Missouri [EPA-R07-OAR-2012-
0596; FRL-9731-3] received September 18, 2012, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7971. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Revisions to the Nevada State
Implementation Plan; Stationary Source Permits [EPA-R09-OAR-
2012-0141; FRL-9728-6] received September 18, 2012, pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
7972. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Mississippi: New Source Review-
Prevention of Significant Deterioration; Fine Particulate
Matter (PM2.5) [EPA-R04-2012-0081; FRL-9728-2] received
September 18, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7973. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Arizona; Nogales PM10 Nonattainment
Area Plan [EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0458; FRL-9730-8] received
September 18, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7974. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; New Mexico; Albuquerque/Bernalillo
County: Infrastructure and Interstate Transport Requirements
for the 1997 and 2008 Ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
[EPA-R06-OAR-2009-0648- FRL-9728-7] received September 18,
2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
7975. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland- Revision for the
Control of Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions from Vehicle
Refinishing [EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0468; FRL-9731-7] received
September 20, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7976. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Commonwealth of Pennsylvania;
Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 8-
Hour Ozone and the 1997 and 2006 Fine Particulate Matter
National Ambient Air Quality Standards [EPA-R03-OAR-2010-
0159; FRL- 9731-9] received September 20, 2012, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7977. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Adhesives and
Sealants Rule [EPA-R03-OAR-2011-0617; FRL-9731-6] received
September 20, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7978. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Disapproval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; State of Utah; Revisions to
Open Burning Regulations [EPA-R08-OAR-2007-1034; FRL-9732-1]
received September 20, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7979. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Regulation of Fuels and Fuel
Additives: 2013 Biomass-Based Diesel Renewable Fuel Volume
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0133; FRL-9678-7] (RIN: 2060-AR55) received
September 20, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7980. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD) [EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0236; FRL-9711-2]
received August 31, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A);
to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7981. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Revisions of Five California Clean Air
Act Title V Operating Permits Programs [EPA-R09-OAR-2011-
0955; FRL-9724-2] received August 31, 2012, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7982. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Standards of Performance for Petroleum
Refineries; Standards of Performance for Petroleum Refineries
for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification
Commenced After May 14, 2007 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0011; FRL-9672-
3] (RIN: 2060-AN72) received August 31, 2012, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7983. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs):
Revisions to Manifesting Regulations [EPA-HQ-RCRA-2011-0524;
FRL-9703-1] (RIN: 2050-AG71) received August 31, 2012,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy
and Commerce.
7984. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Delaware; Section 110(a)(2)
Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Lead National
Ambient Air Quality Standards [EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0376; FRL-
9725-3] received September 5, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7985. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS: Site
Specific Treatment Variance for Hazardous Selenium-Bearing
Waste Treated by U.S. Ecology Nevada in Beatty, Nevada [EPA-
HQ-RCRA-2010-0851; FRL-9715-3] received August 21, 2012,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy
and Commerce.
7986. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia; Section
110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Lead
National Ambient Air Quality Standards [EPA-R03-OAR-2012-
0436; FRL-9725-1] received September 5, 2012, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7987. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Nonconformance Penalities for On-
highway Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines [AMS-FRL-9716-5] received
September 5, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7988. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Divison, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions: Hard and Decorative
Chromium Electroplating and Chromium Anodizing Tanks; and
Steel Picking--HCl Process Facilities and Hydrochloric Acid
Regeneration Plants [EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0600; FRL-9709-9] (RIN:
2060-AQ60) received August 21, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7989. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Significant New Use Rules on Certain
Chemical Substances [EPA-HQ-OPPT-2011-0941; FRL-9357-2] (RIN:
2070-AB27) received September 18, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7990. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Alabama: General and Transportation
Conformity & New Source Review Prevention of Significant for
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) [EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0079; FRL-
9731-5] received September 20, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
7991. A letter from the Director, Office of Congressional
Affairs, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, transmitting the
Commission's final rule -- Initial Test Program of Condensate
and Feedwater Systems for Light-Water
[[Page 14726]]
Reactors [Regulatory Guide 1.68.1] received September 18,
2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
7992. A letter from the Director, Office of Congressional
Affairs, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, transmitting the
Commission's final rule -- Model Safety Evaluation for Plant-
Specific Adoption of Technical Specifications Task Force
Traveler TSTF-522, Revision 0, ``Revise Ventilation System
Surveillance Requirements to Operate for 10 Hours per
Month'', Using the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process
[Project No. 753; NRC-2012-XXXX] received September 18, 2012,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy
and Commerce.
7993. A letter from the Director, Office of Congressional
Affairs, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, transmitting the
Commission's final rule -- NRC Procedures for Placement and
Monitoring of Work with Federal Agencies other than U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) Laboratory Work received September
20, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Energy and Commerce.
7994. A letter from the Assistant Secretary for Export
Administration, Department of Commerce, transmitting the
Department's final rule -- Addition of Certain Persons to the
Entity List; Removal of Person from the Entity List Based on
Removal Request; and Implementation of Entity List Annual
Review Changes [Docket No.: 120813330-2330-01] (RIN: 0694-
AF74) received September 13, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
7995. A letter from the Assistant Secretary for Export
Administration, Department of Commerce, transmitting the
Department's final rule -- Updated Statements of Legal
Authority for the Export Administration Regulations [Docket
No.: 120820369-2369-01] (RIN: 0694-AF78) received September
13, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Foreign Affairs.
7996. A letter from the Program Manager, Department of
Health and Human Services, transmitting the Department's
final rule -- Privacy Act; Implementation [Docket Number:
NIH-2011-0001] received August 28, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform.
7997. A letter from the Program Manager, Department of
Health and Human Services, transmitting the Department's
final rule -- Privacy Act, Exempt Record System [Docket No.
FDA-2011-N-0252] received August 28, 2012, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform.
7998. A letter from the Senior Procurement Executive/Deputy
Chief Acquisition Officer, General Services Administration,
transmitting the Administration's final rule -- Federal
Acquisition Regulation; Federal Acquisition Circular 2005-61;
Introduction [Docket FAR: 2012-0080, Sequence 6] received
September 13, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
7999. A letter from the Director, Office of Surface Mining,
Department of the Interior, transmitting the Department's
final rule -- Montana Regulatory Program [STATS No.: MT-034-
FOR; Docket ID No. OSM-2011-0018] received September 13,
2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Natural Resources.
8000. A letter from the Director, Office of Surface Mining,
Department of the Interior, transmitting the Department's
final rule -- Texas Regulatory Program [STATS No.: TX-064-
FOR; Docket ID: OSM-2012-0005] received September 13, 2012,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Natural Resources.
8001. A letter from the Chief, Branch of Listing,
Department of the Interior, transmitting the Department's
final rule -- Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants;
Determination of Endangered Status for the Chupadera
Springsnail and Designation of Critical Habitat [Docket No.:
FWS-R2-ES-2011-0042] (RIN: 1018-AV86) received September 19,
2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Natural Resources.
8002. A letter from the Acting Deputy Director, Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule
-- Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources of the Gulf of Mexico
and South Atlantic; 2012-2013 Accountability Measure and
Closure for Gulf King Mackerel in Western Zone [Docket No.:
001005281-0369-02] (RIN: 0648-XC160) received September 12,
2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Natural Resources.
8003. A letter from the Acting Deputy Director, Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule
-- Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic
Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries; Closure of the
2012 Trimester 2 Directed Longfin Squid Fishery [Docket No.:
110707371-2136-02] (RIN: 0648-XC098) received September 19,
2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Natural Resources.
8004. A letter from the Acting Director, Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule
-- Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic; 2012
Recreational Accountability Measure and Closure for South
Atlantic Golden Tilefish [Docket No.: 0907271173-0629-03]
(RIN: 0648-XC025) received September 19, 2012, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Natural Resources.
8005. A letter from the Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule
-- Marine Recreational Fisheries of the United States;
National Saltwater Angler Registry and State Exemption
Program [Docket No.: 12018050-2049-01] (RIN: 0648-BB49)
received September 19, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Natural Resources.
8006. A letter from the Acting Director, Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule
-- Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; 2012 Commercial
Accountability Measure and Closure for Gulf of Mexico Gray
Triggerfish [Docket No.: 120417412-2412-01] (RIN: 0648-XCO76)
received August 24, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A);
to the Committee on Natural Resources.
8007. A letter from the Acting Director, Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule
-- Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska;
Reallocation of Pacific Cod in the Bering Sea and Aleutian
Islands Management Area [Docket No.: 111213751-2102-02] (RIN:
0648-XC202) received September 19, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Natural Resources.
8008. A letter from the Acting Assistant Attorney General,
Department of Justice, transmitting the 2011 annual report on
the activities and operations of the Public Integrity
Section, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 529; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
8009. A letter from the Attorney Advisor, Department of
Homeland Security, transmitting the Department's final rule
-- Carbon Dioxide Fire Suppression Systems on Commercial
Vessels [USCG-2006-24797] (RIN: 1625-AB44) received August
28, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure.
8010. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management
Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the
Agency's final rule -- Ocean Dumping; Designation of Ocean
Dredged Material Disposal Sites Offshore of Yaquina Bay,
Oregon [EPA-R10-OW-2012-0197; FRL-9724-7] received September
5, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure.
8011. A letter from the Director of Regulation Policy and
Management; Office of the General Counsel, Department of
Veterans Affairs, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Sharing Information Between the Department of Veterans
Affairs and the Department of Defense (RIN: 2900-AN95)
received September 5, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
8012. A letter from the Director, Regulation Policy and
Management; Office of the General Counsel, Department of
Veterans Affairs, transmitting the Department's final rule --
Guide and Service Dogs (RIN: 2900-AN51) received September 5,
2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Veterans' Affairs.
8013. A letter from the Chief, Trade and Commercial
Regulations Branch, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Extension of
Import Restrictions Imposed on Archaeological Material from
Mali [CBP Dec. 12-14] (RIN: 1515-AD91) received September 19,
2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Ways and Means.
8014. A letter from the Chief, Trade and Commercial
Regulations Branch, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Technical
Corrections Relating to the Rules of Origin for Goods
Imported Under the NAFTA and for Textile and Apparel Products
[CBP Dec. 12-15] received September 19, 2012, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Ways and Means.
8015. A letter from the Chief, Publications and
Regulations, Internal Revenue Service, transmitting the
Service's final rule -- Revenue Procedure Modifying Rev.
Proc. 2011-14 and Rev. Proc. 97-27 (Rev. Proc. 2012-39)
received September 19, 2012; to the Committee on Ways and
Means.
8016. A letter from the Chief, Publications and
Regulations, Internal Revenue Service, transmitting the
Service's final rule -- Examination of returns and claims for
refund, credit, or abatement; determination of tax liability
(Rev. Proc. 2012-40) received September 19, 2012, pursuant to
5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Ways and Means.
8017. A letter from the Director, Acquisition Policy and
Legislation Branch, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting the Department's final rule -- Homeland Security
Acquisition Regulation (HSAR); Revision Initiative [HSAR Case
2009-002] [Docket No.: DHS-2009-0085] (RIN: 1601-AA28)
received September 4, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Homeland Security.
[[Page 14727]]
____________________
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS
Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of committees were delivered to
the Clerk for printing and reference to the proper calendar, as
follows:
Mr. ISSA: Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
H.R. 6016. A bill to amend title 5, United States Code, to
provide for administrative leave requirements with respect to
Senior Executive Service employees, and for other purposes;
with an amendment (Rept. 112-686). Referred to the Committee
of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
Mr. SMITH of Texas: Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 4369.
A bill to amend title 11 of the United States Code to require
the public disclosure by trusts established under section
524(g) of such title, of quarterly reports that contain
detailed information regarding the receipt and disposition of
claims for injuries based on exposure to asbestos, and the
filing of such reports with the Executive Office for United
States Trustees; with amendments (Rept. 112-687). Referred to
the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
Mr. SMITH of Texas: Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 2572.
A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to deter public
corruption, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept.
112-688). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the
state of the Union.
Mr. ISSA: Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. A
Citizen's Guide On Using The Freedom Of Information Act And
The Privacy Act Of 1974 To Request Government Records (Rept.
112-689). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the
state of the Union.
DISCHARGE OF COMMITTEE
Pursuant to clause 2 of rule XIII, the Committee on Energy
and Commerce discharged from further consideration. H.R. 3674
referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of
the Union.
____________________
TIME LIMITATION OF REFERRED BILL-
Pursuant to clause 2 of rule XII, the following action was taken by
the Speaker:
[Omitted from the Record of September 20, 2012]
H.R. 3283. Referral to the Committee on Agriculture
extended for a period ending not later than November 30,
2012.
____________________
PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS
Under clause 2 of rule XII, public bills and resolutions of the
following titles were introduced and severally referred, as follows:
By Mr. CHAFFETZ (for himself, Mr. Polis, Mr. Issa, and
Ms. Zoe Lofgren of California):
H.R. 6480. A bill to adopt fair standards and procedures by
which determinations of Copyright Royalty Judges are made
with respect to webcasting, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. LATHAM (for himself and Mr. McIntyre):
H.R. 6481. A bill to direct the Secretary of Agriculture to
issue loan guarantees for purposes of financing improvements
to school lunch facilities, training school food service
personnel, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Education and the Workforce, and in addition to the Committee
on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by
the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such
provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee
concerned.
By Mr. BURGESS (for himself, Mrs. Christensen, Mr.
Guthrie, Mr. Womack, Mrs. Myrick, Mr. Lance, Mrs.
Blackburn, Mr. Gingrey of Georgia, Mr. Cassidy, Mr.
Griffin of Arkansas, Ms. Granger, Ms. Lee of
California, Ms. Richardson, Ms. Moore, Mr. Davis of
Illinois, Mr. Fleischmann, and Ms. Roybal-Allard):
H.R. 6482. A bill to amend the Congressional Budget Act of
1974 respecting the scoring of preventive health savings; to
the Committee on the Budget.
By Ms. BONAMICI (for herself, Mr. Grijalva, Mr.
Ellison, Mr. Clarke of Michigan, Mr. Filner, Ms.
DeLauro, Mr. Blumenauer, Mr. Sarbanes, and Ms. Chu):
H.R. 6483. A bill to amend the Truth in Lending Act to
address certain issues related to the extension of consumer
credit, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Financial
Services.
By Mr. GARAMENDI (for himself, Mr. George Miller of
California, Mr. Thompson of California, Mr. McNerney,
and Ms. Matsui):
H.R. 6484. A bill to amend the Calfed Bay-Delta
Authorization Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior
to provide assistance to non-Federal interests for levee
stability improvements located within the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta related to Bureau of Reclamation Central Valley
Project water deliveries, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Natural Resources.
By Mr. CHAFFETZ (for himself and Mr. Tierney):
H.R. 6485. A bill to establish requirements relating to the
provision of certain products to the Government of
Afghanistan, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Foreign
Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. McKINLEY (for himself, Mr. Bishop of Utah, Mr.
Rahall, and Mr. Gardner):
H.R. 6486. A bill to amend title 5, United States Code, to
decrease the annual effect on the economy that a rule must
have to be a major rule from $100,000,000 to $50,000,000 for
the purpose of increasing the number of rules for which
Congress can use the resolution of disapproval procedure to
disapprove a major rule, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. McKINLEY (for himself, Mr. Critz, Mr. Rahall,
and Mr. Rush):
H.R. 6487. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to provide incentives for the expansion of manufacturing
in the United States; to the Committee on Ways and Means.
By Mr. DENHAM (for himself, Mr. McKeon, Mr. Miller of
Florida, Mr. Walz of Minnesota, Mr. West, Mr.
Stivers, Mr. Rigell, Mr. Cravaack, Mr. Kinzinger of
Illinois, and Mr. Farenthold):
H.R. 6488. A bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to
extend military commissary and exchange store privileges,
without time-period limitation, to members of the Armed
Forces who are involuntarily separated with a service-
connected disability and also to extend such privileges to
their dependents; to the Committee on Armed Services.
By Mr. HALL (for himself and Mr. Boren):
H.R. 6489. A bill to reauthorize the National Integrated
Drought Information System; to the Committee on Science,
Space, and Technology.
By Mr. PRICE of Georgia (for himself, Mr. Altmire, Mrs.
Blackburn, Mr. Deutch, Mr. Wilson of South Carolina,
Ms. Castor of Florida, Mr. Tiberi, Mr. Braley of
Iowa, Mr. Latham, Mr. Barrow, Mr. King of Iowa, Mr.
Kelly, Mr. LaTourette, and Mrs. Ellmers):
H.R. 6490. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social
Security Act to establish a market pricing program for
durable medical equipment, prosthetics, orthotics, and
supplies (DMEPOS) under part B of the Medicare program; to
the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the
Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently
determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of
such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the
committee concerned.
By Mr. CULBERSON (for himself, Mr. Wolf, Mr. Gene Green
of Texas, Mr. Cuellar, Mr. Smith of Texas, Mr.
Sensenbrenner, Mr. Posey, Mr. Olson, Mr. Calvert, Mr.
West, Mr. Mack, Mr. Farenthold, Mr. Carter, Mr.
Thornberry, Mr. Burgess, Mr. McCaul, and Mr.
Wittman):
H.R. 6491. A bill to preserve American space leadership,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Science, Space,
and Technology, and in addition to the Committee on the
Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. CLARKE of Michigan:
H.R. 6492. A bill to provide for the establishment, in the
Office of Pavement Technology of the Federal Highway
Administration, of the position of Recovered Mineral
Component Ombudsman; to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
By Mr. CLARKE of Michigan:
H.R. 6493. A bill to create jobs by attracting global
investment to economically distressed urban areas, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. THOMPSON of California (for himself, Mr. Carson
of Indiana, Mr. Clay, Mr. Rangel, Mr. Boswell, Mr.
Van Hollen, Ms. Bordallo, Mr. Larsen of Washington,
Ms. Woolsey, Mr. Dingell, Mr. Rahall, Mr. Lujan, Mr.
George Miller of California, Ms. DeGette, Mr. Meeks,
Ms. McCollum, Mrs. Christensen, Ms. Chu, Ms. Linda T.
Sanchez of California, Mr. Heinrich, Mr. McGovern,
Mr. King of New York, Mr. Blumenauer, Mr. Stark, Mr.
Matheson, Mr. Moran, Mr. Quigley, Mr. Kind, Mr.
Kildee, Mr. Nadler, Mr. Grijalva, Ms. Zoe Lofgren of
California, Mr. Farr, Mr. Pascrell, Mr. Faleomavaega,
Mr. Perlmutter, Ms. Schakowsky, Mr. Garamendi, Ms.
Norton, Mr. DeFazio, Mr. Markey, Ms. Pingree of
Maine, Ms. Eshoo, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Kucinich, and Mr.
Reichert):
H.R. 6494. A bill to award posthumously a Congressional
Gold Medal to Stewart Lee
[[Page 14728]]
Udall, in recognition of his contributions to the nation; to
the Committee on Financial Services.
By Mr. AMASH (for himself and Mr. Duncan of South
Carolina):
H.R. 6495. A bill to prohibit the payment of surcharges for
commemorative coin programs to private organizations or
entities, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Financial Services.
By Mr. AMODEI:
H.R. 6496. A bill to reauthorize grants to enhance State
and local efforts to combat trafficking in persons; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. AMODEI:
H.R. 6497. A bill to provide for the conveyance of certain
public lands under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land
Management in and around historic mining townsites in Nevada,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Natural
Resources.
By Mrs. BACHMANN:
H.R. 6498. A bill to amend section 1932 of the Social
Security Act to require independent audits and actuarial
services under Medicaid managed care programs, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
By Mr. BARROW:
H.R. 6499. A bill to amend part C of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 to include the pay
of Members of Congress within the coverage of the Act; to the
Committee on the Budget.
By Mr. CLARKE of Michigan (for himself, Mr. Clay, and
Ms. Norton):
H.R. 6500. A bill to establish the Detroit Jobs Trust Fund
and to temporarily provide a zero percent capital gains rate
for certain new investments in Detroit, Michigan; to the
Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee
on Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. BERG:
H.R. 6501. A bill to prohibit the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency from finalizing certain
proposed rules under the Clean Air Act if a State regulatory
authority gives notice that such a rule will lead to a 3
percent or greater increase in the price of electricity for
end-use consumers; to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
By Mr. BILBRAY (for himself, Mrs. Maloney, and Ms.
DeLauro):
H.R. 6502. A bill to amend title V of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act to provide for extensions of marketing
exclusivity periods for drugs in certain combinations of such
drugs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
By Mr. BILBRAY:
H.R. 6503. A bill to promote the development of renewable
energy on certain Federal land, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the
Committees on Agriculture, and Armed Services, for a period
to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case
for consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. CHABOT (for himself, Mrs. Ellmers, and Mr.
Cicilline):
H.R. 6504. A bill to amend the Small Business Investment
Act of 1958 to provide for increased limitations on leverage
for multiple licenses under common control, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Small Business.
By Mr. CICILLINE:
H.R. 6505. A bill to provide for the establishment of a
Commission on the Advancement of Social Enterprise; to the
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
By Mr. COURTNEY (for himself, Mr. Tierney, Mr. Tonko,
Ms. Norton, Ms. Bordallo, Mr. Quigley, Mr. Larson of
Connecticut, Mr. Carson of Indiana, Ms. Woolsey, Mr.
Larsen of Washington, Mr. Braley of Iowa, and Mr.
Murphy of Connecticut):
H.R. 6506. A bill to amend the Higher Education Opportunity
Act to add disclosure requirements to the institution
financial aid offer form and to amend the Higher Education
Act of 1965 to make such form mandatory; to the Committee on
Education and the Workforce.
By Mr. CRAVAACK:
H.R. 6507. A bill to provide that any State implementation
plan submitted pursuant to the Clean Air Act to address
impairment of visibility shall apply for such State until
2022 with respect to emissions from taconite ore processing
facilities, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
By Mrs. DAVIS of California (for herself, Ms.
Richardson, and Ms. Schakowsky):
H.R. 6508. A bill to direct the Federal Trade Commission to
promulgate rules requiring an Internet merchant to disclose
the use of a price-altering computer program, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
By Ms. DeLAURO (for herself, Mr. Pallone, and Mrs.
Lowey):
H.R. 6509. A bill to establish limitations on the quantity
of total arsenic in rice and rice products under chapter IV
of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; to the Committee
on Energy and Commerce.
By Mr. DEUTCH (for himself, Ms. Castor of Florida, and
Mr. Andrews):
H.R. 6510. A bill to require holders of Federal student
loans and private education loans to apply prepayment amounts
toward loans with the highest rates of interest; to the
Committee on Education and the Workforce.
By Mr. DUNCAN of South Carolina (for himself, Mr. West,
Mr. Wilson of South Carolina, Mr. Sensenbrenner, Mrs.
Black, Mr. Marino, Mr. Griffin of Arkansas, Mr.
Gowdy, Mrs. Blackburn, Mr. Fincher, Mr. Franks of
Arizona, Mr. Lamborn, Mr. Kissell, Ms. Buerkle, Mr.
Harris, and Mr. Rogers of Michigan):
H.R. 6511. A bill to require investigations into and a
report on the September 11-13, 2012, attacks on the United
States missions in Libya, Egypt, and Yemen, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in
addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select),
for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in
each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within
the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. FITZPATRICK:
H.R. 6512. A bill to amend the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 to require nationally recognized statistical rating
organizations to certify that they monitor the accuracy of
each credit ratings issued by the organization; to the
Committee on Financial Services.
By Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN (for himself, Mr. Engel, Mr.
Fitzpatrick, Mr. Gerlach, Mr. Garrett, Mr. Hinchey,
Ms. Hayworth, Mr. Pascrell, and Mr. Murphy of
Connecticut):
H.R. 6513. A bill to extend the authorization of the
Highlands Conservation Act through fiscal year 2024; to the
Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the
Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently
determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of
such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the
committee concerned.
By Mr. GIBSON:
H.R. 6514. A bill to require the Secretary of Health and
Human Services to promulgate regulations regarding the
authorship, content, format, and dissemination of Patient
Medication Information to ensure patients receive consistent
and high-quality information about their prescription
medications and are aware of the potential risks and benefits
of prescription medications; to the Committee on Energy and
Commerce.
By Mr. GRIMM:
H.R. 6515. A bill to stop excessive toll hikes which harm
our local economies, small businesses, and hard working
families; to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
By Ms. HOCHUL (for herself and Mr. Higgins):
H.R. 6516. A bill to award a Congressional Gold Medal to
the members of the Tuscarora Nation who fought to protect the
residents of Lewiston, New York, from the British invasion
during the War of 1812; to the Committee on Financial
Services.
By Mr. HONDA (for himself, Mr. McDermott, Mr. Sires,
Ms. Schakowsky, Ms. Lee of California, Mr. Polis, and
Ms. Matsui):
H.R. 6517. A bill to direct the Secretary of Education to
make grants to State-based STEM networks to expand STEM
education; to the Committee on Education and the Workforce.
By Mr. HUELSKAMP (for himself, Mr. Broun of Georgia,
Mr. Chabot, Mr. Jordan, and Mr. King of Iowa):
H.R. 6518. A bill to replace certain Federal nutrition
programs with a block grant to the States, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to
the Committees on Ways and Means, and Education and the
Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. HUNTER (for himself, Mr. Bilbray, Mr. Dreier,
Mr. Campbell, and Mrs. Bono Mack):
H.R. 6519. A bill to provide an expedited permit process to
authorize private landowners to conduct limited vegetation
removal activities on National Forest System land or Bureau
of Land Management land adjacent to their private property to
reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire that would threaten
residential structures on the private property, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in
addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. HURT:
H.R. 6520. A bill to prohibit the use of appropriated funds
for publicity, propaganda, or certain lobbying purposes, and
for other purposes; to the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform.
By Mr. ISRAEL (for himself, Mr. Rangel, Mr. Lewis of
Georgia, Mr. Ackerman, Mrs. McCarthy of New York, Mr.
Serrano, Ms. Slaughter, Mr.
[[Page 14729]]
Owens, Mrs. Christensen, Mrs. Lowey, Mr. Crowley, Mr.
Bishop of New York, and Mr. Deutch):
H.R. 6521. A bill to provide payment for patient navigator
services under title XIX of the Social Security Act; to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
By Mr. ISRAEL:
H.R. 6522. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to extend and modify the American Opportunity Tax
Credit, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Ways and
Means.
By Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas:
H.R. 6523. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to require that ITIN applicants submit their application
in person at taxpayer assistance centers, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Ways and Means.
By Mr. KING of New York (for himself, Mr. Grimm, Mr.
Huizenga of Michigan, Mr. Gary G. Miller of
California, and Mr. Campbell):
H.R. 6524. A bill to make improvements to provisions of the
Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 relating to proprietary
trading by banking entities; to the Committee on Financial
Services.
By Mr. KINZINGER of Illinois (for himself, Mr. Quigley,
Mr. Walsh of Illinois, Mr. Johnson of Illinois, Mr.
Cooper, Mr. Altmire, Mr. Boswell, Mr. Michaud, Mr.
Matheson, Mr. Gardner, Mr. Schilling, and Mr.
Schock):
H.R. 6525. A bill to increase the long-term fiscal
accountability of direct spending legislation; to the
Committee on the Budget, and in addition to the Committee on
Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. LANDRY:
H.R. 6526. A bill to provide that an Order of the Federal
Communications Commission adopting a methodology for
establishing certain benchmarks for Universal Service Fund
high-cost loop support shall have no force or effect and to
require the Commission to prepare a report on alternatives to
such methodology; to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
By Mr. LARSEN of Washington (for himself, Mrs. Davis of
California, Mr. Rangel, Ms. Speier, Mr. Kissell, Mr.
Filner, and Ms. Bonamici):
H.R. 6527. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to
improve the assistance provided by the Department of Veterans
Affairs to women veterans, to improve health care furnished
by the Department, and for other purposes; to the Committee
on Veterans' Affairs.
By Ms. LEE of California (for herself, Mr. Stark, Ms.
Clarke of New York, and Ms. Schakowsky):
H.R. 6528. A bill to reduce by 5 percent the discretionary
budget authority of any Federal agency for a fiscal year if
the financial statement of the agency for the previous fiscal
year does not receive an unqualified audit opinion by an
external independent auditor, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition
to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California:
H.R. 6529. A bill to amend title 18, United States Code,
with respect to disclosures to governments by communications-
related service providers of certain information consisting
of or relating to communications, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the
Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), for a period to
be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California:
H.R. 6530. A bill to combat trade barriers that threaten
the maintenance of an open Internet, that mandate unique
technology standards as a condition of market access and
related measures, and to promote online free expression and
the free flow of information; to the Committee on Ways and
Means, and in addition to the Committees on Foreign Affairs,
the Judiciary, and Energy and Commerce, for a period to be
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. MARKEY:
H.R. 6531. A bill to amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act to
require a refund value for certain beverage containers, and
to provide resources for State pollution prevention and
recycling programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee
on Energy and Commerce.
By Mr. McCLINTOCK:
H.R. 6532. A bill to provide for the conveyance of certain
Federal land under the administrative jurisdiction of the
Bureau of Land Management in El Dorado County, California, to
the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Natural Resources.
By Mr. MICHAUD (for himself, Mr. Rangel, Mr. Grimm, Mr.
Neal, Mr. Frank of Massachusetts, Mr. Ackerman, Mr.
Welch, Mr. Higgins, Mr. King of New York, Mr. Young
of Alaska, Ms. Pingree of Maine, Mr. Guinta, Mr.
Serrano, Mr. Langevin, Mr. Nadler, Mr. Towns, Mr.
Lynch, Mr. Tonko, Mr. Hinchey, Mr. Tierney, Mr.
Courtney, and Mr. Olver):
H.R. 6533. A bill to establish minimum levels of assistance
for certain States under the Low-Income Home Energy
Assistance Program, and for other purposes; to the Committee
on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on
Education and the Workforce, for a period to be subsequently
determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of
such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the
committee concerned.
By Mr. MICHAUD (for himself, Mr. Olver, Mr. Lynch, Mr.
Welch, and Ms. Pingree of Maine):
H.R. 6534. A bill to direct the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs to establish a registry of certain veterans who were
stationed at or underwent training at Canadian Forces Base
Gagetown, New Brunswick, Canada, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, and in addition to the
Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently
determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of
such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the
committee concerned.
By Mr. NADLER (for himself and Ms. Schakowsky):
H.R. 6535. A bill to amend the Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 to repeal the
sequestration added by the Budget Control Act of 2011, and
for other purposes; to the Committee on the Budget, and in
addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to
be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. NUNES:
H.R. 6536. A bill to authorize the President to seek to
conduct negotiations with the European Union for purposes of
entering into a trade agreement with the European Union, and
for other purposes; to the Committee on Ways and Means.
By Mr. NUNES:
H.R. 6537. A bill to amend the Trade Act of 1974 to make
improvements to the Generalized System of Preferences, and
for other purposes; to the Committee on Ways and Means.
By Mr. NUNES:
H.R. 6538. A bill to establish trade negotiating objectives
with respect to the application of sanitary and phytosanitary
measures to agricultural products, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Ways and Means.
By Mr. NUNES:
H.R. 6539. A bill to establish United States-Brazil Joint
Commission on Commerce and Trade, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Ways and Means.
By Mr. POSEY:
H.R. 6540. A bill to amend title 51, United States Code, to
authorize the Director of the Kennedy Space Center to convey
excess property at the Kennedy Space Center to a State or
political subdivision, municipality, or instrumentality of a
State for the development and operation of a spaceport; to
the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.
By Mr. REED:
H.R. 6541. A bill to direct the Secretary of Transportation
to conduct a study of economically beneficial uses of the
rights-of-way associated with certain highways, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
By Mr. RICHMOND:
H.R. 6542. A bill to improve assistance after a hurricane
or major disaster; to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Energy
and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by
the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such
provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee
concerned.
By Ms. SCHWARTZ:
H.R. 6543. A bill to amend the Older Americans Act of 1965
to define care coordination, include care coordination as a
fully restorative service, and detail the care coordination
functions of the Assistant Secretary, and for other purposes;
to the Committee on Education and the Workforce.
By Ms. SCHWARTZ:
H.R. 6544. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to allow a deduction for patent box profit from the use
of United States patents; to the Committee on Ways and Means.
By Mr. SENSENBRENNER:
H.R. 6545. A bill to require the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency to use the commercially
available volume of cellulosic biofuel in setting
requirements for the renewable fuel program under the Clean
Air Act, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy
and Commerce.
By Mr. SENSENBRENNER (for himself and Mr. Conyers):
H.R. 6546. A bill to amend the Office of National Drug
Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 2006 to increase
congressional oversight of the United States Anti-Doping
Agency; to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
[[Page 14730]]
By Mr. SHIMKUS (for himself and Mr. Bucshon):
H.R. 6547. A bill to amend the Federal Mine Safety and
Health Act of 1977 to require greater experience of mine
safety inspectors under that Act; to the Committee on
Education and the Workforce.
By Mr. SHULER (for himself and Mrs. Davis of
California):
H.R. 6548. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social
Security Act to provide coverage under the Medicare program
for diabetes prevention services; to the Committee on Energy
and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and
Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. STARK (for himself, Mr. Peters, and Mr. Lewis of
Georgia):
H.R. 6549. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to extend the enhanced charitable deduction for
corporate contributions of computer inventory for educational
purposes; to the Committee on Ways and Means.
By Mr. SULLIVAN:
H.R. 6550. A bill to establish an advisory committee on
national security telecommunications; to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
By Mr. SULLIVAN:
H.R. 6551. A bill to amend the Communications Act of 1934
to ensure that security is taken into account in certain
efforts related to the interconnectivity of
telecommunications networks, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
By Mr. SULLIVAN:
H.R. 6552. A bill to continue an advisory committee
considering the optimal security, reliability, and
interoperability of communications systems; to the Committee
on Energy and Commerce.
By Mr. SULLIVAN:
H.R. 6553. A bill to amend the Communications Act of 1934
to add an additional purpose to section 1 of such Act; to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
By Mr. TIERNEY (for himself and Mr. Markey):
H.R. 6554. A bill to limit the period in advance of a
nuclear reactor license renewal that the application for such
renewal may be submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission; to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
By Mr. TURNER of Ohio (for himself, Mr. Franks of
Arizona, Mr. Brooks, Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia, Mr.
Lamborn, Mr. Rogers of Alabama, and Mr. Fleming):
H.R. 6555. A bill to direct the Secretary of Defense to use
the Armed Forces to protect certain nuclear material of the
National Nuclear Security Administration; to the Committee on
Armed Services.
By Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ:
H.R. 6556. A bill to amend the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of
Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act, and
for other purposes; to the Committee on Education and the
Workforce.
By Mr. WELCH:
H.R. 6557. A bill to establish the Higher Education
Regulatory Reform Task Force, to establish procedures for the
presentation and expedited consideration by Congress of the
recommendations of the Higher Education Regulatory Reform
Task Force, to establish requirements for college cost
reduction, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Education and the Workforce, and in addition to the Committee
on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as
fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. WELCH:
H.R. 6558. A bill to simplify the process for determining
the need and eligibility of students for financial assistance
under the Higher Education Act of 1965, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Education and the Workforce,
and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a
period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each
case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Mr. FITZPATRICK (for himself, Mr. Deutch, Mr.
Westmoreland, Mr. Lance, Mr. Aderholt, Mrs. McCarthy
of New York, Mr. Landry, Ms. Linda T. Sanchez of
California, Mr. Walsh of Illinois, Mr. Lankford, Mr.
Hastings of Florida, Mr. Peters, Mr. Meehan, Mr.
Sherman, and Mr. Posey):
H. Con. Res. 139. Concurrent resolution condemning
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the leaders of the Islamic
Republic of Iran for addressing the United Nations on Yom
Kippur; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
By Ms. BUERKLE:
H. Con. Res. 140. Concurrent resolution expressing the
disappointment and concern of the Congress on the failure of
the United States to properly investigate the Pan Am 103
bombing and the failure of Libya to grant permission for
United States Pan Am 103 criminal investigators to
investigate and gather evidence in Libya regarding the Pan Am
103 bombing; to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in
addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, for a period to
be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
By Ms. CHU:
H. Res. 802. A resolution commemorating the 71st
anniversary of the creation of the ``Special Air Unit'' of
the 1st American Volunteer Group (AVG), which became known as
the Flying Tigers; to the Committee on Armed Services.
By Ms. LEE of California (for herself, Ms. Norton, Mr.
Bishop of Georgia, Mr. Rangel, Mr. Rush, Mr.
Cummings, Mr. Carson of Indiana, Mr. Johnson of
Georgia, Mr. Meeks, Mr. Conyers, Ms. Moore, Ms.
Richardson, Mr. Gonzalez, Mrs. Christensen, Ms. Chu,
Ms. Woolsey, Mr. Lewis of Georgia, Mr. Filner, Mr.
Larsen of Washington, Mr. Fattah, Mr. Israel, Mr.
Watt, Mr. Hastings of Florida, Mr. Cleaver, Mr. Farr,
Mr. Polis, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Dingell, Ms. McCollum,
Mr. Harris, Mr. Al Green of Texas, Ms. Roybal-Allard,
Ms. Schakowsky, Mr. Scott of Virginia, Mr. Ellison,
Mr. Cohen, Ms. Clarke of New York, Ms. Edwards, and
Ms. Waters):
H. Res. 803. A resolution recognizing National Emancipation
Day, marking the 150th anniversary of the end of slavery in
areas of rebellion, and the significance of the Emancipation
Proclamation in the struggle for the equal rights and
freedoms afforded to all United States citizens; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mrs. LUMMIS (for herself and Mr. Bishop of Utah):
H. Res. 804. A resolution recognizing the importance of
animal-based protein as a component of the balanced diet of
most individuals in the United States; to the Committee on
Agriculture.
By Mr. YODER:
H. Res. 805. A resolution expressing the sense of the House
of Representatives that in order to create certainty in the
United States economy so that small businesses and job
creators can invest and hire, Congress should enact long-
term, predictable tax policy and, in the event that Congress
and the President choose to raise taxes, they should give
United States citizens at least one year after the enactment
or expiration of the legislation to prepare for and adjust to
any impact that such increase in taxes may have; to the
Committee on Ways and Means.
____________________
CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT
Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, the following statements are submitted regarding the
specific powers granted to Congress in the Constitution to enact the
accompanying bill or joint resolution.
By Mr. CHAFFETZ:
H.R. 6480.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
This bill is enacted pursuant to Article 1, Section 8,
Clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution
By Mr. LATHAM:
H.R. 6481.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 1; and Article I, Section 8 of the
United States Constitution.
By Mr. BURGESS:
H.R. 6482.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Congress has the authority under Article I, Section 9,
Clause 7, ``No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in
Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.'' It is within
Congress' power to regulate the appropriation of money from
the Treasury and this bill is directly related to this
authority to ensure cost saving calculations are taken into
account into the budgeting and appropriation of such funds.
By Ms. BONAMICI:
H.R. 6483.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3
By Mr. GARAMENDI:
H.R. 6484.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Commerce clause found in Art. 1, Section 8 of the United
States Constitution.
By Mr. CHAFFETZ:
H.R. 6485.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 1
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes,
Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for
the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;
but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform
throughout the United States;
By Mr. McKINLEY:
H.R. 6486.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
[[Page 14731]]
According to Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 of the
Constitution: The Congress shall have power to enact this
legislation to make all laws which shall be necessary and
proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and
all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the
Government of the United States, or in any Department or
Officer thereof.
By Mr. McKINLEY:
H.R. 6487.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
According to Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the
Constitution: The Congress shall have power to enact this
legislation to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among
the several states, and with the Indian tribes.
By Mr. DENHAM:
H.R. 6488.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United
States.
By Mr. HALL:
H.R. 6489.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3--To regulate Commerce with
foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the
Indian Tribes; and
Article I, Section 8, Clause 18--To make all Laws which
shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the
foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this
Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in
any Department or Officer thereof.
By Mr. PRICE of Georgia:
H.R. 6490.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Current law has created a health care program called
Medicare that is operated by the federal government. This
bill would improve the efficiency and fairness of the
operation of parts of that program, especially the purchase
of goods and services, while affecting interstate commerce,
which Congress has the power to regulate under Article I,
Section 8, Clause 3.
By Mr. CULBERSON:
H.R. 6491.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
General Welfare Clause
Article I, Section 8
The Commerce Clause.
Necessary and Proper Clause
By Mr. CLARKE of Michigan:
H.R. 6492.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 and Article 1, Section 8,
Clause 18 of the United States Constitution.
By Mr. CLARKE of Michigan:
H.R. 6493.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4 and Article 1, Section 8,
Clause 18 of the United States Constitution.
By Mr. THOMPSON of California:
H.R. 6494.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1, Section 8, Clauses 12-14, and Clause 18 of the
United States Constitution.
By Mr. AMASH:
H.R. 6495.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution
empowers Congress ``To coin Money, [and] regulate the Value
thereof.'' Congress currently authorizes the minting of
commemorative coins, and this bill directs the proceeds of
the minting.
By Mr. AMODEI:
H.R. 6496.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
The constitutional authority on which this bill rests is
the power of Congress to regulate interstate and foreign
commerce, as enumerated in Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of
the United States Constitution, to define and punish felonies
committed outside of U.S. borders and offenses against the
Law of Nations, as enumerated in Article I, Section 8, Clause
10, and to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying
into execution all other powers vested in the federal
government and its departments and officers, as enumerated in
Article I, Section 8, Clause 18.
By Mr. AMODEI:
H.R. 6497.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
The constitutional authority on which this bill rests is
the power of Congress to make rules for the government and
regulation of the land and naval forces, as enumerated in
Article I, Section 8, Clause 14 of the United States
Constitution.
By Mrs. BACHMANN:
H.R. 6498.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1 Section 8 Clause 18: To make all Laws which shall
be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the
foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this
Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in
any Department or Officer thereof.
By Mr. BARROW:
H.R. 6499.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I Section VI of the Constitution.
By Mr. CLARKE of Michigan:
H.R. 6500.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 of the United States
Constitution.
By Mr. BERG:
H.R. 6501.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1 section 8 clause 3 of the United States
Constitution.
By Mr. BILBRAY:
H.R. 6502.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1, Section 8, To regulate Commerce with foreign
Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian
Tribes; Congress has the authority under this section to
regulate commerce and FDA products.
By Mr. BILBRAY:
H.R. 6503.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1, Section 8, To regulate Commerce with foreign
Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian
Tribes; Congress has the authority under this section to
regulate commerce and renewable fuels.
By Mr. CHABOT:
H.R. 6504.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I Section 8 clause 3 ``To regulate commerce with
foreign nations, and among the several states and with the
Indian tribes;''
By Mr. CICILLINE:
H.R. 6505.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8
By Mr. COURTNEY:
H.R. 6506.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 (relating to the power of
Congress to provide for the general welfare of the United
States) and Clause 18 (relating to the power to make all laws
necessary and proper for carrying out the powers vested in
Congress)
Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 (relating to the power of
Congress to dispose of and make all needful rules and
regulations respecting the territory or other property
belonging to the United States).
By Mr. CRAVAACK:
H.R. 6507.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3. The Congress shall have
Power to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among
the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.
By Mrs. DAVIS of California:
H.R. 6508.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8
By Ms. DeLAURO:
H.R. 6509.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the United States
Constitution.
By Mr. DEUTCH:
H.R. 6510.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
The constitutional authority of Congress to enact this
legislation is provided by Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of
the United States Constitution, which grants Congress the
power to regulate commerce among the several States.
By Mr. DUNCAN of South Carolina:
H.R. 6511.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
``This bill follows the Constitutional prerogatives of
Congress under Article I, Section 8, pertaining to the
clauses to `provide for the common Defense' and `make Rules
for the Government.''
By Mr. FITZPATRICK:
H.R. 6512.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3
By Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN:
H.R. 6513.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution.
By Mr. GIBSON:
H.R. 6514.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution gives
Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign Nations,
and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.
By Mr. GRIMM:
H.R. 6515.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
[[Page 14732]]
Article I, Section 8, Clause 1
By Ms. HOCHUL:
H.R. 6516.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United
States.
By Mr. HONDA:
H.R. 6517.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution
By Mr. HUELSKAMP:
H.R. 6518.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
This legislation is introduced under the authority of
Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 and the Tenth Amendment to the
United States Constitution. This bill restores the proper
balance of power between the federal and state governments as
intended under the Tenth Amendment to the United States
Constitution by devolving the responsibility of providing
food assistance for low income citizens to the states. It
reinforces the founding constitutional principle that state
governments are properly situated with attending to their
citizens' health, safety, and general welfare.
By Mr. HUNTER:
H.R. 6519.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
The constitutional authority on which this bill rests is
the power of Congress to make needful rules and regulations
regarding the territory of the United States, as enumerated
in Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the United States
Constitution.
By Mr. HURT:
H.R. 6520.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
The principal constitutional authority for this legislation
is clause 7 of section 9 of article I of the Constitution of
the United States (the appropriation power), which states:
``No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in
Consequence of Appropriations made by Law . . . .'' In
addition, clause 1 of section 8 of article I of the
Constitution (the spending power) provides: ``The Congress
shall have the Power . . . to pay the Debts and provide for
the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States .
. . . .'' Together, these specific constitutional provisions
establish the congressional power of the purse, granting
Congress the authority to appropriate funds, to determine
their purpose, amount, and period of availability, and to set
forth terms and conditions governing their use.
By Mr. ISRAEL:
H.R. 6521.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution.
By Mr. ISRAEL:
H.R. 6522.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8 and the 16th Amendment of the United
States Constitution
By Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas:
H.R. 6523.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 1
By Mr. KING of New York:
H.R. 6524.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:
The Congress shall have Power . . . To regulate Commerce
with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with
the Indian Tribes.
By Mr. KINZINGER of Illinois:
H.R. 6525.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 18
The Congress shall have Power *** To make all Laws which
shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the
foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by the
Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in
any Department or Officer thereof.
By Mr. LANDRY:
H.R. 6526.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Clause 3 of section 8 of Article I of the Constitution
By Mr. LARSEN of Washington:
H.R. 6527.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
As described in Article 1, Section 1 ``all legislative
powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress.''
By Ms. LEE of California:
H.R. 6528.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
This bill is enacted pursuant to the power granted to
Congress under Article I of the United States Constitution
and its subsequent amendments, and further clarified and
interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States.
By Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California:
H.R. 6529.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Clauses 3 and 18 of Section 8 of Article 1 of the U.S.
Constitution.
By Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California:
H.R. 6530.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Clauses 3 and 18 of Section 8 of Article 1 of the U.S.
Constitution.
By Mr. MARKEY:
H.R. 6531.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1, Section 8
By Mr. McCLINTOCK:
H.R. 6532.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
U.S. Constitution, Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 (the
Property Clause), which confers on Congress the power to
dispose of property belonging to the United States.
By Mr. MICHAUD:
H.R. 6533.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8
By Mr. MICHAUD:
H.R. 6534.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 18: The Congress shall have
Power to make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper
for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all
other Powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of
the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
By Mr. NADLER:
H.R. 6535.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Clause 1 of section 8 of article I of the Constitution,
clause 18 of section 8 of article I of the Constitution, and
clause 7 of section 9 of article I of the Constitution.
By Mr. NUNES:
H.R. 6536.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
US Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 provides
Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations
and among the various states.
By Mr. NUNES:
H.R. 6537.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
US Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 provides
Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations
and among the various states.
By Mr. NUNES:
H.R. 6538.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
US Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 provides
Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations
and among the various states.
By Mr. NUNES:
H.R. 6539.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following: Article I, Section 8, provides Congress the
power to regulate commerce with foreign nations.
By Mr. POSEY:
H.R. 6540.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1, section 8, clause 1; Article 1, section 8,
clause 8; Article IV, section 3, clause 2
By Mr. REED:
H.R. 6541.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1 Section 8
By Mr. RICHMOND:
H.R. 6542.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
This bill is introduced pursuant to the powers granted to
Congress under the General Welfare Clause (Art. 1 Sec. 8 Cl.
1) and the Necessary and Proper Clause (Art. 1 Sec. 8 Cl.
18).
Further, this statement of constitutional authority is made
for the sole purpose of compliance with clause 7 of Rule XII
of the Rules of the House of Representatives and shall have
no bearing on judicial review of the accompanying bill.
By Ms. SCHWARTZ:
H.R. 6543.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1, Section 8
By Ms. SCHWARTZ:
H.R. 6544.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1, Section 8
By Mr. SENSENBRENNER:
H.R. 6545.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution of the
United States
By Mr. SENSENBRENNER:
H.R. 6546.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution of the
United States
[[Page 14733]]
By Mr. SHIMKUS:
H.R. 6547.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with
foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the
Indian Tribes.
By Mr. SHULER:
H.R. 6548.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1 Section 8 Clause 1 gives Congress the authority
to ``provide for the common defense and general welfare of
the United States.''
Article I Section 8 Clause 3--The Congress shall have
power***To regulate commerce with foreign nations and among
the several states, and with the Indian tribes.
By Mr. STARK:
H.R. 6549.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Clause I of Section 8 of Article I of the Constitution
By Mr. SULLIVAN:
H.R. 6550.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States
Constitution.
By Mr. SULLIVAN:
H.R. 6551.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States
Constitution.
By Mr. SULLIVAN:
H.R. 6552.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States
Constitution.
By Mr. SULLIVAN:
H.R. 6553.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States
Constitution.
By Mr. TIERNEY:
H.R. 6554.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, section 8 of the United States Constitution.
By Mr. TURNER of Ohio:
H.R. 6555.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Clauses 1, 14, and 18 of Section 8 of Article I of the
Constitution
By Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ:
H.R. 6556.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section VIII
By Mr. WELCH:
H.R. 6557.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16, to make all laws which
shall be necessary and proper for carrying to execution the
foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this
Constitution in the government of the United States, or in
any Department or Office thereof.
By Mr. WELCH:
H.R. 6558.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16, to make all laws which
shall be necessary and proper for carrying to execution the
foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this
Constitution in the government of the United States, or in
any Department or Office thereof.
____________________
ADDITIONAL SPONSORS
Under clause 7 of rule XII, sponsors were added to public bills and
resolutions as follows:
H.R. 100: Mrs. Roby.
H.R. 127: Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia.
H.R. 212: Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia.
H.R. 360: Mrs. Emerson.
H.R. 390: Mr. Barber.
H.R. 574: Mr. Kucinich.
H.R. 615: Mr. Yoder.
H.R. 718: Ms. Schakowsky.
H.R. 719: Mr. Johnson of Ohio.
H.R. 791: Mr. Carney.
H.R. 835: Mr. Culberson.
H.R. 860: Mrs. Roby, Mr. Sherman, and Mr. Canseco.
H.R. 904: Mr. Latham.
H.R. 905: Mr. Peterson.
H.R. 1054: Mr. Peterson and Mr. Moran.
H.R. 1057: Mr. Barber.
H.R. 1063: Mrs. Black and Mr. Kinzinger of Illinois.
H.R. 1116: Mr. Clyburn.
H.R. 1127: Ms. McCollum.
H.R. 1195: Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia and Mr. McNerney.
H.R. 1219: Mr. McNerney.
H.R. 1244: Mrs. Biggert, Ms. Bonamici, and Mr. Stivers.
H.R. 1322: Ms. Woolsey.
H.R. 1370: Mr. Rooney, Mr. Chandler, Mr. Runyan, and Mr.
Young of Alaska.
H.R. 1397: Mr. Barber.
H.R. 1418: Ms. Linda T. Sanchez of California.
H.R. 1426: Ms. Baldwin.
H.R. 1462: Mr. Gonzalez.
H.R. 1489: Mr. Doggett.
H.R. 1513: Mr. Rivera and Mr. Gary G. Miller of California.
H.R. 1537: Ms. Edwards.
H.R. 1639: Mr. Schrader.
H.R. 1675: Mr. Marino and Mr. Lance.
H.R. 1676: Ms. Woolsey.
H.R. 1687: Mr. Latham.
H.R. 1744: Mr. Campbell.
H.R. 1802: Mr. Stark and Mr. Peterson.
H.R. 1845: Ms. Roybal-Allard.
H.R. 1867: Mr. Dingell.
H.R. 1876: Mr. Farr and Mr. Holden.
H.R. 1936: Ms. DeGette.
H.R. 1968: Mr. Hanna.
H.R. 2016: Mr. Kucinich.
H.R. 2020: Mr. Murphy of Connecticut.
H.R. 2030: Mr. Courtney and Mr. Dingell.
H.R. 2069: Ms. Matsui and Mr. Courtney.
H.R. 2088: Mr. Polis and Mr. Neal.
H.R. 2256: Mr. Tierney.
H.R. 2267: Ms. Hochul.
H.R. 2359: Ms. Speier.
H.R. 2364: Mr. Hastings of Florida.
H.R. 2382: Mr. Neal and Ms. Hirono.
H.R. 2402: Mr. Huelskamp.
H.R. 2485: Ms. Buerkle.
H.R. 2492: Mr. Rivera and Mr. Terry.
H.R. 2499: Mr. Deutch.
H.R. 2557: Mr. Peterson.
H.R. 2563: Mr. Jones.
H.R. 2600: Mr. Donnelly of Indiana, Mr. Marino, and Mr.
Rooney.
H.R. 2669: Mr. Pallone and Mr. Gutierrez.
H.R. 2672: Mr. Neal.
H.R. 2698: Mr. Paulsen.
H.R. 2746: Mr. Courtney and Ms. DeGette.
H.R. 2787: Ms. Hochul.
H.R. 2885: Mrs. Roby.
H.R. 2925: Mr. Dingell.
H.R. 2969: Mr. Blumenauer, Mrs. Capito, Mr. Sires, and Mr.
Peterson.
H.R. 2985: Mr. Wittman.
H.R. 3056: Mr. Bishop of Georgia, Ms. Waters, Ms.
Richardson, Mr. Towns, and Ms. Woolsey.
H.R. 3097: Mr. Gibson.
H.R. 3238: Mr. Garamendi, Mrs. Maloney, Mr. Waxman, and Mr.
Dingell.
H.R. 3359: Mrs. Capps.
H.R. 3381: Mr. Conyers, Ms. Sewell, Mr. Hastings of
Florida, Ms. Woolsey, Mr. Connolly of Virginia, Mr. Langevin,
Ms. Zoe Lofgren of California, Ms. Norton, Ms. Lee of
California, Ms. Chu, Mr. Rangel, Mrs. Christensen, Mr. Davis
of Illinois, Mr. Serrano, Mr. Grijalva, Ms. Speier, Ms.
Roybal-Allard, and Mr. Bishop of Georgia.
H.R. 3395: Mr. Price of North Carolina.
H.R. 3423: Mr. Mack, Mr. Nugent, Mr. Ellison, and Mr.
Fitzpatrick.
H.R. 3458: Mr. Peterson.
H.R. 3466: Mr. Heinrich.
H.R. 3481: Mr. Gardner.
H.R. 3485: Mr. Neal and Ms. Edwards.
H.R. 3489: Mr. Moran.
H.R. 3497: Mr. Burton of Indiana.
H.R. 3506: Mr. Bishop of New York.
H.R. 3510: Ms. Hochul.
H.R. 3515: Mr. Bishop of Georgia and Mrs. Capps.
H.R. 3522: Mr. Braley of Iowa and Mr. Cohen.
H.R. 3591: Ms. Roybal-Allard.
H.R. 3664: Mr. Cassidy.
H.R. 3677: Mr. Kind.
H.R. 3713: Mr. Broun of Georgia and Mrs. Bachmann.
H.R. 3767: Mr. Welch.
H.R. 3790: Mr. Garamendi.
H.R. 3798: Mr. Richmond.
H.R. 4017: Mr. Price of North Carolina.
H.R. 4103: Mr. Poe of Texas.
H.R. 4115: Mr. Boswell.
H.R. 4122: Mr. Smith of New Jersey, Mr. McGovern, and Mr.
Neal.
H.R. 4137: Mr. Kind and Mr. Bachus.
H.R. 4169: Mr. Boswell and Mr. Price of North Carolina.
H.R. 4173: Mr. McDermott.
H.R. 4202: Mr. Costa.
H.R. 4209: Mr. Bishop of New York and Ms. Bonamici.
H.R. 4238: Ms. McCollum.
H.R. 4256: Mr. Roskam.
H.R. 4290: Mr. Lynch, Ms. Chu, and Ms. Waters.
H.R. 4322: Mr. Luetkemeyer.
H.R. 4336: Mr. Coble and Mr. Gardner.
H.R. 4378: Ms. Pingree of Maine, Mr. Bishop of New York,
Mr. Peterson, and Mr. Barrow.
H.R. 4379: Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas.
H.R. 4385: Mr. Sam Johnson of Texas.
H.R. 5741: Mr. Chandler.
H.R. 5796: Mrs. Capps, Mr. Hanna, and Mr. Griffin of
Arkansas.
H.R. 5817: Mr. Posey, Mr. Benishek, Mr. Kissell, Mr.
Peters, Mr. Dold, Mr. Shuler, Mrs. McCarthy of New York, Mr.
Michaud, Mr. Kind, and Mrs. Miller of Michigan.
H.R. 5839: Mr. Harris, Mr. Carnahan, and Mr. Chandler.
H.R. 5840: Mr. Peters, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Braley of Iowa,
Mr. Critz, Mr. Reichert, and Mr. Fattah.
H.R. 5846: Mr. Posey and Mr. Carter.
H.R. 5879: Mr. Blumenauer and Mr. Terry.
H.R. 5914: Mr. Boswell and Mr. Hall.
H.R. 5925: Mr. Wittman.
H.R. 5943: Mr. Manzullo.
H.R. 5953: Mrs. Roby.
H.R. 5969: Mr. Benishek.
H.R. 5970: Mr. Benishek.
[[Page 14734]]
H.R. 5996: Mr. Barber.
H.R. 5998: Ms. Buerkle.
H.R. 6015: Mr. Holt and Ms. DeLauro.
H.R. 6033: Mr. Heinrich.
H.R. 6038: Ms. Pingree of Maine and Mr. Michaud.
H.R. 6043: Mr. Matheson, Mr. Grijalva, and Mr. Cassidy.
H.R. 6046: Mr. Hastings of Florida.
H.R. 6098: Mr. Frank of Massachusetts and Mr. Stark.
H.R. 6110: Ms. Roybal-Allard.
H.R. 6119: Mr. Grijalva.
H.R. 6125: Mr. Peters.
H.R. 6128: Mr. Farr, Mr. Kucinich, Ms. Lee of California,
Mr. Stark, and Mr. Polis.
H.R. 6134: Mr. Serrano.
H.R. 6140: Mr. Yoder.
H.R. 6144: Mr. Hanna.
H.R. 6150: Mrs. Capps.
H.R. 6154: Mr. Bilbray and Mr. Blumenauer.
H.R. 6155: Mr. Bishop of New York, Mrs. Capps, Ms. Hirono,
Mr. Murphy of Connecticut, Ms. Woolsey, Mr. Altmire, Ms.
Schakowsky, and Mr. Rothman of New Jersey.
H.R. 6157: Mr. Filner, Ms. Matsui, Ms. Schakowsky, Ms.
Woolsey, and Mr. Murphy of Connecticut.
H.R. 6159: Mrs. Lowey and Mr. Dingell.
H.R. 6172: Mr. Peterson.
H.R. 6179: Mr. Israel.
H.R. 6200: Mr. Kucinich and Mr. Nadler.
H.R. 6242: Ms. Schakowsky and Mr. Sherman.
H.R. 6248: Mr. Jones.
H.R. 6273: Ms. Schakowsky.
H.R. 6280: Mr. Jones.
H.R. 6284: Mr. Kucinich.
H.R. 6289: Mr. Yoder.
H.R. 6291: Mr. DeFazio.
H.R. 6292: Mr. Nadler.
H.R. 6293: Mr. Jones and Ms. Hirono.
H.R. 6302: Mr. Stark.
H.R. 6304: Mr. Kline, Mr. Young of Alaska, and Mr. King of
New York.
H.R. 6310: Mr. Doyle and Mr. Cicilline.
H.R. 6312: Mr. Dent.
H.R. 6326: Mrs. Blackburn.
H.R. 6328: Ms. Bordallo.
H.R. 6352: Mr. Shuler.
H.R. 6373: Ms. Hochul.
H.R. 6374: Mr. Broun of Georgia.
H.R. 6385: Mr. Latta.
H.R. 6388: Mr. Grimm, Mr. Stivers, Mr. Blumenauer, Mr.
Lynch, Mr. Peters, Mr. Jones, Mr. DeFazio, Mr. Grijalva, Mr.
Himes, Mr. Campbell, and Mr. Price of North Carolina.
H.R. 6397: Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania.
H.R. 6398: Mr. Kind and Mr. Blumenauer.
H.R. 6404: Ms. Kaptur.
H.R. 6411: Ms. Chu.
H.R. 6413: Mr. Altmire and Mr. Loebsack.
H.R. 6415: Mrs. Blackburn.
H.R. 6418: Ms. Buerkle and Mr. Pompeo.
H.R. 6419: Mr. Gutierrez, Mr. Serrano, Ms. Lee of
California, Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania, Ms. Bordallo, Mr.
Ellison, Mr. Cohen, Ms. McCollum, Ms. Woolsey, and Mr. Costa.
H.R. 6420: Mr. Scott of South Carolina.
H.R. 6421: Ms. Castor of Florida, Ms. Woolsey, and Ms.
Norton.
H.R. 6426: Ms. Lee of California, Ms. Chu, Mr. Cohen, Mr.
Hinchey, Ms. Eshoo, Mr. Cicilline, and Mr. Waxman.
H.R. 6428: Mr. Towns, Ms. Schakowsky, and Ms. Hirono.
H.R. 6436: Mr. Carnahan.
H.R. 6438: Mr. Platts, Mr. Gibson, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Latham,
Mr. Coffman of Colorado, Ms. Hayworth, Mr. Gardner, Mr.
Benishek, Mr. Owens, and Mr. Cravaack.
H.R. 6439: Mr. Alexander, Mr. McIntyre, Mr. Boustany, Mr.
Fincher, Mr. Schrader, and Mr. Peterson.
H.R. 6441: Mr. Kind.
H.R. 6444: Mr. Barton of Texas.
H.R. 6452: Mr. Akin, Mr. Huelskamp, and Mr. Duffy.
H.R. 6456: Ms. Hanabusa, Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania, Mr.
Fincher, Mr. Costello, and Mr. Cravaack.
H.R. 6460: Ms. Schakowsky and Mr. Moran.
H.R. 6462: Mr. Bishop of Utah and Mr. Simpson.
H.R. 6467: Mr. Blumenauer and Ms. Hirono.
H.J. Res. 47: Mr. Smith of Washington.
H.J. Res. 78: Mr. Waxman.
H.J. Res. 90: Mr. Waxman.
H.J. Res. 106: Mr. Bilbray.
H.J. Res. 115: Ms. Hirono.
H. Con. Res. 107: Mr. Brooks.
H. Con. Res. 116: Mr. Kelly, Mr. Carter, Mr. Luetkemeyer,
Ms. Schakowsky, Mr. Peterson, Mr. King of New York, and Mrs.
Lummis.
H. Con. Res. 129: Mr. Barton of Texas.
H. Res. 111: Mrs. Capps.
H. Res. 134: Ms. Bonamici and Ms. Hirono.
H. Res. 298: Mr. Peterson.
H. Res. 319: Mr. Cicilline.
H. Res. 387: Mr. Peters, Mr. Garamendi, and Mr. Rothman of
New Jersey.
H. Res. 415: Mr. Sires.
H. Res. 704: Ms. Slaughter.
H. Res. 733: Mr. Farr.
H. Res. 734: Mr. Shuler and Mr. Murphy of Connecticut.
H. Res. 736: Ms. Hirono and Mr. Rothman of New Jersey.
H. Res. 745: Mr. Duncan of South Carolina, Mr. Smith of New
Jersey, and Mr. Canseco.
H. Res. 759: Ms. Woolsey.
H. Res. 760: Mr. Gonzalez, Ms. Hahn, Mr. Frank of
Massachusetts, Mr. Cummings, and Mr. Garamendi.
H. Res. 763: Mr. Calvert and Mr. Burton of Indiana.
H. Res. 774: Ms. Woolsey, Mr. LoBiondo, Mr. Carter, Ms.
Pingree of Maine, Mr. DeFazio, Mrs. Biggert, Mr. Barton of
Texas, Mr. Garamendi, Mr. Duncan of Tennessee, Mr. Langevin,
and Mr. Costello.
H. Res. 776: Mr. Rogers of Michigan, Mr. Marino, Mr.
Bonner, and Mr. Grimm.
H. Res. 785: Mr. Garamendi and Mr. Murphy of Connecticut.
H. Res. 790: Mr. Harris and Mr. Burton of Indiana.
H. Res. 793: Mr. Hanna, Mr. Rivera, Mr. West, Ms. Herrera
Beutler, Mr. Diaz-Balart, Mr. King of Iowa, Mr. Cicilline,
Mr. Richmond, Ms. Chu, Mr. Landry, Mr. Walsh of Illinois, and
Mrs. Ellmers.
____________________
DISCHARGE PETITIONS--ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
The following Members added their names to the following discharge
petition:
Petition 5 by Mr. BRALEY on House Resolution 739: Walter B.
Jones, John D. Dingell, Tom Latham, Lynn C. Woolsey, Allyson
Y. Schwartz, Charles B. Rangel, Earl Blumenauer, Brian
Higgins, Jerry F. Costello, Ben Ray Lujan, Mazie K. Hirono,
Daniel Lipinski, Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson Jr., Brad Sherman.
[[Page 14735]]
SENATE--Friday, September 21, 2012
The Senate met at 12 noon and was called to order by the Honorable
Richard Blumenthal, a Senator from the State of Connecticut.
______
prayer
The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, offered the following prayer:
Let us pray.
Almighty and everlasting God, we praise Your Name for all those who
answer the call to serve You and country. We confess that we often pay
honor to people who labored for liberty long ago, but we sometimes
neglect to appreciate those who sacrifice for freedom today. Forgive us
when we resist those in our own time and in our own associations who,
for our own good and for the good of the Nation, challenge our rigid
ideas of thought and patterns of action.
Make our lawmakers, this day, open to greater creativity in their
convictions so that they may become partners with You in these
challenging times by paying the price for unity.
We pray in Your merciful Name. Amen.
____________________
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Honorable Richard Blumenthal led the Pledge of Allegiance as
follows:
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.
____________________
APPOINTMENT OF ACTING PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will please read a communication to
the Senate from the President pro tempore (Mr. Inouye).
The legislative clerk read the following letter:
U.S. Senate,
President pro tempore,
Washington, DC, September 21, 2012.
To the Senate:
Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby appoint the Honorable
Richard Blumenthal, a Senator from the State of Connecticut,
to perform the duties of the Chair.
Daniel K. Inouye,
President pro tempore.
Mr. BLUMENTHAL thereupon assumed the chair as Acting President pro
tempore.
____________________
RECOGNITION OF THE MAJORITY LEADER
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader is recognized.
____________________
SPORTSMEN'S ACT OF 2012--MOTION TO PROCEED
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 504.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report the motion.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 504, S. 3525, a bill to
protect and enhance opportunities for recreational hunting,
fishing, and shooting, and for other purposes.
Schedule
Mr. REID. Mr. President, the next hour will be equally divided
between the two leaders or their designees. The majority will control
the first half and the Republicans the final half.
As I think we should know, and I am happy to restate it, the next
rollcall vote will occur about 1 a.m. this morning, an hour after we
come in. I am, of course, hopeful we can work something out in order to
complete our work. We can either do it all tonight, tomorrow, or, if
that doesn't work out, as the Presiding Officer knows, under the rules
of the Senate we will have that vote at 1 a.m., and then we would have
another vote on the CR. Final passage of that would be around 7:30, 8
o'clock in the morning on Sunday. Then we would immediately follow to
the motion to proceed on the sportsmen's package.
We continue to have discussions. We are working to see if we can
schedule these votes at a more convenient time for Senators. Everyone
should know we would finish by Sunday morning. We are not going to go
into next week.
Measure Placed on the Calendar--S. 3607
Mr. REID. Mr. President, S. 3607 is at the desk and due for a second
reading.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will read the bill by
title for the second time.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 3607) to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline.
Mr. REID. I object to any further proceedings with regard to this
bill.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection having been heard, the
bill will be placed on the calendar.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, over the past week I have listened to my
Republican colleagues come to the floor and lament how little the
Senate has accomplished during the 112th Congress. I, above all, share
that concern. In fact, it is a wonder we have gotten anything done at
all, considering the lack of cooperation Democrats have gotten from
Republican colleagues.
I have said before, and it bears repeating: In my time as the
majority leader, I have faced 382 Republican filibusters. That is 381
more filibusters than Lyndon Johnson faced during his 6 years as
majority leader.
Time and time again my Republican colleagues have stalled or blocked
perfectly good pieces of legislation to score points with the tea
party, and they have done nothing but hurt the middle class in this
process. Even the most noncontroversial, consensus matters--items that
would have passed by unanimous consent in the past--have been
obstructed or stalled.
Take, for example, the bipartisan sportsmen's bill. The junior
Senator from Montana, Mr. Tester, has assembled a broad package to
support the needs of sportsmen across the country. Just so everyone
understands I am not making this up, there are more than 50 groups--50
organizations in this country--who support this legislation. It is a
wide range of organizations, including the National Rifle Association,
Ducks Unlimited, American Sports Fishing Association which, by the way,
has more than 2 million members, Boone and Crockett Club, National
Shooting Sports Foundation, Theodore Roosevelt Conservation
Partnership, The Nature Conservancy, the National Wildlife Federation,
Trout Unlimited. If we put labels on just these 10 organizations I have
mentioned, it goes from the more conservative, many would say, National
Rifle Association, to the more progressive Trout Unlimited.
I ask unanimous consent that a list of these organizations I have
referred to, as well as others, be made a part of the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
American Fisheries Society
American Fly Fishing Trade Association
American Sportfishing Association
Archery Trade Association
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies
B.A.S.S., LLC
Berkley Conservation Institute
Boone and Crockett Club
Bowhunting Preservation Alliance
Campfire Club of America
Catch-A-Dream Foundation
Center for Costal Conservation
Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation
Conservation Force
Costal Conservation Association
Dallas Safari Club
Delta Waterfowl Foundation
Ducks Unlimited
Houston Safari Club
Isaac Walton League
International Game Fish Association
Mule Deer Foundation
National Marine Manufacturers Association
National Rifle Association
National Wildlife Refuge Association
National Wildlife Federation
National Shooting Sports Foundation
[[Page 14736]]
National Trappers Association
National Wild Turkey Federation
North American Bear Foundation
North American Grouse Partnership
Orion--the Hunter's Institute
Pheasants Forever
Pope and Young Club
Public Lands Foundation
Quail Forever
Quality Deer Management Association
Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation
Ruffed Grouse Society
Shimano Sport Fisheries Initiative
Texas Wildlife Association
The Conservation Fund
The Nature Conservancy
Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership
TreadLightly!
Trout Unlimited
Trust for Public Lands
U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance
Wild Sheep Foundation
The Wilderness Society
Wildlife Forever
Wildlife Management Institute
Mr. REID. Mr. President, this measure combines about 20 bills
important to the sportsmen's community--bills that promote hunting,
fishing, and recreation. They would foster habitat conservation through
voluntary programs and, as I have indicated, more than 50 national
sportsmen and conservation groups support this bill unequivocally.
This legislation should be passed like that. As I indicated
yesterday, I have read Capitol Hill newspapers where Republican
Senators said: What a great piece of legislation; I will vote for it.
We should pass this in a matter of seconds. We shouldn't be spending
all this time on it. It is one of those things where there shouldn't be
a fight and there has been a fight.
So I hope, as we try to get back to working on campaigns and doing
the work things we have to do at home, that we can move along and get
this done.
In the process, though, we are holding up a lot of other things. I am
hopeful we can get something done on the Iran containment resolution,
which is something Lindsey Graham, Senator Lieberman, Senator Menendez,
and many others, have pushed very hard to get done. I hope we can
confirm our Ambassadors to Iraq and Pakistan, and the continuing
resolution to fund the government for 6 months.
Republicans say this Congress has been unproductive, but if
Republicans want to know why it has been unproductive, they should take
a look in the mirror. Benjamin Franklin once said: ``Well done is
better than well said.'' Well done is better than well said.
So it is time Republicans stop talking about how much they want to
get things done and start working with us to actually get things done.
Recognition of the Minority Leader
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Republican leader is
recognized.
Addressing Challenges
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, yesterday dozens of Republican Senators
came to the Senate floor one after the other to register their complete
frustration with the way Democrats are running this place. Never
before--never--has a President and a majority party in the Senate done
so little to address challenges as great as the ones our Nation faces
right now--never.
I mean, we have a $16 trillion debt and they haven't bothered to put
together a budget in 3 years. They haven't passed a single
appropriations bill. They haven't passed a Defense authorization bill
for the first time in a half a century. These things are usually about
as standard as turning the lights on. They haven't done any of them. It
is a disgrace.
Think about it: The Middle East is in turmoil, we are fighting a war
in Afghanistan and against al-Qaida, and they can't even bother to pass
a Defense authorization bill.
We are fed up with the way this place is being run. No legislation,
no amendments, no action on taxes, no action on Defense cuts. Nothing.
Now we are at it again. All Republicans want to do is extend government
funding for a few months, and the majority leader won't even do that
unless he can squeeze in yet another political vote.
Democrats have treated the Senate floor like an extension of the
Obama campaign for 2 years. Now they are holding the CR hostage for no
other reason than to help one of their incumbents on the campaign
trail.
Well, we are ready to vote on three bills--the same ones the majority
leader asked for votes on earlier this week.
We have responsibilities to meet. Let's meet them, and leave the
politics of the campaign trail where it belongs.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
Reservation of Leader Time
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the
leadership time is reserved.
Order of Business
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the
following hour will be equally divided and controlled between the two
leaders or their designees, with the majority controlling the first
half.
The Senator from Illinois.
Strategy of Obstruction
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I listened to the statement made on the
floor by the Republican leader. It was a statement similar to one that
was made yesterday. I responded to it yesterday and I wish to make a
response today.
I am disappointed that this session of Congress has been so
unproductive, but I know the reason why. It isn't for lack of effort.
We have tried to bring to the floor time and time again legislation to
help create more jobs in America, create a more positive business
climate, create more consumer confidence in middle-income families, and
we have consistently run into the same problem over and over.
In the last 6 years, since Harry Reid of Nevada has been the majority
leader on the Democratic side, the Republicans have created 382
filibusters. How does this compare with previous years? There is no
comparison. We have never, ever, in the history of the U.S. Senate, run
into such a consistent strategy of obstruction by one party in the
Senate.
It was no surprise, because the Senator from Kentucky who just spoke
announced 4 years ago exactly what his strategy would be. He said his
No. 1 goal was to make sure that Barack Obama was a one-term President.
I have served in the House and in the Senate with Republican
Presidents, and certainly I supported their opponents whenever they ran
for election, but I felt a moral and civic obligation to do my best to
work with those Presidents to achieve some good for this country.
I would say that President George W. Bush is a classic example. He
and I saw the world so differently, and yet when it came to specific
issues I was prepared to stand and not only praise his work but join
him in trying to pass important legislation.
President George W. Bush may not be remembered for this, but he
should be: He spoke in favor of immigration reform. When is the last
time you heard a Republican leader speak about immigration reform? But
George W. Bush understood it, and I admired him for it and complimented
him for it, as I do today.
He stood and said the United States should lead the world in
eradicating the HIV/AIDS epidemic, and he put his money and the money
of the American taxpayers where his promises were, and I supported him
for it. He was right to do it.
President George W. Bush stood up after 9/11 and reminded America we
are not at war with people of the Muslim religion. George W. Bush told
us it is a good and peaceful religion. Those who would corrupt it,
those extremists in the name of Islam, are not a credit to that
religion and do not reflect it, and I admired him for that. At a time
when America was so angry over 9/11 and the loss of all those innocent
lives, he showed real leadership.
What a contrast with those who come to the floor of the House and
Senate and say our No. 1 goal is to make sure this President fails no
matter what he tries. That is not good for America, and that is one of
the reasons we have been as unproductive as we have been. But there
have been exceptions. Let me tell you some of those exceptions.
We passed the Violence Against Women Act--an important piece of
legislation. Go to a domestic violence shelter. I am sure the Acting
President pro tempore did as attorney general of the State of
Connecticut and as U.S.
[[Page 14737]]
Senator, as I did, and sit across the table from a victim of domestic
violence--a poor woman with two black eyes crying her heart out,
saying: I just had to get out of that house.
Go to a domestic violence center in Little Village or in Pilsen in
the city of Chicago where immigrant women come in, holding their
children close by, for fear that drunken husband is going to take
another swing at them or at her and tell me we could not agree,
Democrats and Republicans, to put the resources together to protect
those people.
Well, we passed it over here. We passed it in the Senate--a
bipartisan bill--and it died in the House of Representatives.
The same thing happened on important legislation such as
transportation. That used to be the easiest bill to pass. Who in the
world, elected in the House and the Senate, does not want to see better
highways and bridges and runways and ports across America? We know it
is key to our economic development. We passed it on a bipartisan basis.
What happened? It died in the House of Representatives. They ended up
sending us a shell of a bill so we could go to conference and finally
come up with something.
Then the farm bill. This one troubles me. I say to the Acting
President pro tempore, I know Connecticut has some farmers. We have a
few more in Illinois. My farmers have been through a pretty tough time
of it. This summer has been exceptional when it comes to weather.
Virtually every county in my State has been declared a disaster area
because of drought.
It used to be routine on the Fourth of July to have shoulder-high
corn, to watch in August as it just grew even more and was ready for
harvest. It was a magnificent scene. I have seen it every year of my
life. This year it was a sad scene in too many places in Illinois. The
farmers--many of them will get through; 80 percent of them bought crop
insurance--but they want to know what the farm bill is going to be next
year so they can get ready.
Well, we told them in the Senate. We passed a bipartisan farm bill in
the Senate. Senator Debbie Stabenow of Michigan--what a great example
of leadership. She not only put a good farm bill together, she brought
Pat Roberts, a Republican from Kansas on her committee, with her to the
Senate floor and passed it with 64 votes--a bipartisan bill. It not
only wrote the farm programs for the next 5 years, it saved $23
billion, cut it off the deficit. Pretty good work. I am proud of her.
So what happened to that important bill we sent to the House of
Representatives 3 months ago? It died. The House announced this week
they were unable to pass a farm bill. Do you know why? For the same
reason they have been unable to pass major legislation through the
course of the last 2 years. They insist it be passed only with
Republican votes.
Two of the bills I mentioned--transportation and the farm bill--have
traditionally been the most bipartisan bills to come to the Congress.
Why? Because we all share the concern about the infrastructure of
America and the agricultural sector of America, Democrats and
Republicans. But those bills have died in the House of Representatives.
When the Senate Republican leader comes to the floor and talks about
how unproductive we have been, he fails to mention 382 Republican
filibusters--an all-time record of obstruction. He fails to mention his
promise to make sure his guiding principle would be the defeat of this
incumbent President. And he fails to mention that graveyard of
important legislation across the Rotunda in the House of
Representatives. That is the reality, and the reality is a troubling
one.
Yesterday, I did satellite radio and television feeds back to
Illinois, and a number of the reporters said: Well, what can we do
about it? I said: You get your chance November 6. Decide. Decide what
you want. Decide if you want to send Democrats and Republicans to this
Capitol with an awesome responsibility and also with the spirit of
consensus and cooperation.
We have had one Senate candidate in the Midwest who announced: I am
not going to compromise with anybody when I get to Washington. I hope
the people of Indiana remember that on November 6. If that is what they
want, that is what they will get.
But I sense the American people want more from us. They want us to
work together. There have been instances, examples where that has
happened. President Obama created a deficit commission called the
Simpson-Bowles Commission. Eighteen people were appointed to it.
Senator Harry Reid asked me to join the commission, and I did. I did
not think much would come of it, to be honest with you. There have been
a lot of commissions around here. They spend taxpayers' dollars and a
lot of time and generate reports that are quickly forgotten. This was
an exception simply because Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson came
together and did an extraordinarily good job.
We spent a year looking at this budget and realizing that this
deficit is unsustainable and unacceptable. We borrow 40 cents for every
$1 we spend in this town. Whether we are spending it on food stamps, on
missiles, on foreign aid, or on agricultural programs, we borrow 40
cents of it. And who is our No. 1 creditor in the world? The same
nation that is our No. 1 competitor in the world, China. How about
that? We are borrowing money from China. Borrowing that money, of
course, is at the expense of interest payments which continue to grow
because of the costs we are faced with across the board.
So we talked in the Simpson-Bowles Commission about coming up with a
way to reduce the deficit in a responsible fashion. I was certain, when
I walked in the door, that we were not going to get much done there,
and I was even certain that I was not going to vote for it because I
thought there were some issues I just could not see my way through. But
I came to a different conclusion. I voted yes on the Simpson-Bowles
bipartisan deficit commission, and out of the six Senators who sat on
the commission--three Democrats and three Republicans--five of us voted
yes. We believe it showed the path to a responsible reduction of the
deficit.
Well, it did not go any further, unfortunately, because the
commission did not have 14 votes, which it needed, and it did not have
the power of law, which it needed. It turns out that the original
legislation creating the commission had failed on the floor of the
Senate when seven Republicans switched their votes and voted against
it. After cosponsoring it, they voted against it.
Thank goodness the ideas behind Simpson-Bowles are still alive and
continue to be alive. We have continued to meet. We have had Democratic
and Republican Senators meeting almost nonstop for a long time trying
to push forward this concept of reducing the deficit in a responsible
way while still growing our economy and creating jobs.
We are going to have our chance soon to put on the table whatever we
can come up with. Right after the election, on December 31, we face
what is known as the cliff. At that point, many important pieces of
legislation and laws will expire and automatic spending cuts will go
into place. It is a pretty serious outcome. This is our chance to come
up with a bipartisan answer to it. We cannot get to it until after the
election, which I think is understandable. It is such a highly charged
political atmosphere until November 6. But after the election, it is a
test--a test of the House and Senate as to whether the Democrats and
Republicans can put the campaign behind them and work together to solve
some of this Nation's problems.
The path that Simpson-Bowles laid out is a pretty direct one and a
pretty obvious one. We need to do two things to reduce our deficit. We
need more revenue and we need to reduce spending. Those are the two
things that reduce the deficit. I think we can do that. I think we can
achieve that in a fair way. I have tried to work and continue to work
toward that goal.
I would say despite the statement of the Republican leader just a few
minutes ago, I am more hopeful, even for the rest of this session. If
we can put
[[Page 14738]]
these filibusters behind us for a moment, if we can come to the floor
and work together, I think we can achieve something. We did with the
farm bill, we did with the Transportation bill, we did with the
Violence Against Women Act, and we did with postal reform--bipartisan
bills, important bills that passed the Senate and died in the House. I
hope if we show some leadership over here the House will follow in a
bipartisan fashion to deal with these same issues. We know we have
major problems facing us in this country, problems that will not be
resolved unless we work together.
Super PACs
Mr. President, I would like to make a statement about another issue,
which I think relates directly to the performance of Congress and what
is going on in American politics today.
Across the street, the U.S. Supreme Court reached a decision known as
Citizens United. It was a decision which has had a dramatic impact on
the way campaigns are waged in America. We have seen unprecedented--
unprecedented--influence buying by corporations and wealthy individuals
in a way we have never seen in the history of the United States.
There are about 16 or 17 multimillionaires who are investing millions
and millions of dollars--hundreds of millions of dollars--into our
election process. The same thing holds true for major corporations.
Let me tell you some of the numbers to compare.
In the 2006 congressional midterm elections, outside groups spent $70
million to influence the result, Mr. President. 2006, $70 million.
Four years later, in 2010, outside groups raised the $70 million
figure to $294 million--four times the amount they spent in 2006.
In the current Presidential election cycle outside special interest
groups and wealthy individuals have already broken the record of 2010.
These outside groups--and these are not the campaigns of any candidates
or even political parties--have already spent, with 7 weeks to go, $350
million, breaking all records for outside money.
How is this money being spent? Turn on your television in a
battleground State and try to get around the television ads. They have
spent $50 million more than they did in 2008--and we are just entering
the end of this campaign when the expenditures will skyrocket.
If there was ever any doubt that the Citizens United decision would
lead to a flood of campaign cash from wealthy individuals and
corporations, we have our answer.
At the end of 2010, there were 84 active super PACs. Two years later,
there are now 657 super PACs prepared to spend hundreds of millions of
dollars to persuade voters.
The only thing worse than this unprecedented amount of money from
special interest groups and wealthy individuals flooding our airwaves
is the fact that ordinary Americans often have no idea where this money
is coming from.
In 2006, only 1 percent of all outside spending came from secret
donors. In 2010, after Citizens United and the rise of super PACs,
secret donors rocketed to 46 percent of the outside spending in
campaigns, which means when we see the ads on television, we have no
idea, generally--in half the cases at least--who is paying for it.
As I have said before, these are not just super PACs, these are
outside groups pouring money into elections. They are super secret PACs
in many instances because the public has shockingly little information
about the sources of the money. These super secret PACs and the wealthy
individuals and corporations behind them are drowning out the voices of
average citizens, and many times the voices of the candidates
themselves.
Our representative democracy values transparency, participation, and
open debates. Unfortunately, nonpartisan reports indicate that as the
amount of money flooding into campaigns increases, core democratic
principles are diminished.
The little that we have been able to learn about the major donors to
these super PACs is very disturbing. Mr. President, 17 percent of all
funds raised by super PACs came from for-profit businesses. It is safe
to say that their primary goal is generally not advancing the public
interest but, rather, enhancing their corporate bottom line.
Mr. President, 80 percent of funds given to super PACs during this
Presidential election--80 percent of all the $350 million that I
mentioned--came from 196 people--196 people who want to control our
campaign process.
Moreover, there is an ultra-elite club of 22 millionaires and
billionaires who provided half of all super-PAC money being spent in
this Presidential election--22 Americans. I do not begrudge anyone
their success in life or in business. I applaud it. The voices of
business leaders, wealthy individuals, and special interests should be
heard as part of the public debate. They are an important part of our
country, and they need a seat at the policymaking table. Their voices,
however, are not the only voices and opinions that matter. They should
not occupy every seat at the policymaking table or buy control of what
is served on that table.
A Las Vegas casino magnate, Sheldon Adelson; billionaire oil tycoons,
two brothers, Charles and David Koch; and the multimillionaire head of
a retail empire, Art Pope, may have achieved laudable business success,
but their economic success does not entitle them to secretly use their
virtually unlimited resources and impose their political will and their
political agenda on America. Unfortunately, after the Citizens United
case, that is exactly what they are trying to do.
The Las Vegas casino magnate Sheldon Adelson is reportedly the most
generous super-PAC donor. He has contributed $36 million and threatens
to spend even more. His first spend was on a candidate named Newt
Gingrich. When he did not make it to the finish line, Mr. Adelson said
that he is now going to give it to the Republican nominee for
President. That is a lot of money and a lot of influence and probably
more, but for this particular super-PAC donor, that $36 million
contribution, when you look at his wealth, is equivalent to $168 from
the average American.
The terms of the political debate and, I fear, the outcome of many
elections are not being set by 314 million Americans whose lives, jobs,
safety, and health are impacted by the decisions of the people they
elect; instead, it is the 22, 22 wealthy individuals pouring money into
super PACs that have outsized influence on the terms of our political
debate and the outcome of our elections.
Our fellow Americans may not know the intricate details of campaign
finance laws, but they know their voices are being drowned out by these
corporations, special interests, and wealthy individuals. Many people
are losing confidence in this democracy as a result. According to a
recent survey, three out of four Americans believe corruption has
increased over the last 3 years. Well, in some part, we can thank the
Citizens United decision for that.
The time to fix our broken campaign finance system is now. I am a
realist. I understand that most Americans view this flood of spending
by special interest groups and wealthy individuals on political
campaigns the same way they view gangland slayings: Let them shoot one
another as much as they want. As long as the bullets do not hit us, as
long as we do not have to watch, let them have their fun.
But it is more serious than that. If our political process is stolen
away from the average American, even the average candidate, by these
special interest groups and wealthy individuals, it will diminish our
democracy, there is no question. So here is an idea, one I have been
pushing for a long time. I introduced the Fair Elections Now Act, which
would create a public financing system that would free candidates from
the dangerous reliance on super PACs once and for all. Under Fair
Elections, viable candidates who qualify for Fair Elections programs
would raise campaign funds in small amounts from individual donors--
small amounts. Once they have raised a certain threshold number of
small donations, they could receive matching funds and grants
sufficient to run a competitive campaign. Fair Elections would
fundamentally reform our broken system and put the
[[Page 14739]]
average citizens back in control of their elections and their country.
I wonder what the American people would think of shorter campaigns
directed to the issues, actual debates between the candidates? Would
they miss us if they did not see all of those ads on television? I do
not think they would miss us.
I also support the DISCLOSE Act. The Supreme Court got it wrong in
Citizens United, but this bill we have tried to pass would require
super PACs and other big spenders to disclose all donors who give
$10,000 or more to influence an election. What is wrong with
transparency and disclosure when it comes to our democratic political
process?
I chair the Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on the Constitution,
Civil Rights and Human Rights.
I will tell you that when it comes to constitutional amendments, I
have been pretty picky as a Member of the House and Senate. I think the
Constitution which I have sworn to uphold and defend as a Member of the
Senate and the House is an extraordinary document. I am not so bold or
bigheaded to think I have a great idea that ought to be parked right in
the middle of that fantastic and sacred document. I have been skeptical
of those who have offered amendments over the years. As I have said, I
do not believe we should take a roller brush to a Rembrandt. It is an
amazing work of political art, and we should take care not to amend it
except in the most extraordinary situations.
During the most recent hearing I chaired on the impact of Citizens
United, our subcommittee received 1,959,063 petition signatures from
Americans representing every State in the Union, almost 2 million
Americans. These Americans support the constitutional amendment that
would stop the pernicious influence of secret corporate and special
interest money.
I see on the floor Senator Udall of New Mexico, who has been a leader
on this issue on this constitutional amendment. As I have said, I am
very selective in the constitutional amendments to which I will add my
name. I have joined him because I think he is right.
Citizens United has corrupted this political process. The likelihood
that Congress can change it is a long shot. If it is going to be
changed, it needs to be changed in a meaningful way so that we can
reclaim our political process for the people of this country and take
it away from the 22 multimillionaires and billionaires who are trying
to take control of this political process.
I stand with these 2 million Americans, and I stand with Senator
Udall and so many others because the way we finance our campaigns in
this country is in urgent need of reform.
This will be the last day or two the Senate meets before the
elections. I wanted to come to the floor and speak to this issue before
the election, whatever the outcome may be. America is not a better and
stronger nation when we give up our political process to the wealthy
and politically articulate. The strength of America is when every
person has a voice and a vote and they are not going to be overshadowed
or outdistanced because of someone who happens to be very wealthy and
very successful and wants to buy their way into our political system.
I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from New Mexico.
Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. President, before my colleague, Senator
Durbin, leaves the floor, let me just say that this whole issue, as he
has pointed out, of campaign finance is a pressing issue. It is one
that is before us now. We are seeing it play out in the campaign. I am
sure that at the end of this campaign, citizens across this country are
going to demand reform, they are going to demand change. The Senator
has outlined several pieces of legislation that I believe really do
that. This constitutional amendment is one. The DISCLOSE Act, a piece
of legislation the Senator has offered and fought for, I think both in
the House and the Senate, really brings transparency to the process.
They bring disclosure to the process, and we need to do it. So I really
appreciate the Senator's leadership and look forward to working with
the Senator very closely on this issue as we get into the next
Congress.
Tribute to Russell Train
I rise today to pay tribute to a gentleman by the name of Russell
Train. On Monday of this week, our Nation lost a great friend of the
environment. I was saddened to learn of the passing of Russell Train.
Russ was a true pioneer in the history of environmental protection. He
was a part of that great generation of bipartisan leaders, that
remarkable group of men and women, Democrats and Republicans, who put
the environment center stage, who championed conservation. My father,
who knew and admired Russ, was also a part of that generation. They
leave very big shoes to fill. Their legacy is monumental.
Russ Train's life parallels so much of the history of the
environmental movement in this country because he was part of that
history because he did so much to make it happen. In 1965, when he was
45, Russ left his position as U.S. Tax Court judge. He decided to
devote himself full time to conservation and became president of the
Conservation Foundation. His midlife career change may have been a loss
for the Tax Court, but it was a huge gain for the environment.
Brilliant, tenacious, committed, he dedicated the rest of his life to
the environment. Along with Rachel Carson, the celebrated author of
``Silent Spring,'' Russ helped raise environmental issues to the
national level. He served as Under Secretary of Interior from in 1969
to 1970. He was the first Chairman of the White House Council on
Environmental Quality from 1970 to 1973. He was instrumental in the
creation of the Environmental Protection Agency and headed it from 1973
to 1977. During those years, he oversaw landmark legislation: the Clean
Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Toxic
Substance Control Act. All bore the imprint of Russell Train.
Perhaps his most lasting achievement was the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1970. He helped see that groundbreaking legislation
through the Nixon White House and through Congress. For over 40 years
now, NEPA has required Federal agencies to prepare environmental impact
statements for any major projects. NEPA is justly regarded as the
foundation for U.S. environmental protections.
But what began as a bipartisan triumph was later subject to partisan
divide. While in the House in 2005, I served as the ranking member of a
task force whose stated purpose was to review and improve NEPA. But
there were those who wanted to destroy it--with 1 swift blow or by
1,000 cuts but destroy it all the same. Many of us fought very hard not
to let that happen. As I said at that time, where critics of NEPA saw
only delay, we saw deliberation. Where they saw postponed profits, we
saw public input. NEPA was then and is now an antidote to the potential
arrogance of government power. It listens to the community, it
addresses opposition early on, and in the long run it minimizes
conflict and protects the environment. It trusts the American people to
take part in managing their public resources. And it remains one of
Russell Train's greatest legacies.
Russ himself stated it best at the 40th anniversary of NEPA. He said:
NEPA is America's most-imitated environmental legislation
around the globe. What we launched in 1970 has become a
contribution to the planet not less than to our citizenry . .
. NEPA's legacy is that what the people know has great value
to a government that seeks their knowledge and takes it
seriously.
After leaving the government, Russell led the U.S. branch of the
World Wildlife Fund for many years. He did so with his usual passion
and commitment, always engaged, always pragmatic and reasonable but
ever the visionary for a better world.
In 1991 President Bush awarded Russ the Presidential Medal of
Freedom.
Russell Train was a remarkable man. Jill and I have been honored to
call him and his wonderful wife Aileen our friends. We extend our
sincere condolences to Aileen and their children and
[[Page 14740]]
hope they will take comfort in knowing the world is a better place for
Russell's life and work.
New Mexico's Centennial
On January 16, 1912, President Taft signed the proclamation making
New Mexico the 47th State. So it is with great pride that I join
Senator Bingaman in submitting a resolution recognizing the centennial
anniversary of our State.
For those of us who are blessed to call New Mexico home, we are
imprinted by its remarkable history and its awesome beauty. We are part
of the rich diversity of its people.
One hundred years ago, the population of New Mexico was 327,000
people. Now it is over 2 million. But the mix of Native American,
Hispanic, and European tradition has long been a part of our State. New
Mexico is a land of deep roots. We are enriched by this mosaic of
culture. It has informed our history, our art, and our sense of who we
are as a people. Our State is rightly called the Land of Enchantment.
It is also a land of courage. From the Civil War to Teddy Roosevelt's
Rough Riders, from the Navajo Code Talkers to Bataan and Corregidor,
and from Korea and Vietnam to the brave men and women who have served
in Iraq and Afghanistan, when our Nation has called, New Mexico has
always stood ready to answer that call.
The story of New Mexico is a long and proud one. It goes back well
over 10,000 years to the Clovis people. It goes back to Santa Fe,
founded in 1610, the oldest capital city in the United States. In 1920,
Route 66 connected New Mexico to California and to the Midwest. This
and other interstate projects that followed brought jobs and more
people to our State, and today we need a new commitment to investing in
the infrastructure that is essential to renewed prosperity.
In the 1920s and 1930s, New Mexico was part of an oil boom that
fueled the rest of the Nation, and today we are on the cutting edge of
clean energy technology, helping to reduce our Nation's dependence on
foreign oil. In the 1940s and 1950s Sandia and Los Alamos National Labs
became legendary centers of scientific innovation and research. Today
they continue to play a vital role in our Nation's security. Our State
is also promoting STEM education--science, technology, engineering, and
math--so that our graduates can get good jobs, so they can compete in a
global economy.
How we address these issues will shape the next 100 years in our
State, but I am sure of one thing: We have a blend of cultures and
backgrounds like nowhere else. It has helped bring us where we are
today. It will help take us where we need to go tomorrow. The vitality
and creativity of our people is as strong as ever. Working together, we
will continue to meet the challenges of our State and our Nation. In
this year of our centennial, we look back to our unique history and we
look forward to a bright future.
I thank the Senator from Kentucky, Mr. Paul, for allowing me to
finish my statement. I appreciate very much his courtesy. With that, I
yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Kentucky.
Foreign Aid
Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, I am going to tell you the story today of a
love affair. It is a story that is a steamy one. It is a story of
illicit behavior, of treachery, and of gluttony. It is a story that
involves intrigue and deception. It is a story of unintended
consequences, and it is a story of anger and violence. It is the story
of American foreign aid.
Joseph Sambayi Mukendie never sleeps at home anymore. Mukendie's
sleep is interrupted by dreams. He feels unsafe even a continent away
from his attackers. Mukendie was arrested at home one night. He was
taken to an underground cell at Camp Kongolo--a military base in
Kinshasha, Zaire. The secret police of Mobutu stripped him naked,
stretched him out on the floor, and then he was beaten with a large
stick with nails protruding from the end.
Mobutu received billions of dollars in foreign aid from our country.
Over his 30-year bloody dictatorship, he received billions of our
taxpayer dollars. As his people starved, his wife went to Europe, spent
millions of dollars on spending sprees. Zaire has very little running
water and sporadic electricity. It rotted under Mobutu's rule, and yet
he received billions of American dollars. Mobutu stole the lion's share
of this. He became one of the richest men in the world. Enough was
stolen that his wealth was estimated to be in the billions. They called
his wife Gucci Mobutu. Her shoe collection rivaled Imelda Marcos'. She
was capable of spending $1 million in one day in Europe.
Jean Nguza Karl-i-Bond was an ally of Mobutu who fell out of his
favor. Mobutu accused him of trying to seduce the First Lady. Many
believed his only crime was that he was mentioned in the foreign press
as a possible successor to Mobutu. Nguza was subjected to physical and
electric torture to the genitals--too horrific to even repeat. The
administration of Jimmy Carter, who ostensibly were champions of human
rights, nevertheless continued the steady flow of foreign aid, for
foreign aid is a bipartisan project. There is a consensus in the United
States and in the Senate. We must send it no matter what the behavior
of the recipients.
Not only did our leaders turn a blind eye to Mobutu's graft and human
rights abuses, they bestowed upon him inexplicable and personal
friendship. Mobutu was known as a personal friend of the first
President Bush and vacationed at his personal residence. When Mobutu
traveled to Europe, he would stop by the Central Bank of Zaire. Early
in his reign, he would come by with a Louis Vuitton bag and would get
about $50,000 in cash. Toward the end of his career, he was getting
$500,000 in cash for these trips to Europe. One of his many foreign
residences was in Switzerland. He apparently had the time and money to
vacation there, and even had his own brandy being made at our
taxpayers' expense.
It is sad to contemplate what despots and dictators have done and are
doing to their people. It is sadder still to realize they are being
subsidized in this horrific behavior by taxpayer money. And it
continues. We are having a debate now over foreign aid because they
still want to send more. Many people think the answer is to send more;
maybe they will behave better if they get more of our money.
Apologists for foreign aid don't deny foreign aid has often been
stolen by corrupt leaders, and there is evidence the humanitarian
outcomes are scant and don't occur. Nevertheless, the advocates of
foreign aid justify the continuing aid with the argument we must often
choose the lesser of two evils. As many have pointed out, the lesser of
two evils is still evil.
Throughout the Cold War, the perceived threat of Soviet expansionism,
though, clouded the minds of many leaders. American leaders would pick
one dictator over another if he or she were a pro-American dictator. We
didn't care what they were doing to their people. We turned a blind
eye.
We gave money to dictators from Saddam Hussein, who was once our
ally, receiving billions of our tax dollars, to the mujahedin, who were
radical jihadists. But at the time, we didn't mind if they were a
radical jihadist if they were our radical jihadist because they were
opposing the Soviet Union. But the mujahedin actually, eventually,
became the Taliban, who are now our enemies. We despise jihad now, and
we fight against radical Islamic jihad. But at one time we subsidized
jihad. In fact, there were several weapons left over from the time
period when we were giving weapons to the mujahedin.
We subsidized Qadhafi before we fought Qadhafi. We gave Qadhafi
foreign aid. He was our friend. In the year preceding his overthrow,
there were Senators from this body speaking with Qadhafi's family about
sending more money to Qadhafi. Where does the insanity end?
U.S. foreign aid has continued to flow despite a long string of
abuses well-known to most of those who are dispensing the aid. They
simply turn a blind eye. Except for Libya, Egypt, and Tunisia, where
many are saying let's send the money to secularists; now there is a
question as to whether some
[[Page 14741]]
of that money may be going to radical Islamists.
With the end of the Cold War, some were finally cut off. Mobutu, whom
I mentioned, who committed these atrocious acts of torture, finally was
cut off, but only after 30 years of receiving our taxpayer money,
torturing his own people, and stealing everyone blind.
Foreign aid from developed countries in 2006 totaled $100 billion a
year. Over the past 50 years, we have given $2 trillion to developing
countries in foreign aid. Over the past 42 years, Easterly states that
although $568 billion has flowed into Africa, per-capita growth in
income in Africa has been flat. In fact, in some countries, such as
Zimbabwe, where Mugabe was in charge for several decades, the growth
rate has actually been negative.
So for those who say: I just simply want to help people; I want to
help poor people around the world by sending them money, it is stolen
by their leaders. It doesn't get to the poor people, and, besides, some
may have heard we are $1 trillion short in our budget. How can we send
more money overseas?
Some academics have argued that with the Arab spring, the emerging
democracies will require even more foreign aid. Hillary Clinton is on
Capitol Hill today asking for more money to go to Egypt. As they burn
our flag, as the hordes gather by the tens of thousands, she is asking
to send Egypt more money. There were no Egyptian policemen or soldiers
who showed up when our Ambassador was attacked, and Hillary Clinton is
asking for more money to go to Egypt.
According to Coyne and Ryan, the world's worst dictators have
received $105 billion under the guise of official developmental
assistance. Instead of helping the poor, the assistance is aiding the
ability of the dictators to remain in power. In fact, it keeps them in
power long enough that it inflames the populace so that we end up
having to go back in because of war because the populace is so inflamed
against the dictator that we have propped up against popular rule.
Some academics argue emerging democracies will require more aid.
Professors Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and Alastair Smith argue:
Democracy would make the price much higher. Democracy in
Egypt comes at a big price for U.S. voters. Good or bad--that
is up to the observer, but it will be costly, no doubt.
The professors' argument is that democracy is messy and costs more to
subsidize because the ballot box gives voice to the minorities that
dictators would not hear, that they would silence or imprison.
I think the real question and the image we have to have in our mind
is when we see 10,000 people outside the Embassy in Pakistan burning
the U.S. flag, imagine that we would send them more money. Imagine we
would not ask for restrictions on this money. I have been asking for 6
weeks to place restrictions on foreign aid. I am not even asking that
it end, although I would, but I am asking to simply place restrictions
on it. Everyone should watch this vote. If I get this vote, just watch.
The vast majority of the Senate is going to vote for unlimited,
unrestricted foreign aid. I will probably lose this vote, but when we
ask our friends, when we go home and ask our friends: Should we be
sending money to countries that disrespect us, to countries that burn
our flag, I think most will find that 80 to 90 percent of the American
people wouldn't send another penny. That may be why Congress has about
a 10-percent approval rating. They don't get it. Ninety percent of the
folks up here are going to vote to continue sending taxpayer money with
no restrictions to countries that burn our flag and disrespect us. Is
it any wonder that only 10 percent of America approves of Congress?
In fact, many people who claim to be conservatives are for foreign
aid. Big government conservative advocates, such as John Guardiano, try
to couch their support in feigned opposition. He says:
Now, I don't like foreign aid any more than the next
conservative. Most foreign aid is probably economically
wasteful and counterproductive. But the point of foreign aid
is not economics. It is geopolitics.
That is what most of them will admit around here. Continuing his
quote:
It is intended to shape a recipient country's behavior and,
quite literally, buy American influence.
To his mind he says it does that. But if foreign aid is meant to
shape a country's behavior, advocates have a lot of explaining to do.
From Mobutu to Mugabe, from Mubarak to Hussein to Qadhafi, from the
current Egypt to the current Pakistan that is holding a gentleman who
helped us get bin Laden, to the current Pakistan that seemed somehow to
let bin Laden live for 7 years in their midst with no knowledge he was
there--they have some explaining to do. For those who advocate foreign
aid, saying it is shaping the behavior of these countries, they have
some explaining to do because it doesn't appear as if these countries
respect America. It doesn't appear as if they even like us. And it also
doesn't appear that if they want to be our ally they are acting like
it.
That is all I am asking. If a country wants to be an ally of our
country, they should act like it. If they want to receive and cash an
American check, they need to act like our ally at the very least.
There is some question about whether the aid works when it is sent
for poverty or humanitarian purposes.
Doug Bandow asked this question and argues that foreign aid actually
encourages poverty and starvation because African nations use displays
of poverty and starvation to seek more aid. Why get rid of your
problem? Why cure your problem if that is what you are showing the
world you have so you can get more aid? We don't seem to care about
results because we continue to give it to some of these dictators for
decades, who produce no results and we know are stealing the money.
Brautigram and Knack illustrate the existence of a moral hazard
problem surrounding foreign aid. They contend that aid allocation may
actually encourage impoverishing policy because as the damaging
policies create misery, the more likely the donors are to grant more
aid.
Herb Werlin maintains that American foreign aid is undermined by
tariffs and subsidies, including a $3 billion-a-year subsidy lavished
on 25,000 cotton farmers. Because of high subsidies, America is able to
export corn at two-thirds the cost of production, making it impossible
for African farmers to compete. So our trade policy makes it harder for
African countries to become self-sufficient. Peanuts are protected by a
tariff up to 164 percent, thereby making Africa's peanut-producing
nations, such as Uganda, even more dependent on aid.
But it is not just rich people in poor countries getting foreign aid;
we also continue to shift our dollars to rich countries.
Michael Tennant reports:
According to a report from the Congressional Research
Service, in fiscal year 2010 the United States' top creditor
nations received millions of dollars in aid.
So the countries we are borrowing money from, we are sending them
foreign aid. China, to whom we owe over $1 trillion, still gets $27
million in aid. Russia, to whom we owe $127 billion, still gets $71
million in aid. To add insult to injury, China gets economic
development assistance from the U.S. taxpayer.
It just amazes me. But you mark my words, you listen to the debate,
and you watch the vote today--the vast majority does not want any
change to foreign aid other than that they would increase it. If we are
not getting the behavior we want, they would increase it.
Hillary Clinton is on Capitol Hill today asking to increase aid to
Egypt--not to put restrictions on the aid, to increase it. We currently
do have some restrictions on aid to Egypt. Hillary Clinton has waived
those and said they are doing fine.
When the marauders, when the horde came to the Embassy in Egypt last
week, there was a phone call made to our Embassy saying: The mob is
coming. But no soldiers came. No one came to protect our Embassy. In
the civilized world, the host nation protecting the guest nation's
Embassy is of primary concern. It is something every
[[Page 14742]]
civilized nation is expected to do. In the case of Egypt, no one came.
We were lucky that we escaped death in Egypt. We weren't so lucky in
Libya.
The report on China that found out we were borrowing money and then
giving foreign aid to countries we borrow from was commissioned by
Senator Tom Coburn, who has been watching out for your money. He
demanded this report, and he said:
Borrowing money from countries who receive our aid is
dangerous for both the donor and the recipient. If countries
can afford to buy our debt, perhaps they can afford to fund
their own assistance programs without relying on the American
taxpayer.
Michael Tennant goes on to say this:
We give China 3.9 million to enforce the rule of law and
human rights, neither of which are thought to be China's
selling points.
The one that really burns, though, is that $700,000 in economic
development assistance. It just boggles the mind that the U.S. taxpayer
is asked to send money to China--which is outcompeting us in virtually
every sector--to send money to subsidize their economic development
assistance.
One would think that with all this evidence that foreign aid doesn't
reach the intended beneficiaries and often winds up in the hands of
dictators, this information would make it easy to defeat foreign aid.
When you look at the polls of the American people, you find that
nearly 80 percent of the American people think foreign aid in general
is a bad idea. We have roads in our country that are crumbling and need
repair. We have bridges that are crumbling. In my State alone, we had a
bridge out 6 months last year. We have two bridges in Kentucky that are
older than I am and need to be replaced. We don't have the money, but
we somehow have billions of dollars to send to people who disrespect us
and burn our flag. I don't understand how we can send our money to
these countries that disdain us, disrespect us.
In Pakistan, they hold the doctor who helped us get bin Laden. We
fought a 10-year war in Afghanistan to get bin Laden and his followers.
We finally got him--no help from Pakistan. He lived in Pakistan for
many years. Pakistan is now mad that we got him. In fact, they riot
over there and burn the American flag because we killed bin Laden. What
do we do? Here is some more money. If we give you some more money, will
you behave. If we give you more money, will you let our supplies go
across your northern frontier.
But we don't ask them the real question: Are you our friend? If you
are our friend, act like it. If you are our ally, act like it.
Anytime this question is broached over foreign aid, the vast majority
of career politicians complain bitterly and quash any debate. I have
been trying to have this vote for 6 weeks. I am still hopeful we will
get it, but they don't want to vote on this because they know they are
voting against the popular will, they are voting against the wishes of
their constituents.
There is not one Senator from any one of the 50 States up here who,
when they vote against these limitations on foreign aid, won't be
voting against the will of their State--they won't be voting against
the will of their people. You can go to Massachusetts or Maine or to
conservative Texas and ask the taxpayers, ask the voters: Are you in
favor of sending money to these countries where tens of thousands of
people are gathering and burning our flag? Are you in favor of sending
hard-earned taxpayer money to countries that disrespect us? Are you in
favor of sending money to these countries when we have so many problems
at home that we can't handle? And in every State in the Union, you will
find that a majority of voters--sometimes a vast majority of the
voters--think it is a mistake. So what is happening here is that the
will of the people is not being transmitted by this body because this
body, when it votes on this issue, will vote in direct defiance of the
will of the people.
It is often said that it is difficult to determine whether a
recipient is a friend or a foe. Libya is an example. One day Libya came
in from the cold. A longtime pariah among nations, rivaling Iran as a
model for extreme thuggishness, Libya came in from the cold. Libya and
her Colonel Qadhafi phoned the West and said they would change their
ways, they would stop developing weapons of mass destruction and become
good neighbors to all. This is before the recent Libyan revolution.
This is the Qadhafi, whom we helped to overturn, who was by all
accounts a horrible dictator, but about 2 or 3 years ago he came in
from the cold and wanted to be a friend to America because he wanted
our assistance.
With an alacrity sped by naivete, the West welcomed Qadhafi back into
the bosom of respected nations. Delegations of U.S. Senators--ones who
are still in this body--went to meet with Qadhafi, to meet with
Qadhafi's family, to offer Qadhafi money. Prime Minister Tony Blair
gushed with praise for his new friend Colonel Qadhafi. President Bush
concluded that Libya was no longer a sponsor of terror. Three Senators
met with Qadhafi's son and, according to leaked cables, offered him
aid. Fast-forward barely a year later into the Arab spring, and these
same Senators who were offering Qadhafi aid were back in Libya offering
the rebels aid.
We should scratch our heads and say: My goodness. Maybe we should
question the judgment of these people who tell you foreign aid should
be given to everyone all the time, and if they misbehave, give them
more, because you have Senators from this body going and offering aid
to Qadhafi and a year later offering it to the rebels to overthrow
Qadhafi and saying Qadhafi is a terrible dictator. He was. He always
was. But he played a game, and we accepted the game because we are
always willing to play the game with your money.
Egypt. Egypt is a pile of contradictions. In the words of former CIA
Agent Robert Baer, ``If you want a serious interrogation, you send a
prisoner to Jordan. If you want them tortured, you send them to Syria.
But if you want them to disappear--never to see them again--you send
them to Egypt.''
This was the Egypt under Mubarak, who--when we felt someone needed to
be tortured or disappeared and we didn't want there to be any
repercussions coming back on us, that is where they sent them--to
Egypt.
Over the past 30 years, we bought this sort of regime there to do our
bidding when we wished. It became very unpopular with the people. So
you wonder about the Arab spring and you wonder, why are these people
so unhappy? Well, they hated Mubarak because he was a dictator, he was
an autocrat, and they didn't have freedom of speech, they didn't have
freedom of association, and they were beaten with billy clubs if they
tried to gather. Their political parties were outlawed. They hated
Mubarak because he was antidemocrat. He didn't allow voting. But he was
our guy. We paid for him.
So you have to think this through. Why is there such widespread anti-
Americanism? Because we have propped up and given money to so many
despots, to so many dictators. Over the past 30 years, the United
States sent over $30 billion to Egypt to help finance a police state
ruled by an emergency decree that lasted several decades.
Khaled Said became the face of that foreign aid, as pictures of his
bloody beating at the hands of the Egyptian police spurred the youth of
Egypt to take to the streets in the Arab spring of 2011.
On June 6, 2010, Said had been sitting on the second floor of a cyber
cafe. Two detectives from the Sidi Gaber police station entered the
premises and arrested him. Multiple witnesses testified that Said was
beaten to death by the police, who reportedly hit him and smashed him
against objects as he was led outside to their police car.
The owner of the Internet cafe in which Said was arrested stated that
he witnessed Said being beaten to death in the doorway of the building
across the street after the detectives took him out of the cafe at the
owner's request.
Another young man, Wael Ghonim, a young Egyptian living in Dubai,
found the photos of Said after he was beaten to death by police, and he
started a Facebook page. It is called ``We are all
[[Page 14743]]
Khaled Said.'' It was moderated by Wael Ghonim. It brought attention to
his death, and it became a phenomenon and spread across the Middle East
as people saw the death of this man, beaten to death by the police.
So we have to think, why are we seeing people burning the American
flag? Why are we seeing such great unrest in 30 different countries?
Because our foreign aid and our military aid have propped up dictators
who become, over decades, despotic, autocratic, who torture their
people and prevent freedom from occurring, and then there is a
backlash. What we are seeing is the backlash of 30 years of foreign aid
and propping up military dictatorships simply because they were
predisposed to like us as opposed to someone else.
``We are all Khaled Said'' was the rallying cry that brought hundreds
of thousands of people to the streets in Egypt. Ghonim's Facebook,
where he posted ``We are all Khaled Said,'' spawned a revolution.
As hundreds of thousands of protesters filled Tahrir Square, the
police beat them back.
David Rieff of the New Republic reports:
U.S. military aid to Egypt, which averages $1.3 billion
annually, allowed the Egyptian police and paramilitaries to
bombard protestors with volley after volley of tear gas made
by a company in Pennsylvania.
Why are they angry? They know this. They know their protests are
beaten down by autocrats supported by the United States who are
spraying tear gas on them that is made in the United States. We have to
understand the dynamic if we are ever to try to improve the situation.
The protest in Egypt escalated day after day. An unemployed man by
the name of Salah Mahmoud, who had moved to Cairo in search of work to
save enough money to own a home and marry but instead had been living
on small day's wages, set himself on fire in the middle of the street
before being put out by bystanders.
The U.S. military aid and tactical training given to Libya, Egypt,
and Tunisia to fight terrorism was used to fight against free
association and freedom of speech of their people.
When we hear about the Arab spring, we need to understand where the
Arab spring comes from. The Arab spring was a rising up for democracy.
There is nothing wrong with that. But why would a rising up for
democracy take on anti-American tones? I am as offended as anybody else
by people burning our flag. But we have to understand why did the Arab
spring that seemed to be a search for freedom and democracy--why did it
get transformed into an Arab winter? Why did it get transformed into an
anti-American protest? Because the tear gas that rained down on them
for decades was made here, because the police batons were paid for with
our money, because Mubarak, who stole millions of dollars and whose
family lived with such wealth and abundance, with homes in London and
Paris and secret Swiss accounts, got that at our expense. So when they
hated Mubarak, they hated us also. They hated us because we were
Mubarak. They hated us because we were Ben Ali in Tunisia. They hated
us because we were at one time Saddam Hussein's friend.
If we do not understand this, we are never going to figure out a way
to make things better. There are many and ample fiscal reasons to
oppose foreign aid, but Thomas Eddlem puts it succinctly when he
writes: ``Foreign aid has historically been used to suppress freedom
and has reduced the moral influence of the example of the U.S.
Constitution.''
It is hard for us to imagine, because we have such a great
Constitution and such great freedom here, why they don't appreciate
that. Why don't they appreciate and look to the shining example we set?
We do set a great example in our country for freedom and tolerance and
association. Why can't the folks in the Middle East see that? Because
they see the truncheon, they see the police baton, they see the jail
cells, they see trial without jury from the autocrats we have
supported. We have to understand why this anti-Americanism comes. It
has come because, largely, our foreign aid for decade upon decade has
been given to despots throughout the Middle East. Those despots have
run roughshod on their people and their people are unhappy.
It is not that they despise our Constitution. I think many of them
would like to have the freedoms enshrined in our Constitution, but it
is confusing to us because we think: Oh, they hate what America is all
about. They hate America for our wealth and freedom. They don't hate
wealth and freedom. They probably don't hate us in the abstract, but
they hate us because when they see Mubarak, when they see the other end
of a truncheon coming from the police of Mubarak or the police of
Saddam Hussein or the chemical weaponry and the chemical gas Hussein
sprayed on his people, they see where it came from and they see the
money that came in to prop up these dictators.
From 1980 to 1988, there was a war. We have largely forgotten about
it. It was between Iran and Iraq. In that war there were planes on both
sides, American planes, because we had sold planes to both sides. At
the time, Iran was still flying many F-4s, a couple hundred F-4
Phantoms, and on the other side we had advisers on the ground advising
Hussein.
Hussein was our ally. We sent money to Hussein on a routine basis.
There are some reports that said Hussein directly got money from our
CIA. So we can understand the confusion over there and we can
understand that even though Iraq was been liberated and there is a
democracy there, that some of them still seem to hate us for some
reason. We wonder why they would hate us if we freed them. Because some
still remember Hussein and they fear there will be another Hussein.
One of the saddest stories that came up in the last week was a young
soldier who was killed in Afghanistan. He was killed by the policeman,
the Afghan policeman he was training. We have had over 50 deaths in
Afghanistan this year from friendly fire, from our supposed allies.
This one was particularly sad. This boy was to come home within a week
or two. His brother was having a football game. He was supposed to make
his brother's football game. This is a patriotic family, a military
family. This boy proudly served, and he deserves nothing but our
admiration. But he called his dad a week before and he said to his dad:
I think the guy I am training is going to kill me. The Afghan policeman
had been coming up to him for weeks saying, ``We don't want you here.''
These are the people we are sending our money to. We are sending our
young men and women to die over there, but we are supporting people who
it is not clear want to be our friends or want to be our allies. It is
not clear we can win their friendship. The President of Afghanistan,
Karzai, we basically helped get in power. He stays in power probably
because of our presence there. Yet he is disdainful of us. They have
said if there is a war with Pakistan--Karzai said he would side with
Pakistan.
When there was a shooting recently where an Afghan policeman shot
several of our officers in a government building where they should not
have been armed--or were not armed--Karzai's response was to talk about
the burning of the Koran, as if there was justification for these
deaths.
When the riots erupted in Egypt recently, what were the first words
out of President Mursi's mouth, from Egypt? The first words out of his
mouth were: How dare America produce this film?
America didn't produce the film, but those were the first words out
of his mouth, not that ``we should protect the Embassy'' and that
``there is no justification for attacking an embassy'' regardless of
any kind of discussion over this movie.
We have to figure out how do we get and retain valid allies? We do
have allies around the world we do not give any money to. But too often
through the years we have decided to choose one dictator over another,
to choose the lesser of two evils. Ultimately, often we have had to go
back in to fight against our own weapons. Hussein was our ally. We
ended up going back to fight against him. The mujahedin,
[[Page 14744]]
who became the Taliban, they were our ally, too, against Russia. We
were, in fact, in favor of radical jihad when it was directed against
the Soviet Union. Some of the weapons are left over. In fact, when we
look at Taliban weapons captured now, many of them are American weapons
because it is unclear whether we have a good handle on what we give to
the Afghan police. We are not positive they don't wind up in the hands
of the Taliban.
It is a murky situation, but I don't think it is a situation that
should continue. I think it is time to come home from Afghanistan.
People on the other side say: You want to disengage. No; I want to
have relationships with countries around the world. I want to have
diplomatic relationships. I want to have trade. But I don't think
having diplomatic relationships or engaging with other countries means
we have to bribe them. There are some people who hate us enough that
bribing them will not work and often is counterproductive.
Thomas Eddlem reports that even:
Rieff--[from the New Republic, who is] no opponent of
foreign aid in theory--concluded of [foreign] aid to Egypt
[that] ``this is not only a moral scandal, it is a
geo[political] strategic blunder of huge portions.''
Like so many authoritarian regimes, the prime beneficiary of the U.S.
foreign aid of Egypt was the leader for life, Mubarak, and the end
result of 30 years of supporting an unpopular dictator is we are now
seeing uprising in the streets. Why are they anti-American? Because
they see us as friends of Mubarak. Mubarak was not a friend of freedom.
Aladdin Elaasar, author of ``The Last Pharaoh: Mubarak and the
Uncertain Future of Egypt in the Obama Age,'' said the Mubaraks owned
several residences in Egypt, some inherited from previous Presidents
and the monarchy and others he has built. ``He had a very lavish
lifestyle with many homes around the country.''
He estimates the family's wealth between $50 billion and $70 billion.
The gross national income is $2,000 per family in Egypt. Do you think
that might make people a little bit mad? The guy is worth $50 billion
to $70 billion and the average income is $2,000. The average income in
Africa has not improved in decades and they have dictators worth
billions of dollars. Do you think that makes those people harbor anti-
American sentiments because the leaders, these dictators, have gotten
American money? About 20 percent of the population in Egypt lives below
the poverty line, according to a 2010 report.
It is not just Hosni Mubarak himself, it is his whole family who has
been enriched. In 2001, they estimated his wealth at $10 billion just
in American banks, Swiss, British banks, Bank of Scotland, England,
Credit Suisse of Switzerland. You wonder what it is worth today or if
we found it all. You also wonder how much of that money in those secret
bank accounts is actually just your money.
Egypt's First Lady Suzanne Mubarak's wealth just by herself is
estimated at $5 billion. How much of that is your money?
When we hear these numbers of billions of dollars the dictators have
secreted away in Swiss bank accounts, listen to that and remember when
we hear the plethora of Senators who will come to the floor and say
that not one penny of foreign aid should ever be cut--ever. Not one
penny of aid, they argue, should have conditions placed on it.
The amendment I will offer today places conditions on foreign aid,
but it places conditions that have to pass the Senate, not that can be
rubberstamped by Hillary Clinton. Hillary thinks human rights are going
fine in Egypt. She rubberstamped and said: Give them 1 billion a couple
months ago, no human rights abuses in Egypt.
She also approved an extra billion for Pakistan 1 month ago. We
cannot rely on the purse strings to be transferred--particularly to
this administration but even any administration, Republican or
Democratic. The purse strings are to remain--were intended to remain
and the Constitution says are to remain--in the legislature.
This is a real problem. My legislation makes it come back, and we
have to vote on it here, that they are in compliance, that there are no
human rights violations, that Egypt is not stealing the money and that
they are willing and able--that they can and will protect our Embassy.
I think, at a very minimum, if they are going to cash our check, if
they are going to have our foreign aid--which I am not a big fan of--
but if they are going to get it, at the very least it should have
strings attached to say: You have to protect the American Embassy.
One of Mubarak's friends was Gamal Mubarak. He is the Assistant
Secretary General of the ruling Democratic National Party in Egypt. His
own wealth is estimated at $17 billion, supposedly spread through
several banking institutions in Switzerland, Germany, the United
States, and Britain. You wonder how much of the $17 billion is actually
your money.
Alaa Mubarak, the daughter, her property has reached into nearly $8
billion. She has properties on Rodeo Drive in Los Angeles, real estate
in Washington State, New York, owns two royal yachts with a value of 1
million pounds. These are the yachts one can land a helicopter on.
These are the yachts that have a swimming pool on them. How much of
that $8 billion, how much of the money that went to pay for these
yachts for the Mubarak family is yours?
The thing is, you should be mad. I think Americans are mad. But it is
this confusing situation. We should be mad about the foreign aid and so
are the populations who are burning the American flag, they are mad--
because they did not receive the foreign aid. The foreign aid went to
Mubarak. So you should be mad that your Senators send this money to
dictators and that the dictators live these lavish lifestyles in
mansions throughout the world, throughout Switzerland, London, Paris.
Some of the largest private homes in the world are owned by dictators,
paid for with your money.
You should be angry. You should be frothing. You should be upset. You
should tell your Senators, you should tell your Congressman: No more
money to these dictators.
But at the same time you become angry, think it through and
understand why the Arab world is angry. They don't hate our freedom.
They don't hate our Constitution. They are angry at their own
dictators, but they are angry we propped up their dictators for decade
after decade. But it all has to do with foreign aid.
I have been arguing primarily about Pakistan, but the thing is, this
is bigger than Pakistan. Pakistan is just the most egregious and one of
the larger recipients of our aid--$3 billion worth a year, maybe more.
Right now they are holding Dr. Shakid Afridi, who is the doctor who
helped us get bin Laden. They tortured him for a year, and he will be
in prison for the rest of his life. That is not the way an ally acts.
I say no more money to Pakistan until they release this doctor. I
don't think that is too much to ask. We would find very few in this
body who agree. Ask the American people and 80 to 90 percent agree no
more money to Pakistan until the doctor is free. I will be lucky to get
20 percent of them to agree to not just cut off aid, but have
restrictions on aid. That is how bad it is.
The Arab spring brought corruption and theft of U.S. aid to Libya and
Egypt, but Africa is rife with stories of theft and dictator spoils.
Teodrin Obiang Nguema is the son of Equatorial Guinea's dictator. He
recently ran afoul of French customs who discovered that his chartered
jet had 26 supercars on it, including seven Ferraris, five Bentleys,
four Rolls Royces, and two Buggatis. Is anybody besides me mad that we
are sending foreign aid to African dictators whose sons are importing
Rolls Royces, Bentleys, Ferraris, and Buggatis to Africa, countries
that have no electricity?
I don't care if you are the biggest humanitarian in the world and you
want to help people, it is not going to the people. The foreign aid is
stolen by the leadership of these countries. This is not one example;
this is example after example, decade after decade.
[[Page 14745]]
The learning curve around here is so slow we will get 10, maybe 20
Senators to place any restrictions on foreign aid. Seventy percent of
the people living in Africa live under the poverty threshold of $2 a
day, and the son of a leader is importing Buggatis, Bentleys, Rolls
Royces, and Ferraris on his own private charter jet. It has to be a
pretty big jet to have 26 supercars on it. The rest of Africa lives on
$2 a day. It is our money given by our government to dictators in
Africa. We have to get the connection. We need to be mad. There needs
to be an ``American spring'' where we tell our leaders we are sick and
tired of our money going to fund dictators--an American spring where we
understand what happened in the Arab spring.
The Arab spring is a direct consequence of us sending foreign aid and
lavishing it on people who don't respect the freedom of their
constituents and don't allow constitutional freedoms. The Arab spring's
anger, as much as it is directed against America, is not against our
Constitution. It is not because they don't believe in freedom. It is
because they are upset that we have been funding and subsidizing their
dictators. The United States has given Guinea almost $300 million over
the past 10 years despite Guinea having one of the worst human rights
records on the planet. Torture is said to be commonplace.
The New York Times reported last spring: ``Any policeman can arrest
any citizen at any time.''
Torture is a ``current thing,'' ``current,'' said Mr. Mico, a lawyer
who is with an opposition party. He was recalling his own beating in
the presence of high officials.
Gonzalo Ndong Sima, a pharmacist in the center of town, recounted his
recent encounter with the police over a simple traffic mishap saying,
``They beat me like an animal.''
So what do we do? We give Guinea our money and people are beaten with
police truncheons at traffic accidents. Who are they mad at? We need to
begin to understand where the anger is coming from. When we prop up
dictators in third-world countries who beat their subjects into
submission, that is why they are angry. They don't care that we are
wealthy or free. They are angry because we prop up dictators who beat
them with truncheons.
Despite widespread reports of abuse, corruption, and ineffectiveness,
foreign aid continues unabated. Despite polls that show over 70 percent
of the American voters are opposed to foreign aid, it continues
unabated.
Even when advocates of foreign aid are beaten down with stories such
as I have been telling today of human rights abuses, starvation, and
death threats, hangings, shootings, executions, these advocates trot
forward their last defense: ``Foreign aid is less than 1 percent of the
whole budget.'' It is only $30 billion.
Do you know how many times they use that argument? Every time I want
to cut $30 billion, it is only $30 billion. They use it for $300
million too. It is only $300 million. If we don't get started
somewhere, how are we ever going to balance our budget? We can't live
on the $1 trillion deficits.
They argue eliminating foreign aid would not balance the budget. No,
it won't, but it is a start. We have to start somewhere, and why not
start with something that is counterproductive? Why not start with
eliminating something from the budget that is counterproductive and
seems to create some of the anger--at least it is some explanation for
the anger in the Arab world.
The final arguments for foreign aid are so flimsy one would not think
they would be worth much to even try to refute. Proponents of the
status quo use this argument over and over for any budgetary item. If
we can't cut millions now or even billions, how will we ever get to
trillions?
When conservatives argued for cutting small subsidies to little
airports that sometimes subsidize one airline ticket for $3,000, they
argue it will only save $300 million. It is not a valid argument, it is
a weak argument, and we should not accept it.
Cutting $30 billion worth of foreign aid would not balance the
budget, but I am not even asking to cut the foreign aid. What I am
asking for is that we place contingencies on it, rules of behavior. If
they want to be our ally, act like it. If they want to be America's
ally, act like it. If they want to cash our check, act like an ally and
behave. At the very least shouldn't there be rules and restrictions on
who gets it?
While there are reasons they are burning the American flag, I am an
American and it upsets me. I am bothered by the fact that the American
flag is being burned, but I am also bothered by the fact that we are
sending money to countries where this is occurring. We are faced daily
with tens of thousands of protesters in these Middle Eastern countries.
We are faced with the tragic assassination of Ambassador Stevens.
With all the aid and all the evidence that foreign aid is not
working, that it enables dictators and rarely buys the behavior we
want, Republicans and Democrats still clamor for more. They will fight
tooth and nail against any restrictions on the aid.
So one wonders, where are we going? In fact, we will find in this
argument--and if we will read the paper, we will find that Secretary of
State Clinton is arguing for more aid to Egypt. Their argument is if a
country doesn't like us, if they behave illy toward America, if we give
them more money, maybe they will act better.
I think the opposite. One, we are out of money. We are $1 trillion
short. I think if we give them less money, they would think more about
their behavior. Perhaps if we gave less money or, in my mind, no money
to Pakistan until Dr. Afridi is released, maybe he would be released.
It boggles the mind to think these Senators are in favor of no
restrictions and increasing aid despite decades of evidence that aid is
not working. Proponents of this aid continue to argue that these mobs
will be more inflamed if we don't give them money. I think it is quite
the opposite.
I think the other thing about it they don't quite get is that I don't
think the people writing are writing and saying give us more aid. What
they are writing for is they don't like what our aid did in the first
place. They are writing against autocratic authoritarian governments
that were propped up by our aid.
People arguing that taking away the aid will inflame the Arab world,
turn on the television set. They are plenty inflamed. Taking it away
doesn't make it better, but at least we have some consultation that we
are trying to do something about the deficit and maybe we have problems
at home that are more pressing than this and maybe we won't reward bad
behavior.
To say that taking away the aid may inflame the Arab world, just turn
on the television set because they are plenty inflamed already. If we
don't understand why they are inflamed, if we don't understand the Arab
spring, if we don't understand why they are mad, that they are mad that
we propped up dictators who kept them down and kept them from freedom,
we will never understand or come to a resolution to make things better.
I, for one, will not vote for one more penny of foreign aid to anyone
unless it has restrictions on it. I will only vote for it if the
restrictions say they have to behave and it has to be approved by the
Senate. We have tried it before. The other side may come to the floor
and say foreign aid already has restrictions. Well, yes, they are not
working because we gave them to the executive branch. Like so much in
this body, we have been giving up power to the Presidency for 100
years. This is not a Republican-Democrat thing. This is just a
legislative abdication of power, and we let the President do whatever
he wants.
I am not arguing Republican or Democrat. I am arguing any President.
The power should remain here with the purse strings. We should control
them tightly, and we should say foreign aid only goes out under strict
conditions. We should not let the final decision be made by an
administration that doesn't seem to have the fortitude to make these
tough decisions.
Enough is enough. We are running trillion-dollar deficits, and it is
time to
[[Page 14746]]
make a stand. I have been making a stand for the last week by
filibustering this bill. It doesn't make me the most popular person
here in Washington. People's travel schedules have been disrupted
because of my filibuster. People's campaigning has been disrupted
because of my filibuster. But this is not a new problem, and it is not
a small problem.
We are talking about an aid program that has gone on decade after
decade. We are talking about an enormous uprising in 30 countries, the
Arab spring, and now maybe the Arab winter. We are talking about how we
make things better. Until we fully understand what the Arab spring is
about and also why the huge amount of anti-Americanism is running
throughout the Middle East, we can't make it better.
I say throwing good money after bad is not the answer. This evening I
think we will get to vote on my amendment. My amendment is to simply
say to Libya, Egypt, and Pakistan that there are restrictions. All
three will have to say that they will protect our embassy. There is a
question of whether Egypt was forthcoming in protecting our embassy,
and there is no question Libya was not.
In the case of Libya, I think there are elements there that like
America, and there are also still elements that don't like America, but
there is not really a government. I wonder if an embassy should be
reopened in Libya. If we reopen the embassy in Libya and we put 50
marines in there, we may have a catastrophe like we had in Lebanon when
200 marines were killed in the early 1980s. Without thousands of
marines, I don't think we can protect an embassy in a large city in
Libya.
It doesn't mean we don't have relations. When I argue for not putting
the embassy back in, it is because I think long and hard about the
danger to another ambassador and what their family will have to suffer
if another ambassador is killed. I also think we can have probably an
embassy in a neighboring country, and that is what I will recommend
until things stabilize.
If Libya wants to have aid, they should keep cooperating with us with
regard to finding the assassins. They should try to work where they can
become stable enough to have an embassy. The bottom line with Libya
that a lot of people forget--as I talk about foreign aid, so many
people say we can't cut off aid to Libya; they want to be pro-American.
They have oil.
When President Obama was bombing Libya, he kept saying: It will all
be free. They will pay us for it later. It will be a free war. We heard
that one before. Iraq was going to be a free war also. Iraqi oil was
going to pay for it. It never ends up happening. That is what they told
us about Libya.
With regard to Pakistan, I have one additional requirement. They have
to prove to us they will protect our embassy, and they have to release
Dr. Afridi. I think this is very little to ask. He is under death
threats in prison. His family is under death threats in the
countryside. They are hiding and living in fear because they helped us.
The other reason why this administration should take it personally is
somebody leaked Dr. Afridi's name. His name should have never been
known. I doubt it was someone with the CIA, but somebody who knew his
name leaked this story. There were some stories about a month or two
ago about how the President was doing a great job with terrorism. In
those stories they talked about a doctor with a vaccine program and his
name was found out. Somebody leaked it. Somebody very close to the
President leaked it. I think that needs to be investigated. It is a
crime and it should be punished. Not only is it a crime, but whomever
in the administration leaked that information about Dr. Afridi, I hope
they lie awake at night and worry about their soul in the sense that
this man may well die. He is going to be in prison for the rest of his
life because his name was leaked. That kind of behavior from high-
ranking government officials is inexcusable.
This evening we will have this vote. I will encourage Senators to
vote for this resolution. It doesn't end aid. I would prefer we end it.
This is a moderate step in the sense that it attaches conditions to it.
I think the American people expect that of us, at the very least, and I
encourage my fellow Senators to vote for my resolution.
I thank the Chair.
Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of my time, and I suggest
the absence of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed
to address the Senate as in morning business, with a colloquy with the
Senator from South Carolina, and perhaps other Senators who may wish to
speak.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Immigration
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, before I get into the issue concerning the
amendment of the Senator from Kentucky, I was just informed that the
President of the United States, while speaking to Hispanic television,
alleged that the reason why immigration reform was not enacted in the
last 4 years of his Presidency is because the Senator from Arizona
walked away. Incredible. An incredible statement. I am not often in the
business of accusing Presidents of the United States of not telling the
truth. But facts are stubborn things.
First of all, it was then-Senator Obama who joined with Senator
Kennedy and me when we were doing comprehensive immigration reform, and
we pledged that we would take tough votes so the whole fragile
coalition would not fall apart.
Instead of doing that, the then-Senator from Illinois, Barack Obama,
proposed an amendment which would have destroyed the entire coalition
we had together, and did so without telling Senator Kennedy or me or
anyone else, by sunsetting the provisions that called for temporary
workers.
But, more importantly, in 2009, I was invited over to the White
House. I went over there. It was a conversation with others about
comprehensive immigration reform, and the President at that time stated
they would be proposing legislation. I told him I would be glad to
examine it and I would be glad to support any effort to comprehensive
immigration reform that I could agree with. Nothing came from the White
House--zero, not one word. Not one piece of legislation was proposed by
the administration.
After the shooting and the tragedy in Tucson, the President gave a
great speech. I wrote an article thanking him. I was invited over to
the White House again. And when we discussed comprehensive immigration
reform, I said: I am ready to sit down with you and move forward on it.
He said: Of course. There was never a word. Was the President of the
United States waiting for the Senator from Arizona to bring forward
comprehensive immigration reform? Is that how he thinks government
works? So again we find a President who wants to blame everybody else
no matter what it is.
My friend from South Carolina was involved in this issue as well, and
I would be interested in his observation of this entire issue. I still
stand ready to move forward with comprehensive immigration reform.
Mr. GRAHAM. I thank the Senator.
It was very difficult politics. It was a very fragile but robust
coalition back in the day. President Bush sent over two Cabinet
Secretaries every week and was personally involved in trying to get
comprehensive immigration reform passed in 2006 and 2007. I saw
firsthand the commitment by the White House, where Secretary Gutierrez
and many others came over--the Homeland Security Secretary came over--
and basically wrote the bill line by line--Senator Kennedy, myself,
McCain, Kyl--a bunch of people--Salazar. Senator Obama showed up on
occasion.
[[Page 14747]]
But at the end of the day, the basic construct was that for a modern
immigration system--merit-based immigration, a new way of doing
business, better border security, better employer verification
systems--Republicans would allow the 12 million to earn their way into
lawful standing--a long and arduous way back to citizenship they would
have to earn--and, in return, we would get a temporary worker program
that would help American businesses supplement the labor force when
they could not find an American worker, after paying a competitive
wage.
The chamber, all businesses were for this because it gave the
business community the certainty they needed regarding immigration.
Part of the grand bargain was that the chamber would be able to access
labor in a more modern, efficient way. The labor unions hated that part
of the bill. A lot of people on the right hated the idea of an earned
pathway to citizenship--coming out of the shadows and living under the
law, paying taxes, and all the other things in the bill.
Senator Obama, out of nowhere, came to the floor and said: I have a
commonsense amendment I would like to propose that we sunset the
temporary worker program--$400,000, I think it was, allocated to
American businesses--after 5 years.
Well, what would have happened if I came to the floor and said: Let's
terminate the pathway to citizenship or sunset it after 5 years?
That was the heart and soul of the deal. Thank God his amendment went
down. But during the negotiations and during that critical time, I
think he gave in to the pressure from the unions. But he did promise,
in 2008, when he ran against Senator McCain, that he would pass
comprehensive immigration reform in his first year.
I looked at the interview last night and got bits and pieces of it.
As I recall the first year of the Obama administration, it was all
about ObamaCare and the stimulus. I do not remember any effort,
bipartisan or otherwise, to deal with comprehensive immigration reform
because all the political capital was spent on ObamaCare and the
stimulus.
At the end of the day, the only time President Obama has talked about
immigration reform was when rallies were going to be held. And here, at
the late hour of the election, he tries to do something with a DREAM
Act modified in a unilateral fashion.
So at the end of the day, the Senator is right, I say to Senator
McCain. He can blame others, but I think the record speaks pretty
loudly and clearly where his agenda lay in the first couple years of
his administration, and immigration reform was not even a blip on the
radar screen.
Foreign Aid
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, on another subject, yesterday the Senate
and, then later, the House were called together to get a briefing from
key members of the administration, led by the Secretary of State; a
high-ranking member of the FBI; our Director of National Intelligence,
General Clapper; and the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to
tell us ostensibly what happened in the tragic deaths of Ambassador
Christopher Stevens and three other brave Americans.
We gathered down in the secret room, where everybody turns in their
phones and BlackBerries, and we went in and listened to basically a
description of America's military disposition in that part of the
world--something which certainly does not warrant a supersecret
briefing.
But, more importantly than that, when the Secretary and the others
were asked exactly what happened--what happened here? What caused this
tragedy? What was the sequence of events?--in fact, it was Senators and
the ranking member of the Intelligence Committee: What happened?--the
answer was: Well, that is still an ongoing investigation and we cannot
tell you anything.
Now, we were supposed to be down there to hear what happened, to hear
the administration's version of the events of what happened. We were
told nothing. We were told absolutely nothing because there is an
investigation going on.
This morning in the Wall Street Journal, entitled ``Misjudgments
Preceded Deadly Libya Attack,'' there is a tick-tock starting at 8 p.m.
all the way through of the events that took place. Now, if that is not
an incredible disrespect to the Members of the Senate, I don't know
what is. Again, it is an example of the disdain with which this body is
held by the administration, including, I am sorry to say, the Secretary
of State. It is not that I am offended as a Senator, it is the
disrespect to the institution of the Senate when we are called together
ostensibly to receive information, that information they tell us they
can't give us, and then it appears on the front page of the Wall Street
Journal and the New York Times. What does that mean about the attitude
this administration has to this body? Obviously, it is not one that I
think is of respect.
Does the Senator wish to say something?
Mr. GRAHAM. Just briefly. I was very disappointed in the briefing
yesterday too. The bottom line is that we asked questions like: How
many security people were at the Benghazi consulate?
We will have to get back with you.
And you pick up the New York Times and you get a blow-by-blow
description of what supposedly went on. So it was very frustrating,
like pulling teeth to get information yesterday. A lot of Senators are
frustrated. You pick up major papers in the country and you find
details not shared with you.
One of the things I am worried about is that we are trying to find
out who committed these terrible acts of terrorism. They were acts of
terrorism, not a spontaneous riot.
We said: What is the game plan? Will they be held as enemy
combatants? Are they going to be held as common criminals? Will they be
prosecuted in Libya? Will they be brought back to the United States? Do
you have to read them Miranda rights?
There was absolutely not a whole lot of information. But at the end
of the day, I think it was a lost opportunity to inform the Congress.
Can we now move to the Rand Paul amendment?
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I would like to take what remaining time
we have in order to discuss the Paul amendment. I would like to begin
by asking unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the letter
from retired military leaders urging opposition to the Paul amendment.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Retired Military Leaders Urge Opposition to Paul Amendment
September 21, 2012.
Dear Senator: As co-chairs of the U.S. Global Leadership
Coalition's National Security Advisory Council, a group of
more than 110 retired three- and four-star generals and
admirals, we believe that the International Affairs Budget--
U.S. foreign assistance--is critical to America's national
security.
Like all Americans, we are concerned about the recent
events that have taken place in Cairo, Benghazi, and other
parts of the Arab world. However, a wholesale suspension of
U.S. assistance to nations in this region is not in America's
security interests.
U.S. assistance is not a gift to recipient nations. It is
not a tool to make other countries like us. It's a critical
component, along with a robust military, of America's
national security strategy. These programs pay dividends in
terms of our national security and preventing another 9/11.
America must remain strongly engaged in the world. We urge
opposition to the amendment offered by Senator Rand Paul to
suspend U.S. assistance to several nations in the most
volatile regions of the world.
Thank you for your consideration of our views.
Sincerely,
Admiral James M. Loy, USCG (Ret.),
Co-Chair, National Security Advisory Council.
General Michael W. Hagee, USMC (Ret.),
Co-Chair, National Security Advisory Council.
____
National Security Advisory Council
Admiral Charles S. Abbot, USN (Ret.), Deputy Commander in
Chief, U.S. European Command ('98-'00); Admiral Thad W.
Allen, USCG (Ret.), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard ('06-'10);
Vice Admiral Albert J. Baciocco, Jr., USN (Ret.), Director of
Research, Development & Acquisition, Department of Navy
[[Page 14748]]
('83-'87); Lt. General Thomas L. Baptiste, USAF (Ret.),
Deputy Chairman, NATO Military Committee ('04-'07); Lt.
General Paul Blackwell, USA (Ret.), Army Deputy Chief of
Staff for Operations and Plans ('94-'96); Admiral Frank L.
Bowman, USN (Ret.), Director, Naval Nuclear Propulsion ('96-
'04); General Charles G. Boyd, USAF (Ret.), Deputy Commander
in Chief, U.S. European Command ('92-'95); General Bryan Doug
Brown, USA (Ret.), Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command
('03-'07); Lt. General John H. Campbell, USAF (Ret.),
Associate Director of Central Intelligence for Military
Support, Central Intelligence Agency ('00-'03); Lt. General
John G. Castellaw, USMC (Ret.), Deputy Commandant for
Aviation ('05-'07), Deputy Commandant For Programs and
Resources ('07-'08); Lt. General Daniel W. Christman, USA
(Ret.), Superintendent, United States Military Academy ('96-
'01); Admiral Vernon E. Clark, USN (Ret.), Chief of Naval
Operations ('00-'05); General Wesley K. Clark, USA (Ret.),
Supreme Allied Commander, Europe ('97-'00); Admiral Archie R.
Clemins, USN (Ret.), Commander in Chief, U.S. Pacific Fleet
('96-'99); General Richard A. ``Dick'' Cody, USA (Ret.), Vice
Chief of Staff, United States Army ('04-'08).
Lt. General John B. Conaway, USAF (Ret.), Chief, National
Guard Bureau ('90-'93); General Donald G. Cook, USAF (Ret.),
Commander, Air Education and Training Command, ('01-'05);
General Bantz J. Craddock, USA (Ret.), Commander, U.S.
European Command and NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe
('06-'09); Lt. General John ``Mark'' M. Curran, USA (Ret.),
Director Army Capabilities and Integration Center/Deputy
Commanding General Futures, Army Training and Doctrine
Command ('03-'07); General Terrence R. Dake, USMC (Ret.),
Assistant Commandant, US Marine Corps ('98-'00); Lt. General
Joseph E. DeFrancisco, USA (Ret.), Deputy Commander in Chief
and Chief of Staff of United States Pacific Command ('96-
'98); Admiral Walter F. Doran, USN (Ret.), Commander in
Chief, U.S. Pacific Fleet ('02-'05); Lt. General James M.
Dubik, USA (Ret.), Commander, Multi National Security
Transition Command and NATO Training Mission-Iraq ('07-'08);
General Ralph E. Eberhart, USAF (Ret.), Commander, North
American Aerospace Defense Command/Commander, U.S. Northern
Command ('02-'04); Admiral Leon A. Edney, USN (Ret.), Supreme
Allied Commander Atlantic/Commander in Chief, U.S. Atlantic
Command ('90-'92); Admiral James O. Ellis, Jr., USN (Ret.),
Commander, U.S. Strategic Command ('02-'04); Admiral William
J. Fallon, USN (Ret.), Commander, U.S. Central Command ('07-
'08); Admiral Thomas B. Fargo, USN (Ret.), Commander, U.S.
Pacific Command ('02-'05); General Robert H. Foglesong, USAF
(Ret.), Commander, U.S. Air Forces in Europe ('04-'05);
Admiral S. Robert Foley, USN (Ret.), Commander-in-Chief, U.S.
Pacific Fleet ('82-'85); General John R. Galvin, USA (Ret.),
Supreme Allied Commander, Europe/Commander in Chief, U.S.
European Command ('87-'92).
Lt. General Robert G. Gard, Jr., USA (Ret.), President,
National Defense University ('77-'81); Admiral Edmund P.
Giambastiani, Jr., USN (Ret.), Vice Chairman, Joint Chiefs of
Staff ('05-'07); Lt. General Arthur J. Gregg, USA (Ret.),
Army Deputy Chief of Staff ('79-'81); Vice Admiral Lee F.
Gunn, USN (Ret.), Inspector General, U.S. Navy ('97-'00);
General Michael W. Hagee, USMC (Ret.), Commandant, U.S.
Marine Corps ('03-'06); General John W. Handy, USAF (Ret.),
Commander, U.S. Transportation Command and Commander, Air
Mobility Command ('01-'05); General Richard E. Hawley, USAF
(Ret.), Commander, Air Combat Command ('96-'99); General
Michael V. Hayden, USAF (Ret.), Director, Central
Intelligence Agency ('06-'09); Admiral Ronald J. Hays, USN
(Ret.), Commander in Chief, U.S. Pacific Command ('85-'88);
General Richard D. Hearney, USMC (Ret.), Assistant
Commandant, U.S. Marine Corps ('94-'96); General Paul V.
Hester, USAF (Ret.), Commander, Pacific Air Forces, Air
Component, Commander for the U.S. Pacific Command Commander
('04-'07); General James T. Hill, USA (Ret.), Commander, U.S.
Southern Command ('02-'04); Admiral James R. Hogg, USN
(Ret.), U.S Military Representative, NATO Military Committee
('88-'91); Lt. General Patrick M. Hughes, USA (Ret.),
Director, Defense Intelligence Agency ('96-'99); General
James L. Jamerson, USAF (Ret.), Deputy Commander in Chief,
U.S. European Command ('95-'98); Admiral Gregory G. Johnson,
USN (Ret.), Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Europe/Commander in
Chief, Allied Forces Southern Europe ('01-'04).
Admiral Jerome L. Johnson, USN (Ret.), Vice Chief of Naval
Operations ('90-'92); General John P. Jumper, USAF (Ret.),
Chief of Staff, U.S. Air Force ('01-'05); Admiral Timothy J.
Keating, USN (Ret.), Commander, US Pacific Command ('07-'09);
Lt. General Richard L. Kelly, USMC (Ret.), Deputy Commandant,
Installations and Logistics ('02-'05), Vice Director for
Logistics, Joint Staff ('00-'02); Lt. General Claudia J.
Kennedy, USA (Ret.), Deputy Chief of Staff for Army
Intelligence ('97-'00); General Paul J. Kern, USA (Ret.),
Commanding General, U.S. Army Materiel Command ('01-'04);
General William F. Kernan, USA (Ret.), Supreme Allied
Commander, Atlantic/Commander in Chief, U.S. Joint Forces
Command ('00-'02); Lt. General Donald L. Kerrick, USA (Ret.),
Deputy National Security Advisor to The President of the
United States ('00-'01); General Ronald E. Keys, USAF (Ret.),
Commander, Air Combat Command ('05-'07); Lt. General Bruce B.
Knutson, USMC (Ret.), Commanding General, Marine Corp Combat
Command ('00-'01); General Leon J. LaPorte, USA (Ret.),
Commander, United Nations Command, U.S. Combined Forces
Command, U.S. Forces Korea ('02-'06); Admiral Charles R.
Larson, USN (Ret.), Commander, U.S. Pacific Command ('91-
'94); Vice Admiral Stephen F. Loftus, USN (Ret.), Deputy
Chief of Naval Operations for Logistics ('90-'94); General
John Michael Loh, USAF (Ret.), Commander, Air Combat Command
('92-'95); Admiral T. Joseph ``Joe'' Lopez, USN (Ret.),
Commander in Chief, U.S. Naval Forces Europe/Commander in
Chief, Allied Forces Southern Europe ('96-'98); General Lance
W. Lord, USAF (Ret.), Commander, U.S. Air Force Space Command
('02-'06).
Lt. General James J. Lovelace, USA (Ret.), Commanding
General, U.S. Army Central Command ('07-'09); Admiral James
M. Loy, USCG (Ret.), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard ('98-'02);
General Robert Magnus, USMC (Ret.), Assistant Commandant,
U.S. Marine Corps ('05-'08); General Barry R. McCaffrey, USA
(Ret.), Commander, U.S. Southern Command ('94-'96); Lt.
General Dennis McCarthy, USMC (Ret.), Commander, Marine
Forces Reserve ('01-'05); Vice Admiral Justin ``Dan'' D.
McCarthy, SC, USN (Ret.), Deputy Chief of Naval Operations,
Fleet Readiness, and Logistics ('04-'07); General Stanley A.
McChrystal, USA (Ret.), Commander, International Security
Assistance Force in Afghanistan ('09-'10); Vice Admiral John
``Mike'' M. McConnell, USN (Ret.), Director of the National
Security Agency ('92-'96); Lt. General Frederick McCorkle,
USMC (Ret.), Deputy Commandant for Aviation, Headquarters
('98-'01); General David D. McKiernan, USA (Ret.), Commander,
International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan ('08-
'09)/Commander, US Army Europe ('05-'08); General Dan K.
McNeill, USA (Ret.), Commander, International Security
Assistance Force in Afghanistan ('07-'08); Lt. General Paul
T. Mikolashek, USA (Ret.), Inspector General, U.S. Army/
Commanding General of the Third U.S. Army Forces Central
Command ('00-'02); Vice Admiral John G. Morgan, Jr. USN
(Ret.), Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information,
Plans and Strategy ('04-'08); Admiral John M. Nathman, USN
(Ret.), Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command ('05-'07);
Admiral Robert J. Natter, USN (Ret.), Commander in Chief,
U.S. Atlantic Fleet/Commander, Fleet Forces Command ('00-
'03).
Lt. General Gregory S. Newbold, USMC (Ret.), Director of
Operations, J-3 Joint Staff ('00-'02); General William L.
Nyland, USMC (Ret.), Assistant Commandant, U.S. Marine Corps
('02-'05); Lt. General Tad J. Oelstrom, USAF (Ret.),
Superintendent, U.S. Air Force Academy ('97-'00); Lt. General
H.P. ``Pete'' Osman, USMC (Ret.), Commanding General II MEF
('02-'04); Lt. General Jeffrey W. Oster, USMC (Ret.), Deputy
Administrator and Chief Operating Officer, Coalition
Provisional Authority, Iraq (2004); Deputy Commandant for
Programs and Resources, Headquarters Marine Corps (ended in
'98); Lt. General Charles P. Otstott, USA (Ret.), Deputy
Chairman, NATO Military Committee ('90-'92); Admiral William
A. Owens, USN (Ret.), Vice Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff,
1994-1996; Admiral Joseph W. Prueher, USN (Ret.), Commander
in Chief, U.S. Pacific Command ('96-'99); Lt. General Harry
D. Raduege, Jr., USAF (Ret.), Director, Defense Information
Systems Agency ('00-'05), Commander, Joint Task Force for
Global Network Operations ('04-'05); Vice Admiral Norman W.
Ray, USN (Ret.), Deputy Chairman, NATO Military Committee
('92-'95); General Victor ``Gene'' E. Renuart, USAF (Ret.),
Commander, North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S.
Northern Command ('07-'10); General Robert W. RisCassi, USA
(Ret.), Commander in Chief, United Nations Command/Commander
in Chief, Republic of Korea/U.S. Combined Forces Command
('90-'93); Lt. General Michael D. Rochelle, USA (Ret.),
Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1 Headquarters, United States Army
('06-'09); Vice Admiral Ronald A. Route, USN (Ret.), Naval
Inspector General ('04-'07), President, Naval War College
('03-'04); Lt. General John B. Sams, Jr. USAF (Ret.),
Commander, 15th Air Force ('98-'99).
General Peter J. Schoomaker, USA (Ret.), Chief of Staff,
U.S. Army ('03-'07); Lt. General Norman R. Seip, USAF (Ret.),
Commander, 12th Air Force/Air Forces Southern ('06-'09);
General Henry H. Shelton, USA (Ret.), Chairman, joint Chiefs
of Staff ('97-'01); Admiral Leighton W. Smith, Jr., USN
(Ret.), Commander in Chief, U.S. Naval Forces Europe/
Commander in Chief, Allied Forces Southern Europe ('94-'96);
Admiral William D. Smith, USN (Ret.), U.S. Military
Representative, NATO Military Committee ('91-'93); Lt.
General James N. Soligan, USAF (Ret.), Deputy Chief of Staff
for Transformation, Allied Command Transformation ('06-'10);
General Carl W. Stiner, USA (Ret.), Commander in Chief, U.S.
Special Operations Command ('90-'93); Vice Admiral William D.
Sullivan, USN (Ret.), U.S Military Representative to NATO
Military
[[Page 14749]]
Committee ('06-'09); Admiral Carlisle A. H. Trost, USN
(Ret.), Chief of Naval Operations ('86-'90); Admiral Henry G.
Ulrich, USN (Ret.), Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Europe/
Commander, Joint Forces Command Naples ('05-'08); General
Charles F. Wald, USAF (Ret.), Deputy Commander, U.S. European
Command ('02-'06); Lt. General Joseph H. Wehrle Jr., USAF
(Ret.), Assistant Vice Chief of Staff, Headquarters U.S. Air
Force ('02-'03); General Charles E. Wilhelm, USMC (Ret.),
Commander, U.S. Southern Command ('97-'00); General Michael
J. Williams, USMC (Ret.), Assistant Commandant, U.S. Marine
Corps ('00-'02); General Johnnie E. Wilson, USA (Ret.),
Commanding General, U.S. Army Material Command ('96-'99);
General Anthony C. Zinni, USMC (Ret.), Commander in Chief,
U.S. Central Command ('97-'00).
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I do not think that our military leaders,
retired and Active Duty, are infallible, but I think their views are
very important given the vast experience so many of them on this list
have. These are 110 retired three- and four-star generals and admirals.
I think we should at least pay close attention to their views. They
have earned it. They have earned our respect for their views.
In addition, I ask unanimous consent to have a letter from AIPAC
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
The American Israel,
Public Affairs Committee,
Washington, DC.
Majority Leader Harry Reid and Minority Leader Mitch
McConnell: We are writing to express our opposition to the
Paul amendment cutting off U.S. foreign assistance to
countries which host a U.S. diplomatic facility that is
attacked any time after September 1, 2012. While we hope
every effort is made to find and prosecute the terrorists who
murdered the brave U.S. diplomats killed in the Embassy
attacks in Benghazi, Libya, we do not believe the approach
outlined in the Paul amendment is the way to respond to those
horrific attacks.
For one, the amendment is broadly drafted so it would
potentially affect aid to any American ally (including
Israel) should terrorists decide to ``attack, trespass or
breach'' U.S. diplomatic facilities there. Furthermore, at
this time of turmoil and uncertainty in the Middle East, the
United States government needs to be able to use all
available tools to influence events in the region. U.S.
foreign assistance programs are a critical part of that
toolbox, and essential to ensuring continued strong American
leadership in the world.
We urge you to oppose the Paul amendment.
Howard Kohr,
Executive Director.
Marvin Feuer,
Director, Policy & Government Affairs.
Brad Gordon,
Director, Policy & Government Affairs.
Mr. McCAIN. This letter is from the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee, America's pro-Israel lobby. It is a letter addressed to
majority leader Harry Reid and minority leader Mitch McConnell.
All of us here are very familiar with AIPAC. It is a very well
respected and highly regarded organization that is really responsible
for informing us, for strengthening our ties between the United States
and Israel, and I hope my colleagues will take this very strong letter
of AIPAC into consideration.
There are so many things wrong with the Rand Paul amendment that it
is hard to know where to begin. I would like to mention--because I know
my colleague who plays a role on the Appropriations Committee and the
ranking member of the Intelligence Committee wants to join in, I do not
want to take too much time. I wish to mention two countries--Libya to
start with.
Somehow to labor under the belief that the Libyan people are
opponents of the United States of America is a fundamental
misunderstanding of the Libyans and the Libyan people. They are
grateful. They are grateful to the United States of America. They have
condemned this attack and this heinous crime of the assassination of
four brave Americans. They have said they will do everything in their
power to bring these people to justice.
I was there on July 7 in Tripoli. I saw thousands of Libyans saying:
Thank you, America. Thank you, United States. Thank you, Ambassador
Stevens. Thank you. Because they were under the yoke of one of the most
brutal dictators on the Earth, who, by the way, was responsible for the
deaths of Americans on Pan Am 103 and the bombing of the disco in
Berlin.
But there is a problem in this country. They have porous borders.
They have militias running around. They have not had a government of
their own in forever, literally. And they need our help. They need our
help in providing border security, in bringing these militias under
control and these weapons that have proliferated everywhere.
So our message with the Paul amendment is this: Adios. See you
around.
That is not America's role in Libya. That is not America's role in
the world. And nothing would be more welcomed in Libya today by the
Islamists and al-Qaida who are there and other extremists--nothing
would make them happier than to hear that the United States had cut off
all assistance to Libya. Nothing would encourage them more. Nothing
would allow them to gain more traction and support from the Libyan
people.
This is a fight for the hearts and souls of the people of the Middle
East. It is not a video--it is not a video that has caused this problem
and these riots and demonstrations. It is the efforts of the Islamists
who magnify and spread an obscure video throughout the Arab world to
stoke the fears and anger of the people of these countries when the
fact is that it is a struggle for power. That is what is going on with
these videos--a struggle for power.
So we are going to send a message to the Libyan people who lost
thousands of their citizens in this recent struggle to oust Qadhafi
from their country.
The second country I wish to mention very quickly is Egypt. Many of
us are disappointed at some of the actions the Egyptians have taken. I
will say that President Mursi condemned these attacks. He went to
Tehran and condemned Bashar al-Asad. But in my view, Egypt is pretty
much up for grabs. I don't how the Egyptians are going to go. There is
a struggle internally between the Salafists and the extremists and
those who want a modern and democratic society, and that struggle will
continue.
But I would also remind my colleagues that one of the signal
agreements of our time was the Egyptian-Israeli peace agreement that
was consummated at Camp David by President Carter, Anwar Sadat, and
Menachem Begin. This was a major step forward--peace between Egypt and
Israel. Part of that deal was that the United States would provide aid
to Egypt.
How are the Egyptians going to react if we cut off aid to them? I can
tell you how they will react. They will react that we have breached an
agreement that has gone on for a long time. And, believe me, Egypt and
Israel's relations are vital in the Middle East. And, again, what would
prove a better message to the extremists than to be able to tell their
people: Not only do the American people dislike us, not only are they
not in support of us, but they will not assist us and other countries.
There are many other examples. I believe the role of the United
States in the world is important, and I believe also, as I mention as a
footnote, that this debate has been going on all of the 20th century,
now into the 21st century. Those who are isolationists, who want to
fortress America--you can go back to post-World War I and the fight
over the League of Nations and, prior to World War II, the
isolationists, the Henry Fords, the Charles Lindberghs, the
isolationists prior to World War II, past World War II, the Taft wing
of the Republican Party and the Eisenhower wing, all the way up until
this fight that will probably continue, and history will show that the
greatest Nation in history was the United States of America, which,
following World War II, restored Europe, turned back the tide of
communism, and has been able, all over the world, with no greed, no
selfish interest except for democracy and freedom, to aid these
countries, which eventually redounds to the favor of the United States
of America.
I urge, obviously, rejection of the Rand Paul amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
[[Page 14750]]
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I do see Senator Chambliss here. I will
ask him a question and get his thoughts.
To kind of follow on what Senator McCain said and to begin with, Rand
Paul is a recently elected Senator who has come to the body with a lot
of enthusiasm, and he is willing to make hard choices. I have worked
with him on Medicare reform, on Social Security reform. I think he will
take on the spending situation in this country very aggressively. I
think he is very brave when it comes to entitlement reform. On that
side of the ledger, I find myself very much in agreement with what he
wants to do. But he does have a view of foreign policy that I think is
ill-suited to the times and historically has not worn very well.
As Senator McCain said, history is full of moments where America and
other powers felt that now is the time to withdraw and let those people
argue among themselves. The problem with letting ``those people''--and
you just fill in the blank who they might be--argue among themselves is
that it ignores the fact of what goes on in one place in the world can
affect us, and there is no better example than 9/11. The entire
operation to attack our Nation cost less than $1 million. The 20 or 21
terrorists who trained to attack us had about a $1 million budget. The
author of this attack lived in a cave in a far-away place called
Afghanistan. So it does matter what happens in places such as
Afghanistan. Radical Islamists have no desire for democracy in the
Mideast or anywhere else, and they are a force within the Mideast and
throughout the world.
But the good news for us is they are a minority force. The Taliban,
which is a cousin of al-Qaida, basically, are very much rejected by the
Afghan people. When traveling to Kabul today, one sees a city with
electricity, with commerce, with cars, with movement, and with women in
school. The average Afghan doesn't want to go back to the Taliban way
of doing business, where there is no music, there is no interaction
with each other except on terms set for them. So what we see on the
television at night is a political struggle for the heart and soul of
the Mideast. This has been going on for a long time and, finally, the
lid blew.
Egypt was an authoritarian, corrupt dictatorship. Tunisia. Libya was
ruled by Qadhafi, Syria by Assad. What we see are people who have seen
another way of living and they are saying, enough already, I am not
going to be part of that anymore. I am going to try to change my life
and my children's lives.
Within that population there also are people who are dead set on
making sure that nation in the Islamic world go backward, not forward.
We have to take sides. If we don't take sides, if we sit on the
sidelines, we will pay a price.
I think it is better to help people fight the Taliban than it is to
ignore the Taliban. I think it is good to go after al-Qaida in every
country on the planet so they never know a moment of peace, but we can
have a few moments of peace. I think it is better to fight these guys
in their backyard than to stay home and let them come to our backyard.
There is a reason we haven't been attacked in over 11 years. We have
been on the offensive, and there are more ways to be on the offensive
than just bombing people.
The biggest fear of the Taliban and al-Qaida, beyond having a bomb
dropped on their head--and they do not mind dying; they really don't
like living. They will die in a heartbeat to make sure others can't
live their lives the way they like. It is absolutely of no consequence
to them to sacrifice their own life and take someone with them. Their
goal is: If we are going to live, we are going to live their way, not
our way. But their big fear is that people will have the capacity to
say no to them and the ability to fight back and win in the countries
in question.
When we killed bin Laden, that was a moment of satisfaction and
justice. But has that changed the war on terror? Have the terrorists
given up? Have people said: Oh, the Americans killed bin Laden so we
better not go over the wall in Egypt; we better not attack the
consulate? No. This is a struggle between the modern world and forces
of darkness, and the way America wins this war is to empower those in
other countries to fight and win in their own country, without us
having to be there with 100,000 troops all the time.
The biggest nightmare of the Taliban and al-Qaida is to see built a
one-room schoolhouse where kids can get an education, for the people to
have clean drinking water that they own and control, where people can
go to a courtroom rather than a sharia court to have conflicts
resolved, and to see commerce and interaction with the rest of the
world, to trade with the rest of the world. That is what they fear
most.
Our foreign assistance budget--foreign aid--is 1 percent of the
entire Federal budget. If we took it off the table, we would be left
with the following way to affect the world: Do nothing or bomb people.
You know what, those men and women in uniform have been at war for 11
years. How about having a tool in America's toolbox to fight the enemy
without having to use military force? When we clear a village of the
Taliban, how do we hold and build that village? We bring in a health
care clinic, something with the most rudimentary standards. It is not
something we would even think about sending our kids to, but they
welcome it because they have never had anything. We build a basic one-
room schoolhouse, with a chalkboard and a few books. That lights up
people's lives like we cannot believe. That is how we hold and build,
with the State Department and the Department of Agriculture teaching
people to plant crops other than heroin. That is the al-Qaida and
Taliban's worst nightmare--and Egypt and Libya and Pakistan and Yemen,
and fill in the blank, Afghanistan.
Here is where I am going to challenge the judgment, quite frankly, of
my friend Rand Paul. He has offered an amendment at one of the most
critical times in the history of the Mideast that would break, that
would sever all aid, all assistance to Libya, Egypt, and Pakistan. Why
are we so upset by this thought process? Trust me, I know we are
broke--$16 trillion in debt--and that America is struggling more now
than at any other time in my adult life and that we have to get our
fiscal house in order. But how do we live in peace and prosperity with
the rest of the world in flames? If we want to pay $10 a gallon for
gas, turn the Mideast over to these crazy nut jobs.
Here is my view of what we should do. We should stay in this fight
and we should do more things than just bomb people. We should help them
help themselves. The good news is most people appreciate our help. What
we see on TV is the result not of a film but of radical Islamists
taking advantage of a moment.
Yes, the cultures are different. It is hard for people in the Mideast
to understand that a film could be made disrespecting Islam without the
government approving of it, because in their world nothing gets done
without the government approving it. So it is important for us to say:
This has nothing to do with the United States Government or the
American people. This is the result of some crazy group of people who
have what we call freedom of speech. It is uncomfortable, but that is
the way we are.
I think it is important to let the Mideast know, and Muslims in
general, that this is the way we operate. We reject the disrespect
shown to anyone's religion, and that is not who we are as a people, but
freedom of speech does exist here. The reason we need to explain that
is because in their world they can't imagine something being done like
this without the government blessing it.
Having said that, there is no excuse in any society to do harm to
another human being because of the way somebody speaks or acts unless
it is an act of violence.
Senator Paul is proposing disengagement in three of the most volatile
areas of the Mideast at a time when it means the most. The way he has
written this amendment should make everyone pause and evaluate how they
want to vote. AIPAC, which most of us are familiar with, has indicated
the way the amendment is written, if there is an act of violence
against a U.S. interest in Israel, maybe we would have
[[Page 14751]]
to withdraw our aid to Israel. But they have said they oppose the Rand
Paul amendment because they know what happens to Egypt if this were to
ever pass and become law.
The treaty Senator McCain referred to was the Camp David Accords.
Israel and Egypt have been living under a peace treaty for decades now.
Part of the deal was that America would provide aid to Egypt and
Israel, and if we broke the agreement with Egypt, that would break the
treaty with Israel.
So do not tell me or anybody else you support Israel if you vote for
this amendment, because one of two things is going on: Either you have
no idea what it means to support Israel or you are trying to pull the
wool over my eyes. It is impossible to support the security of the
Israeli nation and vote for this amendment because it will lead to the
breach of a treaty with one of their strongest neighbors--80 billion
people living in Egypt. It will unravel a delicate balance that has
existed for decades. And I will be recorded as having no part of that.
Imagine if this amendment passed what the chatter would be on every
Islamic Web site in the world. And by the way, if these people had a
PAC, they would be supporting this amendment.
I know Rand Paul is as patriotic as anyone in this body, but the fact
of the matter is the crazy Islamic extremist terrorists who try to kill
us all would love nothing more than this to pass. They know they cannot
win if we stay engaged helping people, so they are trying to drive us
out because that is their best hope of winning the day. So if we want
to empower the terrorists who exist in this world, we should pass this
amendment because they will go crazy with hope and excitement that
their tactics are working. And if we want to destroy the hope of
everybody in the Mideast who has been brave enough to stand up to these
thugs and lose their family members, if we want to break their spirit,
then vote to pass this amendment. If this amendment passes, good luck
finding anybody anywhere in the world who will partner with us, who
would be brave enough to stand up to these thugs and say: You will not
have my children's future. If this amendment passed, America could
never look anyone in the eye again in the Mideast and say: Stand with
me. You can count on me.
Ladies and gentlemen of the United States, and my colleagues in the
Senate, I wish the world were not as screwed up as it is. I wish it
would change. I hate the fact we have been at war and we have spent so
much money. But I am telling you this right now: These are historic
times in which we live. And every time in history when good people were
confronted with evil and they blinked, millions died, not thousands.
The only reason millions haven't died in the war on terror is the nut
jobs who want to kill us all can't get ahold of weapons to do it. If
you don't want Iran to get a nuclear weapon, if that bothers you--that
they may get a nuclear weapon and throw the whole region into a nuclear
arms race or share that technology with a terrorist organization to use
it against us--then vote against this amendment. Because if this
passed, what would the Iranians think about America's resolve to deal
with them?
The last thing I am going to talk about is the vision of the author
of this amendment, who, honest to goodness, is a friend, but on this
issue I think he is dead wrong. Senator Paul had the guts to write a
budget, and I give him credit for that, but look at the vision of this
amendment when it comes to our role in the world. In his budget, the
American military's budget was reduced by 16 percent in the first year.
This foreign assistance account I was talking about, which gives us a
tool other than killing people--staying engaged and trying to build up
their lives so they can live in peace with us, and is about $50
billion, or about 1 percent of the budget--under his proposal it goes
down to $5 billion after 2014 and is frozen there forever.
It is important to note that the author of this amendment believes we
can gut the military--and that is exactly what he does with military
spending--and then take all the assets we have to help people off the
table and we will be safe. I don't know how in the world anyone can
believe, given the times in which we live, it is a good idea to take
military spending below historic levels, disengage from the world, and
have absolutely no influence on nations other than trying to use
military force.
I hope my colleagues will come to the floor and resist the temptation
to do something that sounds good in a 30-second sound bite. I know
people are frustrated and war weary, and I know we are broke, and we
would like to leave everybody else alone, but they are not going to
leave us alone.
Look how much money we have spent after 9/11. Look what 20 people can
do to this Nation if we disengage from the world.
So now I would like to ask the question of my colleague, Senator
Chambliss, who is the ranking member of the Intelligence Committee--and
I have asked this of the author--when you wrote this amendment
disengaging from Libya, Egypt, and Pakistan, which is a nuclear-armed
nation, did you ask anybody in the intelligence community? General
David Petraeus? If there is ever an American hero of modern times, it
is he. Have you ever asked him or Senator Chambliss or anybody else:
Oh, by the way, I am thinking about pulling the plug on our aid to
Pakistan, Egypt, and Libya. What is your view of that? Have you been
asked that question?
Mr. CHAMBLISS. I thank my friend from South Carolina, as well as my
friend from Arizona, with respect to the debate they have been engaged
in, for bringing this issue to the forefront, and being willing to
stand up and say: Hey, if you talk about foreign aid in a coffee shop
in Seneca, SC, or Phoenix, AZ, or Moultrie, GA, it is not the most
popular topic. Most people back home think we can balance the budget if
we eliminate foreign aid. But the fact is, as Senator Graham said, it
is a fairly minuscule amount in the overall context.
Right now we are at a critical juncture in our country with respect
to our fiscal house and with respect to any number of domestic and
foreign policies. As we go into the election, the American people are
going to have a choice to make, but we are also at a crossroads with
our foreign policy in this country.
All people have to do is pick up this morning's paper or turn on the
TV and they will see what is happening in countries that are the
subject of this particular amendment. There are tens of thousands of
people protesting in Pakistan today. There are folks in Egypt who are
still protesting. There are folks in Libya who are still protesting. We
are 10 days away from the Ambassador to Libya from the United States of
America having been killed.
We know that part of the world is in turmoil. We know that part of
the world also has been very critical to our fight in the war on
terror. When the President of the United States is asked if Egypt is an
ally, and he can't answer that question affirmatively, that tells us
what kind of foreign policy this particular President has. He doesn't
know what his foreign policy is if he can't tell us whether Egypt is an
ally.
Well, in spite of all that has happened in the last 10 days--and all
of us still grieve for the loss of four very brave Americans who put
their lives in harm's way as civilians to advocate what is in the best
interests of our country. But I will assure you, if Ambassador Stevens
were here today, he would say, absolutely, the direction in which the
Paul amendment takes us is the wrong direction to go.
I know what the intelligence community thinks about this particular
direction. I know the intelligence community thinks in spite of all of
our problems with Pakistan--and we have had our very open and overt
problems with Pakistan over the last several months and couple of
years. But the fact is we have American soldiers in harm's way today in
Afghanistan who are fighting to protect the freedoms of this country
and who are fighting to make sure we remain the safest, most secure
country in the world. We cannot decouple Afghanistan and Pakistan.
It is very important that we maintain a strong relationship with
Pakistan. Even though it is difficult and
[[Page 14752]]
even though it is fractured, it is of critical importance that we
maintain that relationship. It is important because of what is
happening in Afghanistan, but it is also very important for another
reason.
We had a debate in this body about a year ago on what is called the
START treaty, which is a treaty that we have with Russia for the
elimination of certain nuclear weapons over a period of time.
During the course of that debate, we talked about the elimination of
Russian nuclear weapons versus weapons in the United States. And that
is good to a certain extent. But none of us in this body who have any
idea about intelligence around the world have a great fear of any
country getting hold of an ICBM, a major intercontinental ballistic
missile, sticking it into a sleeve somewhere, and shooting it toward
the United States. What we do have a fear of is somebody getting hold
of what we call tactical nuclear weapons, sticking them into a suitcase
and bringing them to the United States or putting them in a position to
kill and harm Americans.
Pakistan has tactical nuclear weapons. As long as we maintain a
strong relationship with them and as long as they are our ally--however
you characterize that--then we have the ability to at least dialogue
with the Pakistanis with respect to their nuclear program.
Even today, with all that has happened over the last 10 days and all
the condemnation around the world from democratic countries, and
particularly within the United States the condemnation of what has
happened and the consternation and appall at what is taking place from
the standpoint of demonstrations in Pakistan and in Libya, the Libyan
Government and the Pakistani Government have given us all the help they
can possibly give us, particularly in Libya. That is a government in
transition. It is a temporary government, and we need to make sure the
people of Libya have the opportunity to, hopefully, have a democratic
form of government one day.
If we sever ties with them today, folks, that is over. We can just
make certain of the fact that we have one more territory, one more
country where terrorists have the opportunity to be trained to kill and
harm Americans.
With respect to Pakistan, the PAC government has sent the Palace
Guard to guard the Embassy of the United States. That is their most
elite troops. Again, our relationship is frayed and it is fractured,
but they are doing their level best to try to make sure the Americans
who remain in Pakistan are protected. If we all of a sudden decide that
we are going to cut them off from financial aid, is that going to
improve the situation? Is it going to give us some sort of
satisfaction? It may from the standpoint of folks who don't like the
idea of foreign aid period. But from a national security standpoint, it
is simply the wrong thing to do.
There will be one country that will gain from this. The country that
will gain from this is the most notorious terrorist-sponsoring nation
in the world, and that is Iran. Iran has a very powerful presence in
Pakistan today. They want to have a powerful presence in Libya. I
assure you if we cut off the minimal amount of aid that is being talked
about with this amendment, then we are simply fostering the ability of
Iran to have a larger voice and a larger presence in countries that are
very fractious and very vulnerable today.
So while in spirit I agree with my good friend Senator Paul, this is
not the right time in the history of our country and not the right time
in the history of the world to take action that is simply not in the
best interest of the United States.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, in the last few days several interesting
things have happened, and some of them tragic--of course, beginning
with the tragic loss of our brave four Americans and Ambassador Chris
Stevens, then the demonstrations that have taken place everywhere. But
I also remind my colleagues there was a most sophisticated attack on
one of the most heavily fortified installations in Iraq. It was
professional. It was carried out in a professional fashion. It resulted
in $200 million worth of loss to the American taxpayer, the greatest
single act of destruction since the Tet Offensive back during the
Vietnam war.
In Afghanistan, because of the attacks of Afghan soldiers on American
soldiers, we have had to suspend the operations between the military
and police between the two countries. If there was ever an indicator of
failure of our policy in Afghanistan, it is our now inability to even
train with them to be ready to take over the responsibilities that we
now hold.
There is no greater indication of the failure of the President of the
United States to continue to tell the American people and the people of
the world not that we need to succeed, not that we need to win, but
that we need to withdraw. So countries in the region have taken the
lesson and are making accommodations.
The fact is we are now facing a collapsed national security policy in
the region, beginning of course with the assertion by the ambassador of
the United Nations that what happened with Christopher Stevens and the
three others was ``spontaneous'' and the President's spokesperson
saying the same thing.
We knew it wasn't spontaneous. We know people don't bring heavy
weapons and mortars and rocket-propelled grenades to demonstrations
spontaneously. This was a well-orchestrated, well-planned, well-
executed act of murder of four brave Americans. Now we blame it on the
video; it is the video.
It is not the video. The video is the vehicle of radical Islamists
that they use. And don't think there will not be other vehicles. There
are people now, I am sure, all over the world who are making videos
that Muslims may find offensive. I found it offensive when there was a
picture--that I will not even describe now--back some years ago that
was sponsored by the National Endowment for the Arts. And we believe in
freedom of speech. The first thing we should have said is Americans
cherish and have fought for these freedoms, including freedom of
speech.
Very briefly, because I know my colleagues want to talk, we have
totally failed in Iraq. Today, as we speak, Iranian aircraft are
overflying Iraq to Syria and delivering weapons to Bashar Assad. We
were supposed to leave a residual force there. We didn't because then-
Senator Obama, who said the surge would fail--where he was completely
wrong--now has said he is now celebrating that we are out of Iraq.
They just sentenced their Vice President to death. The tensions
between Sunni, Shia, and Kurd have never been greater, and al-Qaida is
on the rise in Iraq. In the words of General Keane, the architect of
the surge, we won the war and we have lost the peace.
In Syria, 25,000 people have now been massacred. When is the last
time the President of the United States stood and spoke on behalf of
these people? It is impossible for me to understand why the President
of the United States wouldn't at least speak out against the murder,
rape, and torture that is going on, and continues to go on, and it is
an unfair fight with Bashar Assad supplied with Russian weapons,
Iranians on the ground--which they have acknowledged. Of course, every
day that goes by more and more al-Qaida infiltrate the country.
In Afghanistan, of course they know we are leaving. Of course they
are accommodating. There is a famous story of the Taliban prisoner and
the American officer. The Taliban prisoner says: You have the watches;
we have the time.
America is believed to be on the decline and weakening. So Mitt
Romney was right. The statement issued by the Embassy in Cairo was a
semi-apology, which later the administration itself repudiated.
This President does not believe in American exceptionalism, he does
not believe in American leadership, and we have just paid a very heavy
price for our lack of leadership. Leading from behind is not the role
of America in the world, and appropriate lessons are being drawn from
that all over the world.
[[Page 14753]]
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I thank my friend from Arizona. I will be
very brief because I know others want to speak.
This last conversation is extremely important. Northern Africa and
other Arab countries are in a state of flux, to say the least. The Arab
spring has caused lots of questions and profound implications that we
don't begin to now fathom. Those countries don't have executive
governments that have any experience. They have replaced tyrants who
preceded them. These are Muslim countries.
Many of the people who live in these countries believe other parts of
the world are more wealthy and they have been put upon. Add to that,
these are countries which, in most respects, have very high
unemployment. Add to that, most of the demographics of these countries
are such that close to half of the population is under the age of 25 or
30, maybe even younger than that. It is a powder keg, and these are
countries which don't have the history and culture of the first
amendment freedom of speech we have.
I say all this because I urge all of us on both sides of the aisle to
work together. It is an extremely complicated, complex situation.
It used to be not too many years ago that politics stopped at the
water's edge. It used to be not too many years ago that on foreign
policy issues, because they are nonpartisan, we as a country worked
together. We addressed the world with one voice. So I strongly caution
my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to not make this a partisan
issue; that is, U.S. policy in the Middle East, especially in this
case, northern Africa--but, rather, we work together. It is so
important.
There is probably a reason why politics used to stop at the water's
edge not too many years ago. Because it made us a lot more effective
worldwide. I urge my colleagues not to be too critical of the other
side of the aisle. It gets us nowhere. It is dividing and conquering,
and that puts us at a great point of weakness.
Second Big Sky Honor Flight To DC
I rise on another matter and that is to recognize a very important
event that is occurring this Sunday and Monday. What is that? Eighty-
nine World War II veterans from the State of Nevada will take part in
the Big Sky Honor Flight and come to Washington to visit their
monument, the World War II Memorial. Their trip is hosted by the Big
Sky Honor Flight Program. The mission is to recognize American veterans
for their sacrifices and achievements by flying them to Washington, DC,
to see their memorials at no cost. They raised money from Montanans all
across the State to make this possible. I helped make this possible at
steak fries, et cetera, and in today's economy, Montanans' generosity
in paying for these flights is something special. Don't forget it has
to be two tickets, one for the vet and one for the person helping the
vet, because these World War II vets have been around several years and
they often need a little bit of assistance.
One of the passengers on Sunday's flight is a 102-year-old. His name
is Dr. McDonald W. Held of Billings, MT. Don has had a remarkable life.
He has been a U.S. Air Force intelligence worker, a professor, an
author, a minister, and a college president. Don was born in 1909. What
was going on in 1909? That year President Taft was inaugurated as the
27th President. The U.S. Army received its first delivery from the
Wright brothers. Congress passed the Homestead Act, which resulted in a
large influx of settlers all across the West, including my State of
Montana.
Don graduated from Baylor University in 1933 with a degree in speech.
Although he earned his master's and doctoral degrees from Northwestern
University, Don's heart remained at Baylor. He wears a Baylor workout
suit every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday when he exercises at the
Billings YMCA. Remember, Don is 102 years old.
During World War II, Don served in the Air Force as an intelligence
officer in the Philippines. After the peace treaty was signed he was
stationed in Tokyo. He worked just a couple of buildings down from GEN
Douglas MacArthur.
After the war, Don embarked on his career in academics at Howard
Payne University, as a professor there from 1955 to 1964. He presided
over the speech and theater department and served as academic dean. Don
then worked for 7 years at Wayland Baptist University before moving to
Billings, MT.
In Billings he became the first head of the speech and theater
department at the Eastern Montana College, which we now know as Montana
State University-Billings.
At age 74, Don was ordained as a Baptist minister in the Baptist
church. He has ministered in three churches in Montana and also served
as a president of the Yellowstone Baptist Bible Institute, now
Yellowstone Baptist College.
Don and his wife Beverly have five children, five grandchildren, and
seven great-grandchildren so far. His son Don, Jr., a veteran of the
Vietnam war, will escort him to Washington this Sunday.
This is a special weekend for this group of heroes. Believe me, I was
here when the last honor flight came in. I cannot remember a time when
I have been so touched by people. You see these World War II vets. Most
of the men and women are just talking about their experiences. They are
the ``greatest generation,'' as has been mentioned before, especially
by Tom Brokaw.
It is time to give them thanks for their courage, time to give them
thanks for their sacrifice. They have done so much. It is time to
reflect on all the sacrifices they made. Think of it, battles of
Europe, Korea, the jungles of Vietnam, deserts of Iraq, and those who
are currently fighting in the mountains of Afghanistan. We must not
forget them.
Please join me in welcoming our Montana heroes to Washington this
weekend. I am going to be down there. I know many others will too.
I yield the floor.
I thank again my good friend from South Carolina.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak in
morning business for the next hour.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Manchin). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Iran's Nuclear Program
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, we are going to have a nice discussion
between Republicans and Democrats about an important issue. If you are
looking for bipartisanship, your ship has come in. S.J. Res. 41 has 82
cosponsors. I am not sure we could get 82 of us to agree that Sunday
should be a day off, but we have done it when it comes to the concept
of not allowing the Iranian ayatollahs to possess a nuclear weapon and
trying to contain them. S.J. Res. 41 has 82 cosponsors. The Presiding
Officer is one of them. To my Democratic colleagues, Senators
Blumenthal, Coons, Menendez, Casey--Senator Casey was the first one to
step up--Senator Lieberman--it has been a real joy to work in a
bipartisan fashion over something that matters, that if there is a time
for the Senate to speak, it is now, regarding Iran's desire to get a
nuclear weapon.
President Obama has rejected containing a nuclear-armed Iran as a
national strategy. Mr. President, you are dead right on that. I know
Governor Romney agrees.
What I wish to do is recognize my good friend from Georgia, Senator
Isakson, and we have Senator Ayotte here, to share their thoughts. I
will be joining later, and certainly Senator Blumenthal, who has been
one of the leading voices on the Democratic side for this resolution.
At this time I wish to yield for Senator Isakson.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.
Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, before he leaves, I wish to acknowledge
that today may be one of the more important foreign policy debates that
ever takes place in the Senate because whichever way the Paul amendment
goes and this resolution goes is going to determine the direction of
where
[[Page 14754]]
America goes in terms of foreign policy. Are we engaged? Are we firm?
Are we the greatest power on the face of this Earth? Or do we recede as
we did prior to World War II and put our Nation in jeopardy again? I
don't vote for receding. I think it is time to be strong. If there were
ever an issue to be strong about, it is nuclear proliferation and the
possibility of Iran possessing nuclear fissionable material to make a
weapon. I will commend Senator Graham for his leadership in the Armed
Forces, for his leadership on this issue, for his leadership on the
floor of the Senate. He is a beacon of hope in a body that needs it
right now.
I also commend him for getting 82 cosponsors--I agree with him, we
could not agree that Sunday is a day of rest if we had to have a vote
on it--to come together and join to send a clear message not just to
the Iranians but to the world that a nuclear-armed Iran is not
acceptable. We need to have a policy of prevention. That is what this
resolution does. It doesn't just say to Iran we want to prevent you
from having nuclear fissionable material and weapons, it encourages the
world to join together to prevent it.
Ten days ago I was in Germany, meeting with the EU Minister of
Finance, meeting the German Minister of Finance, and meeting with the
Defense Minister of Germany. Do you know what the No. 1 question of all
three of them was? It was not the problems with the EU, although they
have them. It was Iran and what would happen if they ended up
possessing fissionable nuclear materials and a weapon. So this
resolution is an important statement of the United States of America,
but moreover the world, and I think it will be replicated in
parliamentary bodies around the world to send that united signal. We
are close to a time when we have to fish or cut bait. The Iranians have
continued to work. We have pretty good knowledge but not total
knowledge. One of the problems the Germans have, the IAEA thinks they
know where the centrifuges are and where they all are, but they are not
sure. They think there hasn't been movement and in some cases they
think there may have been movement.
We need clarity, and the only way to get clarity is for the Iranians
to agree to the rules that we establish for them to disclose through
the United Nations or through whatever body possible to see to it we
have total transparency, and in the absence of that they need to
understand that our goal is to prevent them from ever possessing a
weapon that could destroy humanity.
The nation of Iran states clearly and often and tells the world it
yearns for the day until it destroys the nation of Israel and the
Jewish people. No entity, none whatsoever, deserves the ability to have
enriched uranium or any other tool to actually carry out what it says
is its stated goal.
So I rise today as one Georgian, but one of millions of Americans, to
send a clear and unvarnished message to the people of Iran. We want the
people of Iran to know freedom and democracy, to be released from the
tyranny of the ayatollahs and the current totalitarian government but,
most importantly, we will not stand 1 day, 1 minute, or 1 hour for Iran
to possess fissionable material or a weapon that could destroy mankind.
I end by commending the Senator.
I yield the floor.
Mr. GRAHAM. I thank Senator Isakson, who is on the Foreign Relations
Committee. He is a ranking member on the African subcommittee. He has,
frankly, opened my eyes with what we are doing in Africa. A little
money goes a long way in Africa, trying to prevent radical Islamists
from taking over the continent of Africa, combating the Chinese who are
trying to buy up all the resources, and using American taxpayer dollars
to create an environment and create jobs back here at home and,
frankly, save thousands if not millions of young children from certain
death from AIDS and malaria. Johnny is everything right about being a
Senator in that regard. I appreciate him coming down here today.
If the Senator from New Hampshire doesn't mind, can we go to our good
friend Senator Blumenthal? I have had the pleasure of going to Egypt
with him and all these other hotspots and enjoyed working with him on
this resolution. This started with a meeting in our offices, an idea to
try to back up what President Obama said about not containing a
nuclear-armed Iran. The next thing we know we are on the floor of the
Senate today with 82 cosponsors.
My good friend from Connecticut, Senator Blumenthal.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I want to begin by thanking my
colleague and friend from South Carolina who has so eloquently and
powerfully stated the case for this resolution. But even before
discussing resolution 41, I thank him and our colleagues who spoke
today on the floor about the Rand Paul resolution.
I think this morning's debate--and I listened to it for all 3 hours,
because I was presiding at the time--marked one of the finer moments of
my brief time as a Member of the Senate. What I saw this morning was an
articulate, thoughtful, and courageous statement against a resolution
that would do grave harm to this Nation's national interests if it
became law and if it bound the U.S. Government and cut off aid to these
countries. I think the case stated was courageous because it very
likely may prove unpopular with some elements of their own party--to
put it very bluntly, the political reality here. But I think it was one
of the finer moments of this body because it marked a point of clarity
and a clear recognition for the need to come together as a nation when
our national interests are threatened, when our national security is at
stake, when the harm to this Nation requires acting together.
I am hoping this spirit of bipartisanship will also come together, as
it has so far with 82 cosponsors, on the resolution we have sponsored,
S.J. Res. 41. As Senator Graham has rightly observed, it began with the
leadership of a handful of Senators. He was one of the key leaders, as
were Senator Lieberman, Senator Ayotte, Senator Hoeven, Senator Casey,
and Senator Menendez. I was proud to be among them. The spirit of
bipartisanship and the strength of that spirit was really
extraordinary.
Here is what we know. At a time of confusion and obfuscation, in many
respects, where foreign policy is concerned, knowing with certainty
some of the facts is very important. We all know from the International
Atomic Energy Agency that as of November 2011, Iran had produced
approximately 5,000 kilograms of uranium enriched up to 3.5 percent. We
also know that this Iranian regime is the most active state sponsor of
terrorism in the world, according to our Department of State. We know
this regime has repeatedly expressed its desire to ``wipe Israel off
the map.'' We know this regime has provided weapons training to Hamas,
Hezbollah, and militias in Iraq who murder civilians and spread terror.
We know it has already actively and consistently provided aid to the
Assad regime in Syria in its brutal and unconscionable repression of
its own people. The torture and murders that have occurred have been
directly linked to Iran. We know the Iranian Government is attempting
to develop nuclear weapons. If it does, it will lead to an arms race in
that part of the world that will be as threatening as any other
potential harm to this Nation. We know Iran would create access for
terrorists to these nuclear weapons, making the Middle East a nuclear
tinderbox. We cannot trust this regime. We know that fact beyond any
potential doubt.
Iran's nuclear program is of extraordinarily grave concern not only
to nations in that part of the world but to all nations everywhere that
want peace. That is why an international coalition has come together,
with the leadership of the United States of America. Iran cannot be
permitted to continue its nuclear program to a point where it is
capable of making a nuclear weapon.
Despite repeated calls for it to suspend or stop this program, we
know with certainty that Iranian leaders show no signs of waiting or
wanting to halt their program to build nuclear weapons. In fact, recent
intelligence shows they are continuing to enrich uranium and develop
nuclear facilities.
[[Page 14755]]
That is why we need S.J. Res. 41. There is no question that the
administration, under President Obama, has repeatedly affirmed his
commitment to such a policy. The President has made his position and
the position of the United States absolutely clear. I am quoting
President Obama:
Iran's leaders should understand that I do not have a
policy of containment; I have a policy to prevent Iran from
obtaining a nuclear weapon.
That is the message of S.J. Res. 41. That is the message we must
convey as a nation together from all parties, all parts of the United
States, and all interests, that time is limited. Time is limited to
keep Iran from acquiring nuclear weapon capability.
This resolution calls for increased pressure on Iran to come into
compliance with the U.S. security resolution. This resolution builds on
the efforts of myself and others to call for successful P5+1 talks that
would lead Iran to halt its nuclear program. This resolution says to
the world that the United States and governments of other responsible
nations have a vital, mutual interest in working together to prevent
Iran from acquiring nuclear weapon capability. Let's underscore the
words and recognize their importance: nuclear weapons capability.
Many of us have written multiple times to President Obama outlaying a
framework that would lead to successful negotiations. My hope is that
the combination of strict international sanctions and international
condemnation of a nuclear-armed Iran will convince that government to
desist and cease its program of nuclear weapons capability building. It
is not in our interest, it is not in the world's interest, and
ultimately it is not in that regime's interest. If sanctions fail, we
must be prepared to act.
This resolution expresses the resolution and the resoluteness of this
body. I am hopeful that sanctions will work, but if the Government of
Iran is unconvinced by this very compelling case, it must know that
this issue is not a partisan one, it is not one on which we are
divided. We stand together, we stand strong, and we are resolute and
resilient. The United States and its allies will join together to
prevent a nuclear-armed Iran.
Again, I thank the Senator from South Carolina and all 82 of my
colleagues who have joined as cosponsors. We began with a handful, but
I think the compelling power and persuasiveness of the need for this
resolution is carrying the day.
I yield to the Senator from South Carolina, my good friend and the
leader of this effort.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. GRAHAM. I thank Senator Blumenthal for those articulate words
about the resolution and for his kind comments. Senator Lieberman was
on the ground floor of this, as he is with everything, including bills
to construct foreign policy for the country.
One of the original partners we had trying to get this matter going
was Senator Ayotte, who is a freshman Senator but has quickly hit the
ground running and has become a strong voice on national security.
With that, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to yield to the
Senator whatever time she needs.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.
Ms. AYOTTE. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from South Carolina.
He has really led the effort on this incredibly important resolution. I
also thank my colleague from Connecticut, Senator Blumenthal, for his
leadership on this issue.
The bipartisan nature of this resolution tells us very clearly that
this really is the policy of this Congress and how important this issue
is for our country. This resolution will ensure that we give a clear
message to Iran that it is not our policy and that the United States
and the world will not accept Iran acquiring the capability of having a
nuclear weapon. We understand that it would make the Middle East a more
dangerous place than it is now and would cause an arms race in that
part of the world. In addition, it would also cause us to be in a
position in which one of our strongest allies in the Middle East,
Israel, is threatened with annihilation because that is exactly what
the Iranian regime has said.
Most importantly, it will endanger our own country if Iran acquires a
nuclear weapon because Iran is incredibly hostile to the United States
of America. Iran participates with various terrorist groups, including
Hezbollah. One of the greatest risks we face is that the regime itself
wouldn't use the nuclear weapon; they would just give it to a terrorist
group who could hit any one of our allies. They could use it to harm us
and our country, and then, of course, the world changes. We cannot
allow this to happen, and it is very important to have 82 Senators
sponsoring this resolution.
I wish to talk briefly about the Paul amendment that is pending
before this body. How we act on this amendment, as my colleague from
Georgia so eloquently said, will define the foreign policy of the
United States of America. I wish to state my strong opposition to the
Paul amendment because I am very concerned that if we pass the Paul
amendment, then we are sending the very message to the radical
Islamists and the terrorists of the world that they want to hear from
us, which is that we will withdraw.
Let's be clear on what their goal is when they attack us. They don't
want us to be engaged. They would like the Middle East to become a
seventh-century, Taliban-style government that is a threat to our
country.
In my view, for us to withdraw now, we would put ourselves in a
position where, for example, the amendment is so broadly drafted that
even if one of our ally's embassies were attacked, such as Israel, we
would have to withdraw aid and it would send the absolute wrong
message. It would be to the detriment of the safety of the United
States of America.
I understand that my colleague Senator Paul is well intentioned, but
every time we have withdrawn, people have died and the world has not
become safer and the battle comes here. We don't want the battle to be
here. We don't want any of these elements to be in our country. We
can't forget what happened to us on September 11.
As my colleagues have eloquently stated before, our only tools can't
be our military. The reason we have so many of our present and former
military leaders standing up and saying they oppose the Paul amendment
is because they understand that by engaging with these countries
through the small foreign aid budget we have, we can prevent conflict.
We can actually be in a position where we are engaged and we are
sending the message to the radical Islamist terrorists that, no, the
United States of America will not back off. They cannot put us in a
position where they can bring the battle to our soil. We will not be
defeated by them.
I think if we were to pass this amendment from my colleague, no
matter how well intentioned it is, we would only be empowering those
radical elements. I urge my colleagues to vote against the Paul
amendment.
I also believe it very much relates to this containment resolution
for the following reasons: We see Iran right now ignoring what the U.N.
has asked of it, ignoring what the good people of the world want to
have happen in Syria. In fact, Iran is supporting Hezbollah. They are
arming and training Assad's forces in Syria. They are providing weapons
to insurgents in Afghanistan who are killing our troops. They are
engaged with radical elements in Iraq. If we look at the whole course
of events, we can imagine that Iran will cheer if we pass an amendment
in which we say that we back off our commitment to Pakistan, our
commitment to Egypt, and our commitment to Libya and other areas around
the world. God forbid if one of our other allies' embassies were
attacked.
Most importantly, as my colleagues have said, Iran would cheer if the
Paul amendment passes because it would actually break the Camp David
Accords in which we agreed as a country to provide aid to Egypt. It
would also make Israel less safe, and there is nothing in the world
that Iran wants more than to have Israel be less safe. In fact, they
have stated very clearly that their goal
[[Page 14756]]
is to annihilate Israel from the face of the Earth.
We cannot allow them to get nuclear weapons. They are marching closer
and closer to this capability. Senator Blumenthal told us about the
enrichment of the uranium. This is not the level of enrichment used for
a powerplant. It is being enriched to have the capability of having a
nuclear weapon.
They have created more and more centrifuges despite us asking them to
stop, despite the sanctions we have put in place, all for the
possibility of having that nuclear weapon they could use that would
change the world, not to mention what they have said about our friend
Israel, that they would seek to annihilate Israel.
The world is a very dangerous place. If we allow Iran to acquire a
nuclear weapon, this is a game changer for the world. That is why this
resolution is so incredibly important.
I very much appreciate the leadership on both sides of the aisle in
support of this resolution, and my colleague from South Carolina for
bringing this forward, because we need to tell the world we are not
going to allow this game changer to happen. Iran needs to hear a very
clear message from us as a Congress, backing up our President, that we
will not allow for the containment of a nuclear-armed Iran, for the
safety of the world.
Finally, we need to let our friends in Israel know, when Prime
Minister Netanyahu said on September 16 that ``those in the
international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don't
have a moral right to place a red light before Israel,'' I say to our
friends in Israel: Please know that by passing this resolution, we
stand with you. We will work with you to make sure the tyrannical
regime in Iran never gets that weapon of mass destruction that could
very much change the safety of the Middle East, the safety of your
country, as well as our own country and the world.
With that, I yield for my colleague from South Carolina.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. GRAHAM. Thanks to Senator Ayotte for helping to get this whole
process going, for being on the Senate floor and for getting this whole
process started, and for her strong voice on national security.
Now I wish to recognize my friend, the Senator from Tennessee, Mr.
Corker. He is on the Foreign Relations Committee and is moving up the
ladder to be chairman or ranking member, depending on how the election
comes out. But no matter how it comes out, Senator Corker will be there
talking about constructive engagements and guarding the taxpayer
dollar. I would like for him to give his thoughts about the Rand Paul
amendment and the noncontainment of a nuclear-capable Iran.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I wish to thank the great Senator from
South Carolina, the State where I was born. I do want to say the
committee makes those decisions. I don't want anybody to be jumping the
gun with the kind of statements made earlier about future situations.
First of all, I wish to speak to the resolution brought forward on
Iran. I thank the Senator from South Carolina for that and for the
tremendous work he has done to bring so many of us on as cosponsors. I
think it is a strong signal to Iran, but also to people in the
neighborhood, about our beliefs. So I thank the Senator from South
Carolina for that.
I wish to speak mainly, though, about the Paul amendment. First of
all, I wish to say to the Senator from Kentucky that I understand the
sentiments that drive people to look at foreign aid the way a lot of
people around this country are looking at it today. I wish to remind
people that our total foreign aid budget is 1 percent of what we spend
each year, but that doesn't mean we don't need to look at it in a very
different way.
We haven't done an authorization bill on foreign aid since I have
been here. I have been here almost 6 years now. I know the Senator from
South Carolina is the ranking member on Foreign Operations, and I know
they spend a lot of time looking at things in an appropriate way. But
there is no question that as a body we should be looking more closely
at how we generate foreign aid to other countries, and I hope we are
going to be doing that in this next Congress when, hopefully, we will
begin to function in a much better way.
I wish to say the purpose of foreign aid at the end of the day, in
many cases, is to keep our men and women in uniform from having to be
deployed in other places because of unrest that is against our national
interests. So I would like to point that out.
In this particular case, regarding Libya, Egypt and Pakistan, I would
just like to point out three things: No. 1, the people of Libya are
very thankful for our intervention. However, people have come in and
created a travesty in Benghazi around our consulate, and these are
people who are trying to undermine what we are doing there.
So the way the Paul amendment is drafted, if terrorists in any
country we are aiding happen to do something at one of our embassies or
consulates, then we withdraw aid. So what that means is that basically,
terrorists--people such as al-Qaida, the Taliban, and other groups--are
deciding what we are going to do as it relates to foreign aid. That
would be a real big step for the Senate to say that in the future,
everything we do relating to foreign aid will be determined by
terrorists. I don't think that is what we want to do as a body.
So let me set Libya aside and say this was obviously something that
wasn't a popular movement. It was done by premeditated terrorists. It
was terrible. We all loved Chris Stevens, and we thank him for the work
he has done for our Nation. But this is not the way for us to react to
a country that is trying to evolve into, hopefully, a functioning
democracy and, hopefully, a country that in some way down the road will
create even more stability in that part of the world.
Let's move to Egypt. I was just in Egypt and sat down with the
military leaders. One of the things we continue to talk about is the
Camp David Accords. The aid we send to Egypt is to reinforce, in many
ways, the Camp David Accords. That is very important to Israel, which
is one of our major allies, one of the biggest allies we have in the
world. So I don't know why we would decide to cut off all aid, which
would totally undermine the Camp David Accords, which would totally
undermine the security of a country that is one of our biggest allies.
Now, do we need to take into account the response in Egypt to what
happened at our embassy? I think we should, and I think it should
affect the negotiations we have with them regarding our foreign aid. I
mean, let's face it. We have had decades of relationships with their
military, and even though there have been a lot of changes in the
country, the military is still there and, candidly, they did respond
exactly the way we would like for them to respond. They are a great
ally.
The President was a little hesitant to respond. I understand the fine
line he is walking. He had just been elected. I understand the country
hasn't been through this process, and I understand he didn't respond
exactly the way we would expect him to respond. He, since that time,
has, but I still think it should affect our negotiations and we ought
to go slowly.
It is my understanding that the Senator from South Carolina, working
with his counterpart, has taken those things into account as it relates
to this next year, and I thank them for that.
So in Egypt, it looks to me as if we are slowing this down a little
bit. We are making sure the relationship we have with Egypt is
appropriate under the circumstances, and I thank the Senator for
helping to make that happen. But withdrawing all aid would basically
totally undermine the Camp David Accords, which most of us in this body
believe to be something that is very important.
So let me move to Pakistan. Pakistan is a place where probably most
of us are most disappointed. We understand the relationship the
intelligence
[[Page 14757]]
agencies in Pakistan have with the Haqqani network, and that has been
disappointing. We understand the trouble we have had trying to close
down some of the ammonium nitrate plants that are there and that are
actually helping to create some of the IEDs that are used to dismember
and harm and kill our men and women in uniform in Afghanistan. So we
are disappointed about a lot of things in Pakistan.
Obviously, one of the most disappointing things--or maybe one of the
things that is most difficult for us to understand--is the treatment of
this physician who aided us with Osama bin Laden. Yet there is a legal
process that is underway there, and I think we sometimes forget that,
and there is a court of law there and, hopefully, that will have an
outcome that ends up showing that it has been handled in a judicious
way.
Let me just speak to Pakistan. We are getting ready to leave
Afghanistan. We are going to have all of our troops out of Afghanistan,
or a big part of our troops out of Afghanistan, by 2014. I met
yesterday with General Dempsey. He was telling me that in order to meet
that timeline, we have to move a truckload of equipment out of
Afghanistan every 7 minutes between now and the end of 2014--every 7
minutes. Well, what is the major route we use to move our equipment out
of Afghanistan? Pakistan.
Now, if we want to cut our nose off to spite our face, I would say
let's close off that route, let's create enmity between us, more enmity
than already exists.
I think most of us realize we have a very transactional-oriented
relationship with Pakistan. It is not quite the way those of us in
America would like to see it be, but the fact is there are some
valuable things there that have a lot to do, by the way, with the
safety of our men and women in uniform. If we have to take another
route out in getting all of this equipment and material out of there,
we are probably going to take a route that doesn't work quite as well
for our men and women in uniform.
So, again, I understand the sentiment. Our phone is ringing off the
hook with people who share the same sentiment. I understand it. When we
see on television people rising up in these nations against us--by the
way, these countries are not monolithic. It is not unlike here. We have
groups, such as Occupy Wall Street, that are able to express
themselves, but they don't represent my viewpoint. These countries are
in some ways like ours. I mean, they have people who protest and do
things. That doesn't mean the whole country feels that way. These are
countries that have had strong men leading their countries in some
places and aren't used to understanding what it means to be able to
express themselves, and they don't understand how to operate in a
society that is more open than it has been in the past.
So that certainly doesn't quell my strong feelings about what has
happened in Benghazi, nor does it for anyone else here, I am sure. But
the fact is we need to look at foreign aid in a different way. I think
we have taken some steps to do that. We need to continue to improve. We
need to make sure there is accountability.
What I do know is the Paul amendment is not the way to do it. Again,
I appreciate the energy the Senator has brought to this body and the
many good points he brings forth. But I know this: We do not want an
amendment to pass that says if terrorists attack an embassy or
consulate anyplace around the world, aid is taken from that country. I
do not want a terrorist determining what our relationship is going to
be with that country, and I think all of us know that our withdrawal
from the Middle East will leave us in a world that is vastly unsafe for
our citizens and for people around the world.
While I know our engagement needs to continue and evolve, I know this
amendment is not the way to make that happen. I strongly oppose it, and
I will vote against it if we ever get a vote on this amendment.
With that, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I thank Senator Corker for his very good,
country-by-country explanation; kind of a big picture, rational
approach to what we are trying to do. I understand Senator Paul's
convictions. A lot of Americans are frustrated. We are broke but giving
money to people overseas. They all hate us.
Well, they all don't hate us. Some do, some don't. Let's invest in
the ones we can live with and stand up to the ones who want to kill us
all.
Before I turn it over to Senator Hoeven, one last thought about the
world in which we live. We could get hit in the next minute. We could
get hit today. We could get hit tomorrow. They are trying to get here
as desperately as they can. Thank God for every day we have been able
to survive without being attacked again in our homeland. But I would
say this: One of the reasons we have been effective after 9/11 is that
we are in their backyard. We are deployed over there--not just with
military force but with assistance. We are making their lives more
difficult by raising money and operating and being able to maneuver and
find allies. To get to America now to attack us is harder than it was
on September 10, 2001, because we are engaged in the fight. If we
withdraw aid, we take one of the most valuable tools off the table.
There has to be more tools in the tool kit than just bombing people or
disengaging from the world. So this 1 percent of the budget is a
godsend to those in the military.
S.J. Res. 41
Now I will turn back to S.J. Res. 41. Senator Hoeven of North Dakota
was my first Republican cosponsor of the idea that we cannot contain a
nuclear-capable Iran, and I cannot tell my colleagues how much I
appreciate his leadership.
So I yield to Senator Hoeven.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I wish to thank the Senator from South
Carolina for his leadership on this incredibly important issue and to
also express my appreciation for the Senator from Tennessee and my
agreement with his remarks. I thought he was right-on with what he
said, and I support what he had to say.
I am very pleased to be a cosponsor of S.J. Res. 41 with Senator
Graham. He is knowledgeable on this issue. He has dedicated an
incredible amount of time and commitment to this effort.
Recently I was with Senator Graham and Senator McCain and others. We
were in Afghanistan, and then we were in Egypt, where we met with the
Muslim Brotherhood. We were in Israel, where we met with Prime Minister
Netanyahu. Then we were in Libya, where we met with a number of the
militia groups who now control Benghazi and Mirsrata and, of course,
Tripoli. And we were in Tunisia as well. I have to say that it is
incredibly important that we had the opportunity to go to those
countries. Senator Graham has been there many times, as has Senator
McCain. But it is very important that we understand what is going on.
Some of the comments Senator Corker expressed are so true. We have to
understand what is going on in these countries. At the same time, we
have to communicate with these countries as they try to build
democracies. But we must be clear and consistent in our foreign policy
that we support our friends, we support our allies, we will oppose our
opponents, and that we demand safety for our embassies and for
Americans abroad. We provide no less to the people who come to our
country, and we expect the same in return.
S.J. Res. 41 is a bipartisan effort. And I want to express that
again; that is so important. It is a bipartisan effort--80 Senators
standing together and expressing their support, bringing this
resolution to the Senate floor, and saying to the administration: We
need to take a tough stand with Iran. We cannot allow Iran to develop
nuclear weapons. It is not an option. Containment--a nuclear Iran
contained is not an option. It does not work.
Look what is going on in the Middle East right now, in Egypt, in
Libya, Tunisia, Yemen. Across the Middle East right now, you have
extremist groups--fundamental Islamic extremist
[[Page 14758]]
groups--that are undermining the democratic efforts in those countries.
Look at the attacks on our Embassy. Look at the killing of our
Ambassador. We cannot allow that and can only prevent that through
strength--through strength.
So we have to stand for America's interests in all of these
countries, and we have to prevent a nuclear Iran. Iran is helping the
extremists throughout all of these countries, supporting Bashar Asad in
Syria, supporting Hezbollah, Hamas--all these groups that are
undertaking violence throughout the Middle East, not only against
Americans but against their own people, undermining these nations'
democracies. The way we help stop that and the way we help support
freedom and democracy is through a strong, consistent foreign policy.
That is what the resolution, on a bipartisan basis, is all about--
saying to the administration: We must stand up to Iran, and we must
prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons. And if Iran were to develop
a nuclear weapon, that could also start a race for other countries in
the Middle East to develop a nuclear capability. Look at the unstable
situation there. It is certainly not a situation where nuclear weapons
can be added to the equation as well.
We have worked in the Senate, in the House, to provide tools to the
administration to put sanctions in place to prevent Iran from
developing a nuclear weapon. The Kirk-Menendez legislation, which was
passed as part of the Defense authorization bill, provides strong
sanctions against Iran that still have not been fully implemented. The
best way to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon is through
sanctions. All options have to be on the table. We must support Israel
in whatever action Israel determines it must take to protect itself.
All options for the United States must be on the table as well. The
best way to stop Iran, if we can, is with sanctions, but the only way
that is going to work is if they are fully imposed to the full extent
possible.
Let me use Kirk-Menendez as an example. What did that legislation
provide? That legislation provided a tool to the administration that
essentially barred any company or country that does business with Iran
or its Central Bank from doing business with the central banking system
in the United States. That is an effective tool because if Iran cannot
sell its oil, it cannot continue to function.
We must fully impose those sanctions. We must stand strongly with our
closest friend and ally Israel in the region. This resolution is a
bipartisan message to our administration saying: Stand strong. We can
and we must prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons.
With that, Mr. President, I see the majority leader and the minority
leader are on the floor, and I will turn the floor back to the esteemed
Senator from South Carolina and thank him for his work.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, before I turn this over, may I have just 2
minutes to wrap up.
I want to thank Senator Reid and Senator McConnell for scheduling
this vote. Eighty-two Senators stand behind President Obama's statement
that it is bad policy to contain a nuclear-capable Iran. Let me tell
you right quickly why. If the Iranians get a nuclear weapon or nuclear
capability, the Sunni Arab States will want one themselves to counter
the Shia Persian influence, and you will have a nuclear arms race in
the Mideast. That is not a good result. That is the road to Armageddon.
Israel will never know a minute's peace. If the ayatollahs in Iran have
a nuclear weapon, my God, what would living in Israel be like? Look at
the threat you would live under the rest of your life. That is a no-go
for the people of Israel.
The big concern I have above all else is that the ayatollahs will
share that nuclear capability, that technology with a terrorist group.
The only reason thousands have died in the war on terror and not
millions is they just cannot get the weapons to kill millions of us.
And if the ayatollahs had those nuclear weapons or that capability,
they would share it with terrorists. That is why containment is not a
good idea.
This is not an authorization to use force. It encourages sanctions.
It encourages diplomacy. It says that all options are on the table. It
is not authorizing force, but it is taking off the table the idea that
the Iranians can get a nuclear weapon and we will try to contain them
because that is just emptying Pandora's box.
One last thought. An Israeli soldier was killed today because the
Sinai border between Egypt and Israel was breached. Part of our aid to
Egypt has conditions that say: If you break the treaty with Israel, you
lose the money. And you need to beef up the security in the Sinai.
The Egyptian Army is basically being driven out of the Sinai. They
are moving back in. So if you really do care about the security of
Israel, we cannot break relations with Egypt. It is a complicated
relationship, but it is in our interest to be involved.
Again, we are all over the world in different fashions, and I would
rather be helping people help themselves than having to send soldiers
in every time there is a hot spot in the world. We cannot disengage
from the world. It is our destiny to be the leader of the free world;
we just need to do it smartly.
One percent of our budget is spent on foreign assistance. I think it
makes sense.
With that, I will yield the floor and thank all of my colleagues for
jumping on board for a resolution that I think is timely. If the Senate
of the United States ever needed to speak with one voice on a single
topic, it is now, and that single topic is to the Iranian regime: You
will not be allowed to get a nuclear weapon, period.
With that, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Order of Procedure
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 11:30 p.m.
this evening, there be 30 minutes of debate equally divided between the
majority leader and Senator Paul or their designees; that following the
use or yielding back of that time, the Senate proceed to votes in
relation to the following items in the order listed: passage of S.
3576, passage of S.J. Res. 41, cloture on H.J. Res. 117; that if
cloture is invoked on H.J. Res. 117, the pending amendments be
withdrawn and the Senate proceed to vote on passage of H.J. Res. 117;
that immediately following that vote, the Senate proceed to the cloture
vote on the motion to proceed to S. 3525; that if cloture is not
invoked on H.J. Res. 117, the Senate proceed to the cloture vote on the
motion to proceed to S. 3525; that the vote on passage of S. 3576 be
subject to a 60-affirmative-vote threshold; that if S. 3576 does not
achieve 60 affirmative votes, then it be returned to the calendar; that
following the cloture vote on the motion to proceed to S. 3525, the
majority leader be recognized; finally, that no amendments, motions, or
points of order be in order during the consideration of these measures.
That all begins at 11:30. Mr. President, usually we have a 15-minute
vote for the first one, but I think, with the time we are doing this, I
would like all votes to be 10-minute votes, so I also ask unanimous
consent that be the case and that between each vote there be 2 minutes
equally divided so the sponsors and those opposing the passage of that
legislation can speak on them.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, this agreement paves the way for the
completion of our remaining business for this work period. It is going
to be a very early morning or late night, however you look at it, but
it is the right thing to do. I expect that upon the completion of the
scheduled votes, the motion to proceed to the sportsmen's bill will be
pending, postcloture. I am gratified that we are on track to attempt to
move this measure when we get back. After we address that bill, when we
return in November, I intend to move to Senator Menendez's housing
bill. But I will be in touch with the Republican leader several times
before the election, I am sure, anyway.
[[Page 14759]]
Mr. President, before we leave here, everyone should understand that
what we are going to try to do this evening--I have spoken with the
Republican leader--is that when people finish their talking--we hope it
can be early this evening--we would go into recess--and hopefully we
can do that at 5 or 6 o'clock tonight--until 11:30 tonight. I hope that
can be done.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
S.J. Res. 41
Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, we have before us a resolution on
containment of Iran. I have voted for sanctions on Iran and do not
think it is a good idea that Iran have nuclear weapons. However, I am
very concerned about this particular resolution. I think a vote for
this resolution is a vote for the concept of preemptive war. I know of
no other way to interpret this resolution.
The resolution says that containment--the strategy of trying to
prevent expansion or invasion of countries--will never be our policy
with regard to Iran. While I think it unwise to announce that we will
contain Iran--I do think it unwise to tell Iran: Oh, it is fine to get
a nuclear weapon; we will contain you--I also think it is equally
unwise to say: We will never contain you.
The reason I say this is that we woke up one day and Pakistan had
nuclear weapons. We woke up one day and Russia had nuclear weapons--
China and India and North Korea. Had we made the statement--the rash
statement--that we will never contain any country that has nuclear
weapons, what does that mean? I think that means that you have
decided--right now, before anything happens, you have decided that you
will preemptively go to war.
We have been at war for a decade now. We have been at war in
Afghanistan. I supported going to Afghanistan, but I am ready to come
home from Afghanistan. We were at war in Iraq for nearly 10 years. I am
glad we are coming home from Iraq. But I do not want to automatically
commit our country to a war in Iran.
So while I do think it is a mistake to say we will not contain them,
I think it is also a mistake to say we will contain them. It is a
mistake to have a policy that is explicit one way or the other.
President Reagan was once criticized and accused of having no foreign
policy. He replied that it was not that he had no foreign policy; it
was that he did not care to share it with everyone. Because if you give
everyone--your potential enemies or friends--if you say to every
country: If you do X, I will do X, or if you maybe do this, I will do
that, you are exposing exactly what your plans are, and that may not be
the best strategy. In other words, foreign policy is an ever-shifting
battleground, and there should be a certain strategic ambiguity to
foreign policy.
So when we announce to Iran or to the world that we will never, ever
contain Iran, it is an announcement that the bombs will be dropping if
we ever hear that they are a nuclear power. I do not think we should
say automatically we are willing to accept them as a nuclear power, but
I do not think we should automatically say there will be a preemptive
war with Iran.
Now, everybody has been bragging. They say: Oh, everybody in the
Senate is for this. Everybody is not. I am not for this. I may be alone
on this, but, interestingly, if you travel to Israel, there is a very
spirited debate on this.
Meir Dagan, who was the head of the Mossad, cares deeply about
Israel, would not be, by anyone's imagination accused of being a
shrinking violet--he has done many things to prevent Iran from having a
nuclear weapon. He is worried about what happens the minute the bombs
start dropping on Iran. Where do you think the next set of bombs will
go? They will be on Tel Aviv. They will not be on the United States.
But if you live in Tel Aviv, you might have some concern over what
happens and what Iran does.
The other thing about beginning a war is that historically in our
country we have had defensive wars. Nobody messes with us, and I agree
with that. You mess with the United States there will be significant
repercussions. We will not let you invade other countries and we will
not let you invade the United States. But the idea that we will have
offensive war and not defensive war is a concept that is new in our
history.
Preemptive war, going to war and saying we will go to war to prevent
you from doing certain activities is a new concept in our lexicon of
foreign policy. I think it is a dangerous one. Announcing to the world,
as this resolution does, that containment will never be our policy is
unwise. It is a recipe for perpetual war. A country that vows to never
contain an enemy is a country that vows to always preemptively attack.
To rule out containment as a strategy or as a strategic and sometimes
militarily active form of defense is to admit we have become Orwellian.
Yes, we have always been at war with East Asia or, yes, we have always
been at war with Eurasia. It is an idea that we will always be
perpetually at war.
I am proud of being for a strong national defense. I am proud of
being for protecting our country. But I cannot accept a resolution that
says we will completely get rid of the containment strategy that was a
strategy that kept us safe for 60 years during the most aggressive and
dangerous war we have ever encountered, the Cold War. The Soviet Union
had 30,000 intercontinental ballistic missiles that could reach the
United States and attack us and devastate our country.
If we would have had this concept that we rule out the idea of
containment, we would have had an awful and devastating and maybe
cataclysmic war with Russia. Now North Korea is more similar to Iran, a
two-bit dictatorship that has trouble feeding their own people, has
trouble having enough supplies of food and gasoline for their own
people. There are similarities. But when North Korea announced it had a
nuclear weapon, did we immediately start dropping bombs? Did we say we
will not contain them? We contained North Korea. Some would argue the
leadership of North Korea is equally as irrational as the leadership of
Iran, if not more so. So we were able to contain a two-bit socialist,
very small and unproductive country such as North Korea. I see no
reason why, if we had to, we could not contain Iran. I am not promoting
that as a philosophy. We should not be telling Iran we will contain
them. But for goodness' sake, we should not be saying: We will never
contain you.
The people who vote for this resolution I think are well meaning, but
I do not think they are thinking this through. We have had this before.
When the resolution came up for the Iraq war, many voted for it and
then some came back later and said: I voted for it before I voted
against it. They wanted it both ways. Many come up to me now and say: I
voted for the Iraq war, but it was a mistake. I voted for this concept
of offensive war, of preemptive war to stop Iraq from having weapons of
mass destruction, but I made a mistake.
I think the Iraq war was a mistake. I was not here, but I would have
voted no. I fear we are pushing on. Every month there has to be a new
and more bellicose resolution to ensure we will go to war and that at
all costs we will go to war in Iran. I think it is a mistake. I think
there should be some strategic ambiguity, meaning that we do not
announce to our enemies exactly what we are going to do. We let them
know firmly what our position is, but we do not announce to them our
entire military strategy.
To do so, to rule out a strategy that we had for 60 years that
worked, that kept us in a very difficult and uneasy peace with the
Soviet Union, does anybody here argue we would have been much better if
containment would not have been a strategy, if we would have said
absolutely to Russia, if you do this, we are going to--the bombs will
drop tomorrow.
That scares me. But what scares me more is that so many Members of
this body are jumping up and down to embrace each other in the
bipartisan desire that we will not have containment as a strategy, that
we absolutely will go to war if we wake up and Iran has nuclear
weapons. You know what, the other day Meir Dagan, the former head of
the Mossad, said that you cannot bomb the nuclear knowledge out of the
[[Page 14760]]
psyche. Nuclear knowledge, the knowledge to make nuclear weapons, is
out there now. It is in Iran. We will not be able to stop that
knowledge. We will not be able to eradicate the knowledge of nuclear
weapons. That is something to think about. Because there may come a
day--and this is the prelude to the next argument. The next argument we
have on this floor will be one day when Iran announces, and am not for
this, I think we should do everything--I voted for sanctions. I think
we should do everything to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon.
But my goodness this is a huge mistake. It may be unpopular for me at
home to say this, but I will say it. I will say it loudly. To rule out
any kind of defensive strategy that does not include an offensive war
is a huge mistake for the country. I will vigorously oppose this
resolution. I hope those who have glommed onto this resolution so
quickly, because there is an incredible force behind this resolution,
there is an incredible lobbying apparatus that says you have to go onto
this or else. I hope they will reread this and reconsider. Think about
the double and triple amputees who have come home to your town. Think
about the soldiers who have committed suicide. Think about the hundreds
of thousands of soldiers who are overseas now. Ask yourself, are we
ready to send another 100,000 or 200,000 or 300,000 soldiers to Iran?
I am not asking that we do nothing. We just beefed up the sanctions a
couple months ago. But there are other things to do besides saying we
will always have to go to war. For example, who does Iran trade with?
You know the reason why the sanctions probably will not ultimately
work? Because Iran trades with China and Russia and India and Japan and
they are exempt from the sanctions. We say there are sanctions, but
then we give them exemptions and they sell all their oil somewhere
else. We do not have the power to shut down Iran through sanctions.
If we were to convince somehow Russia and China to be on our side, we
could have leverage, and I think Iran would listen. The sanctions have
brought them back to the table. They are negotiating. I do not for 1
minute believe everything they say or think they are trustworthy. But
it is better than war to have negotiations, even with a fallible and
perhaps deceitful partner sometimes--but it is still better than war.
I think there is such an eagerness or such a lack of reluctance in
this body to think through the issues of war. That is how we get into
this. We get into it because everybody wants to be stronger than the
next guy. Everybody wants to be more bellicose than the next guy.
Everybody wants to say: Nobody pushes us around and we are not going to
take it. But there are other ways. There are other ways.
We have to worry about and think about what ultimately are the
repercussions. Our soldiers are not inanimate clay that we put on this
master board of chess, this geopolitical chess game, to move around.
These are young men and women who live in your neighborhood, who live
in the neighboring town. When I think about war, I think about this
resolution; I do not think about empty black and white words on a page.
I think about those young men and woman and my commitment, my real and
strong commitment that I am not going to war without absolute
provocation, without a threat to the national security, and for
goodness' sake, without a debate over it.
The other side may say: This does not say anything about war. No, but
it says some things that are very unwise; that we would rule out an
entire form of defense strategy that we used for 60 years successfully
to stay out of war. I think it is a mistake to say it is OK for Iran to
be a nuclear country and we will contain them. But I think it is also a
mistake to say we will never contain them.
I have another amendment that is coming up this evening. This is an
amendment to place limitations on foreign aid. For the last hour or
two, we have had a bit of the other side giving their response. That is
fine. We discover the truth by hearing the debate on both sides of
this. But Senator Moynihan, who used to serve up here who is deceased,
once said: Everybody has the right to their own opinion, but you do not
have the right to make up your own set of facts.
There was a Senator here earlier who said: Oh, that guy from
Kentucky, he does not believe in a strong national defense. He would
slash national defense. So anybody who is against foreign aid is not
for national defense.
This particular Senator said: He would gut defense and he would cut
it by 16 percent. That is just sort of making up your facts. That is
not fair. He is entitled to his opinion, but he is not entitled to make
up the facts. I do have a budget that I put forward that balances the
budget in 5 years. I also have a priority within that budget that I
think the most important thing our government does and that the
Constitution mandates is a strong national defense. I think it is the
most important thing we do in this country.
So in my budget I am able to cut a significant amount of spending,
but I actually limit the military sequester. The military sequester was
an automatic cut. I do it by cutting out other spending, real cuts in
spending in the same year to reduce the size of government, but I do
not have a 16-percent cut in military in 1 year.
In fact, under the military sequester, I actually restore $50 billion
that allows the first year not to have any cuts in military. Do I think
there should be some cuts in military? Yes. But I make it a little bit
easier on the cuts over time. To say I am proposing a 16-percent cut is
untrue.
Others have said: Yes, the military sequester is so horrible. He is
going to cut foreign aid. The country will be defenseless. The hordes
will be over here. We will have to fight them over there. There is a
certain irony to this because half these people, these Senators who are
caterwauling about this military sequester, guess what they will not
tell you. They voted for the military sequester. I voted against the
military sequester last year because I did not think there was going to
be enough cuts to rescue us from this debt bomb that is ticking.
But the people who voted for the military sequester are now up here
accusing me of wanting to gut defense and all the military cuts and
they voted for the military sequester. Others have come to the floor
and said: If we do not pay people to be our friend, if we do not give
people foreign aid, then we are wanting to withdraw from the world,
that we are going to withdraw into a little, tiny shell, into a closet
and lock ourselves in a fortress and we are not going to engage the
world.
Nothing could be further from the truth. We do not give any foreign
aid to England. Have we withdrawn from England? We do not give any
foreign aid to anybody in Europe. Have we withdrawn from Europe? We are
incredibly connected with Europe. We are incredibly connected with
China, despite our differences--incredibly connected with China. We do
not have to give foreign aid to be connected to the world. We should
trade with the world. That is the connection. The more we are
interconnected through trade, the less likely we are to go to war.
The other side also says that if we do not have foreign aid we will
have war. My goodness, has anybody been paying attention? We have had
two pretty big wars for a decade. We are involved in the longest war in
the history of our country. I do not see any evidence that foreign aid
is preventing war.
Some might say: But foreign aid is humanitarian and we want to help
poor people. I see zero evidence that foreign aid is helping poor
people. It is helping rich people in poor countries. I went through an
hour's worth of this earlier talking about how dictators are the ones
stealing the money in Africa. Africans live on an average of $2 a day.
They did 30 years ago and they still do because foreign aid does not
get to the people; it is stolen by the dictators.
The other point to make about foreign aid is: My goodness, if we do
not have foreign aid, we will be fighting them on our shores. Because
we have foreign aid, we have a great deal of antipathy. What they need
to think
[[Page 14761]]
through--and nobody is thinking through--is why are the Arabs mad? Why
are they yelling and screaming and burning the American flag? That
makes me mad, and that is one reason I don't want to send them any
money, because they are burning our flag. But why are they mad?
They are mad because Mubarak, who was a dictator in Egypt--do you
know what he did when the crowds were formed? He hosed them down with
teargas made in Pennsylvania and bought with foreign aid. When the
police came with truncheons and beat the crap out of people who were
protesting in Egypt, they did it with money from the United States.
They are not mad at us because we are rich, they are not mad at us
because we drive cars and have nice clothes and have music they find
distasteful. They are really not even ultimately mad at us because of
that movie. They do not like it, and I understand there are
sensibilities on this, but that is not ultimately why they are mad. But
they get really mad when they are hit over the head with a police
truncheon paid for with foreign aid.
So it is exactly the opposite of what the other side says. The other
side says without foreign aid we will have more war. I say because of
the foreign aid we have more war. There is no objective evidence. Is
there any objective evidence we have had less war with foreign aid?
None. Zero. There is a lot of evidence we are out of money, though. We
are $1 trillion in the hole every year, and they all come down and pay
lip service to it, but then say: Oh, well, $30 billion won't make a
difference. I say we have to start somewhere, and foreign aid is a
great place to start.
These Senators are disconnected from the public. I defy any Senator
who votes to continue foreign aid with no limitations to go home and
ask their people. I will bet 90 percent of the people at home--it
routinely polls in the 70s--are in favor of not sending money overseas,
particularly if asked whether they want to send money overseas to
people who despise us or if they would want to send money overseas to
people who are burning our flag; would they want to send money overseas
to a country that has tortured a man who helped us get bin Laden; to a
country that allowed bin Laden to live within its midst for 6 or 7
years unmolested; to a country that is mad at us now because we got bin
Laden; to a country where a third of the population would vote for bin
Laden for president.
I say far from destabilizing the world, what would happen if we were
to remove foreign aid is we would remove the impetus to the Arab spring
becoming the Arab winter. What I see is people recognizing that people
are angry, but I see no intelligent discussion about why they are
angry. When people come to me and they say: Oh, it is because we are
rich and we are a wealthy country, that doesn't make any sense to me.
Many of these people actually in the Arab spring do want freedom--a
freedom like our freedom. It may be a little different, because it is a
different culture and they believe in a different system of democracy
than we do, but they still want some freedom. Some might ask: If they
want freedom and we have freedom, why wouldn't they admire our system;
why wouldn't they be sympathetic; why are they burning our flag; why
are 20,000, 30,000, 40,000, 50,000 people rallying and burning our
flag? It is because too often our foreign aid has gone to support
dictators who have oppressed their people.
Mubarak got $60 billion in Egypt. Estimates of his family's worth are
up to $50 billion. They repressed their people. No one could come into
the street without being beaten over the head with a police baton or
sprayed with teargas made in Pennsylvania. They were mad at Mubarak,
understandably, so that anger is transferred to us. The same with Ben
Ali in Tunisia, and the same with Hussein.
Remember that Hussein was our ally before he was our enemy. In the
Iran-Iraq war we had American planes on both sides. We had military
advisers supporting Hussein against Iran, but we had F-4 Phantoms
flying on Iran's side that were left there when we left. So this goes
back a long way.
I remember being in high school and being perplexed as to why the
Iranians hated us. Why were they burning our flag? Why were they
burning our Embassy and jumping up and down like a bunch of idiots
burning our flag? Why did they hate us so much? Because we kept in
power a man--the shah--whom they didn't like, whom they despised, and
who was autocratic and had a very significant police force that didn't
allow dissent.
It is the opposite of what the other side argues for. The other side
is arguing that without foreign aid we will have war. I am arguing that
because of foreign aid we have war. Because of foreign aid and because
of the misapplication of foreign aid, because of the theft of foreign
aid, and because foreign aid is given to people who repress their
people, the Arab spring, which has a healthy element to it, has become
the Arab winter. If we don't understand that, we are never going to get
beyond that.
We have to also go back to the specifics of what I am asking for in
this amendment. In this amendment, what I am asking for is that there
simply be restrictions. I am asking that in order to get our foreign
aid, a country has to act like an ally; they have to significantly and
believably pledge to protect our Embassy. In Libya's regard, they have
to promise to turn over the people who assassinated our Ambassador.
I think that is the minimum of what we should do. Frankly, I think we
probably shouldn't be sending aid at all, but I think this is a first
step in the right direction; to say, for goodness sakes, if we are
going to send aid to people, at least send it to people who are acting
like our allies.
When we see the American flag being burned in public by tens of
thousands of the horde around our Embassies around the world, we should
ask ourselves if we want to send good money after bad to that country.
Do we believe it is working? And when we think about whether our money
should go to African despots and dictators, we should ask if that money
is getting to the poor people in Africa or is our foreign aid going to
rich people in poor countries. That is the history of it. It is the
history of repression, it is the history of human rights abuse, it is
the history of theft and more corruption than anyone can ever imagine.
I will probably lose this vote, but I have fought long and hard. I
have fought for 6 weeks to get this vote, and so we are going to have
this vote at midnight. People aren't too happy with me now, but we are
going to have a vote tonight at midnight, and I think it is an
important vote. I think it is an important first step whether we win or
lose. Because every Senator who votes on this tonight will have to go
home and they will have to engage their constituents and explain to
their constituents why they are still willing to send money to
countries that are burning the American flag; why they are still
willing to send money to countries where there is ample evidence of
corruption and thievery; why they are still willing to send foreign aid
to countries that are openly disdainful of us.
Does everyone realize the President of Afghanistan, or senior
advisers, have said that if there is a war with Pakistan--between the
United States and Pakistan--they will side with Pakistan? Pakistan's
senior advisers have said if there is a war with Iran, they will side
with Iran. These are the people we are sending billions of dollars to
and saying: Please be our friends. They laugh and snigger at us and
turn away and say: Fools. That is what they say about us.
I say what we need in this country is an American spring--an American
spring where we wake up and say: Look, to make our country great again,
to retain American greatness, we have to figure out how to grow at
home. And I think that means leaving more money at home. I hope the
Senate will consider this when they vote this evening.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
Report on Operation Fast and Furious
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, on Wednesday, the inspector general of
the Department of Justice issued his
[[Page 14762]]
report on ATF's Operation Fast and Furious. This report is a
significant milestone for the family of Border Patrol Agent Brian
Terry. He was killed in a firefight with illegal aliens who were armed
with illegal guns from Fast and Furious.
Attorney General Holder delayed any discipline for the officials
responsible for Fast and Furious until after this report was released.
The time for accountability has come. There are no more excuses for
inaction.
The inspector general's nonpartisan review confirmed virtually
everything I heard from whistleblowers over the last year and a half.
The Justice Department tried to push all the blame on the ATF and
officials down in Phoenix, AZ, but the inspector general confirmed that
senior officials in Washington ignored red flag after red flag.
Senior officials in both the Justice Department and ATF knew or
should have known that Operation Fast and Furious was putting guns into
the hands of criminals. But they ignored the risk and failed to take
steps to protect the public safety. The Inspector General also
confirmed that there were major information-sharing failures between
law enforcement agencies.
We are still going through the nearly 500-page report, as well as 309
pages of new documents the Justice Department produced late Wednesday.
However, I was surprised to learn from the report that Attorney General
Holder testified that he doesn't remember the conversation with me
about Fast and Furious in my office on January 31, 2011. That is when I
handed the first letters to the Attorney General opening the
investigation of Fast and Furious.
I happen to remember that conversation. My staff told the Attorney
General that day what whistleblowers had told us. Remember,
whistleblowers got involved in coming to Congress because for months
they were sending reports up from Phoenix to main Justice that selling
guns illegally or encouraging our gun dealers to sell guns illegally
was not a very smart thing for our Justice Department to do. And when
they weren't listened to, these whistleblowers started coming to this
Senator.
Specifically, at that meeting with Holder, we discussed that two
weapons the ATF let go in Fast and Furious were found at the murder
scene of Border Patrol Agent Terry. I emphasized I was personally
bringing it to his attention--meaning the attention of the Attorney
General--because these were very serious and credible allegations, not
just some run-of-the-mill letter that I send to departments generally.
Yet even after that meeting, the Department didn't take this case
seriously. The inspector general's independent report says so
explicitly.
We do not believe that the gravity of this allegation was
met with an equally serious effort by the Department to
determine whether ATF and the U.S. Attorney's Office had
allowed the sale of hundreds of weapons to straw purchasers.
The Justice Department claimed its process for writing letters to
Congress was sound. But its response to me, in its February 4, 2011,
letter, was false. That letter came back only 4 or 5 days after I first
handed the letter to the Attorney General. The February 4, 2011, letter
was false because DOJ later withdrew it and claimed it relied on bad
information from the ATF and the U.S. Attorney's Office. However, the
inspector general agreed with me that the Justice Department's response
was seriously flawed--and not just the initial response. The inspector
general also found that the Justice Department knew its initial reply
wasn't true when it reaffirmed the denial of the whistleblower
allegations in a May 2, 2011 letter to me.
Instead of acknowledging it was wrong, the Department repeatedly
doubled down on its denials.
For example, Attorney General Holder said on multiple occasions since
November 2011 that the wiretap evidence authorized by the Justice
Department headquarters did not put senior leadership on notice that
the ATF was walking guns.
Most recently, on June 7 of this year, the Attorney General went
before the House Judiciary Committee. At this point, many Members of
Congress had obtained and read the affidavits, even though the Justice
Department did not want us to see them. Members who reviewed them said
that the affidavits contained evidence of gunwalking. But Attorney
General Holder testified:
I've looked at these affidavits, I've looked at these
summaries. There's nothing in those affidavits as I've
reviewed them that indicates gunwalking was allowed.
The inspector general has read these same wiretap affidavits. Since
the inspector general is independent and nonpartisan, that independent,
nonpartisan conclusion is at odds with the quote I just gave you from
the Attorney General, and that quote from the Attorney General comes
from testimony before the other body.
I quote from his report:
[T]he affidavits described specific incidents that would
suggest . . . ATF was employing a strategy of not
interdicting weapons or arresting known straw purchasers.
In fact, much of the inspector general's report is redacted because
those affidavits are still under seal. Chairman Issa and I asked the
Justice Department months ago to move to unseal them so the public
could decide for themselves. Now the inspector general has joined
Congressman Issa and this Senator, and is also calling for the
Department to ask for permission of the court to release the
affidavits. The Justice Department should have filed that motion months
ago. Unsealing the affidavits will allow the American people and the
Terry family to see the whole story.
The details of those affidavits show that senior officials knew, or
should have known, about gunwalking in Fast and Furious. The inspector
general independently confirmed this point, quite contrary to Attorney
General Holder's denials. Those denials by the Attorney General show
either incompetence or lack of truthfulness. Congress created an
explicit statutory duty for certain senior Justice Department officials
to authorize all wiretap applications, not just those involved with
Fast and Furious.
Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jason Weinstein, who served
directly under criminal division head Lanny Breuer, was one of the
officials who approved some of these affidavits. Senior officials such
as Mr. Weinstein tried to claim that they shouldn't be held accountable
because they only read memos summarizing the wiretaps, not the full
wiretap applications, as I think is required under law. But the
inspector general found that Justice Department officials should review
more than just the cover memo. He said that under the statute, they
have the responsibility to be fully informed before authorizing wiretap
applications.
Yet the inspector general also found that even
. . . a reader of the . . . cover memorandum would infer from
the facts that ATF agents did not take enforcement action to
interdict the weapons or arrest [straw purchasers].
So the memo Mr. Weinstein admits he did read indicated that ATF had
walked guns, according to the inspector general.
Back in September of last year, Attorney General Holder said at a
press conference:
The notion that somehow or other this thing reaches the
upper levels of the Justice Department is something that . .
. I don't think is supported by the facts.
Maybe the Attorney General doesn't think someone who reports directly
to the head of the criminal division is a senior official, but this
Senator does.
As a result of the inspector general's findings, Deputy Assistant
Attorney General Weinstein has resigned. Mr. Weinstein should be held
accountable, but he shouldn't take the fall for more senior officials
who are also culpable.
Mr. Weinstein reported directly to Assistant Attorney General Lanny
Breuer. When the Justice Department sent its letter to me denying ATF
ever walked guns, Breuer knew otherwise. He knew in 2010 about
gunwalking in another case, Operation Wide Receiver. That was long
before the allegations in Fast and Furious; yet he waited 9 months
before e-mails about Wide Receiver were about to be produced to
Congress before he publicly apologized for not doing more about
gunwalking in the previous gun walking Wide Receiver.
[[Page 14763]]
I asked Breuer whether he had seen the draft of the February 4 false
letter to me. Breuer testified:
I cannot say for sure whether I saw a draft of the letter
that was sent to you.
Now I will explain why that was a false statement that he made to me.
A month after Breuer's testimony, the Justice Department released
more documents showing that Breuer was sent five drafts of the letter
before it was sent to me. He forwarded three of them to his personal e-
mail account. Breuer still maintained in written responses that it was
``highly unlikely'' he had read the letter because he was in Mexico
when it was sent. On this matter, the inspector general report
contained a significant factual error.
By the way, there aren't many errors in this inspector general's
report. I compliment him for a very good job that he did.
The report read:
The OIG found no e-mail messages from Breuer in which he
proposed edits, commented on the drafts, or otherwise
indicated he had read them.
That statement of the inspector general is not true. In response to
one of the drafts that Breuer received, he commented to Weinstein that
it was ``great work.''
That may not be a proposed edit, but it is certainly a comment. Thus,
Breuer's statement to Congress is simply not credible. E-mails show
that Breuer was very engaged in the process, asking for and receiving
updates from Weinstein at every stage of the drafting of that letter of
February 4, 2011 that 8 or 9 months later they withdrew because it was
false. Breuer and Weinstein sent multiple e-mails to each other on the
matter each day, with Breuer asking after a quiet period, ``Jason, let
me know what's happening with this.''
So, quite obviously, he was involved before the letter was ever sent
to me. Rather than holding him accountable for this evidence, the
inspector general's report gives him a pass.
Worse, new e-mails produced Wednesday show that Breuer was in the
weeds about his deputy Jason Weinstein coming to brief the Senate
Judiciary Committee staff a week after the Justice Department's false
letter was sent to me.
On February 13, 2011, Breuer sent an e-mail about such details as
what specific questions my staff asked of Weinstein at this briefing.
Breuer wrote:
The goal--and by all accounts it seems to have worked--was
to communicate that ATF's work in the AZ case and others like
it reflected sound judgment and investigative work.
It is clear that Breuer was in the weeds enough to know what the
Justice Department was communicating to me was undermined by the
gunwalking he knew about in Wide Receiver. He should have come forward
in February 2011 and told Congress that he knew ATF had in fact walked
guns. His failure to do so, coupled with his attempt to mislead
Congress, is why I have called for him to resign or be fired. I made
that request last fall on the floor of this Senate.
The Attorney General has been saying for months that he would hold
off on any personnel action until the inspector general's report was
released. We have been hearing that for almost a year, ``Let the
inspector general finish his work, and then we will decide what to
do.'' So, Mr. Attorney General, it is time to hold people accountable.
I wish to close with language from a statement that the family of
Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry issued. Agent Terry is the person where
two guns that were walked were found at his murder scene.
From the family of Brian Terry:
The Department's failure chronicled in the report had
deadly and tragic consequences for hundreds of innocent
American and Mexican victims of violent crimes.
And our son, friend, relative and hero, Brian Terry, is
dead.
Questions and concerns should have been raised before the
weapons purchased in this failed government sting wound up in
the hands of drug dealers and killers, including those who
killed Brian.
The focus today should not be on political spin control nor
on praise for the Department of Justice supervisors who chose
to resign in light of the report's findings, but rather on
the gross negligence of the Department documented in the
report and the tragic consequences of that negligence.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Franken). The Senator from Iowa.
The Ryan Budget
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, our Nation faces an absolutely fundamental
choice in this year's election: Are we going to rescue, restore, and
rebuild the middle class or are we going to continue to shift even more
wealth and advantages to those at the top at the expense of the middle
class?
As I have done every day we have been in session here, I want to
point out to the American people what the blueprint is for this country
under the Romney-Ryan budget. That is their budget. A budget is a
blueprint of where you want to go, what you want to do, how you want to
build something--how you want to build the future of our country. That
is the Ryan budget. So I want to take a look again at the Ryan budget
and what it does for the future of this country.
First of all, the very centerpiece of the Ryan budget is whopping new
tax cuts, mostly for those at the top, the richest 2 percent. Those
making $1 million or more a year would receive $265,000 a year in new
tax cuts on top of the $129,000 they would get from extending the old
Bush tax cuts. That means now if you are in the top 2 percent and you
are making over $1 million a year, you get $394,000 in new tax cuts.
We keep hearing about Mr. Romney and Mr. Ryan talking about
entitlements. We have got to cut back on entitlements. Don't we? What
about this? That is what they always talk about. They are talking about
people who are lower income, who rely upon certain things such as
nutrition assistance or job training programs, maybe Pell grants for
students, for poor kids to go to college--cut back on those. What about
this entitlement? This is an entitlement; you are entitled to it: If
you make over $1 million a year, you will be entitled to those tax
cuts.
We don't hear them cutting back on that entitlement. No. They want to
extend it. How do they pay for all these new tax cuts? The total is
$4.5 trillion over 10 years. They do not exactly say how, but the
Republican budget, that Ryan budget, would offset these tax cuts by
making very deep and Draconian cuts in programs that undergird the
middle class--everything from education, student loans, grants, law
enforcement, clean air, clean water, food safety, medical research,
highways, bridges and other infrastructure, all cut in the Ryan budget.
The Ryan budget, as I will explain a little bit more in detail
shortly, would end Medicare. We will hear a lot of people saying it
will end Medicare as we know it. Well, if we end something as we know
it, that means we end it.
The Romney-Ryan budget, since Mr. Romney called it marvelous--the
Romney-Ryan budget would end Medicare and make it a voucher care
system. That would force seniors to pay nearly $6,000 more per year out
of their pockets for health care in the future.
Last, they offset these tax cuts by raising taxes on the middle
class--actually raising taxes on the middle class. Mr. Ryan's budget is
to use the deficit crisis as a pretext for dismantling Medicare,
Medicaid, cutting education and environmental protection, workplace
safety, and all the things I have said. What they do is double down on
the theory that if we just give more and more to those at the top, it
will trickle down to everybody else. That theory was tried under
President George W. Bush, and it did not work out too well.
Today I want to focus on the devastating impact of the Romney-Ryan
budget on Medicare and on health care generally. Since he first arrived
in Congress, Representative Ryan has consistently pushed a very
specific and radical health care program to end Medicare. Under his
proposal, seniors would no longer have the guaranteed Medicare benefits
they have enjoyed for decades. Instead, they would get a voucher from
the Federal Government. They can then go out and buy individual private
insurance or Medicare.
[[Page 14764]]
Again, they say: You can buy Medicare. You can stay in Medicare if
you want or you can buy private insurance. Let's take a look at that.
In 10 years the Ryan plan would eliminate Medicare, shift to vouchers,
but the vouchers would not be enough to cover the health care costs so
seniors' out-of-pocket costs would go up.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has projected that the
Ryan proposal could increase annual out-of-pocket costs for seniors by
more than $1,200 in 2030, almost $6,000 in 2050. If we total all these
years, if we add one year after the other that seniors would have to
pay, seniors retiring in 2023, over their lifetime, would be paying
almost $60,000 more in total. For seniors retiring in 2030 it would be
about $125,000. When we get up to 2050, a senior retiring then would be
spending about $330,000 over their retirement years just for health
care. That is what voucher care means.
In addition, the Ryan plan would leave the traditional Medicare
system in a death spiral. Mr. Romney and Mr. Ryan, in extolling their
budget, say: You know, we will give them a voucher. If you want to, you
can go out and buy traditional Medicare or you can buy a private
insurance plan.
What does that mean? That means if someone is a very healthy senior
they might get a better deal by going out and buying a private
insurance plan. So who stays in Medicare? The poorest and the sickest.
Then the Medicare costs explode and it becomes unaffordable and we
destroy the whole Medicare system. Do not buy that argument of Mr.
Ryan, that someone can stay in Medicare if they want. No, it would
destroy it.
Make no mistake, the Ryan plan is a radical break with the past. This
is not some little transition. This is not some little bit of
experimentation or something. No, the Ryan budget is a radical break
with what we have had in the past. It turns a successful, reliable
comprehensive source of health care that seniors have depended on for
decades, paid into over years of hard work--they turn it into an
unpredictable, unreliable voucher care system.
Our approach is very different. President Obama has fought to
strengthen Medicare, not end it. He believes Medicare is a sacred
compact, and he has improved Medicare in the Affordable Care Act or
what we now know as ObamaCare.
My friends on the other side of the aisle have been saying
``ObamaCare'' as though it is a pejorative. It has a bad connotation. I
use it as a very good connotation because I want to tell you President
Obama does care. He cares about the fact that kids can stay on their
parents' policy until age 26. He does care that insurance companies can
no longer put lifetime caps on real sick people any longer. President
Obama does care if someone has a preexisting condition, they cannot be
denied affordable health care insurance. So, yes, President Obama does
care. That is why I think ObamaCare really does describe it well--Obama
cares.
For example, in ObamaCare we eliminate gaps in coverage; that is, the
doughnut hole. We close the doughnut hole. We reduce the cost of
prescription drugs. According to Medicare's Actuary--not me, the
Actuary--the Affordable Care Act extends the program's solvency by 8
years, from 2016 to 2024, by getting rid of wasteful subsidies to
insurance companies, getting rid of fraud, waste, and abuse in the
system. So our plan for Medicare is simple: Mend it, don't end it. That
is just what we do.
The Ryan plan is bad news for those who depend on Medicare for their
basic health care needs. It is disastrous for people who depend on the
Medicaid Program. The Ryan budget would block-grant Medicaid, put the
entire program under the States, and then cut it by $810 billion over
the next 10 years. That's right. The Medicaid Program, block-grant it
to the States, cut it by $810 billion over the next 10 years.
What does Medicaid do? Seniors, if they pay into the program, have
Medicare when they retire. If they become disabled, if they have paid
in the requisite amount of money, they can get disability coverage or
survivors' benefits. I am talking about Medicaid, health care for low-
income Americans and other populations.
The Medicaid Program is something we instituted over half a century
ago now to tell all Americans that they are going to be able to have
quality health care. Do you remember that debate? I remember watching
one of the debates that the Republicans were having in their
Presidential series. The question was asked: You know we take care of
sick people in our country. Where do they go? They can go to the
emergency room. It costs a lot more money. But the question was asked--
something about, do you just deny that? A lot of people would say just
let them die, leave them out on the street.
Is that the kind of country we want to be? If we are sick and we do
not have the wherewithal we cannot get health care? We moved beyond
that. We have moved beyond that as a society.
The other population is Americans with disabilities. Almost one in
every two Americans, almost 50 percent of Americans with disabilities
depend on Medicaid for access to health services and support that span
everything from hospital to home care. Services from the Medicaid
Program allow our citizens with disabilities to live with dignity and
with purpose in their homes and in their communities. Nearly 3 million
seniors and people with disabilities use the Medicaid Program to avoid
costly nursing home care. If we cut home and community-based care for
this group of Americans, then they would have to turn to institutional
care.
The short-term cuts, these cuts they are going to make in Medicaid,
will lead to longer term expenses because we know that institutional
care is more expensive than care at home or in the community. I guess,
unless we just say to them: Tough luck, you are on your own. Tough
luck. You have a disability? Cut your Medicaid. Can't live at home? Go
live in an institution. Oh, the institution is no longer there because
we cannot afford it--then I guess you have to go out on the street and
beg.
Is that what we want to see? Like many third world countries where we
see people with disabilities on the corners begging? Families with a
child with a disability out in the street begging? Is that what we
want? Do we want to walk down the street and see people who, through no
fault of their own, are disabled and they are out there begging with a
tin cup and a tin plate? Is that the kind of country we want to become?
To dismantle the Medicaid Program, as they would do under the Ryan
budget, would dismantle our commitment to quality affordable health
care for all. The Medicaid Program is a lifeline to hundreds of
thousands of middle-class families--yes, middle-class families, working
families who have children with lifelong disabilities such as Down
syndrome or autism. Instead of cutting these families off from a
critical lifeline, we should be strengthening the long-term viability
of this program, Medicaid, reassuring these families that America is
not going to turn its back on them when they need help the most.
You do not have to take my word for it about shredding this compact.
I have said many times that we have a unique American social contract,
a compact that evolved over our march from a society in which we had
child labor, which, if people were older and poor, they went to the
county home; where children died in infancy; where, if people were
disabled, they were put in dark places.
We evolved a social contract. We said, basically, in America we are
going to provide a ladder of opportunity or ramp of opportunity. We are
going to make sure we take care that we educate our young and take care
of our elderly, a social safety net.
Here is the former Reagan economic adviser, Mr. Bruce Bartlett. Here
is what he said:
Distributionally, the Ryan plan is a monstrosity. The rich
would receive huge tax cuts while the social safety net would
be shredded to pay for them.
Then again, we don't have to take those words. I think the bishops
had something to say about that when the
[[Page 14765]]
bishops said the Ryan budget fails the moral test. The Nation's
Catholic bishops reiterated their demand that the Federal budget
protect the poor and said the GOP measure ``fails to meet these moral
criteria.'' That is the Ryan budget.
At the centerpiece of the Ryan budget is its promise to repeal the
Affordable Care Act or ObamaCare. Again, once we get past this
political theater and look at what repeal of the Affordable Care Act or
ObamaCare would actually mean, it is not a very pretty picture. Repeal
would reopen the Medicare prescription doughnut hole, requiring seniors
to pay about $600 more per year on average for prescription drugs.
Thanks to the Affordable Care Act or ObamaCare, about 86 million
Americans received at least one free preventive service in 2011 and
almost 1 million Iowans received at least one free prevention service
in 2011. That would be repealed, and then they would be charged.
Americans now get services such as mammograms, colonoscopies, and other
cancer screenings. Eighty-six million Americans received free
preventive services. This is in keeping with ObamaCare's goal that
changes from a sick care society to a health care society. Rather than
focusing all of our attention and money on emergency room care or when
people get the sickest, we start to move it more upfront to preventive
care. We would get to people early and prevent illness. We would keep
people healthy and out of the hospital in the first place.
The Ryan budget shreds all of that. It is back to the old system we
always had--no preventive care. When someone gets sick, they go to the
emergency room, and that is busting us as a country. That is breaking
our budget. We have to put more into prevention.
Mr. President, your mother was right, an ounce of prevention is worth
a pound of cure. I don't know why we have not learned that. We did
learn it. We put that in ObamaCare.
The Ryan budget says, no, we want to get rid of that. The repeal of
ObamaCare would allow insurance companies to deny people coverage
because of a preexisting condition. Nearly half of Americans have some
form of a preexisting health condition, and right now the Affordable
Care Act covers all children. In 2014--just 1 year and a little over 2
months from now--everyone will be covered even if they have a
preexisting condition.
This is Eleanor Pierce from Cedar Falls, IA. She was denied health
insurance, when she lost her job, because of a preexisting condition of
high blood pressure. Without coverage, she racked up $60,000 in medical
debts. If you repeal ObamaCare, more than 30 million people would be
denied access to affordable and comprehensive health insurance. It
would make insured Americans pay more than tens of billions of dollars
of uncompensated care when they show up in emergency rooms.
Actually, repealing ObamaCare would cost American families an average
of over $1,100 extra in premiums annually right now that we are paying
for uncompensated care when people show up in an emergency room. Repeal
would kick more than 3 million young people off their parents' policy.
That hurts people like Emily Schlichting. She testified at one of our
hearings. She is a young woman from Omaha. She said that ``young people
are the future of this country and we are the most affected by reform.
We are the generation that is most uninsured. We need the Affordable
Care Act because it is literally an investment in the future of this
country.''
She suffers from a rare autoimmune disorder. In the bad old days,
that made her uninsurable. Thanks to the Affordable Care Act or
ObamaCare, she is now covered under her parents' policy until age 26.
Guess what. In 2014 her preexisting condition will mean nothing. She
will be able to get affordable health insurance. The Ryan budget says,
sorry, Emily, you are on your own.
These are just a few of the ways in which the Ryan plan to repeal
ObamaCare would drag us backward to the bad old days when insurance
companies were in the driver's seat and millions of Americans were one
illness away from bankruptcy.
Over the last few weeks, Governor Romney and Representative Ryan have
been saying that the President's health reform robs Medicare. I heard
that he said that in Florida last night. I don't know how else to say
this, but that is totally false. That is untrue. First of all,
nonpartisan economists have certified that the President's health care
plan or ObamaCare has strengthened the Medicare Program and extends its
solvency by 8 years. If we were robbing the Medicare Program, how could
it extend its solvency by 8 more years?
The Affordable Care Act doesn't rob Medicare, it makes the program
more efficient and more reliable. It saves $700 billion, not from
beneficiaries, not from recipients who are on Medicare, but from
overpayments to private insurance companies, providers,
pharmaceuticals. It cracks down on fraud, waste, and abuse.
What is interesting is that the Ryan budget has exactly the same
savings in his budget as ObamaCare has in the plan we passed here. It
is the same and exact to the dollar. It is written the same way. As
President Clinton said: ``You gotta give [him] one thing--it takes some
brass to attack a guy for doing what you did.'' Ryan put in his budget
exactly what we had in ObamaCare, and now they are attacking President
Obama for what they have in their budget. Go figure. In both of his
budget proposals, Mr. Ryan keeps all of the Affordable Care Act's
medical improvements that we put in the Affordable Care Act.
I heard Mr. Romney in Florida last night attacking President Obama
for doing what Mr. Romney said was marvelous about Mr. Ryan's budget.
In short, Mr. Ryan's Medicare plan would end Medicare.
There is something else that I hear them say all the time. They say
they are going to protect everyone over age 55. Under the Ryan plan he
says they are going to go to this voucher care, but anyone over age 55
is protected. I have to ask: Protected from what? I mean, if it is such
a good deal, why don't we do it for everybody? Yet Mr. Ryan and Mr.
Romney say, no, everyone over age 55 has the same Medicare system and
they don't get the voucher program. It is only for those under age 55.
There must be something wrong with it then. If it is so darn good, why
don't they put everybody in there right away? Conversely, if they are
protecting everyone over age 55, why don't they protect everyone under
age 55? Got it? If they are aged 55 and over they are unprotected. Put
them on a voucher program. That is the dirty little secret they are not
telling us.
Again, by repealing the Affordable Care Act, ObamaCare, 439,000 Iowa
seniors would be forced onto these vouchers, 60,000 Iowa seniors would
be forced back into the doughnut hole and paying more money for their
drugs, and 400,000 Iowa seniors would pay for preventive services that
they now get at no cost. More than 30 million people will be denied
coverage under the Ryan budget. ObamaCare insures more than 94 percent
of all Americans. That is what would happen; they would be denied
coverage.
I will close with this: The bottom line is President Obama and
ObamaCare protects Medicare. It keeps it solvent. It keeps everyone
covered. The Ryan budget shreds the social safety net for Medicaid and
destroys Medicare by turning it into a voucher system. ObamaCare
protects Americans from insurance company abuses, expands coverage,
increases the quality of care, shifts more into prevention and keeping
people healthy. The Ryan budget does away with all of that and would
drag us backward to the bad old days.
When we look at the Ryan budget--or the Romney-Ryan budget, since Mr.
Romney called it marvelous--we have to shake our heads in disbelief
that they would take America back that far after we have come so far in
covering people and getting rid of preexisting condition clauses.
ObamaCare takes off caps on lifetime coverage for those who have a
serious illness so they don't go bankrupt. ObamaCare makes sure kids in
America can stay on their parents' policies. We don't want to go back,
and that is why this Ryan budget must be totally defeated.
[[Page 14766]]
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I want to congratulate my colleague,
Senator Harkin, for his remarks. I certainly agree with him. I want to
amplify a point Senator Harkin made. There was a frightening story in
the New York Times today. I don't know that people have digested it,
but the headline is ``Life Spans Shrink for Least-Educated Whites in
the U.S.''
Generally speaking, the trend for life expectancy in the United
States, and all over the world, has been going up. The goal of a good
society and a strong health care system is to see that people live
longer, healthier, and happier lives, but as a result of the
devastating attacks in a variety of ways on the working class of this
country, over a period of years--not just starting yesterday--this is
where we are. Let me quote from this article. I hope people hear this
because this is shocking stuff. I quote:
The steepest declines were for white women without a high
school diploma, who lost five years of life between 1990 and
2008.
Their life expectancy went down by 5 years. This is astronomical.
Going back to the article, it says:
S. Jay Olshansky, a public health professor at the
University of Illinois at Chicago and the lead investigator
on the study, published last month in Health Affairs.
What happened is between 1990 and 2008--an 18-year period--life
expectancy for white women without a high school diploma declined by 5
years.
The article states:
White men lacking a high school diploma lost 3 years of
life. Life expectancy for both blacks and Hispanics of the
same education level rose, the data showed. But Blacks
overall do not live as long as whites, while Hispanics live
longer than both whites and blacks.
So let's digest what that means. As chairman of the Subcommittee on
Primary Health and Aging, last year we held a hearing entitled
``Poverty as a Death Sentence.'' What that hearing pointed out is that
people who are in the top 20 percent live, as I recall, about 6 years
longer than people in the bottom 20 percent. But what new evidence is
suggesting is that people without a high school degree--the least
educated people in America and often the poorest people in America--we
are now seeing a significant decline in the life expectancies of both
men and women. This is moving in exactly the wrong direction.
The authors of the study are not exactly sure why this is taking
place. Many low-income, uneducated people are using drugs, cutting
short their lives. Lack of health care is certainly one of the reasons.
More and more low-income people can't access health care, which is why
it is so important that we defeat the Romney-Ryan effort to devastate,
as Senator Harkin just said, Medicaid and throw millions and millions
of people off health insurance. If life expectancy for low-income
people is now going down, think of what it will mean if we throw
millions more off Medicaid. It is a death sentence.
I also wish to say a word on the issue of Social Security, and I wish
to thank the Presiding Officer and Senator Whitehouse and Senator
Begich for joining me yesterday in releasing a letter which had 29
signatures on it from Members of the Senate, and that letter was pretty
simple. What it said is that Social Security has not added a nickel to
the deficit because Social Security, of course, is funded by the
payroll tax. It said Social Security has a $2.7 trillion surplus and
can pay out all the benefits to eligible Americans over the next 21
years. So it is absolutely wrong and bad public policy to be talking
about cutting Social Security within the context of deficit reduction
when Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit.
The reason we are in a deficit situation in a significant way--the
reason we have gone a very long way in the wrong direction since
January 2001 when Bill Clinton left office with a $236 billion
surplus--has nothing to do with Social Security. It has everything to
do with Bush and those people who voted for two wars and forgot to pay
for them, thereby adding to the deficit; those people who gave huge tax
breaks, much of it going to the richest people in this country, forgot
to pay for it; passed the Medicare Part D prescription drug program and
forgot to pay for it; and a recession caused by Wall Street which
resulted in lower revenue coming into the Federal Government. Those are
the reasons why we are in a deficit, not because of Social Security.
I understand Republicans want to cut Social Security. That is what
they do. They are not very sympathetic to Social Security. They have
opposed Social Security for years. They don't believe the government
should be involved in retirement security. They want to balance the
budget on the backs of the elderly, the sick, the children and the poor
and give tax breaks to the rich. I understand that. More and more
Americans understand that.
But I will tell my colleagues what I am concerned about. I am
concerned about President Obama. Four years ago, the President was very
clear on this issue. When the President was running for election
against Senator McCain, this is what he told AARP and, ironically, he
just spoke to AARP, I believe it was today. So 4 years ago, same venue.
This is what he said 4 years ago:
John McCain's campaign has suggested that the best answer
for the growing pressures on Social Security might be to cut
cost-of-living adjustments or raise the retirement age. Let
me be clear: I will not do either.
Candidate Barack Obama said that 4 years ago. Barack Obama is in the
White House now.
We have people such as billionaire Pete Peterson, who has been
pushing deficit reduction on the backs of working people for years now.
He has been spending huge amounts of money to make sure we do deficit
reduction not by asking the wealthiest people in this country to pay
their fair share but by balancing the budget on the backs of the
elderly, the children, the sick, and the poor. These guys have come up
with a strategy called the chained CPI.
Nobody in America outside Capitol Hill knows what the chained CPI is.
It is a new formulation as to how we determine cost-of-living
adjustments--COLAs--for seniors. What these economists have decided--
these rightwing economists--COLAs today are formulated in a way that
are too generous--too generous for America's seniors and for disabled
veterans. They want to reformulate how we come up with these COLAs. If
they get their way--and I have a great deal of fear that unless some of
us stop them, unless the American people stop them, they will, in fact,
get their way--what this will mean is that if a person is 65 years of
age today, by the time they are 75, they will lose about $560 a year in
their benefits. If a person is 65 years of age today, in 20 years, when
that person is 85, they will lose $1,000 a year.
Let me be very clear. I do not believe we should move to a deficit
reduction on the backs of a senior citizen living on $14,000 or $15,000
a year and take $1,000 away from them and then get on the floor of the
Senate and talk about how we have to give more tax breaks to
billionaires. I think that is not only morally inexcusable, I think it
is bad economics.
While we are talking about this so-called chained CPI which will cut
benefits for seniors, we are also talking about cutting VA benefits for
disabled veterans. So I want to hear all these tough guys here who
think we should balance the budget on the backs of the elderly and the
children, let them get up here and tell us why, when somebody fought in
a war to defend the United States--maybe they lost their legs or their
eyes or their arms--they want to cut their benefits and then they want
to give tax breaks to billionaires.
The American people don't want to do that. So I think we have to get
on the phones right now. We have to call our Senators and we have to
call Members of the House and we have to call President Obama: Mr.
President, 4 years ago you told us you weren't going to cut Social
Security. Is that still your position? Four years ago, you came up with
an idea that is, in fact, exactly the right idea. You made the point
that multimillionaires are contributing the same amount of money
[[Page 14767]]
into the Social Security trust fund as somebody making $110,000, and 4
years ago you made the point that if we lift that cap--and we don't
have to start at $110,000; we can go up to $250,000--if we lift that
cap above $250,000, we could bring in enough revenue to fund Social
Security for the next 75 years. That was your position, Mr. President,
4 years ago. Is that your position today? Are you going to stand up to
the Republicans and the Wall Street folks who want us to cut Social
Security?
That is where we are right now.
My last point I wish to make is on the much discussed remarks of
Governor Romney from the video released recently that has gone all over
the Internet. There is a lot that can be said about it, and I suspect
everybody has said a lot. I just want to pick up on one point. I feel
strongly about this point because I am the son of a working-class
family--of a father who never made a lot of money but worked hard his
entire life and of a mother who raised her kids as best she could. So I
take this kind of personally.
This is what Mr. Romney said in connection with the famous 47 percent
of the people who don't pay taxes, which is not true, of course. As we
know, they pay Social Security taxes and gasoline taxes, Medicare
taxes. But be that as it may, that is not the issue I want to get to.
This is what Mr. Romney said:
My job is not to worry about those people. I will never
convince them they should take personal responsibility and
care for their lives.
Let me repeat that.
I will never convince them they should take personal
responsibility and care for their lives.
He was talking about my parents. He was talking about the parents of
millions of people who worked hard their whole lives who don't need
advice from a multimillionaire who went to elite schools and had all
the money and privileges his family could provide him. We don't need
advice from him to families who have worked and struggled their whole
lives to, in fact, take personal responsibility to make sure their kids
did well. That is an incredibly arrogant statement from a guy
surrounded by money, speaking to millionaires, who should not be making
that statement.
People on Social Security, people on Medicare, in many cases, have
worked their entire lives, have done the best they could to provide for
their kids, have seen their kids go to college. Many of the people on
Social Security, Medicare have fought in wars defending this country.
They do not need advice from a multimillionaire about how they should
take personal responsibility for their lives. That is an insulting
remark and it would become Governor Romney to apologize for that
remark.
With that, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.
Mr. HATCH. Might I ask how much time I have?
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Tester). There is no controlled time. The
Senator may consume as much time as he wishes.
Mr. HATCH. I thank the Chair.
Mr. President, I have to say I always enjoy my colleague from
Vermont. He is a very sincere and dedicated man and I like him. There
is no use kidding about it; you can't help but like him, in my eyes.
But I don't know any Republican Senator who wants to cut Social
Security. They want to save Social Security. I don't know anybody who
wants to cut Medicare or Medicaid. We want to save Medicare and
Medicaid. Anybody in their right mind who looks at this knows we have
to do some things and change some things or we are not going to have
Medicare and Medicaid for our people and we will not have Social
Security continue.
With regard to Mitt Romney, yes, he may not have articulated his
thoughts as well as he may have wished. But there is no way in this
world Mitt Romney meant his comments to be taken the way they have been
taken by the left in this country. All he is saying is there are too
many people riding in the wagon and not enough people pulling the wagon
and we are going to have to get jobs for those who should be outside
the wagon, pulling the wagon, and help them to have the self-esteem
that comes from working. That is what the whole welfare bill of 1996
was all about, in having a work requirement: We are going to help you,
we are going to subsidize you, we are going to give you job training,
but after a certain period of time, if you don't have a job, you are
off the dole. Literally two-thirds, almost two-thirds of the people who
have been on the dole, some for generations, went to work after
incentives were realigned through Republican welfare reform. That is
the Republican approach, to get people back to work, to provide
efficient incentives, and to get this economy moving again; not to hurt
anybody. So these things can be exaggerated to a point where sometimes
it becomes confusing to the American people, and that is not right
either.
I know Mitt Romney. I know how he cares for people. I know what he
did when he was a bishop in the LDS Church, in the Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-day Saints. I was a bishop when I was running for
Senate, and I have to tell my colleagues I spent at least 30 hours a
week of my own time and expense, because there is no paid clergy in the
LDS faith, other than the general authorities and those are very few
people, and we all volunteer our time. We help people from every walk
of life.
Fiscal History of the 1990s and 2000s
Mr. President, I am here today to talk about some very important
things that are related to what I have just been saying.
There has been much discussion by President Obama about the source of
our current economic and fiscal challenges. The President seems to
suggest we could easily return to the prosperity of the 1990s by
adopting the policies of President Clinton, particularly by raising
taxes to the level they were during his Presidency. At the recent
Democratic National Convention, President Clinton himself made a
similar argument. But the positive economic and fiscal history of the
1990s was not owing to higher taxes, and the economic and fiscal
challenges we face today--in particular, our $16 trillion national debt
and exploding entitlement spending programs--cannot be fixed by higher
tax rates.
During his convention speech, President Clinton claimed that
President Obama inherited a damaged economy, put a floor under the
crash, began the road to recovery, and laid the foundation for a
modern, well-balanced economy. Tell that to the 12.5 million unemployed
Americans who continue to struggle with unemployment. Tell that to
Americans who have been suffering through unemployment rates above 8
percent for 43 consecutive months. Explain to Americans how
redistribution, massive expansion of refundable tax credits, ballooned
transfer payments, and an interventionist Federal Reserve represent a
foundation for future growth of the economy. Explain how this economy
is ``well balanced'' when government spending represents as much as 25
percent of GDP, debt is higher than an entire year's worth of the
output of the economy, and we have an activist Federal Reserve that has
increased its balance sheet by well over $1 trillion.
President Clinton does admit that, under President Obama, we are not
where we need to be. So, instead, he asks whether we are better off
than when President Obama took office, and he answers in the
affirmative. Putting aside the rhetoric and spin and considering the
facts, this is a dubious claim at best.
Relative to the beginning of 2009 when President Obama took office,
jobs are down by 261,000 and unemployment remains above 8 percent. But
wait. Democrats say the President cannot be held responsible for bad
things that happened during his Presidency; those things were inherited
or due to Europe or caused by uncontrollable forces. All right, then.
Let's look at the President's jobs record after the end of the
recession, which the National Bureau of Economic Research says was June
of 2009. Since then, job growth under President Obama has been only
73,600 jobs per month on average--far too
[[Page 14768]]
weak to move the unemployment rate below 8 percent.
Democrats say the only reason we do not have more jobs is because
Republicans will not agree to more Keynesian stimulus--never mind that
the previous dose, which cost over $800 billion and was promised to
deliver unemployment below 8 percent, failed to get unemployment down.
Remember those promised shovel-ready jobs that became a source of
amusement to the President? Remember the promised infrastructure?
Americans should ask themselves where all those things are. Where are
the jobs? Well, the President makes claims of saving millions of jobs
because of stimulus magic. And the Federal Reserve claims millions of
jobs saved from its so-called quantitative easing. There you have it.
The President's foundation of well-balanced economic growth rests on
debt-financed Keynesian stimulus and Federal Reserve stimulus.
Absent anything but a dismal record on jobs, President Obama has
decided to try to run on President Clinton's record. So let's consider
President Clinton's rose-colored nostalgia--a revisionist history
adopted by President Obama and his surrogates.
President Clinton's view goes like this: I came into office with a
weak economy. I raised taxes. The economy boomed.
President Clinton's depiction of the roaring 1990s is missing a few
chapters. In his first years in office, Democrats controlled Congress.
He and the Democrats raised income taxes and gas taxes. He tried to
impose a Btu energy tax, attempted a government takeover of health
care--known as HillaryCare and proposed a $31 billion stimulus while
putting off welfare reform.
The first few years of the Clinton Presidency can fairly be
characterized as prioritizing tax-and-spend economic policy. But
HillaryCare failed, and American voters decided to make some changes.
They faced uncertainty over taxes, health care, energy costs, deficits,
and runaway government spending. After 2 years of complete Democratic
control of Washington, American voters decided in 1994 that Republican
control of the Senate and House was desirable.
Does this sound familiar? A new Democrat in the White House, complete
Democratic control of Congress, prioritizing higher taxes, a government
takeover of the Nation's health care system, and more spending,
followed by a popular uprising that gave some Republican balance in
Congress. It was the first Republican Congress in over 40 years.
But in contrast to President Obama's refusal to heed the message of
the 2010 election, President Clinton listened to the American people
and moved to the political center. He embraced a Republican goal of a
balanced budget and, after two vetoes, signed GOP welfare reform
legislation shortly before the 1996 election. In 1996 President Clinton
was reelected, but Republicans retained control of Congress.
Now, President Obama claims these were the good old days because
President Clinton raised taxes. Let's consider that tax landscape.
President Clinton did raise the top income tax rate in 1993, and
Democrats credit that increase for shrinking the deficit and unleashing
future economic growth. However, he also agreed with Republicans in
1997 to cut the capital gains tax rate to 20 percent from 28 percent,
which contributed to revenue and economic growth. I know because it was
the Hatch-Lieberman bill that they followed in doing that. Joe
Lieberman had the guts to stand up on that issue, as did I, and it
happened. The Democrats said we would lose revenues. The revenues went
up because people did not feel gouged anymore. Funny how that chapter
gets left out of the Democrats' 1990s story.
In 2000 President Clinton left office with Federal receipts measuring
20.6 percent of GDP--well above the 17.5 percent seen in 1992 before he
took office. But those receipts were boosted by capital gains
realizations associated with the Internet stock bubble that formed
toward the end of the Clinton Presidency.
But even more notable and something Democrats do not discuss in
relation to the Clinton Presidency is that he left office with Federal
outlays measuring 18.2 percent of GDP--significantly below the 22.1
percent seen in 1992 before Clinton took office. Significant reductions
in Federal outlays as a share of GDP occurred once Republicans gained
control of the Congress. In contrast, President Obama has presided over
the largest spending spree since World War II, with outlays as high as
25.2 percent of the entire economy--something that has not happened
since the years surrounding World War II.
In his 1996 State of the Union speech, President Clinton took credit
for budget improvements and spending restraint imposed by Republicans
in Congress. He famously stated that the era of big government is over.
But in a nod to the Republicans' role in containing the budget, in that
same speech, he said: ``I compliment the Republican leadership and
membership for the energy and determination you have brought to this
task of balancing the budget.'' Compare that to the sentiment of
President Obama: We tried it their way, and it did not work.
President Obama and those Democrats who embrace the history of the
1990s also conveniently neglect to give any credit to Ronald Reagan,
whose ending of the Cold War led to a peace dividend which helped allow
President Clinton to curtail growth in Federal defense outlays.
In summary, the Democratic nostalgia for the 1990s is based on a very
limited recollection of events. They see that Clinton raised taxes, the
economy grew, and the budget improved. Apparently, correlation is all
that is necessary to establish causality in their world, particularly
when it works in their favor.
What also gets left out of the standard Democratic history is a
stock-price bubble that was actually the basis of much of the growth in
the 1990s. So let's consider the Clinton bubble further and ask what it
could possibly mean for the recent financial crisis.
One of the charges levied by President Clinton, which echoes a
familiar Democratic talking point, is that Americans should be wary of
Republicans because we champion deregulation that ``got us into this
mess.'' But who generated the mess? The mess was a devastating
financial crisis, and who sowed the seeds of that crisis?
First, consider the significant financial deregulation under the Bush
administration. The fact is there was not any. So where did the
deregulation in finance come from? Whose policies promoted financial
markets prone to bubbles and irrational exuberance and bailouts?
It was under President Clinton's watch that warnings were ignored
about the riskiness of derivatives. It was under his watch that risky
derivatives led to the collapse of the hedge fund Long-Term Capital
Management--or LTCM and to an eventual bailout arranged by the Fed. It
was under his watch that the Fed left market participants with a belief
that should there be significant market turbulence, the Fed would be
there to bail them out. It was under his watch that the Gramm-Leach-
Bliley Act was signed into law, which many Democrats believe
contributed to the crisis by repealing part of the Glass-Steagall Act
of 1933. I think that they misunderstand the financial crisis by making
that claim, but since they and President Obama appear to believe it,
through their promotion of the so-called Volker rule, then the
deregulation they decry came under Clinton.
As a basis for strong fundamental growth in the economy, President
Clinton's stock bubble was lacking, and numerous companies crashed. A
bursting stock bubble, along with corporate accounting scandals, which
included the Enron debacle, left a mess for President Bush, who, by the
way, did not whine about it for 4 straight years.
It was under President Clinton's watch that significant growth began
in risky subprime mortgage lending, which ended up at the heart of the
recent financial crisis. And warnings were ignored--even the warning by
the Clinton-appointed Federal Reserve official Edward Gramlich.
Clinton's presidency pushed financial deregulation,
[[Page 14769]]
and it showed inattention to the beginnings of speculative excesses in
housing and mortgage markets.
The financial crisis was indeed severe. Seeds of the crisis were sown
during President Clinton's Presidency and then nurtured by many years
of regulatory inattention. Failure of regulators to do their job during
the Bush administration has nothing to do with deregulation. There was
no deregulation. There were plenty of regulations to go around, but the
regulators failed to use their authority as bubbles and irrational
exuberance was tolerated by the unaccountable regulators. To say that
Republican deregulation caused the recent crisis is simply false.
We have faced crises before. President Obama is not unique in this
respect. What is unique is how poorly he has handled our economic and
fiscal crisis.
In February 2009 President Obama said his Presidency would be a
``one-term proposition'' if the economy did not recover within 3 years.
Well, it has been over 3 years and the economy has not recovered;
therefore, by the President's own metric, his administration should be
a one-time proposition. No, he wants 4 more years to do more of the
same.
The President has no plan.
The President claims to want to get our deficit under control by
raising taxes on the wealthy and keeping the tax burden on middle-class
Americans where it is. But the President's tax proposals do not work,
as we learned from his Buffett tax, which fell over $800 billion short
of his plan to use the tax to pay for a long-term alternative minimum
tax patch. The unpleasant fact facing the President is that there
simply is not enough revenue from taxing the so-called rich to fill his
desires of permanently larger government.
Taxing business owners who the President thinks are undeserving of
their success will simply not pay for his redistribution dreams. Of
course, contrary to President Obama's disdain for business, Americans
who own and operate businesses did build them, and they also paid
taxes, which built the roads and bridges they use. And make no mistake,
business owners and American workers did build America. They did build
it.
Mr. President, let me go back just a little bit here. I made the
comment, with regard to all of this media criticism of Governor Romney,
that he was inarticulate in a private meeting, where no press was
invited, and he is the first to admit that.
He certainly has tried to explain himself. But he is right. He is
right. There are at least 47 percent of Americans who do not pay a
nickel or a penny of income taxes. The standard answer by my friends on
the other side is, well, they pay payroll taxes. Well, everyone does
that. But those are unlike income taxes. With payroll taxes, workers
pay into Social Security and Disability Insurance and the like. Which
is to say, they pay in; but they also receive benefits. To equate the
payroll tax system with the income tax system is simply misleading.
But in the income tax system, 23 million or so people get refundable
tax credits which are more than they pay in payroll taxes, and a little
less than 16 million get refundable tax credits that are more than they
and their employers pay in payroll taxes.
Now, do Republicans want to tax the truly poor? Heavens no. This is a
great country. We can take care of the truly poor. The question is, Are
all of those in the--according to Joint Tax Committee, recently the
bottom 51 percent did not pay any income taxes--are all of those in the
truly poor category? The answer is no.
Well, what does Governor Romney mean? He means that, as I said at the
beginning, there are too many people who are riding in the wagon and
not enough pulling. Many people simply have no skin in the game in the
income tax system, which means they really don't care much if income
taxes on others are raised. And it is not their fault in many cases,
except there are millions who will not find a job in the Obama economy,
or they just become discouraged given the bleak labor market. I do not
blame them, with the economy, but they ought to be looking for jobs
anyway. I would do anything if it were me. I would do anything to be
able to support my family other than be on Federal largesse. But that
is the way it is today.
Governor Romney's goal in this life is to pull us out of this mess,
get spending down to no more than 20 percent of the GDP, which would be
a remarkable downturn in spending compared to what we have today, and
also to get people to work, get them to where they have the self-esteem
that comes from working, which we did on welfare reform in 1996. I
worked hard on that bill, as did so many others at that time. Give them
the self-esteem that comes from supporting themselves. That is what he
meant. That is what is meant here. He will create jobs, and a vibrant
economy where all workers prosper and can find work.
Frankly, let's just be honest, the mainstream media is not for
Governor Romney. We all know that. Anybody with brains knows that. All
you have to do is watch it. And that is the way it has been here ever
since I have been in the Congress. Frankly, they are not going to treat
Governor Romney fairly. But I will tell you this: Mitt Romney will put
America to work. He knows how to do it. This man has been successful in
everything he has ever undertaken to do. He does not need this job as
President, but he is running because he knows this country is in
trouble. He knows it is not following good economic practices. He knows
this administration is a disaster from a jobs standpoint, among other
things. He could have the most lovely life, and he is taking this kind
of unmitigated barrage of assaults in trying to do that which he knows
is right for this country.
I think we ought to be more fair in these Presidential elections. I
wish the media was split 50/50. It is not. Everybody knows it. I care a
great deal for my friends in the media, but there is no one with brains
who does not understand that especially the mainstream media right here
in Washington, DC, New York, Los Angeles, et cetera, is heavily stacked
in favor of President Obama.
I like President Obama too. I have known him as a Senator. I have
known him as a friend. I have known him as a President. And what I am
saying here is that he has not done the job. I do not believe he is
going to do the job. I do not think he has the background to do the
job, and for us to not put somebody who does in there may be
catastrophic for the future of our country.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my friend
from Alabama and I be allowed to engage in a colloquy.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Pryor.) Without objection, it is so
ordered.
The Budget
Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, let me say from the outset that this
Senate and this Nation are profoundly fortunate to have had the
services of Senator Orrin Hatch for decades and decades. The speech he
just delivered to this body was profound in so many ways and true in so
many ways. It was made at 10 minutes til 6 on a Friday night when
perhaps Americans are looking elsewhere, but just so much of what the
Senator said is absolutely the truth, and our country needs to hear it.
I appreciate him coming and delivering it in such a talented way.
Mr. HATCH. I thank my friend and colleague. I really appreciate it. I
enjoy serving with the Senator, as I do with everybody in this body.
Mr. SESSIONS. Senator Wicker just talked for a minute about this.
What does the Senator think? Would it be great to have the chairman of
the Finance Committee be named Senator Orrin Hatch?
Mr. WICKER. Well, it would be. I think that with the leadership of
people such as Senator Hatch, we would not be ignoring what we have out
there facing us in America today, and that is nothing less than a
financial crisis. The Senator from Utah is correct. The President of
the United States is doing
[[Page 14770]]
everything he can to change the subject from the central issue of our
faltering economy. Yet the mainstream media is out there playing
trivial pursuit, talking about everything that is not important, and
that is a distraction. But you just can't get around the facts. The
facts are these: We have a $16 trillion staggering debt in this
country. This government has added $6 trillion in 3\1/2\ short years.
Just the facts. You can't get around it.
You also can't get around these absolute truths: We have had no
appropriations bills come out of this Senate this year. Our Republican
friends in the House--it is a different story. They have done their
work, and they passed product after product, as they are supposed to
do. And my hat is off to the chair, the gentleman from Kentucky,
Chairman Rogers, for getting the appropriations bills done. We have not
done that in this Democrat-led Senate. We have not passed a defense
bill--first time in half a century that we will have gone through a
whole session and not passed a defense bill, at a time when we have
troops at war, troops in harm's way. Our men and women are putting
themselves at risk and fighting and dying. We do not have a defense
bill.
Mr. SESSIONS. It is amazing. We do not have a defense bill. The
Senator serves on the Armed Services Committee, as I do. It came out of
committee unanimously, bipartisan vote, and for some reason, the
Democratic leadership has failed to bring the bill up to the floor for
the first time in 50 years. Is that not amazing?
Mr. WICKER. No question about it. It does not make me comfortable to
point fingers, but there is no getting around the fact that there is
one person on this planet who can call up a bill before this Senate;
that is, the majority leader of the Senate. He has not brought up the
defense bill.
We also do not have a budget resolution. Again, our friends in the
House, the Republicans in the House, under Speaker Boehner, have during
the 2 years of their stewardship brought budget resolutions to the
floor, passed them, sent them over here, only to be ignored.
The President has submitted budgets--did not get a single vote in the
House of Representatives, did not get a single vote when we called it
up as sort of a test vote here in the Senate. But this Senate, under
the leadership of the Democratic majority, has not followed the statute
that says you bring a budget resolution up every year--has not done it.
We are into our fourth year now.
Beyond that, they do not have a budget deficit reduction plan. It is
one thing to have a resolution that could say anything, but what the
American people need, what our future generations are crying out for is
a plan to reduce this debt.
I look forward to and hope to see the day when my friend from Alabama
is chairman of the Senate Budget Committee. I would ask him to assure
everyone within the sound of our voices today that under his leadership
as chairman of the Budget Committee, we will see a budget resolution
brought to the floor and debated according to statute.
Mr. SESSIONS. Senator Wicker asked a very good question, and every
American needs to be thinking about that. I have given a lot of thought
to it. We have not had a budget in 3 years--1,241 days. We have not had
a budget passed on the floor of this Senate. They did not even report
one from committee this year.
If we are blessed by the American people--we the Republican
Senators--and have a majority in this body and if I am honored to have
the opportunity to lead the Budget Committee, we will have a budget.
Failure is not an option. It cannot be that we will not comply with the
law. But more than that, Senator Wicker, we have to have a plan to get
us off the course to financial disaster, and the budget is the way you
lay out that plan.
Does the Senator not agree that the difficulty our Democratic
colleagues had is that anything they thought they could agree on and
bring forth would not be popular with the American people? And they did
not want to subject themselves to having it debated on the floor and
having a vote on amendments, as the Budget Act allows, even though you
can pass a budget with a simple majority, cannot be filibustered?
I guess what I will ask the Senator, when you do not write a budget
because you cannot agree or are unwilling to step forward with a plan,
what you are really doing is failing to provide leadership. We were
elected to lead, to have a plan that we are willing to announce to try
to get us on the right course, a budget. Would the Senator not agree to
sort of have a plan to deal with the crisis we are facing? We have not
seen one in this body.
Mr. WICKER. Well, it is one of our basic responsibilities. As I said,
the discretionary part of it is the appropriations bills. Not one
single appropriations bill has cleared this Senate during 2012. And
yes, indeed, at a time when we are running a debt of $6 trillion, when
we are seeing our friends and allies across the ocean teetering on the
brink, we are seeing all the warning signs.
We have time in this Capitol, in this Capital City, the shining city
on the hill, to be an example to the world.
I can only answer the Senator's question by saying that the
President's budget was so unpopular it did not get a single vote. There
is not one single--even the most leftwing, left-leaning Senator would
not step forward and embrace that budget. I can only assume that what
they would have suggested would have been very much like that.
But when you are in the majority, you have a responsibility to lead.
We all have a responsibility to lead, but in particular, when you are
the only vehicle for bringing bills to the floor, you have a
responsibility to lead in a time of crisis. That is what we have been
lacking here in the Senate.
Of course, we do have the Federal Reserve, and the leader of the
Federal Reserve announced the other day that he is going to print $40
billion extra each month. Now, that is his solution. I would counsel
against that. I think most Members on this side would counsel against
that. But at least it is a plan. We have had no indication from the
leader of the Senate whether they like that plan.
We do know this. We passed a stimulus bill over here that cost almost
$1 trillion. Unemployment has gone up under this bill that was supposed
to jump-start the economy. It was supposed to do two things: jump-start
the economy and keep the unemployment rate 8 percent or less. Of
course, we know that for 42 months now, the unemployment rate has been
over 8 percent. And the last thing the stimulus bill did was jump-start
the economy. It has been going downhill ever since. It is hard to put a
pretty face on this situation. Of course, the result is that a
staggering 23 million American citizens either do not have a job, are
underemployed, or have stopped looking for work.
In addition, of course, the President promised in 2008--the Senator
remembers that promise--that he would cut the deficit in half by the
end of his first term. Well, this is the end of his first term. The
deficit has mushroomed, not been cut in half. We are in a financial
crisis, and everybody on television seems to be trying to paint a rosy
picture and avoid the subject. So I am glad to join with my friend, the
ranking member on the Budget Committee, to suggest that we will have a
plan, as House Republicans had a specific plan, in black and white, to
address this unbelievable financial crisis our country faces.
Mr. SESSIONS. Well, it is a challenge we have to face, and it is not
easy. It will be a challenge and it will be difficult and it will force
us to make difficult choices. But I feel very frustrated. We are from
small towns in America. Where we grew up, if you had a tough choice to
make, if somebody came up with an idea and defended it, you respected
them, even if you didn't agree with it. If you didn't have a better
plan, and all you did was criticize their plan, people wouldn't think
much of you, would they?
Mr. WICKER. That is right.
Mr. SESSIONS. So what we did in this body, when the budgets were
[[Page 14771]]
brought up--they brought up the House budget--called the Ryan budget--
and we brought up the President's budget, and Senator Toomey and others
had a budget, and every one of them was brought up--our Democratic
colleagues voted against every one of them. And not in one instance did
they set out before the people what they believed in, what they would
advocate for, what they would fight for, what they believed would fix
the American economy and put us on the right track. But they have
invested a tremendous amount of effort in attacking Congressman Ryan
and the House budget.
Let me say this about that budget. Any budget is going to be subject
to some complaint here and there, but it was historic. It would change
the debt course of America. It would reduce our deficit by $3.5
trillion and it would create economic growth. It was designed not just
to be a budget-cutting, frugal budget, but also to try to create growth
and prosperity in this country and get this country moving again and
get businesses hiring again.
It was a historic and good budget that would change the debt course
of America and put us on the right path, yet all we have heard from our
colleagues, without offering anything themselves, is criticism of him.
And I believe the House, as the Senator said, fulfilled their duty.
Mr. WICKER. I tell you what else it would do. It would tell the truth
to the American people about what we are facing. I like what our young
nominee for Vice President said. We have got time to fix this, but we
need to fix it, and we don't have much time.
Speaking of telling the truth, I wish to pivot, if I could, to a
question that has been raised on this floor in the last couple of days
about this Senate's lack of compliance with the Budget Act. There is
not a more learned expert on the federal Budget Act of 1974 than my
friend from Alabama, and I would ask him to clarify, if he would, the
statements and misstatements and charges and countercharges that have
been made about the fact there has not been a budget resolution brought
to this floor for consideration and amendment.
Mr. SESSIONS. I thank Senator Wicker for raising this point because
we need to discuss this, and the American people need to ask themselves
who is telling the truth about this and who is accurate about this.
A group of us spoke--40 or more Republicans--and we expressed
frustration with the lack of action in this body, the likes of which we
have never seen perhaps in our history, with regard to not passing an
appropriations bill. Historic research has been done, and we have not
passed a single appropriations bill only two times: 2010 and this year,
both under this Democratic leadership. Those are the only times in
history that no appropriations bill has passed.
Yesterday, however, Senator Reid used this language. It kind of hurt
my feelings, because I said we didn't have a budget, and I am the
ranking member of the Budget Committee. Maybe 10 or 15 Republicans
talked about our not having a budget, and Senator Reid said: ``It is a
lie to say we don't have a budget.''
I don't know if that violates the rules of the Senate about personal
attacks, but I try not to use that word--lie. I try not to say a
colleague is lying. Even if I ever would say something like that, I
would want to be sure I had absolute proof to back it up. And that is a
responsibility.
You know, we like Harry Reid. I consider him a friend, I really do.
He has always treated me fairly on the floor. But I have to say, the
majority leader shouldn't have said that. First of all, it is not
accurate. For example, Senator Reid announced unequivocally that he had
no intention of passing a budget. This is what he said last year. He
said: ``There is no need to have a Democratic budget, in my opinion.''
It is a statutory requirement. Unfortunately, it doesn't say you go
to jail if you don't pass one. The people are crying out for a plan to
get out of the financial condition we are in, but he said there is no
need to have one, in his opinion.
He said at another time, ``It would be foolish for us to do a
budget.'' Foolish for us to do a budget. And they did not do one. There
is no budget. So for him to say it is a lie when we say we don't have a
budget, well, that is inaccurate.
I will point out, as Senator Wicker knows, the Budget Act, the United
States Code, defines what a budget is. It lays out some of the things
that have to be a part of the budget and the process by which one is
produced. It has to be reported by the Budget Committee by April 1. It
sets out the date as April 1. Then we have to have a floor vote by
April 15. And when it comes to the floor, the rule says we have
unlimited amendments, with 50 hours of debate, and it can't be
filibustered. So 50 hours would mean about 1 week. It can be done in 6,
7 days at most.
Mr. WICKER. It is the one thing that can't be filibustered.
Mr. SESSIONS. Absolutely. The party with the majority, 53 Senators,
ought to be able to pass a budget. We passed a budget with 51 senators
one time. A budget allows us to control everything but Social Security.
We can't touch Social Security but we can deal with Medicare, Medicaid,
food stamps, pensions, as well as the discretionary accounts. So that
was all avoided.
My friend has been around here and in the House for a number of
years, but it seems to me it would have been a healthy thing indeed for
the Democrats to have brought to the floor a budget, even if I didn't
agree with it. We then could have had a national public debate about
these difficult choices the Nation faces and Senators would have to
vote as to whether they believed that balancing the budget was worth
cutting some spending here, and how much they believed in taxes we
ought to raise, and how much would they be cutting in spending. We
could read the fine print and ask how much we are cutting and actually
debate and vote on these things. But that is what the majority leader
and his colleagues wanted to avoid.
Mr. WICKER. It is what every city council, every State legislature
cannot avoid. They do not have a printing press down in Montgomery, AL,
or Jackson, MS.
I know the Senator has seen the local delegations of county officials
coming in and talking about economic development. They tell me:
Senator, we have had to cut back on this, we have had to cut back on
that, we have had to do this to our budget. We used to be able to
afford these things and now we can't afford them anymore. They have had
to make sensible decisions. Councils and legislatures, Republican and
Democrat, have faced the hard choices, and it can't be any fun for
them. They have to face the voters and say: we paid for this last year,
we don't have the money this year. And families have had to do that as
well.
Mr. SESSIONS. I couldn't agree more. In my hometown of Mobile, AL,
they fell one vote short of raising the sales tax because of the
financial challenges they were facing, and they had a big debate about
it, but they didn't duck the vote. They had the vote and they decided
they didn't need to raise the taxes. But it wasn't a question of the
city council being able to avoid a vote.
We in the great United States Senate, we travel the whole of our
States over and over and over again and we ask for this tough job. My
wife has a good phrase for it when I complain. She says: Don't blame
me. You asked for the job. Well, we asked for this job. Nobody said it
was going to be easy, and this is not easy because we have never faced
a more fundamental financial crisis. Because of demographics and
history and trends that are going on in our population, the situation
is such that it is going to be difficult to meet these challenges.
Mr. WICKER. But we can meet these challenges.
I have grown children--32, 28, and 25. They may be about to age into
the next year, and they wonder if they will even receive Medicare when
it comes time to retire. That retirement for them will come sooner than
they think, though it seems like forever. But they do not believe--that
generation doesn't believe--Medicare will be there for them. If we
tackle this problem, Medicare can be there for the next generation. It
should be there for the next generation.
[[Page 14772]]
Mr. SESSIONS. Exactly.
Mr. WICKER. It won't look exactly like it does for my father, who is
88 years old today and depends on Medicare, but Medicare could be
there. But not the way it is going now. We have to tackle these issues.
Mr. SESSIONS. My colleague is so right. We are not going to have to
cancel these programs.
Mr. WICKER. No, sir.
Mr. SESSIONS. We can save these programs. It is just going to require
us to confront reality and make some changes in how we do business.
I wish to say one more thing about this budget, before I forget. My
Democratic colleagues claim the Budget Control Act was a budget, but it
only dealt with discretionary spending. It didn't deal with all the
other spending. It only set limits on expenditures and it didn't have
any debate on the floor. It was a secret agreement. There was a budget
limitation placed on spending as a result of Republicans insisting we
had to reduce some spending before we would allow the President to
raise the debt limit. That went on into the wee hours of the morning
and they put together a horrible deal and now we are paying the price
for it. It did cut some spending, and it limited how much spending we
could do, but it didn't go through the budget process, it didn't cover
all the government programs, and it doesn't have anything like the
indices of a budget.
An attempt was made--and successfully--to bring up the President's
budget for a vote. The motion was believed to be legitimate because
there was no budget, and we were going to have a vote on it. Our
Democratic colleagues ran to the Parliamentarian to try to argue that
this cap on spending that was agreed to last August was a budget. They
picked the Parliamentarian. The majority hires the Parliamentarian. And
very courageously and properly the Parliamentarian said: No, it is not
a budget. So there was no budget in the Senate, and President Obama's
budget was brought up and got zero votes.
I wanted to share that.
Mr. WICKER. Well, I appreciate the Senator's sharing his time with
me.
Mr. President, I guess in a moment, Senator Sessions will yield the
floor and we will go dark, subject to the call of the Chair for a vote
at midnight, and then we will sort of slink out of town, with no
appropriations bills, no defense bill, and no dealing with
sequestration, which means meat axe cuts to defense and other programs.
But we will have gotten away under cover of darkness to face the
voters, and in this country they are the ultimate arbiters.
I appreciate this opportunity to stand on the floor with a statesman
such as my friend from Alabama and to thank him for his leadership on
budget issues and to thank him for coming here and telling the truth to
our colleagues and to the American people.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, Senator Olympia Snowe, who is not
running again, is frustrated with this body and pointed out yesterday
on the Senate floor that we voted in this body a few years ago up until
November 1. We act like we have to be out by the middle of September.
We aren't going to do any work during October, and we will come back
maybe after the election in a lameduck circumstance and see how much
junk can be shoved through here without real votes.
Isn't it true that we have had plenty of time since September to
bring up the Defense authorization bill, to bring up a budget, to bring
up some of the appropriations bills, at least some of them?
Mr. WICKER. Day after day, hour after hour in quorum calls. It is
very frustrating, and frustrating to the people who sent us here to do
a job.
Mr. SESSIONS. We have heard it said that 40 percent of what we spend
every day is borrowed. Really, $4 billion a day is what we borrow.
People probably think that can't be true, that 40 cents of every dollar
we spend and put out the door has to be borrowed from countries around
the world and from others who will loan us the money, and we pay
interest on it.
In a recent interview in July on CNBC, Mr. Erskine Bowles--President
Clinton's Chief of Staff, appointed by President Obama to head the debt
commission--said this about the state of our finances:
If you take last year, 100 percent of our revenue that came
into the country, every nickel, every single dollar that came
into the country last year was spent on our--what's called
mandatory spending and interest on the debt. Mandatory
spending is principally the entitlement programs, Medicare,
Medicaid, and Social Security.
What that means is every single dollar we spent last year
on these two wars, national defense, homeland security,
education, infrastructure, high-value-added research, every
single dollar was borrowed. And half of it was borrowed from
foreign countries. That is crazy. Crazy. It's a formula for
failure in any organization.
That is the man President Obama chose to head the debt commission, a
businessman who understands the threat this Nation faces.
We can get off this path. Congressman Ryan laid out a plan that would
get us off this path. We have to get off this path.
As we head out from this Senate to return to our States and visit
with our constituents, and as we head into an election, I would just
like to ask, Is there one Senator on the other side of the aisle who
can defend to the good people of this country the decision of this body
to withhold a budget, withhold a financial plan from the country? Can
you defend that? Can you defend not even attempting to do the
fundamental requirement of Congress, which is to appropriate the money
to run the government--not even bring up a single bill--for the second
time in the history of the Republic?
What about the Defense authorization bill? It came out of our Armed
Services Committee unanimously. The leadership has refused to bring it
up on the Senate floor. Can you defend that?
Really, can you defend failing to deal with the fiscal cliff, the
deep defense cuts and huge tax increases that will occur January 1?
Wouldn't the economy be better if that uncertainty had been removed? We
could have already brought up those bills and voted on them.
Instead, you know how they are going to do it: The leadership will
meet over here, and it will be December 23. The majority leader said we
may be here until December 23. That is when they will bring it all up.
That is when the health care bill was passed. Christmas Eve is when the
health care bill was passed.
So that is the plan: Bring it up at the end. Everybody will have to
vote for it, or the government will shut down and it will be a
disaster. That is the kind of thing we should be avoiding.
I believe the complaints that have been made today are not just
political rhetoric, not just talk, but represent a legitimate, honest
criticism of the leadership of the Senate. I think the American people
should weigh that as they go to the polls.
Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. President, today the Senate will vote on H.J. Res.
117, a continuing resolution to fund Federal agencies for the next 6
months. While I appreciate that this measure avoids the need to
negotiate a spending bill during the lame duck session, after careful
consideration, I believe the promises I made to the people of
Pennsylvania in 2010 compel me to oppose this bill.
H.J. Res. 117 establishes discretionary appropriations for fiscal
year at $1.047 trillion, an amount equal to the spending cap created by
the Budget Control Act of 2011. Unfortunately, this figure is far above
what is fiscally responsible, which is one of the reasons I voted
against the Budget Control Act last year. Given that the Federal
Government has now run deficits in excess of $1 trillion for 4
consecutive years, it would be irresponsible to vote for a bill that
increases discretionary spending by about $8 billion.
Furthermore, H.J. Res. 117 employs a tired old accounting gimmick
called ``changes in mandatory spending programs'' to make discretionary
spending appear nearly $20 billion lower. This gimmick does not
eliminate mandatory spending; it only delays it, resulting in no actual
budgetary savings.
The continuing resolution fails to restore recently undermined
welfare-to-
[[Page 14773]]
work provisions within the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families--
TANF--Program. In 1996, a Republican led Congress and President Clinton
enacted the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation
Act--P.L. 104-193, a key component of which established work
requirements, helping individuals provide for themselves and their
families. On July 12, 2012, the administration unilaterally weakened
reporting requirements for TANF, erroneously stipulating that waiver
authority provided under section 1115 of the Social Security Act
enabled the agency to modify work participation requirements, a
provision explicitly outside the scope of waivable provisions. Welfare-
to-work provisions have proven instrumental in transitioning millions
off welfare. While TANF's work requirements have contributed towards
declining welfare rolls, there remain additional opportunities to
strengthen and reform the TANF program. By failing to engage in a
dialogue, Congress missed a critical opportunity to restore the
welfare-to-work requirements and assist more TANF recipients take steps
towards independence.
Though I am unable to support this continuing resolution, I would
note my support for one provision in the underlying legislation. I am
happy that a technical correction was included that ensures that States
that have not remediated all of their abandoned mine lands do not lose
any payments from the Abandoned Mine Lands Trust Fund as a result of
the recently enacted Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act
(MAP-21). To pay for MAP-21, conferees inserted a provision intending
to cap payments to States that have been certified by the EPA as having
remediated all of their abandoned mine lands.
After enactment, there was some uncertainty about how this provision
would affect noncertified states like Pennsylvania because of the
structure of the funding formula. This was clearly not the intent of
Congress. The Congressional Budget Office scored the provision as
capping payments to certified States only. Therefore, this technical
correction ensures that Pennsylvania, the State with more abandoned
mine lands than any other, continues to receive its baseline level of
funding.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss an important
provision included in the continuing resolution. As parents sent their
children off to school this fall, many were uncertain whether their
child would be taught by teachers in training who are enrolled in
alternative route programs. That is why I am pleased this legislation
requires the Department of Education to provide Congress, and the
parents of Washington State and the country, information on how
frequently this is occurring. The data and report should be made public
and available to parents and other interested parties. As a former
teacher, a Parent Teacher Association member, a school board president,
and most important a mom who actively participated in my two children's
journey through the education system, I firmly believe that every
parent deserves to know the qualifications of their child's teacher.
Specifically, the provision requires the Secretary of Education to
report to Congress no later than December 31, 2013, on the extent to
which students with disabilities, English learners, students in rural
areas, and students from low-income families are being taught by
alternative route teachers in training who are deemed highly qualified
according to title 34 section 200.56(a)(2)(ii) of the Code of Federal
Regulations. This regulation allows individuals who have not yet
obtained regular State teacher certification but are participating in
alternative route programs to be labeled ``highly qualified.'' The
provision included in this continuing resolution will require the
Department of Education to gather and report the extent to which our
most vulnerable students and those with the highest needs are being
taught by teachers with the least amount of preparation. While we know
many students are being taught by these teachers in training, we do not
know if these teachers are equitably distributed among high need
schools, in which States they are concentrated, or which student
subgroups they are teaching. The report will provide this information
and will be vital for developing policies to ensure every child in
America receives a high-quality education.
The report should include data on the professional qualifications of
teachers. In particular the number of teachers who have not met State
qualification and licensing criteria for the grade levels and subjects
areas in which the teacher provides instruction. Also, the report
should include the number teaching under emergency or other provisional
status through which State qualification or licensing criteria have
been waived, the baccalaureate degree major of the teacher and any
other graduate certification or degree held by the teacher, and the
field of discipline of the teacher's certification or degree. States
and local education agencies are already required to collect this data
according to the Parents' Right to Know provisions of the No Child Left
Behind Act of 2001.
I look forward to receiving this important report. Throughout my
political career, from the school board to the Senate, I have been
committed to doing everything I can to ensure every student has an
opportunity to learn, and to succeed, to the best of his or her
ability. This report will help us craft policy that supports this goal.
Parents deserve to know who is teaching their child and it is our
responsibility to ensure this information is provided.
Foreign Aid
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I would like to speak in opposition to
the Paul amendment, and to put this debate over foreign aid in some
context.
As chairman of the Intelligence Committee, I see the threats this
Nation faces around the world.
We are no longer in a world where we can focus on ballistic missiles
from Russia or troops pouring into Europe through the Fulda Gap.
Instead, we face asymmetric threats--terrorist attacks, the potential
use of chemical weapons, and the thousands of attempted cyber
intrusions that hit our networks every day.
In this environment, our partnerships with other nations are more
important than ever, as attacks can emanate from anywhere, and the
responses to those threats often require bilateral or multilateral
support.
I agree with Senator Paul that there are areas where other nations
can and should do more to combat these threats; after all, terrorism
and extremist ideologies are not U.S. problems, they are global
problems.
On the subject of Pakistan, I strongly agree that Dr. Shakil Afridi
should be released from prison.
He helped play an important role in making the intelligence case that
Usama bin Laden was at that compound in Abbottabad, and his actions
helped this Nation eliminate the world's most wanted target.
I had the opportunity to make this case directly to Pakistan's
Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar and Pakistan's Ambassador to the
United States Sherry Rehman in a meeting on Wednesday.
But is the appropriate response to cut off all U.S. assistance to
Pakistan--including economic and humanitarian assistance--because of
Dr. Afridi? No, clearly, it is not.
I joined an effort by Senator Graham on the Foreign Operations
Appropriations bill to cut $33 million in Foreign Military Financing
for Pakistan in FY 2013--$1 million for every year of Dr. Afridi's
prison sentence. It was a targeted effort, and it enabled us to send a
public message to Pakistan.
The United States and Pakistan have had a series of confrontations
over the past couple of years, and the relationship has been sorely
tested. There has been fault on both sides.
And we are now improving our coordination and partnership in key
areas, including on counterterrorism. We absolutely need to continue to
press Pakistan to do more, and to release Dr. Afridi--and we are.
But eliminating all foreign assistance without a national security
waiver is a knee-jerk reaction that will cause the United States more
harm than good.
[[Page 14774]]
The amendment would also cut off all foreign assistance to the
nascent governments in Egypt and Libya because elements of their
populace or foreign fighters attacked the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and the
consulate in Benghazi.
Both of those governments have denounced the attacks, and both have
increased the security they are providing to U.S. missions.
We are still learning who was behind these attacks, whether motivated
solely by a stupid video put out by someone with no regard for
religious tolerance or the safety of Americans overseas or by terrorist
elements who used the protests as a pretext to carry out an agenda of
violence against the United States.
But one thing is pretty clear: the anger and violence directed
against the United States by the people of Libya, Egypt, and perhaps
numerous other Middle Eastern countries will not be lessened by
reducing American aid.
The Paul amendment goes even further, though. It would prohibit any
direct U.S. assistance to any country in which a U.S. diplomatic
facility was attacked, trespassed upon, breached, or attempted to be
attacked, trespassed upon, or breached even if the host government
provided every possible measure of security and support, and no matter
how small the infraction.
I believe in a strategy of engagement. I believe that the United
States should work with countries to root out terrorists and denounce
extremism of all forms.
And I believe that we should use foreign aid--which, by the way,
accounts for only 1 percent of the U.S. government's budget--to bring
humanitarian relief, support democratization, and help other
governments improve their own security and law enforcement efforts to
defeat terrorism and extremism.
Indeed, at this time, we should look to the example set by Ambassador
Chris Stevens, a man who dedicated himself to learning the language and
the culture of the Middle East and promoting the universal values of
democracy, human rights and the rule of law--from his time as a Peace
Corps volunteer in Morocco, to tours as a Foreign Service Officer in
Jerusalem, Damascus, Riyadh, and Cairo, and, finally, as our Ambassador
to a democratic Libya.
Ambassador Stevens worked tirelessly to help the people of Libya
build a new country and new future after years of brutal dictatorship.
He knew that path would not be easy and there would be many
challenges. But he also knew that the Libyan people could succeed and
that leadership and support from the United States would be crucial.
This amendment will turn America away from the commitment to the
Middle East that Ambassador Stevens championed and towards isolation.
It will harm America's interests, will harm our national security,
and will promote anti-Americanism in precisely the parts of the world
where we need to be more, not less, engaged.
I urge my colleagues to oppose the Paul amendment.
Mr. RUBIO. Mr. President, in every region of the world, the
United States should search for ways to use foreign aid and
humanitarian assistance to strengthen our influence, the effectiveness
of our leadership, and the service of our national interests and
ideals. When done effectively, in partnership with the private sector,
with faith-based organizations, and our allies, foreign aid is a cost-
effective way not only to export our values and our example but to
advance our security and economic goals.
Foreign aid is a foreign policy tool used by the United States to
work with other countries. In the case of Libya, Egypt, and Pakistan,
each receives significant amounts of foreign aid from the U.S.
taxpayers, and U.S. citizens expect these countries to meet the
conditions we set upon this aid. In the wake of the uprisings across
the Muslim world and the September 11, 2012, terrorist attack on the
U.S. consulate in Libya, it is imperative that the United States
receive the full cooperation of the host nations in investigating and
prosecuting those responsible for the attacks on our diplomatic
missions and the deaths of four brave Americans.
Senator Rand Paul's legislation would affect aid for these countries
by effectively eliminating it. The American people deserve to be
outraged following these attacks. However, the situations in these
three countries are very different.
In Egypt, the government has the security capabilities to protect our
Embassy and failed to do so. It was unacceptable that their President
didn't immediately condemn the attacks and instead focused on a YouTube
video.
In Libya, there was a terrorist attack on our consulate which
resulted in the death of four Americans, including the Ambassador. The
Libyan people rejected Islamists in their recent election, but their
pro-Western Libyan Government does not have the security capabilities
of the Egyptians. So far, the Libyans are trying to do the right thing
by working with the United States to investigate these attacks and
strengthen their own security capabilities. In fact, just yesterday
thousands of Libyans fed up with terrorism took matters into their own
hands by seizing control of the headquarters of several militias and
demanding they be disarmed. Cutting off aid to Libya, which is trying
to help us, is not the answer as it would weaken their ability to help
us and undermine their efforts to defeat the terrorists in their
country. It would also represent America's stunning rejection of what
is clearly the Libyan people's will to reject extremists and terrorists
trying to lead Libya back to darkness.
With Pakistan, I believe we should condition some if not all of the
aid on the release of Dr. Afridi. He has been arrested on false
charges. The time has finally come for Pakistan to decide if they are
going to be a truthful ally of the United States.
Senator Paul's legislation lumps in three different countries with
three very different situations, and I could not support such a measure
as drafted. Prior to the vote on this matter, I urged Senator Paul to
consider, at a minimum, restructuring his amendment to recognize that
there are considerable differences between Libya, Egypt, and Pakistan.
Since no changes were ultimately made, I opposed this measure.
Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
RECESS
Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
recess until 11:30 p.m. today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Thereupon, the Senate, at 6:22 p.m., recessed until 11:30 p.m. and
reassembled when called to order by the Presiding Officer (Mr. Kerry).
____________________
SPORTSMEN'S ACT OF 2012--MOTION TO PROCEED--Continued
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont is recognized.
Foreign Aid
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, seeing the distinguished chairman of the
Foreign Relations Committee in the chair, I have a feeling I may be
preaching to the converted, but let me say we, all of us, were outraged
by the video denigrating the Muslim faith but then by the mob
violence--some of it encouraged by al-Qaida or other extremist groups--
against our embassies and diplomats in Egypt, Libya, Pakistan, and
other countries around the world. Secretary of State Clinton said it
well: ``The United States rejects both the content and message of that
video . . . and deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the
religious beliefs of others.''
The Secretary and President Obama have also said, repeatedly, that
there is never any justification for the violent
[[Page 14775]]
acts that have been perpetrated against our diplomats, and they have
called on the governments of those countries to protect our embassies
and consulates. And of course, they are right.
As far as I am aware we have received the condolences and support of
the governments of these countries, as well as scores of other
governments around the world.
The support and sympathy expressed, not only by foreign officials but
by countless citizens of these countries who have denounced the attacks
on United States personnel, needs to be recognized.
There is no evidence, that I am aware of, that any of these
governments were responsible for, or had any involvement in, these
violent demonstrations. They neither ordered nor condoned them. To the
contrary, they have since taken steps to protect our facilities and
personnel.
That is why I am mystified by the legislation offered by the junior
Senator from Kentucky, Senator Paul, which would cut off aid to key
U.S. allies like Israel, Indonesia and Jordan where such protests have
occurred, even peaceful demonstrations, as well as security partners
like Egypt, Libya, and Pakistan.
On the one hand, there are some affirmations of our policy goals in
the legislation that I agree with--for example, we all want those
responsible for the deaths of Ambassador Stevens and the other
Americans in Benghazi, as well as the destruction of property there and
in Cairo and elsewhere, to be brought to justice. And already, dozens
of people are under arrest in those countries.
But anyone who is inclined to support this legislation should read
the fine print, because the way it is drafted is not only unworkable,
it would serve to inflame an already dangerous situation, harming
America's national security interests.
For example, all aid would be cut off to governments in countries
where a demonstration occurred, even a peaceful demonstration, until
the government arrests everyone who participated, and until the FBI has
identified everyone involved and they are all in the custody of the
United States, even if we do not have extradition treaties with those
countries.
In other words, we would cut off aid to the governments of Egypt,
Israel, Jordan, Libya, Pakistan, Indonesia, Morocco, Nigeria, Turkey,
Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, Tunisia, Yemen, and India, among others,
until every one of the thousands of people who participated in
demonstrations in those countries has been identified by name,
arrested, and brought to the United States and imprisoned.
I have seen unworkable, unwise legislation before, but this may win
the prize. Not only would this be a colossal waste of FBI resources, it
would be impossible to implement.
How is the FBI going to determine the identity of everyone who joined
in these protests? Is that really what we want the FBI doing?
Are we, who believe in freedom of speech, really going to fill up our
prisons with thousands of foreigners, including those who have engaged
in peaceful demonstrations?
Does the author of this amendment have any idea how much that would
cost U.S. taxpayers?
Are we really going to cut off aid to the Government of Egypt, which
has reaffirmed its peace agreement with Israel, sent troops against
Egyptian extremists in the Sinai, deployed police to protect the U.S.
embassy, and is in the process of negotiating an agreement with the
IMF--with U.S. and European support--to reform its economy?
Are we going to also cut off aid to Israel--which we would not do, of
course?
Do we really want to cut off aid to the Government of Indonesia, the
largest Muslim country in the world and a key U.S. ally in South East
Asia?
And Libya, which we helped to liberate, and which has just emerged
from a bloody revolution to overthrow a tyrant who posed a real threat
to regional peace and security?
As I said before, we are all outraged and saddened by the tragic
events in Benghazi, Cairo, and elsewhere. There is no justification for
it. We expect to see those responsible for the violence to be brought
to justice, and we have insisted that these governments fulfill their
obligation to protect our embassies, as we protect theirs.
But this is no way to honor the patriotism and sacrifice of
Ambassador Stevens and the others who lost their lives.
We are not talking about brutal kleptocracies like the Mobutu
Government of the 1980s who the junior Senator from Kentucky spoke of
today.
These are fledgling democracies whose people have been ruled and
brutalized by corrupt dictators for decades. They are struggling to
draft new constitutions, elect parliaments, reform their police,
restructure their stagnant economies, and manage competing ethnic,
religious and political factions, some of which have been in conflict
with each other for centuries.
We can punish them by cutting off our aid, even though these
governments had no more to do with organizing the protests than our
government had to do with producing the anti-Muslim video that is
inciting the protests.
That might score political points for some back home.
Or we can support them in making decisions that will improve our
relations and strengthen our security.
Withdrawal is not an option for the United States. Isolationism is
not an option. Overreacting in ways that embolden violent extremists is
not an option.
This amendment is poorly conceived, poorly drafted, and would have
all sorts of unintended and dangerous consequences. The best message
the United States Congress could send to the forces of democracy in
these countries is to defeat it overwhelmingly.
I believe, like so many both Democrats and Republicans who have
spoken against this, it makes no sense.
I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Who yields time? The Senator from
South Carolina.
Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, Americans are crying out for us to stop
giving away hard-earned tax dollars to countries that are not our
friends. I agree. We need to review all our foreign aid and make any
aid conditional on the protection of Americans and of our interests.
But when it comes to the bill offered by Senator Paul, I have to say I
do not like how some parts of it are worded. It has some flaws and
Members on both sides of the aisle have some legitimate concerns. I
have been working all day with Senator Paul to improve the language to
address concerns on our side.
Senator Paul has been more than accommodating on this. He was willing
to limit the scope of the bill to Libya, Pakistan, and Egypt. With
respect to Libya and Egypt, he agreed to loosen restrictions so the
funds would not turn off for 60 days, and only turn off if it was clear
their governments were not cooperating with the investigation into the
attacks and efforts to find the perpetrators. In short, he was willing
to accept the legitimate concerns that have been raised by colleagues
with respect to the potential unintended consequences of the bill.
Then Senator Paul asked the majority leader if he could modify the
bill. Senators do this all the time--or at least we used to. We work
together, we have managers' amendments, we allow Senators to modify
their legislation to fix issues raised by other Senators. So after all
this work and this good faith accommodation by Senator Paul who, to
address the concerns of colleagues on both sides of the aisle, was
agreeing to changes that narrowed the scope of the legislation far
beyond what he personally wanted--after all this, the other side of the
aisle decided to play gotcha. They would not let him modify his own
amendment. His request was made 8 to 10 hours before the vote--plenty
of time for Members to review the changes--but the normal rules of
comity apparently do not apply anymore in the Senate.
This Senator is ashamed of the way the Senate is being run. We have
had an entire Congress of gag rules, limited
[[Page 14776]]
debate, limited votes, limited amendments, and the result has been no
accomplishments. Over the last 2 years, the Senate has become a
laughingstock. I may not like the way Senator Paul's bill is worded,
his unmodified bill. I do not agree with the scope of the conditions in
some cases, but I support the goals of providing accountability in our
foreign aid, of freeing Dr. Afridi, and of ensuring that those we
support with our precious dollars are defending our interests and our
diplomats overseas.
I will vote yes on this bill in support of these principles. The bill
will not pass, but the other side cannot hide from this issue forever.
Senator Paul will be back and I will be back with him. We will get the
votes the American people are demanding.
Mr. KERRY. Will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. DeMINT. Certainly.
Mr. KERRY. I ask the Senator this question. We all understand the
normal rules of the Senate. This is a big policy, cutting off four
countries' aid with a set of circumstances that is so rigid it may
encompass countries such as Israel and others. The normal rules of
comity are that something such as this would go through the appropriate
committee. That is why we have committees.
The Senator from South Carolina is a member of the Foreign Relations
Committee. This has never been to the Foreign Relations Committee. Does
the Senator believe some policy as important as this doesn't deserve a
hearing, doesn't deserve a process? I think the Senator knows that as
the chairman I have never slowed down a process of our committee. The
normal rules of comity ought to require this to go through the
committee.
Mr. DeMINT. I say to the Senator, if that were true, I think he has
to admit Senator Tester has one that his side pushed this night that
has not been through committee, violates the budget, and a number of
other things.
The point is this. Senator Paul has been working on this legislation
for several months and has been working to try to get a vote on this
floor for several months and he could not get it. He was turned down
time and time again. This legislation has been out there. The issue of
foreign aid has been out there. We have not taken it up as a committee
as we should have. The fact that he is not given the opportunity to get
a vote on the amendment of his choice, to modify his own amendment,
does break the precedent of the Senate and does break the comity we
should enjoy here. When a Member offers an amendment, they should be
able to modify it.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Utah.
Mr. LEE. Mr. President, I stand tonight in support of the amendment
of Senator Paul to provide limitations on the amount and scope of
foreign aid the United States sends abroad. This is not a decision I
have reached quickly, nor is it an issue I take lightly.
I appreciate that, as some of my colleagues have pointed out,
conditions already exist on some of the foreign aid we send to
Pakistan, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen. I respectfully submit, however, that
these conditions are not producing the desired result nor are they yet
fully enforced.
For example, is Pakistan cooperating with the United States on
countering terrorism efforts and preventing terrorists from basing or
operating in Pakistan, as is already required in section 7046 of Public
Law 112-74? Are the programs and activities we support in Afghanistan
sustainable, as is also required by section 7046? If the answer to
these and to other questions regarding this aid could possibly be no,
then we have an obligation to the American people to at least review
this aid and inspect every single dollar we send abroad to ensure that
the billions of dollars we send to Pakistan, to Egypt, and to Libya are
well spent.
I support this amendment, if for no other reason than to begin the
debate on the merit of sending billions of American dollars abroad each
and every year. When will we stop sending this kind of money to nations
that harbor terrorists and imprison those who, like Dr. Afridi, would
defend our interests?
To be clear, I don't think the amendment of Senator Paul is perfect.
Many of my colleagues have legitimate concerns about this amendment's
potential effect on some of our allies outside the Middle East. That is
why I and several other Senators have asked our staffs to work with
Senator Paul and his office to narrow the scope of this amendment.
Senator Paul was responsive to our concerns and was willing to make the
requested changes.
Unfortunately, the majority leader refused to allow Senator Paul to
modify his own amendment. I don't yet have 2 full years under my belt
as a Member of this body, but I have been around just long enough to
see that managers' amendments and modifications are routinely applied
to their own legislation, and I am very sorry Senator Paul was not
given the courtesy that apparently is reserved only for other Members
of this distinguished body.
In a Senate where the majority leader has recently announced ``the
amendment days are over,'' I guess I should not be surprised.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. KERRY. I will just take 1 minute before I yield back. With
respect to the question, first of all--I obviously do not run the
Senate so I cannot speak about what happened with respect to these
other pieces of legislation, but I am responsible for the Foreign
Relations Committee. This particular amendment was filed at the desk on
September 19. We are here under rule XIV. That is not months of work.
The first time I heard of it was when it came to the desk. So this
could well have been a policy we amended in the committee, that we
worked on appropriately, came up with some appropriate way of dealing
with legitimate issues.
I am not denigrating the legitimacy of some of the issues the Senator
from Kentucky raises. We had a very profound conversation with the
Foreign Minister of Pakistan the other day. The Foreign Relations
Committee met with her. We went into Dr. Afridi's situation in some
detail, and there are other issues raised here. But just to come in out
of the whole blue and file it at the desk and say let's change years of
policy with a country that we, in the case of Egypt, desperately rely
on with respect to the peace process in the Middle East, sustaining the
peace agreement with Israel--it just defies rationale about how you
make good foreign policy.
I will have more to say about it in a moment, but I just want to make
it clear this did not come to the floor until September 19 at the desk
and it is here under rule XIV.
Mr. McCAIN. Will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. KERRY. I don't know how much time we have.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Nine minutes.
Mr. KERRY. We will hold off and come back.
Mr. LEE. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. KERRY. Not on my time, no. I will do it on the Senator's time.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Who yields time?
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry: Whose time is
being----
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. If no one yields time, time will be
charged equally to both sides.
The Senator from Utah.
Mr. LEE. Mr. President, I rise to respond to my friend and
distinguished colleague, the Senator from Massachusetts.
In the first place, it is significant. Dr. Afridi has been in prison
for more than a year. It is significant that this amount of time has
elapsed. It is appropriate that we respond in some fashion. I don't
know why exactly legislation has not emerged from the Foreign Relations
Committee, on which I sit. The fact is it has not.
I respect the junior Senator from Kentucky for having the courage to
bring forward this legislation. Regardless, the fact is that this
legislation is now before us. We can argue about how it got here and
about whether it should
[[Page 14777]]
have gone through committee, but it is before us. The fact that it is
now before us means the Senator from Kentucky who introduced it ought
to have certain prerogatives--prerogatives to change it or modify it
before it gets to the floor. That is the point I was making, and that
is the point I think bears some mention here. I think that is a point
which was somehow lost in this discussion today, and that is most
unfortunate.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Kentucky.
Unanimous consent Request--S. 3576
Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending
business be set side and that S. 3576 be made pending; that the Paul
substitute amendment No. 2849 to S. 3576 be adopted; and that at the
appropriate time the Senate consider S. 3576 as amended under the terms
of the earlier order.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection?
Mr. KERRY. Yes, I object.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection is heard.
Who yields time?
The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. PAUL. It boggles the mind to think that Hillary Clinton was on
Capitol Hill this week to ask for increasing aid to Egypt. It boggles
the mind that last month President Obama found an extra $1 billion to
give to Pakistan.
Meanwhile, Dr. Shakil Afridi has been in prison for a year. He said
directly in interviews that he has been tortured by the Pakistani
Government. Now he has been imprisoned for life. The Foreign Relations
Committee has had a year to act on this and has not been forthcoming in
doing anything to address Dr. Afridi or get him freed or to attach any
restrictions or limitations to foreign aid. The restrictions currently
in place are for the administration, and they have been waived.
I say we don't give up the power of the purse. I say we keep the
power of the purse and the restrictions with the legislature. This bill
places restrictions on foreign aid to three countries. This bill does
not end foreign aid, it adds restrictions. Some have argued that
interrupting foreign aid now could inflame the Arab world. Does anyone
think they are not already inflamed? They are inflamed because our
foreign aid has incensed them. Our foreign aid bought Mubarak tear gas
and police truncheons. We need to understand why the Arabs are angry.
Some have argued that aid to Israel could be ended by this bill. That
is ridiculous. The bill requires the Secretary of State to allege that
a country did not attempt to protect an embassy that was attacked. To
imply that a Secretary of State, Republican or Democrat, is going to
allege that Israel is not protecting our embassy is absurd. It boggles
the mind to think that any Senator wants to send foreign aid without
conditions to countries that are burning our flag. I, for one, will not
vote for one more penny to be sent to the people who riot and burn the
American flag. Enough is enough. We are running a trillion-dollar
deficit, and Americans are tired of their tax dollars being sent to
countries that are burning the American flag.
I urge a ``yes'' vote on placing restrictions on foreign aid.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Massachusetts. I
yield the time to the Senator from Arizona.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, let me say quickly to the Senator from
Kentucky, whom I asked the other day whether he has ever been to
Pakistan or Egypt--I think if he had, he would know something more
about the millions of people in those countries who aspire to democracy
and who have invested in our values and are trying to have a different
future.
I particularly--``resent'' is not a particularly attractive word, but
to hear him say that the Foreign Relations Committee has done nothing
on Dr. Afridi does a disservice to the efforts we have been making in
what is called a quiet and thoughtful diplomacy. Not all diplomacy is
conducted by passing a fly-by-night amendment on the floor of the
Senate, pretending that is going to improve relations or change the
world. When we sit down with people and talk through problems, we can
work out a resolution.
We had a long conversation just a day ago with the Foreign Minister
of Pakistan about Dr. Afridi. That was not the first conversation. For
months some of us have been talking with Pakistan about how we resolve
this issue, which does, incidentally, have something to do with the law
of another country, the politics of another country, and the political
demands and needs of another country. It is not always the best way to
resolve those things simply by racing to the floor of the Senate and
saying: Here, do what we tell you. I am afraid that is not always how
it works.
So I think the Senator from Kentucky has a lot to learn about how we
get things done within the international community.
I yield 3 minutes to the Senator from Arizona.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I hope all of my colleagues will take note
that AIPAC disagrees with the view of the Senator from Kentucky about
the effect this legislation may have on aid to Israel.
Every Member of Congress and all Americans should know what happened
today in Benghazi, Libya. The reports are that as many as 30,000
Libyans took to the streets in Benghazi, the city in which Ambassador
Chris Stevens and three of his colleagues were tragically murdered 10
days ago. These demonstrators marched peacefully to the gates of the
compound of Ansar al-Sharia, the militia that was responsible for the
attack that killed Ambassador Stevens and his colleagues. The
demonstrators conducted themselves peacefully. According to media
reports, they carried signs that read ``The Ambassador was Libya's
friend'' and ``No, no to militias.'' When these brave Libyans arrived
at the gates of the compound, they told the militia that they and their
violent, extremist agenda are not welcome in the new Libya. Do we want
to send a message tonight, after the people of Libya told the militants
no, that we don't want to have anything to do with them, we won't
assist them, we won't give them what they need to establish a
democratic and free society?
Because of what happened in Benghazi today, somewhere Chris Stevens
is smiling. He is smiling because this is the real Libya, the Libya he
knew and loved so well. This is the Libya he wanted America to support
and remain engaged with, the Libya of which he ultimately gave his
life. These brave people in Libya are friends of America's. They want
our help, and they need our help. We must continue to provide it to
them, which is exactly what Chris Stevens would have wanted.
If the Senate were to cut off all U.S. assistance to Libya now, as
this amendment before us would do, it would abandon our friends to our
terrorist enemies and destroy America's moral standing in the world and
do egregious harm to our national interests.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, how much time do we have remaining?
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Four minutes.
Who yields time?
Mr. KERRY. How much time is remaining altogether?
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Two minutes 20 seconds on Senator
Paul's time; 4 minutes left to the Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. KERRY. Does the Senator plan to use his time?
Mr. PAUL. I will reserve the remainder of my time.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. If no one yields time, time will be
charged equally to both sides.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I yield such time as I may use. I will be
happy to have the Senator speak last if that is what he wants to do.
We have heard today from 110 retired generals and admirals that the
suspension of U.S. aid is not in America's interest and that assistance
is a critical component of America's national security strategy.
We have heard from Jewish Americans about the impacts this bill would
[[Page 14778]]
have on our relationship with Israel at what they have called ``a time
of turmoil and uncertainty,'' and ``the U.S. government needs to be
able to use all available tools to influence events in the region.''
It would affect Israel's security if the United States were to
suddenly pull out its assistance and change its relationship with Yemen
and particularly change its relationship with Egypt.
I have heard from the State Department, which said this legislation
``will weaken democracies'' and ``play into the hands of extremists.''
With respect to Libya, Senator McCain has just spoken eloquently
about Chris Stevens. He knew Chris Stevens. We knew him on our
committee. He worked for Senator Lugar, and we knew him as a Pearson
fellow. There was no more dedicated person. We just confirmed him and
sent him over this May. I guarantee that the last thing he would want
is his death being used as an excuse for the United States to cut off
Libya and to disengage.
The 30,000 people who marched today marched for America. They marched
for themselves. They marched for democracy. They marched for what Chris
Stevens was investing in. I don't think we want to punish those people
and that government because of what happened.
With respect to Egypt, the United States derives extraordinarily
important security benefits from that relationship. Shutting down
American military assistance to Egypt would jeopardize our
nonproliferation initiatives. It would undermine efforts to stop the
smuggling of weapons and interdicting of arms into Gaza, which affects
the security of Israel. It would undermine the 1979 peace treaty
between Israel and Egypt. Those of us who have traveled to Israel in
recent months have heard concern from Israeli officials about the
prospects of suspension of American military assistance to Egypt. They
have already talked about it. They are nervous about it, and they think
it would have a profound negative impact on their security and Israel.
These are the connections the Paul legislation just doesn't face up
to. Senator Paul's legislation would essentially shut down our ability
to work with the new civilian government. And while we are working to
build the same kind of alliance with them we have had previously, it
would really interrupt that and say to them that the United States of
America is not interested in having that kind of an alliance.
With respect to Pakistan, the reality is the United States has vital
national security interests in Pakistan, all of which are at stake.
They have a population of 190 million people, a troubled economy,
pockets of extremism, and a robust nuclear arsenal. We can't turn our
backs on any of that, and I think we need to remember that our aid
plays a critical role in supporting our interests and our values.
The Paul amendment would make us less secure, and it is in no one's
interest.
Whatever time we have, I reserve the remainder.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Whitehouse). The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, nothing in this bill refers to Israel, and
nothing would apply to Israel. To imagine that any money could be
removed from Israel, we would have to imagine that Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton accuses Israel of not protecting the Embassy. It is a
canard, and it is a typical one that has been used many times.
Nothing in the bill says we would have no aid to these countries. It
simply says to these countries that if they protect our Embassy--Libya,
if you continue to cooperate and send back terrorists and catch the
assassins, you will continue to get our aid.
It conditions aid on behavior. Right now, aid is not being
conditioned on behavior.
We have Pakistan, which has actually tortured a friend of America's.
Dr. Shakil Afridi has been tortured for a year by the Pakistani
Government.
The Foreign Relations Committee has done nothing to address that, and
so we have Dr. Shakil Afridi now in prison for years--for the rest of
his life, essentially. I don't see any action forthcoming from the
Foreign Affairs Committee.
What I would say to my colleagues is this is a bill that places
restrictions on foreign aid, it does not end foreign aid. It doesn't
breach the Israel-Egypt treaty or the Camp David Accords. It is a
canard. It is brought up routinely to try to prevent any changes or
reform in foreign aid. We always hear it is going to end aid to Israel.
It is a canard.
What I would say to my colleagues is this bill does not end foreign
aid. It places restrictions on foreign aid. Ask the American people: Do
you think these restrictions are appropriate? Do you think a host
country should protect our Embassy? Do you think a host country such as
Libya should be asked to continue to cooperate? Do you think a host
country such as Pakistan should turn over a friend of America and not
imprison and torture a friend of America?
I think these are very reasonable restrictions. I think these are
restrictions we should have. I think these are restrictions anyone in
America would say are very reasonable, and I urge adoption of the
resolution.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, could we have order in the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is order in the Senate.
The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, for such time as I have left, let me make
it clear: The Paul legislation requires all identifiable persons
associated with organizing, planning, participating in the attacks,
trespass, breach, or attempted attack, have been identified by the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, Bureau of Diplomatic Security, or
other United States law enforcement entity, and are in United States
custody. We are talking about other countries. That is an absolutely
impossible-to-fulfill requirement and that is why it would result in
the cutoff of aid automatically, and that is why it is dangerous.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.
____________________
PROVIDING LIMITATIONS ON UNITED STATES ASSISTANCE
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the clerk will
report S. 3576.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 3576) to provide limitations on United States
assistance, and for other purposes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the clerk will read
the bill for the third time.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading and was read
the third time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill having been read the third time, the
question is, Shall the bill pass?
Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
There is a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer)
and the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray) are necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman), the Senator from North Carolina (Mr.
Burr), the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Heller), the Senator from Oklahoma
(Mr. Inhofe), the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), the Senator from
Florida (Mr. Rubio), and the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Vitter).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Heller)
would have voted: ``yea.''
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 10, nays 81, as follows:
[[Page 14779]]
[Rollcall Vote No. 196 Leg.]
YEAS--10
Crapo
DeMint
Grassley
Lee
Moran
Paul
Risch
Roberts
Shelby
Toomey
NAYS--81
Akaka
Alexander
Ayotte
Barrasso
Baucus
Begich
Bennet
Bingaman
Blumenthal
Blunt
Brown (MA)
Brown (OH)
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Chambliss
Coats
Coburn
Cochran
Collins
Conrad
Coons
Corker
Cornyn
Durbin
Enzi
Feinstein
Franken
Gillibrand
Graham
Hagan
Harkin
Hatch
Hoeven
Hutchison
Inouye
Isakson
Johanns
Johnson (SD)
Johnson (WI)
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lugar
Manchin
McCain
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Merkley
Mikulski
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Nelson (FL)
Portman
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Sanders
Schumer
Sessions
Shaheen
Snowe
Stabenow
Tester
Thune
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden
NOT VOTING--9
Boozman
Boxer
Burr
Heller
Inhofe
Kirk
Murray
Rubio
Vitter
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The 60-vote threshold not having been
achieved, the bill is rejected.
____________________
EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE NUCLEAR PROGRAM OF THE
GOVERNMENT OF THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the clerk will
report S.J. Res. 41 by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A joint resolution (S.J. Res. 41) expressing the sense of
Congress regarding the nuclear program of the Government of
the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The Senate proceeded to consider the joint resolution.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there is now 2
minutes equally divided.
The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, this resolution has 83 cosponsors. Even I
cannot lose this vote.
This resolution says it will not be the policy of the United States
to allow the Iranian regime to get a nuclear weapon and try to contain
them. President Obama has rejected containment. Governor Romney, 83
Senators have said that is a bad idea.
Very quickly, why will containment not work? If the Iranians get a
nuclear weapon, every Sunni Arab state will want one themselves. Israel
will never know a minute's peace. And my biggest fear: If we allow
these people to get a nuclear weapon, they will share the technology
with terrorists. The reason thousands have died in the war on terror--
not millions--is because the terrorists cannot get the weapons to kill
millions.
Senator Casey has been terrific. My Democratic colleagues, thank you
for working in a bipartisan fashion.
I yield now to Senator Casey.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I want to, first of all, thank all the
Members who are cosponsors, led by Senator Graham, Senator Lieberman,
and our team doing this.
This is bipartisan on a very important issue. I think it does three
things. It adds a sense of urgency because of the threat posed by an
Iranian nuclear program, it adds clarity, and also the resolve of the
American people to stop them.
I thank the Chair.
Mr. FRANKEN. Mr. President, today I vote to support S.J. Res. 41,
reinforcing President Obama's policy of preventing Iran from possessing
a nuclear weapon rather than containing a nuclear Iran. I support this
resolution, which explicitly states that nothing in it should be
construed as an authorization to use force, because its intention and
its purpose is to echo and reinforce President Obama's policy toward
Iran. It is particularly important to make that clear because there has
been a lot of debate about the meaning of the term ``nuclear weapons
capability'' in the resolution. But a brief examination of the issue
shows that the resolution and its language support the President's
policy of preventing Iran from developing or acquiring a nuclear
weapon.
An authoritative definition of a nuclear weapons capability was
offered in testimony by the Director of National Intelligence in 2009.
He stated that there are three parts of an effective nuclear weapons
capability: production of fissile material; effective means for weapon
delivery; and design, weaponization, and testing of the warhead itself.
According to this definition, the Senate and the President are
articulating the same position: we are committed to preventing Iran
from achieving all of those components of a nuclear weapons capability,
which amounts to saying that Iran must not develop or acquire nuclear
weapons.
That we are reinforcing the President's policy was one of the main
themes in the debate on the resolution on the floor of the Senate. When
this was debated in May, that is what both the sponsor, Senator Graham,
and the lead cosponsor, Senator Lieberman, emphasized repeatedly.
Senator Lieberman stated, ``This resolution's main focus is to
essentially back up with a congressional statement the position
President Obama has articulated: that no matter what happens,
containment of a nuclear Iran is not an acceptable policy from the
point of view of the security of the United States; that our policy is
to prevent the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran from
acquiring a nuclear weapons capability.'' And Senator Graham stated,
``We are intending to echo a policy statement made by President Obama
that the policy of the United States will be--if you are listening in
Tehran--not to contain Iran if they obtain a nuclear capability.''
Again, Senator Graham stated, ``We are not coming up with a new idea:
we are just reinforcing an idea put on the table by our own President--
we are not going to contain a nuclear-capable Iran as a policy.''
Other leading voices on this issue in the Senate made the same point
at the time. Senator McCain stated, ``So this resolution we are
considering is no different in any way--in fact, it is less specific
than what the President of the United States has said and what I
believe most every Member of the U.S. Senate is on record one way or
the other saying: that the development of a nuclear weapon by Iran
would be an unacceptable situation.'' Senator Menendez similarly
characterized the resolution as ``making the intentions or amplifying
the intentions of the President crystal clear.''
Those intentions are to prevent Iran from developing or acquiring a
nuclear weapon. I share those intentions, and that is why I support the
resolution today.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I will vote for this resolution which
reaffirms current U.S. policy towards Iran.
In doing so, I want to emphasize that it is my understanding that
this Resolution, which is non-binding, is in no way intended by its
sponsors to endorse, authorize, or otherwise encourage the use of
military force against Iran.
Secretary of Defense Panetta, Secretary of State Clinton, former
Secretary of Defense Gates, and other top Pentagon officials have
strongly advised against the use of pre-emptive military force. They
said it would, at best, only temporarily halt Iran's nuclear program,
it would drive their program further underground, and it could ignite a
wider war in the Middle East that could spin out of control.
I am as concerned as anyone about Iran. But while this Resolution
reaffirms that concern, that is the extent of what it does. The policy
of the Administration, and of our allies is to support sanctions, to
use diplomacy, to resort to military force only if all other options
fail. This Resolution does not change that.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time in favor has expired.
Who yields time in opposition?
The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, a vote for this resolution is a vote for the
concept of preemptive war. I know of no other way to interpret this
resolution.
[[Page 14780]]
The resolution states that containment will never be our policy
toward Iran. While I think it is unwise to say we will contain Iran, I
think it is equally unwise to say we will never contain Iran.
We woke up one day and Pakistan was a nuclear power. We woke up one
day and North Korea was a nuclear power--India, Russia, China. But if
we would have announced preemptively that we were not going to contain
anyone, then we would be at odds with these countries, and what would
the solution be? Preemptive war.
Announcing to the world, as this resolution does, that containment
will never be our policy is unwise. A country that vows to never
contain an enemy is a country that vows always to preemptively strike.
I urge a ``no'' vote on this resolution.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time is expired.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the joint
resolution.
The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading
and was read the third time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The joint resolution having been read the
third time, the question is, Shall the joint resolution pass?
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer)
and the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray) are necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman), the Senator from North Carolina (Mr.
Burr), the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Heller), the Senator from Oklahoma
(Mr. Inhofe), the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), the Senator from
Florida (Mr. Rubio), and the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Vitter).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Heller)
would have voted: ``aye.''
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Nelson of Florida). Are there any other
Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 90, nays 1, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 197 Leg.]
YEAS--90
Akaka
Alexander
Ayotte
Barrasso
Baucus
Begich
Bennet
Bingaman
Blumenthal
Blunt
Brown (MA)
Brown (OH)
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Chambliss
Coats
Coburn
Cochran
Collins
Conrad
Coons
Corker
Cornyn
Crapo
DeMint
Durbin
Enzi
Feinstein
Franken
Gillibrand
Graham
Grassley
Hagan
Harkin
Hatch
Hoeven
Hutchison
Inouye
Isakson
Johanns
Johnson (SD)
Johnson (WI)
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Lee
Levin
Lieberman
Lugar
Manchin
McCain
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Merkley
Mikulski
Moran
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Nelson (FL)
Portman
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Risch
Roberts
Rockefeller
Sanders
Schumer
Sessions
Shaheen
Shelby
Snowe
Stabenow
Tester
Thune
Toomey
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden
NAYS--1
Paul
NOT VOTING--9
Boozman
Boxer
Burr
Heller
Inhofe
Kirk
Murray
Rubio
Vitter
The joint resolution (S.J. Res. 41) was passed, as follows:
S.J. Res. 41
Whereas, since at least the late 1980s, the Government of
the Islamic Republic of Iran has engaged in a sustained and
well-documented pattern of illicit and deceptive activities
to acquire nuclear capability;
Whereas the United Nations Security Council has adopted
multiple resolutions since 2006 demanding the full and
sustained suspension of all uranium enrichment-related and
reprocessing activities by the Government of the Islamic
Republic of Iran and its full cooperation with the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on all outstanding
issues related to its nuclear activities, particularly those
concerning the possible military dimensions of its nuclear
program;
Whereas, on November 8, 2011, the IAEA issued an extensive
report that--
(1) documents ``serious concerns regarding possible
military dimensions to Iran's nuclear programme'';
(2) states that ``Iran has carried out activities relevant
to the development of a nuclear device''; and
(3) states that the efforts described in paragraphs (1) and
(2) may be ongoing;
Whereas, as of November 2008, Iran had produced, according
to the IAEA--
(1) approximately 630 kilograms of uranium hexaflouride
enriched up to 3.5 percent uranium-235; and
(2) no uranium hexaflouride enriched up to 20 percent
uranium-235;
Whereas, as of November 2011, Iran had produced, according
to the IAEA--
(1) nearly 5,000 kilograms of uranium hexaflouride enriched
up to 3.5 percent uranium-235; and
(2) 79.7 kilograms of uranium hexaflouride enriched up to
20 percent uranium-235;
Whereas, on January 9, 2012, IAEA inspectors confirmed that
the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran had begun
enrichment activities at the Fordow site, including possibly
enrichment of uranium hexaflouride up to 20 percent uranium-
235;
Whereas section 2(2) of the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions,
Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-
195) states, ``The United States and other responsible
countries have a vital interest in working together to
prevent the Government of Iran from acquiring a nuclear
weapons capability.'';
Whereas, if the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran
were successful in acquiring a nuclear weapon capability, it
would likely spur other countries in the region to consider
developing their own nuclear weapons capabilities;
Whereas, on December 6, 2011, Prince Turki al-Faisal of
Saudi Arabia stated that if international efforts to prevent
Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons fail, ``we must, as a
duty to our country and people, look into all options we are
given, including obtaining these weapons ourselves'';
Whereas top leaders of the Government of the Islamic
Republic of Iran have repeatedly threatened the existence of
the State of Israel, pledging to ``wipe Israel off the map'';
Whereas the Department of State has designated Iran as a
state sponsor of terrorism since 1984 and characterized Iran
as the ``most active state sponsor of terrorism'';
Whereas the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran has
provided weapons, training, funding, and direction to
terrorist groups, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and Shiite
militias in Iraq that are responsible for the murders of
hundreds of United States forces and innocent civilians;
Whereas, on July 28, 2011, the Department of the Treasury
charged that the Government of Iran had forged a ``secret
deal'' with al Qaeda to facilitate the movement of al Qaeda
fighters and funding through Iranian territory;
Whereas, in October 2011, senior leaders of Iran's Islamic
Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force were implicated
in a terrorist plot to assassinate Saudi Arabia's Ambassador
to the United States on United States soil;
Whereas, on December 26, 2011, the United Nations General
Assembly passed a resolution denouncing the serious human
rights abuses occurring in the Islamic Republic of Iran,
including torture, cruel and degrading treatment in
detention, the targeting of human rights defenders, violence
against women, and ``the systematic and serious restrictions
on freedom of peaceful assembly'' as well as severe
restrictions on the rights to ``freedom of thought,
conscience, religion or belief'';
Whereas President Barack Obama, through the P5+1 process,
has made repeated efforts to engage the Government of the
Islamic Republic of Iran in dialogue about Iran's nuclear
program and its international commitments under the Treaty on
the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, done at Washington,
London, and Moscow July 1, 1968, and entered into force March
5, 1970 (commonly known as the ``Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty'');
Whereas representatives of the P5+1 countries (the United
States, France, Germany, the People's Republic of China, the
Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom) and
representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran held
negotiations on Iran's nuclear program in Istanbul, Turkey on
April 14, 2012, and these discussions are set to resume in
Baghdad, Iraq on May 23, 2012;
Whereas, on March 31, 2010, President Obama stated that the
``consequences of a nuclear-armed Iran are unacceptable'';
Whereas in his State of the Union Address on January 24,
2012, President Obama stated, ``Let there be no doubt:
America is determined to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear
weapon, and I will take no options off the table to achieve
that goal.'';
Whereas, on March 4, 2012, President Obama stated ``Iran's
leaders should understand that I do not have a policy of
containment; I have a policy to prevent Iran from obtaining a
nuclear weapon'';
[[Page 14781]]
Whereas Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta stated, in
December 2011, that it was unacceptable for Iran to acquire
nuclear weapons, reaffirmed that all options were on the
table to thwart Iran's nuclear weapons efforts, and vowed
that if the United States gets ``intelligence that they are
proceeding with developing a nuclear weapon then we will take
whatever steps necessary to stop it'';
Whereas the Department of Defense's January 2012 Strategic
Guidance stated that United States defense efforts in the
Middle East would be aimed ``to prevent Iran's development of
a nuclear weapons capability and counter its destabilizing
policies''; and
Whereas, on April 2, 2012, President Obama stated, ``All
the evidence indicates that the Iranians are trying to
develop the capacity to develop nuclear weapons. They might
decide that, once they have that capacity that they'd hold
off right at the edge in order not to incur more sanctions.
But, if they've got nuclear weapons-building capacity and
they are flouting international resolutions, that creates
huge destabilizing effects in the region and will trigger an
arms race in the Middle East that is bad for U.S. national
security but is also bad for the entire world.'': Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
That Congress--
(1) reaffirms that the United States Government and the
governments of other responsible countries have a vital
interest in working together to prevent the Government of
Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability;
(2) warns that time is limited to prevent the Government of
the Islamic Republic of Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons
capability;
(3) urges continued and increasing economic and diplomatic
pressure on the Islamic Republic of Iran until the Government
of the Islamic Republic of Iran agrees to and implements--
(A) the full and sustained suspension of all uranium
enrichment-related and reprocessing activities and compliance
with United Nations Security Council resolutions;
(B) complete cooperation with the IAEA on all outstanding
questions related to the nuclear activities of the Government
of the Islamic Republic of Iran, including the implementation
of the additional protocol to Iran's Safeguards Agreement
with the IAEA; and
(C) a permanent agreement that verifiably assures that
Iran's nuclear program is entirely peaceful;
(4) expresses the desire that the P5+1 process successfully
and swiftly leads to the objectives identified in paragraph
(3), but warns that, as President Obama has said, the window
for diplomacy is closing;
(5) expresses support for the universal rights and
democratic aspirations of the people of Iran;
(6) strongly supports United States policy to prevent the
Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran from acquiring a
nuclear weapons capability;
(7) rejects any United States policy that would rely on
efforts to contain a nuclear weapons-capable Iran; and
(8) joins the President in ruling out any policy that would
rely on containment as an option in response to the Iranian
nuclear threat.
SEC. 2. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Nothing in this resolution shall be construed as an
authorization for the use of force or a declaration of war.
____________________
MAKING CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012--Continued
Cloture Motion
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under
rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
The legislative clerk read as follows.
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
hereby move to bring to a close debate on H.J. Res. 117, a
joint resolution making continuing appropriations for fiscal
year 2013, and for other purposes.
Harry Reid, Daniel K. Inouye, Patty Murray, Bernard
Sanders, Jeanne Shaheen, Richard J. Durbin, Sheldon
Whitehouse, Debbie Stabenow, Max Baucus, Mark Pryor,
Christopher A. Coons, Jon Tester, Michael F. Bennet,
Kay R. Hagan, Robert P. Casey, Jr., Richard Blumenthal,
Ron Wyden, Barbara Boxer.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now 2 minutes equally divided prior
to a vote on the motion.
The Senator from Hawaii.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, this CR funds the government for the next
6 months at a level agreed to by the Budget Control Act. It contains a
minimum of anomalies and allows adequate funding for disaster relief.
This is an inefficient way to fund our Federal Government, but it is
better than shutting it down next week.
I urge a ``yes'' vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum
call has been waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on H.J.
Res. 117, a joint resolution making continuing appropriations for
fiscal year 2013, and for other purposes shall be brought to a close?
The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer)
and the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray) are necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman), the Senator from North Carolina (Mr.
Burr), the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Heller), the Senator from Oklahoma
(Mr. Inhofe), the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), and the Senator
from Louisiana (Mr. Vitter).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Heller)
would have voted: ``yea.''
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 62, nays 30, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 198 Leg.]
YEAS--62
Akaka
Alexander
Baucus
Begich
Bennet
Bingaman
Blumenthal
Blunt
Brown (MA)
Brown (OH)
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Cochran
Conrad
Coons
Durbin
Feinstein
Franken
Gillibrand
Hagan
Harkin
Hoeven
Hutchison
Inouye
Johanns
Johnson (SD)
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lugar
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Merkley
Mikulski
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Nelson (FL)
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Sanders
Schumer
Shaheen
Stabenow
Tester
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden
NAYS--30
Ayotte
Barrasso
Chambliss
Coats
Coburn
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Crapo
DeMint
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Hatch
Isakson
Johnson (WI)
Lee
Manchin
McCain
Moran
Paul
Portman
Risch
Roberts
Rubio
Sessions
Shelby
Snowe
Thune
Toomey
NOT VOTING--8
Boozman
Boxer
Burr
Heller
Inhofe
Kirk
Murray
Vitter
The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 62, the nays are
30. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in
the affirmative, the motion is agreed to.
Under the previous order, the pending amendments are withdrawn.
The clerk will read the joint resolution for the third time.
The joint resolution (H.J. Res. 117) was read the third time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on passage of the joint
resolution.
Mr. REID. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer)
and the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray) are necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman), the Senator from North Carolina (Mr.
Burr), the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Heller), the Senator from Oklahoma
(Mr. Inhofe), the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), and the Senator
from Louisiana (Mr. Vitter).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Heller)
would have voted: ``yea.''
[[Page 14782]]
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Brown of Ohio). Are there any other
Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 62, nays 30, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 199 Leg.]
YEAS--62
Akaka
Alexander
Baucus
Begich
Bennet
Bingaman
Blumenthal
Blunt
Brown (MA)
Brown (OH)
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Cochran
Conrad
Coons
Durbin
Feinstein
Franken
Gillibrand
Hagan
Harkin
Hoeven
Hutchison
Inouye
Johanns
Johnson (SD)
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lugar
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Merkley
Mikulski
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Nelson (FL)
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Sanders
Schumer
Shaheen
Stabenow
Tester
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden
NAYS--30
Ayotte
Barrasso
Chambliss
Coats
Coburn
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Crapo
DeMint
Enzi
Graham
Grassley
Hatch
Isakson
Johnson (WI)
Lee
Manchin
McCain
Moran
Paul
Portman
Risch
Roberts
Rubio
Sessions
Shelby
Snowe
Thune
Toomey
NOT VOTING--8
Boozman
Boxer
Burr
Heller
Inhofe
Kirk
Murray
Vitter
The joint resolution (H.J. Res. 117) was passed.
Vote Explanation
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I was unable to attend the roll
call votes that occurred at midnight, September 22. Had I been present,
I would have voted against S. 3576, related to foreign aid and voted in
favor of S.J. Res. 41, the Iran Resolution. I would have also voted to
support passage of H.J. Res. 117, the Continuing Appropriations
resolution and would have voted against the motion to invoke cloture on
the motion to proceed to S. 3525, the Sportsmen's Act.
____________________
SPORTSMEN'S ACT OF 2012--MOTION TO PROCEED
Cloture Motion
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, pursuant to rule
XXII, the Chair lays before the Senate the pending cloture motion,
which the clerk will state.
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to
proceed to Calendar No. 504, S. 3525, a bill to protect and
enhance opportunities for recreational hunting, fishing, and
shooting, and for other purposes.
Harry Reid, Jon Tester, Joe Manchin III, Jeanne Shaheen,
Sheldon Whitehouse, Debbie Stabenow, Ron Wyden, Max
Baucus, Daniel K. Inouye, Kent Conrad, Mark Pryor,
Christopher A. Coons, Michael F. Bennet, Kay R. Hagan,
Robert P. Casey, Jr., Richard Blumenthal, Ben Nelson.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are now 2 minutes equally divided.
The Republican leader is recognized.
Mr. McCONNELL. I am going to proceed very briefly on my leader time.
I ask consent that the next vote on cloture on the motion to proceed to
S. 2535 be vitiated and the Senate proceed to the immediate
consideration of H.R. 4089, which is at the desk and is the House-
passed Sportsmen's Heritage Act, the bill be read a third time and
passed with the motion to reconsider laid upon the table.
For the record, again, this will allow a bill to get to the
President's desk immediately.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? The majority leader.
Mr. REID. Reserving the right to object, Mr. President, the House
bill is this big. It has three provisions. The bill we are going to
vote on has 20, supported by over 50 groups--NRA, Ducks Unlimited, and
more than 50 others, a wonderful piece of legislation that is robust,
it is conclusive, and it is not partisan. It is a very good piece of
legislation. It should be widely accepted. It is a fine piece of
legislation supported by conservation groups, sportsmen's groups all
over America.
I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard. The Republican leader.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, very briefly, we could have tonight
passed the House-passed Sportsmen's bill. It would have gone straight
to the President for signature. That having been thwarted by our
friends on the other side, I certainly think it is appropriate to vote
to proceed to the measure before us and I intend to vote aye.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now 2 minutes equally divided. The
Senator from Montana is recognized.
Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, as the majority leader pointed out, this
Sportsmen's Act is a compilation of 19 bills. Hunting season has
already started. This bill benefits 90 million Americans who hunt,
fish, and watch wildlife, supported by 56 groups from the Nature
Conservancy to the NRA. It reduces our deficit by some $7 million due
to net gain over 10 years. This is an economic driver of outdoor
industry, some $646 billion in direct spending to our economy. I urge a
``yes'' vote on the motion to proceed and since it is 20 after 1, I
would like to have a voice vote on it.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I want to explain my vote in support of
cloture on the motion to proceed to S. 3525, the Sportsmen's Act of
2012. I am supporting cloture in an effort to move this important bill
forward. It is a compilation of almost 20 different pieces of
legislation that are important to the sportsmen's community. The
Sportsmen's Act will increase habitat conservation while improving
access to recreational fishing and hunting lands. The Senate deserves
the chance to debate this bill, and I support invoking cloture on the
motion to proceed in an effort to make it the pending business before
the Senate.
However, I want to voice my opposition to a provision in this bill
dealing with polar bears. The provision would allow hunters who killed
polar bears in Canada before a ban was put in place to bring their
remains into the United States. I believe this provision could
encourage further hunting of polar bears, increase demand for polar
bear trophies, and lead to a rise in poaching or illegal trade of polar
bear parts. It could also stimulate demand for other exotic and
endangered animal parts from around the globe.
Polar bears are currently listed as threatened under the Endangered
Species Act. Their habitat is being threatened by global warming. We
need to do everything we can to curb the hunting of these creatures for
sport and avoid the unintended consequence of putting polar bears and
other endangered species at risk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Mr. REID. I yield back all time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent the mandatory quorum call
has been waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the
motion to proceed to S. 3525, a bill to protect and enhance
opportunities for recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting, and for
other purposes be brought to a close?
The yeas are mandatory under the rule. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer)
and the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray) are necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator
from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman), the Senator from North Carolina (Mr.
Burr), the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Heller), the Senator from Oklahoma
(Mr. Inhofe), the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn), the Senator from
Illinois (Mr. Kirk), and the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Vitter).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Heller)
would have voted: ``yea.''
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Whitehouse). Are there any other Senators
in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 84, nays 7, as follows:
[[Page 14783]]
[Rollcall Vote No. 200 Leg.]
YEAS--84
Akaka
Alexander
Ayotte
Barrasso
Baucus
Begich
Bennet
Bingaman
Blunt
Brown (MA)
Brown (OH)
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Chambliss
Coats
Cochran
Collins
Conrad
Coons
Corker
Cornyn
Crapo
Durbin
Enzi
Feinstein
Franken
Gillibrand
Graham
Grassley
Hagan
Harkin
Hatch
Hoeven
Hutchison
Inouye
Isakson
Johanns
Johnson (SD)
Johnson (WI)
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Lee
Levin
Lieberman
Lugar
Manchin
McCaskill
McConnell
Merkley
Mikulski
Moran
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Nelson (FL)
Portman
Pryor
Reid
Risch
Roberts
Rockefeller
Rubio
Sanders
Schumer
Sessions
Shaheen
Shelby
Snowe
Stabenow
Tester
Thune
Toomey
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden
NAYS--7
Blumenthal
DeMint
Kyl
McCain
Menendez
Paul
Reed
NOT VOTING--9
Boozman
Boxer
Burr
Coburn
Heller
Inhofe
Kirk
Murray
Vitter
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Whitehouse). On this vote, the yeas are
84, the nays are 7. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn
having voted in the affirmative, the motion is agreed to.
The majority leader.
____________________
UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--S. 3254
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I have been asked on a number of occasions
by Senator Levin and Senator McCain what we are going to do on the
Defense authorization bill.
I now ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by me
after consultation with the Republican leader, the Senate proceed to
Calendar No. 419, S. 3254, the Defense authorization bill; and that
only relevant amendments be in order on the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I am very
disappointed in this request. Senator McCain has been asking that the
leader take up the Defense authorization bill for weeks. This evening
he tried very hard to get agreement from the Senator from Michigan, the
chairman of the committee, and others to try to work out a way that we
could take up this bill right after we come back or at some point after
we come back after the election.
After he leaves the Chamber, and after virtually everybody is gone,
at 1:40 in the morning the majority leader asks unanimous consent to
take up the bill limited to relevant amendments. Now that would be fine
with me, and I am sure it is fine with Senator McCain, but everybody
knows you can't get unanimous consent of your colleagues when they are
all gone at 1:40 a.m. in the morning without any advanced notice that
the request was going to be made.
As a result--though I would be happy personally to agree to the
request--we don't know what our Members would agree to and whether they
would agree to limiting this to relevant amendments. To me that is the
only thing that seems to be out of order, but obviously we can't agree
to it because we can't hotline this at this time of the evening and get
consent from our Members.
What mostly bothers me is the implication, therefore, that the leader
is all for taking it up and it is the Republicans who are objecting. I
hope anyone who is aware of what has been going on here appreciates the
fact that no one wants to go to the Defense authorization bill more
than my colleague from Arizona, John McCain, and our leader, Mitch
McConnell.
With great regret and only because at this time of morning there is
no way to survey our Members to see whether they would agree to the
request, we have no option but to object.
I would certainly hope the leader would contact Senator McCain. He
left the Chamber now, but perhaps he could contact him tomorrow or the
next day and ask if we can begin to work this out and allow us to talk
to our Members so when we come back we can take up the Defense
authorization bill. We should.
The Republican Members of this body want to do so, and I would hope
we could work that out so it could be dealt with in the very early days
after the election.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I said I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The majority leader.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, Senator Levin has consulted with John McCain
in regard to this matter. Senator McCain knew this was going to happen.
That is what the chairman of the committee told me, and Senator Levin
has never misled me ever. Again, it is obvious the bill is being held
up. So I am not surprised. This has been going on for 6 months.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, would the majority leader yield for one
question from me?
Mr. REID. Of course.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, my question is, Is the Senator saying that
Senator McCain was aware the Senator was going to make this request
tonight in the form it was made?
Mr. REID. Senator Levin gave this to me and said he already talked to
Senator McCain about this.
Mr. KYL. I know they talked all evening long, but I am not sure that
Senator McCain was made aware that the Senator would propose this
tonight.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I first learned about this several hours ago
from Senator Levin, so I take him at his word.
Mr. KYL. Thank you, Mr. President.
Mr. REID. I note 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 (Mr. Merkley). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________
UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENT--S.J. RES. 41
Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the preamble to S.J. Res. 41
be agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I note the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call
be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
EXECUTIVE SESSION
______
EXECUTIVE CALENDAR
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations:
Calendar Nos. 456, 714, 880 through 908, and 910, and all nominations
placed on the Secretary's desk in the Air Force, Army, Foreign Service,
Navy, and Public Health Service; that the nominations be confirmed en
bloc; the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the
table, with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be
in order to any of the nominations; that any related statements be
printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of
the Senate's action and the Senate then resume legislative session.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The nominations considered and confirmed en bloc are as follows:
[[Page 14784]]
AMTRAK BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Albert DiClemente, of Delaware, to be a Director of the
Amtrak Board of Directors for a term of five years.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSe
Heidi Shyu, of California, to be an Assistant Secretary of
the Army.
in the AIR FORCE
The following named officer for appointment in the United
States Air Force to the grade indicated while assigned to a
position of importance and responsibility under title 10,
U.S.C., section 601:
To be lieutenant general
Maj. Gen. Christopher C. Bogdan
The following named officer for appointment in the Reserve of
the Air Force to the grade indicated under title 10,
U.S.C., section 12203:
To be brigadier general
Col. Jon A. Weeks
The following named officer for appointment in the United
States Air Force to the grade indicated under title 10,
U.S.C., section 624:
To be major general
Brig. Gen. Andrew M. Mueller
The following Air National Guard of the United States
officer for appointment in the Reserve of the Air Force to
the grade indicated under title 10, U.S.C., sections 12203
and 12212:
To be major general
Brig. Gen. Donald P. Dunbar
The following Air National Guard of the United States
officer for appointment in the Reserve of the Air Force to
the grade indicated under title 10, U.S.C., sections 12203
and 12212:
To be brigadier general
Col. Gerard F. Bolduc, Jr.
The following Air National Guard of the United States
officer for appointment in the Reserve of the Air Force to
the grade indicated under title 10, U.S.C., sections 12203
and 12212:
To be brigadier general
Col. Matthew P. Jamison
In the army
The following Army National Guard of the United States
officers for appointment in the Reserve of the Army to the
grades indicated under title 10, U.S.C., sections 12203 and
12211:
To be brigadier general
Colonel David O. Smith
The following named officer for appointment in the Reserve
of the Army to the grade indicated under title 10, U.S.C.,
section 12203:
To be brigadier general
Michaelene A. Kloster
The following named officer for appointment in the Reserve
of the Army to the grade indicated under title 10, U.S.C.,
section 12203:
To be brigadier general
Col. Garrett S. Yee
The following Army National Guard of the United States
officer for appointment in the Reserve of the Army to the
grade indicated under title 10, U.S.C., sections 12203 and
12211:
To be major general
Brig. Gen. Deborah A. Ashenhurst
The following Army National Guard of the United States
officers for appointment in the Reserve of the Army to the
grade indicated under title 10, U.S.C., sections 12203 and
12211:
To be major general
Brig. Gen. Judd H. Lyons
Brig. Gen. Lee E. Tafanelli
The following Army National Guard of the United States
officers for appointment in the Reserve of the Army to the
grades indicated under title 10, U.S.C., sections 12203 and
12211:
To be major general
Brig. Gen. Kendall W. Penn
To be brigadier general
Col. Keith A. Klemmer
The following named officer for appointment in the Reserve
of the Army to the grade indicated under title 10, U.S.C.,
section 12203:
To be major general
Brig. Gen. Michael R. Smith
The following named officer for appointment in the Reserve
of the Army to the grade indicated under title 10, U.S.C.,
section 12203:
To be major general
Brig. Gen. David J. Conboy
The following named officer for appointment in the United
States Army to the grade indicated while assigned to a
position of importance and responsibility under title 10,
U.S.C., section 601:
To be lieutenant general
Maj. Gen. Frederick B. Hodges
The following named officer for appointment in the United
States Army to the grade indicated while assigned to a
position of importance and responsibility under title 10,
U.S.C., section 601:
To be lieutenant general
Maj. Gen. Mark S. Bowman
The following named officer for appointment in the Reserve
of the Army to the grade indicated under title 10, U.S.C.,
section 12203:
To be brigadier general
Col. Ural D. Glanville
in the navy
The following named officer for appointment in the United
States Navy to the grade indicated while assigned to a
position of importance and responsibility under title 10,
U.S.C., section 601:
To be vice admiral
Rear Adm. (lh) James D. Syring
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Sharon English Woods Villarosa, of Texas, a Career Member
of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-Counselor,
to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the
United States of America to the Republic of Mauritius, and to
serve concurrently and without additional compensation as
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United
States of America to the Republic of Seychelles.
Dawn M. Liberi, of Florida, a Career Member of the Senior
Foreign Service, Class of Career Minister, to be Ambassador
Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of
America to the Republic of Burundi.
Stephen D. Mull, of Virginia, a Career Member of the Senior
Foreign Service, Class of Career Minister, to be Ambassador
Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of
America to the Republic of Poland.
Walter North, of Washington, a Career Member of the Senior
Foreign Service, Class of Career Minister, to be Ambassador
Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of
America to Papua New Guinea, and to serve concurrently and
without additional compensation as Ambassador Extraordinary
and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the
Solomon Islands and Ambassador Extraordinary and
Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the
Republic of Vanuatu.
Richard G. Olson, of New Mexico, a Career Member of the
Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-Counselor, to be
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United
States of America to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
Joseph E. Macmanus, of New York, a Career Member of the
Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-Counselor, to be
Representative of the United States of America to the Vienna
Office of the United Nations, with the rank of Ambassador.
Joseph E. Macmanus, of New York, a Career Member of the
Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-Counselor, to be
Representative of the United States of America to the
International Atomic Energy Agency, with the rank of
Ambassador.
UNITED NATIONS
John Hardy Isakson, of Georgia, to be a Representative of
the United States of America to the Sixty-seventh Session of
the General Assembly of the United Nations.
Patrick J. Leahy, of Vermont, to be a Representative of the
United States of America to the Sixty-seventh Session of the
General Assembly of the United Nations.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
The following-named Career Members of the Senior Foreign
Service, Class of Career Minister, for the personal rank of
Career Ambassador in recognition of especially distinguished
service over a sustained period:
William R. Brownfield
Kristie Anne Kenney
Thomas Alfred Shannon, Jr.
NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES
Emil J. Kang, of North Carolina, to be a Member of the
National Council on the Arts for a term expiring September 3,
2018.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Kevin K. Washburn, of New Mexico, to be an Assistant
Secretary of the Interior.
Nominations Placed on the Secretary's Desk
in the air force
PN1546 AIR FORCE nominations (2350) beginning ADAM D.
AASEN, and ending MARK C. ZWYGHUIZEN, which nominations were
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of April 23, 2012.
PN1783 AIR FORCE nominations (33) beginning LANCE A.
AIUMOPAS, and ending ROBERT S. ZAUNER, which nominations were
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of June 25, 2012.
PN1784 AIR FORCE nominations (1236) beginning JAMES H.
ABBOTT, and ending MARIO F. ZUNIGA, which nominations were
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of June 25, 2012.
PN1848 AIR FORCE nomination of Michael F. Wendelken, which
was received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of August 2, 2012.
PN1849 AIR FORCE nominations (2) beginning MICHAEL M.
HOWARD, and ending
[[Page 14785]]
PATRICK E. KNOESTER, which nominations were received by the
Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of August 2,
2012.
PN1850 AIR FORCE nominations (3) beginning KARYN J. AYERS,
and ending JOHN M. TUDELA, which nominations were received by
the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of August
2, 2012.
PN1851 AIR FORCE nominations (4) beginning KIMBERLY A.
DALE, and ending CHRISTOPHER B. VOGLER, which nominations
were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of August 2, 2012.
PN1891 AIR FORCE nomination of Stephen P. Roberts, which
was received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of September 10, 2012.
PN1898 AIR FORCE nominations (3) beginning JEFFREY R.
ALTHOFF, and ending GREGORY T. MCCAIN, which nominations were
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of September 10, 2012.
IN THE ARMY
PN1852 ARMY nomination of Gregory S. Ulma, which was
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of August 2, 2012.
PN1853 ARMY nomination of Patrick P. Metke, which was
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of August 2, 2012.
PN1854 ARMY nomination of Drew D. Dukett, which was
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of August 2, 2012.
PN1855 ARMY nomination of David A. Cortese, which was
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of August 2, 2012.
PN1856 ARMY nomination of Jeffrey T. Whorton, which was
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of August 2, 2012.
PN1857 ARMY nomination of Charles J. Romero, which was
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of August 2, 2012.
PN1858 ARMY nominations (2) beginning TANASHA N. BENNETT,
and ending REIES M. FLORES, which nominations were received
by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of
August 2, 2012.
PN1859 ARMY nominations (9) beginning BRAD D. BEKKEDAHL,
and ending WILLIAM L. ZANA, which nominations were received
by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of
August 2, 2012.
PN1893 ARMY nomination of George C. Sturges, which was
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of September 10, 2012.
PN1894-1 ARMY nominations (615) beginning DAVID W. ACKER,
and ending D003093, which nominations were received by the
Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of September
10, 2012.
PN1895 ARMY nomination of Joseph R. Newcomb, which was
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of September 10, 2012.
PN1896 ARMY nomination of Morohunranti O. Oguntoye, which
was received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of September 10, 2012.
PN1897 ARMY nomination of August Seeber, which was received
by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of
September 10, 2012.
PN1899 ARMY nominations (15) beginning ERIC J. ALBERTSON,
and ending D011234, which nominations were received by the
Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of September
10, 2012.
PN1900 ARMY nominations (7) beginning STUART N. BURRUSS,
and ending ROBERT J. QUINKER, III, which nominations were
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of September 10, 2012.
PN1901 ARMY nominations (389) beginning ANDRE B. ABADIE,
and ending G001060, which nominations were received by the
Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of September
10, 2012.
PN1902 ARMY nominations (329) beginning JOHN J. ACEVEDO,
and ending D010397, which nominations were received by the
Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of September
10, 2012.
PN1903 ARMY nominations (7) beginning JEFFREY S. BELL, and
ending MARK R. THORNTON, which nominations were received by
the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of
September 10, 2012.
PN1904 ARMY nominations (7) beginning STEVEN E. BATTLE, and
ending LUZMIRA A. TORRES, which nominations were received by
the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of
September 10, 2012.
PN1905 ARMY nominations (14) beginning ANTHONY H. ADRIAN,
and ending JOHN F. WOYTE, which nominations were received by
the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of
September 10, 2012.
PN1906 ARMY nominations (67) beginning FREDRIC N. AMIDON,
and ending ANNE E. YOUNG, which nominations were received by
the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of
September 10, 2012.
PN1907 ARMY nominations (8) beginning ELIZABETH A. BAKER,
and ending IAN J. TOLMAN, which nominations were received by
the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of
September 10, 2012.
PN1908 ARMY nominations (139) beginning PATRICK M. ARIDA,
and ending ALI S. ZAZA, which nominations were received by
the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of
September 10, 2012.
FOREIGN SERVICE
PN1819 FOREIGN SERVICE nominations (328) beginning Joelle-
Elizabeth Beatrice Bastien, and ending Kenneth R. Propp,
which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in
the Congressional Record of July 12, 2012.
navy
PN1860 NAVY nomination of Alan T. Wakefield, which was
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of August 2, 2012.
PN1861 NAVY nomination of Tassos J. Sfondouris, which was
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of August 2, 2012.
PN1862 NAVY nominations (3) beginning GLEN CABARCAS, and
ending RICARDO A. FERRA, which nominations were received by
the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of August
2, 2012.
PN1863 NAVY nominations (9) beginning CHUCK J. BROWDER, and
ending CHRISTOPHER K. TUGGLE, which nominations were received
by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of
August 2, 2012.
PN1864 NAVY nominations (10) beginning DANIEL ARANDA, and
ending CHAD J. STUEWE, which nominations were received by the
Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of August 2,
2012.
PN1865 NAVY nominations (12) beginning MATTHEW R. ALLEN,
and ending BRIAN T. WIERZBICKI, which nominations were
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of August 2, 2012.
PN1866 NAVY nominations (14) beginning WILLIAM E. BLANKS,
and ending JEREMY J. WAGNER, which nominations were received
by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of
August 2, 2012.
PN1867 NAVY nominations (21) beginning BRADLEY H.
ABRAMOWITZ, and ending ERIC A. WEISS, which nominations were
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of August 2, 2012.
PN1868 NAVY nominations (22) beginning CHARITY A.
BREIDENBACH, and ending PHILLIP A. ZAMARRIPA, which
nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the
Congressional Record of August 2, 2012.
PN1869 NAVY nominations (25) beginning HENRY L. BUSH, and
ending STANLEY C. WARE, which nominations were received by
the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of August
2, 2012.
PN1870 NAVY nominations (29) beginning KYLE R. ALCOCK, and
ending SHEREE T. WILLIAMS, which nominations were received by
the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of August
2, 2012.
PN1871 NAVY nominations (47) beginning JEREMIAH P.
ANDERSON, and ending AARON L. WOOLSEY, which nominations were
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of August 2, 2012.
PN1872 NAVY nominations (265) beginning MARK J. AID, JR.,
and ending BRIAN L. ZIMMERMAN, which nominations were
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of August 2, 2012.
PN1873 NAVY nominations (769) beginning BRYCE D. ABBOTT,
and ending MAXWELL V. ZUJEWSKI, which nominations were
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of August 2, 2012.
PN1909 NAVY nominations (316) beginning DEMETRIA L. AARON,
and ending AMY J. ZWETTLER, which nominations were received
by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of
September 10, 2012.
PN1910 NAVY nominations (3) beginning TIMOTHY M. FRENCH,
and ending BRYAN E. WOOLDRIDGE, which nominations were
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of September 10, 2012.
PN1911 NAVY nominations (109) beginning CEDRIC J. ABRON,
and ending CHADWICK Y. YASUDA, which nominations were
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of September 10, 2012.
PN1912 NAVY nominations (65) beginning AMY H. ADAIR, and
ending DONAVON A. YAPSHING, which nominations were received
by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of
September 10, 2012.
PN1913 NAVY nominations (10) beginning VINCENT M. J.
AMBROSINO, and ending MARK VERHOVSHEK, which nominations were
received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of September 10, 2012.
PN1914 NAVY nominations (35) beginning KORY A. ANGLESEY,
and ending ADAM G. ZAJAC, which nominations were received by
the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of
September 10, 2012.
PN1915 NAVY nominations (34) beginning EVAN D. ADAMS, and
ending HAROLD B. WOODRUFF, which nominations were received by
the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of
September 10, 2012.
PN1916 NAVY nominations (22) beginning WALTER B. BLACKWELL,
and ending JAMES P. ZAKAR, which nominations were received by
the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of
September 10, 2012.
PN1917 NAVY nominations (151) beginning ELIZABETH A. ABAN,
and ending ELIZABETH M. ZULOAGA, which nominations
[[Page 14786]]
were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of September 10, 2012.
PN1918 NAVY nominations (32) beginning THOMAS M. BROWN, and
ending RALPH G. S. YOUNG, which nominations were received by
the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of
September 10, 2012.
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
PN1790 PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE nominations (600) beginning
Melinda Astran, and ending Chelsea True, which nominations
were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional
Record of June 25, 2012.
PN1829 PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE nominations (1628) beginning
Donald S. Ahrens, and ending Diamond E. Zuchlinski, which
nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the
Congressional Record of July 25, 2012.
____________________
NOMINATIONS DISCHARGED
Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the Commerce Committee be
discharged from further consideration of Presidential Nomination 1958,
Kenneth T. Boyt to be Lieutenant Commander in the U.S. Coast Guard; and
the Foreign Relations Committee be discharged from further
consideration of Presidential Nomination 1879, Foreign Service
nominations beginning with Michael Lewis and ending with Carolyn
Shuckerow; Presidential Nomination 1880, Foreign Service nominations
beginning with Bridget C. Riffle and ending with David J. Zanni; and
Presidential Nomination 1923, Robert Stephen Beecroft, of California,
to be Ambassador to the Republic of Iraq; that the Senate proceed to
the nominations en bloc, that the nominations be confirmed; the motions
to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no
intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to
the nominations; that any related statements be printed in the Record;
and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The nominations considered and confirmed en bloc are as follows:
coast guard
To be lieutenant commander
Kenneth T. Boyt
foreign service
The following-named Members of the Foreign Service to be
Consular Officers and Secretaries in the Diplomatic Service
of the United States of America:
Michael Lewis, of Virginia
George Lin, of Virginia
Scott Lindsay, of Michigan
Jared Ragland, of Maryland
Carolyn Shuckerow, of Virginia
For appointment as Foreign Service Officer of Class Four,
Consular Officer and Secretary in the Diplomatic Service of
the United States of America:
Bridget C. Riffle, of New York
Christopher Canellakis, of Massachusetts
Daniel Michael Pattarini, of Virginia
David A. Brock, of California
Donald Burton Cordell, of Virginia
Edward Howard Winant, of West Virginia
Holly D. Wilkerson, of Tennessee
Jennifer G. Handog, of Nevada
Kristina R. Hayden, of Virginia
Rebecca Catherine Alper, of Florida
Skye Spencer Justice, of West Virginia
The following-named Members of the Foreign Service to be
Consular Officers and Secretaries in the Diplomatic Service
of the United States of America:
Katie Marie Adamson, of Colorado
Ani A. Akinbiyi, of Maryland
Carlton B. Ammons, of Virginia
Laura Anikow, of Virginia
Benjamin D. Arterburn, of Kentucky
Oscar Alejandro Baez Mejia, of Massachusetts
Grover R. Battle, of North Carolina
Drew David Bazil, of Colorado
Daniel Alexander Boehmer, of Massachusetts
Evelina Bozek, of California
Diana Braunschweig, of California
Shannon S. Brown, of Florida
Elise Brumbach, of Pennsylvania
Sean Thomas Buckley, of the District of Columbia
Natalie Calvano, of Kentucky
Barrak Jeffrey Chaaban, of Virginia
Scott I. Cohen, of Virginia
James Trenton Core, of Utah
Sydney Alexis Cross, of Missouri
Thomas Louis Czerwinski, of Texas
Ranya Daher, of Virginia
Aleksander Daigle, of Virginia
Elon Michael Dando, of Minnesota
Quazi Rumman Dastgir, of the District of Columbia
James Davis II, of the District of Columbia
Paul W. Degennaro, of Virginia
Merrica Dominick, of Illinois
Alexander Fairbanks Douglas, of Virginia
Daniel A. Durazo, of California
Brian B. Duty, of California
Patrick R. Elliot, of Virginia
Christopher Frank Estoch, of Florida
Cavan Fabris, of California
Rebecca E. Fox, of Arizona
Destiny L. Freeman, of Virginia
Joseph Freeman, of Virginia
Katherine Diane Garry, of the District of Columbia
Jonas B. Gil, of Nevada
Brian Gilligan, of Virginia
Gayshiel Fayandy Grandison, of New York
Julia Groeblacher, of Kansas
Joshua J. Hack, of Virginia
Matthew J. Harrier, of Missouri
Caitlin B. Hartford, of Washington
Thomas M. Hartman, of Virginia
Jeffrey W. Henry, of Virginia
Mark James Hitchcock, of California
Gregory Earl Holliday, of Virginia
Nina Elizabeth Horowitz, of Virginia
Phillip Christopher Hughey, of Virginia
Irina Itkin, of Indiana
Shayma Jannat, of Connecticut
Anton Philip Jongeneel, of California
Jehan Khaleeli, of the District of Columbia
Traci Thiessen Kidwell, of the District of Columbia
Daniel Edward Kight, of Ohio
Joseph Kim, of Michigan
Erin Leigh Kimsey, of North Carolina
Erica Samona King, of Texas
Kristine M. Knapp, of South Dakota
Leanne N. Koontz, of Virginia
Sheela E. Krishnan, of Virginia
Jon R. Larson, of the District of Columbia
James E. Laster, of Virginia
Kristin R. Laster, of Virginia
Joseph N. Leavitt, of Oregon
James S. Manlowe, of New Mexico
Michael John Marble, of Virginia
Michael Marcous, of Florida
Bria Mathews, of Missouri
Dwayne T. McDavid, of Nevada
Shaun M. McGuire, of Nevada
Sean P. McKeating, of Texas
Michael James Method II, of Alaska
Shay Suzanne Miller, of the District of Columbia
M D Mitchell, of Maine
Angela C. Mizeur, of the District of Columbia
Joseph M. Morbach, of Virginia
Khanh P. Nguyen, of Massachusetts
Kevin J. O'Connor, of California
Matthew D. Parry, of Alaska
Drew Nathaniel Peterson, of Vermont
Stephanie W. Peterson, of Minnesota
Richard T. Phillips, of South Dakota
Marissa Joy Polnerow, of New Jersey
Daniel Charles Rhodes, of the District of Columbia
Lois L. Ribich, of Virginia
Mirna S. Rivas, of Virginia
Amanda Roberson, of Arizona
William L. Romine, of Florida
Stephen V. Sass, of New Jersey
Bryan Scott Schiller, of Florida
Shiloh Anne Schlung, of Alaska
Jillian Schmitt, of Montana
Lynn Marie Segas, of California
Shan Shi, of Wisconsin
Colleen Smith, of Washington
Eric L. Smith, of Virginia
Marco Sherwood Sotelino, of Massachusetts
Hannah Taber, of Michigan
Jett Thomason, of Tennessee
Michelle B. Thornburgh, of Virginia
Kharmika K. Tillery, of North Carolina
Thao Ahn Nguyen Tran, of the District of Columbia
Holly D. Turner, of the District of Columbia
Melissa P. Tyborowski, of Connecticut
Stephen E. Watson, of Virginia
David Karl Wessel, of North Carolina
James L. West, of Virginia
Brad Michael Wilkinson, of Virginia
Lisa Marie Wilkinson, of Virginia
Anton Lee Wishik II, of Washington
Angela Jean Wyse, of Michigan
Duden Yegenoglu, of Georgia
Matthew June Yi, of California
Steven D. Zack, of Virginia
David J. Zanni, of Virginia
Robert Stephen Beecroft, of California, a Career Member of
the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-Counselor, to
be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United
States of America to the Republic of Iraq.
____________________
NOMINATION OF GONZALO P. CURIEL TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR
THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
______
NOMINATION OF ROBERT J. SHELBY TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR
THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
Mr. REID. I now ask unanimous consent that the Senate consider the
following nominations en bloc: Calendar Nos. 674, 675; that the Senate
proceed to vote on the nominations in the order listed, without
intervening action or debate; the motions to reconsider be considered
made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; that
no further motions be in order to the nominations; that any
[[Page 14787]]
statements related to the nominations be printed in the Record; that
the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the
Senate then resume legislative session.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the nominations.
The legislative clerk read the nominations of Gonzalo P. Curiel, of
California, to be United States District Judge for the Southern
District of California, and Robert J. Shelby, of Utah, to be United
States District Judge for the District of Utah.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there any further debate?
The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the
nominations of Gonzalo P. Curiel, of California, to be United States
District Judge for the Southern District of California; and Robert J.
Shelby, of Utah, to be United States District Judge for the District of
Utah?
The nominations were confirmed.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, Senate Republicans' partisan obstructionism
has reached a new low. There are 17 district court nominees pending
before the Senate, and 12 of them would fill judicial emergency
vacancies on our Federal trial courts. In an unprecedented breaking
from our tradition, Senate Republicans have decided that they will
recess for the election and deny almost all of these consensus nominees
confirmation. Worse, they have decided to extend the delays that
Americans face in our overburdened Federal courts by denying new judges
to those courts. We all know that justice delayed is justice denied. By
denying confirmation votes to 15 of these 17 nominations, Senate
Republicans are denying justice to the American people. By refusing to
vote on these 15 nominations, Senate Republicans have declared that
they are unconcerned about the millions of Americans who will continue
to lack adequate access to our Federal courts and speedy justice.
Sadly this is just one more example of Senate Republicans putting
partisanship ahead of the interests of the American people. The refusal
to allow votes on consensus nominees has become standard operating
procedure for Senate Republicans. They refused to vote on 10 judicial
nominees at the end of 2009, left 19 judicial nominees pending at the
end of 2010, and blocked votes on 19 judicial nominees pending at the
end of 2011. It took through May of this year to clean up the backlog
left from last year. Then in June Senate Republicans declared their
shutdown of confirmations. I have served in the Senate for 37 years,
and I have never seen so many judicial nominees, reported with
bipartisan support, be denied a simple up-or-down vote for four months,
five months, six months, even 11 months. I have never seen such twisted
applications of their ``Thurmond Rule'' and never have I seen the
Thurmond Rule used to block votes on consensus district court nominees.
And if there was any doubt that Senate Republicans insist on being the
party of ``no'', their current decision to deny votes on these highly-
qualified, noncontroversial district court nominees, supported by their
home State Senators both Republican and Democratic, while our Federal
courts still have almost 80 vacancies, shows that they care more about
opposing this President's nominees than helping the American people.
Before the American people elected Barack Obama as our President,
district court nominees were generally confirmed within a couple of
weeks of being reported by the Judiciary Committee. This was true of
those nominated by Republican Presidents and Democratic Presidents.
Deference was traditionally afforded to home State Senators and
district court nominees supported by home State Senators were almost
always confirmed unanimously.
However, Senate Republicans have raised the level of partisanship so
that district court nominees have now become wrapped around the axle of
partisanship. And that is unfortunate. In just this year, the Majority
Leader has been forced to file cloture on 23 of President Obama's
judicial nominees, including 19 district court nominees. Every single
one of those 23 nominees had bipartisan support, and when the Senate
was finally allowed to vote on them, all of the 22 who did receive an
up-or-down vote were confirmed with votes from both Republican and
Democratic Senators.
In spite of this unprecedented obstruction of President Obama's
nominees, Senate Republicans are oblivious to their foot-dragging and
the harm it is creating for Americans seeking justice from our Federal
courts across the country.
There are currently 78 Federal judicial vacancies. Judicial vacancies
during the last few years have been at historically high levels and
have remained near or above 80 for nearly the entire first term of the
President. Nearly one out of every 11 Federal judgeships is currently
vacant. Vacancies on the Federal courts are more than two and one half
times as many as they were on this date during the first term of
President Bush. That is not what any objective observer would call
``consistent progress.''
The fact is that due to across-the-board obstruction by Senate
Republicans, we remain well behind the pace we set during President
Bush's first term. According to the Congressional Research Service, 95
percent of President Bush's district court nominees were confirmed in
his first term. We would have had to confirm all 17 of the district
court nominees the Majority Leader sought consent earlier this week,
just to get close to parity with that level. Moreover, President
Obama's district court nominees have been consistently stalled, being
forced to wait nearly three times longer for a Senate vote once
reported by the Judiciary Committee.
Nor has the Senate even been allowed to keep pace with the progress
that Senate Democrats made on President Bush's district court nominees
in 2008, the last year of his presidency. That year, the Committee
reported 24 district court nominees and all 24 were confirmed. We
continued holding hearings and the Committee reported and the Senate
then confirmed nominees into September of that presidential election
year. This year, the Senate has been allowed to confirm only 13
district court nominees reported this year. Because of Republican
obstruction, the Senate has barely accomplished half of what we did in
2008.
Indeed, in September 2008, the Judiciary Committee held hearings on
and then reported 10 district court nominees, all of whom were then
confirmed by unanimous consent in that same month. Contrary to the
assertion from the Republican leader, they were not backed up and long
delayed. We did not do what Senate Republicans are now doing. We moved
promptly on consensus trial court nominees. This year, Republicans have
backlogged consensus nominees who were reported in April, five months
ago. None of these nominees has been pending for less than seven weeks.
To date, the Senate has been allowed to confirm one district court
nominee this September while 17 other Federal trial court nominees
await Republicans agreeing to a vote so that they can be confirmed and
get to work for the American people.
There are still far too many judicial vacancies and the Republican
leader's efforts to slice and dice various numbers in ways most
flattering to this obstruction do nothing to explain why we cannot make
more progress. The Majority Leader is not ``jamming'' through nominees
when he asks for votes that should have taken place before the Memorial
Day, Fourth of July, and August recesses.
Despite the Republican filibuster against Caitlin Halligan to serve
on the D.C. Circuit, Patty Shwartz of New Jersey to serve on the Third
Circuit; their filibuster of Judge Barbara Keenan of Virginia to serve
on the Fourth Circuit; their opposition to Justice Sonia Sotomayor,
Justice Elena Kagan, Judge Jane Stranch of Tennessee to serve on the
Sixth Circuit, Judge Susan Carney of Connecticut to serve on the Second
Circuit, Judge Bernice Donald of Tennessee to serve on the Sixth
Circuit, Judge Morgan Christen of Alaska to serve on the Ninth Circuit,
Judge Stephanie Thacker of
[[Page 14788]]
West Virginia to serve on the Fourth Circuit, Judge Jacqueline Nguyen
of California to serve on the Ninth Circuit, Judge Nancy Freudenthal of
the District of Wyoming, Judge Benita Pearson of the Northern District
of Ohio, Judge Susan Hickey of the Western District of Arkansas, Judge
Ali Nathan of the Southern District of New York, Judge Cathy Bissoon of
the Western District of Pennsylvania, Judge Yvonne Rogers of the
Northern District of California, Judge Sharon Gleason of the District
of Alaska, Judge Cathy Bencivengo of the Southern District of
California, Judge Margo Brodie of the Eastern District of New York,
Judge Beth Phillips of the Western District of Missouri, Judge Gina
Groh of the Northern District of West Virginia, Judge Ronnie Abrams of
the Southern District of New York, Judge Susie Morgan of the Eastern
District of Louisiana, Judge Miranda Du of the District of Nevada and
Judge Mary Lewis of the District of South Carolina, there is one area
in which we have been able to make progress is spite of Senate
Republican obstruction. With the confirmation last week of Judge
Stephanie Rose to the district court in Iowa, President Obama has
already, in his fourth year in office, appointed as many women to the
Federal bench as President Bush had in all eight years in which he was
President. I hope that all Americans are proud of President Obama's
outstanding effort to increase diversity in the Federal judiciary and
to ensure that it better reflects all Americans. Those commendable
efforts are not preventing votes on the 17 Federal trial court nominees
ready for final Senate action. Senate Republicans are preventing those
votes.
I wish Senate Republicans approached this as something other than an
ill-conceived game of tit for tat. This obstruction has real costs to
the American people. Last week I inserted in the Record an article
about the ``Human Costs of Judicial Confirmation Delays.'' The author,
Andrew Cohen, described the problems facing just one of our Nation's 94
district courts. In the Middle District of Pennsylvania, where there
are two judicial emergency vacancies, a litigant had to wait nearly two
months for an ``urgent injunction hearing'' because there ``simply
aren't enough federal judges in the Middle District of Pennsylvania to
handle his case.'' In that District, senior judges have had to take on
far more cases than they would otherwise. Four of those senior judges
are at least 86 years old. The Chief Judge of that district called it
an ``absurdity.'' It is not fair to the senior judges, and it is not
fair to the litigants who rely on the court to do justice. Two of the
Federal trial court nominees being held hostage by Senate Republicans
would fill judicial emergency vacancies in the Middle District of
Pennsylvania.
This is just one example of the damage done to our courts by
needlessly delayed confirmations. I have heard from judges around the
country whose courts have vacancies, including in Illinois and Florida.
They are working hard to keep their courts functioning, but they need
help to ensure that all Americans have access to courts and to justice.
There are also judicial emergency vacancies in California, New York and
Illinois that we could have filled this week but Senate Republicans
objected. Of the 17 district court nominees pending before the Senate a
dozen would fill judicial emergency vacancies.
These longstanding vacancies are harming the American people, but it
does not have to be this way. Americans seeking justice in Federal
trial courts in California, Connecticut, and Utah should not have to
wait five months for a judge because Senate Republicans will not
proceed with nominations that have bipartisan support and have been
considered and voted on by the Senate Judiciary Committee. Americans in
Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, and
Oklahoma should not have to wait four and five extra months for their
courtrooms to have judges. If we were keeping pace with what Senate
Democrats did in President Bush's first term and as recently as 2008,
those nominees would be confirmed. They would be hearing cases and
providing justice today.
Some Senate Republicans have sought to justify their inaction on
nominations by complaining that the President has not sent us enough
nominees. The fact is that there are 17 district court nominees who can
be confirmed right now, including 12 who would fill emergency
vacancies. The names of these 17 nominees have been printed in the
Senate Executive Calendar every day for the last several months, every
day since they were voted on by the Senate Judiciary Committee months
ago. There is no excuse for not acting on them.
Today the Senate finally voted on the nomination of Gonzalo Curiel to
fill a judicial emergency vacancy on the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of California. He has the support of his home State
Senators, Senator Feinstein and Senator Boxer. His nomination was
reported with a virtually unanimous voice vote by the Judiciary
Committee five months ago. The only objection came as a protest on
another issue by Senator Lee.
Judge Curiel currently serves as a judge on the Superior Court of
California in San Diego County. Prior to joining the State bench in
2006, Judge Curiel spent 17 years as a Federal prosecutor and 10 years
in private practice. As a Federal prosecutor he rose to become Chief of
the Narcotics Enforcement Section for the Southern District of
California, and led the successful investigation and prosecution of a
multibillion dollar trafficking organization responsible for over 100
drug-related murders in the United States and Mexico.
The Senate finally voted on the nomination of Robert Shelby to fill a
judicial emergency vacancy on the U.S. District Court for the District
of Utah. He is currently a shareholder at the Salt Lake City law firm
of Snow, Christensen & Martineau. After law school he served as a law
clerk to Judge J. Thomas Greene in the District of Utah, the same court
to which he is nominated. His nomination, which has the support of both
of Utah's Senators, Senator Hatch and Senator Lee, was reported nearly
unanimously by the Judiciary Committee by voice vote nearly five months
ago.
Further delays on the 15 additional district court nominees still
awaiting their confirmation votes do not help the American people.
These nominees should be providing justice for the American people.
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy said recently that this extreme
partisanship erodes the public's confidence in our courts and ``makes
the judiciary look politicized when it is not, and it has to stop.'' He
is right. If Senate Republicans have a good reason for why courts in
California and Illinois and Michigan and New York and Pennsylvania
should remain overburdened and unable to provide the quality and speedy
justice Americans deserve, then I wish they would let the American
people know what that reason is. The fact is, Senate Republicans have
not explained their unprecedented obstruction of President Obama's
consensus nominees, they just try to pretend it does not exist. The
American people know better, and they deserve better.
Americans are rightfully proud of our legal system and its promise of
access to justice and speedy trials. This promise is embedded in our
Constitution. When overburdened courts made it hard to keep this
centuries-old promise, the Senate should work in a bipartisan manner to
fill judgeships and to create and fill new judgeships. That is what
Senate Democrats did when Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George
W. Bush were President. Since the American people elected President
Obama, Senate Republicans have determined that they are no longer
interested in whether or not our courts are able to meet this
fundamental guarantee. They have decided that it is acceptable for
hardworking Americans to wait two months for ``urgent'' hearings, and
that the ten additional judicial emergency vacancies they could fill
right now should remain vacant for no good reason. The American people
deserve better.
[[Page 14789]]
____________________
LEGISLATIVE SESSION
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will now return to legislative
session.
Mr. REID. 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.
____________________
EUROPEAN UNION EMISSIONS TRADING SCHEME PROHIBITION ACT OF 2011
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 484, S. 1956.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 1956) to prohibit operators of civil aircraft of
the United States from participating in the European Union's
emissions trading scheme, and for other purposes.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill,
which had been reported from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation, with an amendment to strike all after the enacting
clause and insert in lieu thereof the following:
S. 1956
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``European Union Emissions
Trading Scheme Prohibition Act of 2011''.
SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON PARTICIPATION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION'S
EMISSIONS TRADING SCHEME.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall
prohibit an operator of a civil aircraft of the United States
from participating in the emissions trading scheme
unilaterally established by the European Union in EU
Directive 2003/87/EC of October 13, 2003, as amended, in any
case in which the Secretary determines the prohibition to be,
and in a manner that is, in the public interest, taking into
account--
(1) the impacts on U.S. consumers, U.S. carriers, and U.S.
operators;
(2) the impacts on the economic, energy, and environmental
security of the United States; and
(3) the impacts on U.S. foreign relations, including
existing international commitments.
(b) Public Hearing.--After determining that a prohibition
under this section may be in the public interest, the
Secretary must hold a public hearing at least 30 days before
imposing any prohibition.
SEC. 3. NEGOTIATIONS.
The Secretary of Transportation, the Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration, and other appropriate
officials of the United States Government--
(1) should, as appropriate, use their authority to conduct
international negotiations, including using their authority
to conduct international negotiations to pursue a worldwide
approach to address aircraft emissions; and
(2) shall, as appropriate, take other actions under
existing authorities that are in the public interest
necessary to hold operators of civil aircraft of the United
States harmless from the emissions trading scheme referred to
under section 2.
SEC. 4. DEFINITION OF CIVIL AIRCRAFT OF THE UNITED STATES.
In this Act, the term ``civil aircraft of the United
States'' has the meaning given the term under section
40102(a) of title 49, United States Code.
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I would like to thank my colleague from
Oregon, Mr. Merkley, for working with the Senator from Missouri, Mrs.
McCaskill, and me today to address his concerns with our bipartisan
bill, S. 1956, the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme Prohibition
Act. The amendment, which he has filed for consideration and which is
currently running through the hotline process, reconfirms that the
Secretary of Transportation's responsibility to determine there is a
public interest before taking any action does not end after the first
determination. Instead, it is an ongoing responsibility.
The amendment that Mr. Merkley has filed, and which I support,
clarifies that it is the Secretary's right to reassess the public
interest determination. Additionally, the amendment clarifies that if
the EU ETS is amended, if there is an international agreement on
aviation emissions, or if a Federal public law is enacted that
addresses aviation emissions, that the Secretary will again revisit the
public interest determination.
Again, I would like to thank the Senator from Oregon for working with
me, and I look forward to passage of S. 1956.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-
reported amendment be considered, the Cardin and Merkley amendments at
the desk be agreed to, the committee-reported amendment, as amended, be
agreed to, the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed, the
motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, and
any statements relating to this bill be printed in the Record.
I would also extend my appreciation to all Senators who have been
involved in this contentious issue--for a while, at least--and
especially Senator Thune, who has helped us work through this and a
number of other things.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendments were agreed to, as follows:
Amendment No. 2859
(Purpose: To prohibit the use of taxpayer dollars to pay taxes and
penalties imposed on United States air carriers pursuant to the
European Union emissions trading scheme)
Beginning on page 5, strike line 14 and all that follows
through page 6, line 2, and insert the following:
SEC. 3. NEGOTIATIONS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation, the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, and
other appropriate officials of the United States Government--
(1) should, as appropriate, use their authority to conduct
international negotiations, including using their authority
to conduct international negotiations to pursue a worldwide
approach to address aircraft emissions, including the
environmental impact of aircraft emissions; and
(2) shall, as appropriate and except as provided in
subsection (b), take other actions under existing authorities
that are in the public interest necessary to hold operators
of civil aircraft of the United States harmless from the
emissions trading scheme referred to under section 2.
(b) Exclusion of Payment of Taxes and Penalties.--Actions
taken under subsection (a)(2) may not include the obligation
or expenditure of any amounts in the Airport and Airway Trust
Fund established under section 9905 of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, or amounts otherwise made available to the
Department of Transportation or any other Federal agency
pursuant to appropriations Acts, for the payment of any tax
or penalty imposed on an operator of civil aircraft of the
United States pursuant to the emissions trading scheme
referred to under section 2.
____
Amendment No. 2860
(Purpose: To provide for the reassessment by the Secretary of
Transportation of a determination that it is in the public interest to
prohibit operators of civil aircraft of the United States from
participating in the European Union's emissions trading scheme)
On page 5, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
(c) Reassessment of Determination of Public Interest.--The
Secretary--
(1) may reassess a determination under subsection (a) that
a prohibition under that subsection is in the public interest
at any time after making such a determination; and
(2) shall reassess such a determination after--
(A) any amendment by the European Union to the EU Directive
referred to in subsection (a); or
(B) the adoption of any international agreement pursuant to
section 3(1).
(C) enactment of a public law or issuance of a final rule
after formal agency rulemaking, in the United States to
address aircraft emissions.
The committee-reported amendment in the nature of a substitute, as
amended, was agreed to.
The bill (S. 1956), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a
third reading, was read the third time, and passed, as follows:
S. 1956
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``European Union Emissions
Trading Scheme Prohibition Act of 2011''.
SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON PARTICIPATION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION'S
EMISSIONS TRADING SCHEME.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall
prohibit an operator of a civil aircraft of the United States
from participating in the emissions trading scheme
unilaterally established by the European Union
[[Page 14790]]
in EU Directive 2003/87/EC of October 13, 2003, as amended,
in any case in which the Secretary determines the prohibition
to be, and in a manner that is, in the public interest,
taking into account--
(1) the impacts on U.S. consumers, U.S. carriers, and U.S.
operators;
(2) the impacts on the economic, energy, and environmental
security of the United States; and
(3) the impacts on U.S. foreign relations, including
existing international commitments.
(b) Public Hearing.--After determining that a prohibition
under this section may be in the public interest, the
Secretary must hold a public hearing at least 30 days before
imposing any prohibition.
(c) Reassessment of Determination of Public Interest.--The
Secretary--
(1) may reassess a determination under subsection (a) that
a prohibition under that subsection is in the public interest
at any time after making such a determination; and
(2) shall reassess such a determination after--
(A) any amendment by the European Union to the EU Directive
referred to in subsection (a); or
(B) the adoption of any international agreement pursuant to
section 3(1).
(C) enactment of a public law or issuance of a final rule
after formal agency rulemaking, in the United State to
address aircraft emissions.
SEC. 3. NEGOTIATIONS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation, the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, and
other appropriate officials of the United States Government--
(1) should, as appropriate, use their authority to conduct
international negotiations, including using their authority
to conduct international negotiations to pursue a worldwide
approach to address aircraft emissions, including the
environmental impact of aircraft emissions; and
(2) shall, as appropriate and except as provided in
subsection (b), take other actions under existing authorities
that are in the public interest necessary to hold operators
of civil aircraft of the United States harmless from the
emissions trading scheme referred to under section 2.
(b) Exclusion of Payment of Taxes and Penalties.--Actions
taken under subsection (a)(2) may not include the obligation
or expenditure of any amounts in the Airport and Airway Trust
Fund established under section 9905 of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, or amounts otherwise made available to the
Department of Transportation or any other Federal agency
pursuant to appropriations Acts, for the payment of any tax
or penalty imposed on an operator of civil aircraft of the
United States pursuant to the emissions trading scheme
referred to under section 2.
SEC. 4. DEFINITION OF CIVIL AIRCRAFT OF THE UNITED STATES.
In this Act, the term ``civil aircraft of the United
States'' has the meaning given the term under section
40102(a) of title 49, United States Code.
Mr. REID. Mr. 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. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the
quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
MORNING BUSINESS
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed
to a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak
therein for up to 10 minutes each.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
CHANGES TO THE SENATE RULES
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, the institution of the Senate is unique in
its robust protections of the rights of the minority. In establishing
our democracy, our Founders warned of the dangers of a tyrannical
majority, and through our history as a country the Senate has stood,
often alone, against that threat. One of the essential aspects of the
Senate is the ability of 41 Senators, a minority, to defeat a measure
if they are willing to talk and there are not 60 Senators who will vote
to end the talking. Throughout the history of the Senate, the minority
has usually used its right to thwart the will of the majority
judiciously and only on measures of the greatest importance. Without
that self-restraint, we would be exchanging a tyranny of the majority
for a tyranny of the minority, and, indeed, that could mean a tiny
minority.
That important quality of self-restraint is essential for the proper
functioning of the Senate. With this quality, the Senate can debate,
negotiate, and compromise; and without it, the result is gridlock. In a
legislative body where extended debate is a central principle, self-
restraint is what allows the gears of government to eventually turn.
The Senate cannot operate without it.
It is that self-restraint that is too often missing in today's
Senate. It is one reason for the low public approval of Congress. In
fact, scholars of the Congress have noted an unprecedented change in
the functioning of the Senate. In his testimony before the Senate Rules
Committee on May 19, 2010, Norm Ornstein said:
The sharp increase in cloture motions reflects the
routinization of the filibuster; it's used not as a tool of
last resort for a minority that feels intensely about a major
issue but as a weapon to delay and obstruct on nearly all
matters, including routine and widely supported ones. It is
fair to say that this has never happened before in the
history of the Senate.
Wait, some might say, the Senate seems to have plenty of debate,
perhaps too much. But the sad fact is, in today's Senate, a small
minority of Senators routinely block the Senate from even beginning
debate on legislation by filibustering or more accurately, perhaps,
threaten to filibuster the motion to proceed to legislation. Without 60
votes to end debate on the motion to proceed, the Senate is routinely
blocked from even beginning debate on critical legislation, making
negotiation and compromise on legislation far more difficult.
Mr. Ornstein is right. The routine threat of a filibuster is an abuse
of the rules. Just consider the number of filibusters of the motions to
proceed. From the time the cloture rule was first extended to cover the
motion to proceed in 1949 to 1990, 41 years, the Senate saw a total of
53 filibusters on the motion to proceed. During those years, Senate
minorities would filibuster no more than a handful of motions to
proceed during any single Congress. In recent years, the numbers of
filibusters have exploded. Now, it is not uncommon for the Senate to
see dozens of filibusters of the motions to proceed during any single
Congress, as has been the case in the last 2 years. Where is the self-
restraint?
Why is this so important? Why should the country care if a small
group of Senators block the Senate from doing its work? What is at
stake? In my opinion, the stakes could not be higher.
Over and over again, the Senate is forced to waste time just on the
question of whether to begin debate on a bill. The process of
threatening a filibuster and requiring cloture on every motion to
proceed, including the mandatory postcloture debate time of 30 hours
under the Senate rules, can consume a week of the Senate's time. That
is a full week of the Senate's time consumed just by the question of
whether to begin debate on a bill. Where is the self-restraint?
Does self-restraint mean that Senators must abandon long-held
positions or violate principle? Of course not. Throughout the history
of the Senate, Senators have fought fiercely for their positions and
beliefs. Still, at some point, the fighting stopped and agreements were
struck. That is the way of every legislative body. The majority's
ability to act is what allows other legislative bodies to function.
Self-restraint is what separates a functioning U.S. Senate from a
broken one. It is what separates a Senate that is capable of doing the
Nation's business from a Senate that is prevented from even beginning a
debate on that business. The lack of self-restraint is the root of the
problem the Senate faces.
In the Senate, a tension has always existed between the majority that
wishes to enact legislation and the minority that wishes to amend or
defeat it. That tension is not unique to today's Senate. The rules of
the Senate have always provided the minority with an arsenal of
parliamentary weapons to counter a determined majority. For instance,
if a majority leader blocks the minority from offering
[[Page 14791]]
amendments to a bill, then the minority can filibuster the legislation
and deny it passage if it lacks 60 votes. The ability to extend debate
and deny cloture are powerful tools that the minority can use to
prevent the Senate from acting.
On the other hand, short of 60 votes, Senate rules do not provide a
tool for the majority to counter an obstructionist minority. The
majority leader could offer a minority days, weeks, or months of debate
and endless amendments to a bill, but nothing in the rules of this body
would allow the majority to even begin debate if a unified minority
filibusters the motion to proceed, which it does now routinely.
Republicans insist that they filibuster motions to proceed because
the majority leader fills the amendment tree and blocks consideration
of minority amendments. That rationale could justify a filibuster of a
bill after the Senate begins its consideration and the leader fills the
tree. It does not justify the routine filibusters of the motion to
proceed.
The Senate must strike a balance between protecting the rights of the
minority and the need of the Senate to function better. To limit the
consideration of the motion to proceed would not stifle debate; in
fact, it would help ensure Senators have the opportunity to have a
debate.
As a practical matter, we will have little chance of ending the
filibuster on the motion to proceed unless we, at the same time, assure
the minority opportunities to offer and vote on amendments, forcing
them to filibuster the bill itself in order to gain that assurance.
According to the Senate rules, any change to those rules can be
adopted by a simple majority vote. However, rule XXII of the Standing
Rules of the Senate requires an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the
Senators present and voting in order to invoke cloture and end debate
on a proposed change to the rules. This extraordinarily high threshold
has prevented most attempts to amend the rules of the Senate.
Some of our colleagues believe the rules of the Senate can be changed
outside the auspices of the Senate rules. They say the U.S.
Constitution allows a simple majority to change the Senate rules. They
call it ``the constitutional option;'' others call it ``the nuclear
option.'' Supporters of the constitutional option point out that the
Constitution endows each House of Congress with the authority to
establish its own rules of proceedings. Accordingly, at the beginning
of every Congress, the House of Representatives adopts rules by a
majority vote. Those rules govern proceedings of the House for only the
term of that Congress. Supporters of the constitutional option argue
the Constitution empowers the Senate to do the same.
The mechanics of the constitutional option are fairly
straightforward. One such approach to this option would occur as
follows. At the beginning of a Congress, a Senator would offer a
resolution adopting Senate rules. The resolution would be filibustered,
and so cloture would be filed. Cloture would yield an affirmative vote
of a simple majority, but not the two-thirds necessary to end debate as
described in rule XXII. Supporters of the resolution would raise a
constitutional point of order, which the Presiding Officer, presumably
the Vice President, would sustain under this scenario. The chair's
ruling would be appealed, and finally the appeal would be tabled by a
simple majority vote. And just like that, the Senate could become a
simple majoritarian body.
Historically, of course, the Senate has not adopted its rules at the
beginning of a Congress as the House does. In fact, Senate rules
explicitly address this. According to rule V of the Standing Rules of
the Senate, ``The rules of the Senate shall continue from one Congress
to the next Congress unless they are changed as provided in these
rules.'' Rule V makes clear that the Senate is a continuing body.
Indeed, only one-third of its membership is up for election every 2
years while the other two-thirds of its membership continue their
service into the new Congress, which is why a quorum in the Senate is
continuously in being from Congress to Congress.
Both supporters and opponents of the constitutional option have
compelling arguments, but none of them are new. This question has been
debated for decades. Confronting the same question in 1949, Senator
Arthur Vandenberg, one of my predecessors from Michigan, said:
I continue to believe that the rules of the Senate are as
important to equity and order in the Senate as is the
Constitution to the life of the Republic, and that those
rules should never be changed except by the Senate itself, in
the direct fashion prescribed by the rules themselves. One of
the immutable truths in Washington's Farewell Address, which
cannot be altered even by changing events in a changing
world, is the following sentence: The Constitution, which at
any time exists, until changed by an explicit and authentic
act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all.' I
respectfully submit as a basic explanation of my attitude,
that I accept this admonition without reservation, and I
think it is equally applicable to the situation which
Senators here confront, though obviously the comparison
cannot be lit-
eral. . . . [T]he Father of his Country said to us, by
analogy, The rules of the Senate, which at any time exist,
until changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole
Senate, are sacredly obligatory upon all.'
Senator Vandenberg continued:
I have heard it erroneously argued in the cloakrooms that
since the Senate rules themselves authorize a change in the
rules through due legislative process by a majority vote, it
is within the spirit of the rules when we reach the same net
result by a majority vote of the Senate upholding a
parliamentary ruling of the Vice President which, in effect,
changes the rules. This would appear to be some sort of
doctrine of amendment by proxy. It is argued that the Senate
itself makes the change in both instances by majority vote;
and it is asked, What is the difference? Of course, this is
really an argument that the end justifies the means.
Senator Vandenberg continued:
When a substantive change is made in the rules by
sustaining a ruling of the Presiding Officer of the Senate--
and that is what I contend is being undertaken here--it does
not mean that the rules are permanently changed. It simply
means that regardless of precedent or traditional practice,
the rules hereafter, mean whatever the Presiding Officer of
the Senate, plus a simple majority of Senators voting at the
time, want the rules to mean. We fit the rules to the
occasion, instead of fitting the occasion to the rules.
Therefore, in the final analysis, under such circumstances,
there are no rules except the transient, unregulated wishes
of a majority of whatever quorum is temporarily in control of
the Senate. That, Mr. President, is not my idea of the
greatest deliberative body in the world. . . . No matter how
important [the pending issue's] immediate incidence may seem
to many today, the integrity of the Senate's rules is our
paramount concern, today, tomorrow, and so long as this great
institution lives.
Mr. President, the November elections are upon us. I believe it is
important to lay out my position on the constitutional option now,
before we know the outcome of the election and the makeup of the Senate
next year. I believe one's position on this question is so essential to
the nature and the future of the Senate that it should not be dependent
upon the outcome of an election but upon the best interests of this
institution.
I believe the so-called constitutional option to change the rules of
the Senate, if actually implemented, would turn the Senate into a
legislative body where the majority can, whenever it wishes, run
roughshod over the rights of the minority. My frustration with the
recent abuses of the rules does not overwhelm my duty to defend the
uniqueness and integrity of this great institution.
With that in mind, I suggest a change to the Senate rules that would
provide the majority leader with an additional procedural option that
preserves his ability to control the floor while maintaining the
necessary 60-vote threshold to end debate. This alternative procedure
would avoid the filibuster on the motion to proceed, preserve the
ability of the majority leader to fill the amendment tree, but at the
same time ensure all Senators have the ability to offer and have votes
on relevant, timely filed amendments prior to a vote on final passage
of a measure.
Using this procedure, the majority leader could move to proceed to
the consideration of a measure with only relevant amendments in order.
When a motion to proceed is made in such
[[Page 14792]]
form, the consideration of that motion would be limited to 2 hours. If
the Senate adopted that motion, then Senators would have until 1 p.m.
the following session day to file relevant, first-degree amendments and
until 1 p.m. the session day after that to file relevant, second-degree
amendments.
This procedure would guarantee that any Senator who has a timely
filed, relevant amendment could offer that amendment prior to final
passage, even if the amendment tree is filled. For example, if the
Senate is considering a bill under this procedure and the amendment
tree is filled, following disposition of all pending amendments but
prior to the third reading, it would be in order for any Senator with a
relevant, timely filed amendment to call up that amendment. Once
pending, that amendment would need to be disposed of before final
passage.
While this procedure would expedite the process to begin
consideration of a bill, it would not abandon the essential principle
that a supermajority is necessary to bring debate to a close on a bill
in the Senate. Nothing under this procedure would deny Senators his or
her right to extended debate on a bill, unless, of course, 60 or more
Senators vote to invoke cloture. Aside from the filing deadlines, the
only substantive change from the current cloture process would be the
application of a relevancy standard rather than the conventional
germaneness standard. Only relevant amendments would be in order only
if the majority leader opted to use this alternative approach to moving
to proceed.
This procedure would not be needed or even appropriate for every bill
that is placed on the calendar. But for some bills, the majority leader
might view this alternative procedure as a useful tool that could help
both the majority and the minority achieve their aims. And should this
alternative procedure prove to be ineffective, the majority leader
could always abandon it for regular order, and if the right to get
votes on relevant amendments is abused by filing a dilatory number of
relevant amendments, the majority leader would simply not utilize the
option.
As I said, an election season is upon us. We will soon recess, and
only after November 6 will we know who will hold a majority in this
body. My support for ending the current motion to proceed process will
be there after the election, regardless which party controls the Senate
in the next Congress. My goal is not to gain partisan advantage but to
protect the unique role of the Senate. Increasingly, after facing years
of excessive obstruction, some Members on my side of the aisle see the
filibuster as an archaic procedure that prevents the Senate from
addressing the pressing needs of the Nation. I suspect that some of my
friends in the minority today, if in the majority sometime in the
future, will find the filibuster equally frustrating to their own
efforts. We face an increasing danger that, in order to end the
gridlock that prevents either side from offering solutions to the
challenges we face, pressure to severely reduce minority rights will
become irresistible.
If we are to preserve the Senate's function as a check on haste, as a
haven for minority views, we must ensure that protection of minority
rights is no longer a barrier to any and all action. Limiting excessive
filibusters on the motion to proceed is one modest change we can make
that addresses this crisis without changing the Senate's fundamental
character. I ask my colleagues to consider carefully whether a change
in the present might be necessary to avoid more radical change in the
future.
____________________
REMEMBERING NEIL A. ARMSTRONG
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I rise today in celebration of the life
and career of Neil A. Armstrong. Americans and people around the world
paused when Mr. Armstrong passed away on August 25, 2012, to recall his
heroic accomplishments and historic legacy.
Neil Armstrong is remembered as a man who pushed the frontiers of
space exploration and engineering. Over the course of his life and
service to the Nation, he promoted the idea of never doubting what is
possible. He inspired countless young men and women to pursue careers
in science and engineering, many of whom became aeronautics workers at
facilities like the Stennis Space Center in Mississippi.
Mr. Armstrong was born in Wapakoneta, OH, on August 5, 1930. He
received a Bachelor of Science in Aerospace Engineering from Perdue
University, a Master of Science in Aerospace Engineering from the
University of California, and received honorary doctorates from
multiple universities.
Mr. Armstrong embarked on a remarkable career that would involve his
flying more than 200 different models of aircraft including jets,
rockets, helicopters and gliders.
From 1949 to 1952, Mr. Armstrong served as a naval aviator, and in
1955 joined the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, now the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration. From 1955 through 1972,
he served as an engineer, test pilot, astronaut, and administrator for
our Nation's ambitious space program.
Mr. Armstrong's transfer to astronaut status in 1962 led to his
performing the first successful docking of two vehicles in space in
March 1966 as the command pilot for Gemini 8. Mr. Armstrong
subsequently became commander for Apollo 11, the first manned lunar
mission, and was the first man to land a craft on the moon. At 10:56
p.m. ET on July 20, 1969, Neil Armstrong became the first man to step
on the surface of the moon. It was one of the defining moments of the
20th century and one of the proudest days for the American people.
Following his career with NASA, Mr. Armstrong was a Professor of
Aerospace Engineering at the University of Cincinnati between 1971 and
1979. Mr. Armstrong was decorated by 17 countries and was the recipient
of many special honors including: the Presidential Medal of Freedom,
the Congressional Gold Medal, the Congressional Space Medal of Honor,
the Explorers Club Medal, the Robert H. Goddard Memorial Trophy, the
NASA Distinguished Service Medal, the Harmon International Aviation
Trophy, the Royal Geographic Society's Gold Medal, the Federal
Aeronautique Internationale's Gold Space Medal, the American
Astronautical Society Flight Achievement Award, the Robert J. Collier
Trophy, the AIAA Astronautics Award, the Octave Chanute Award, and the
John J. Montgomery Award.
Mr. Armstrong will be remembered not only for his famous words as he
stepped foot on the moon--``That's one small step for a man, one giant
leap for mankind''--but more importantly for inspiring generations of
people around the world to explore and push the boundaries of what they
believe is possible. Neil Armstrong was a true American hero who will
be missed by many, but never forgotten.
____________________
CAPACITY TO IMPLEMENT THE ACA
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, the Supreme Court decision on the
Affordable Care Act has put the brakes on Medicaid expansion for now.
The Federal Government can no longer force States to expand their
Medicaid programs.
With the expansion and the billions of dollars that States would have
had to spend on hold, and as we look at solutions to address our 16
trillion dollar national debt, now is a good time for us to step back
and ask what role health care should play for States in our Federal
system.
Mr. President, as of today, the primary function of a state is health
administration--not primary and secondary education, not public safety,
not roads and bridges.
According to the National Association of State Budget Officers,
Medicaid is the single largest spending line in state budgets at 23.6
percent.
The economic downturn and high unemployment have resulted in an
increase in Medicaid enrollment as individuals lose job-based coverage
and incomes decline.
Medicaid enrollment increased by 5.1 percent during fiscal 2011 and
is estimated to increase by 3.3 percent in fiscal 2012.
[[Page 14793]]
In governors' recommended budgets for fiscal 2013, Medicaid
enrollment would rise by an additional 3.6 percent.
This would represent a 12.5 percent increase in Medicaid enrollment
over this three-year period.
Medicaid enrollment surged during the economic downturn with
enrollment rising by 7.2 percent from June 2009 to June 2010.
Although Medicaid enrollment is easing for now, the implementation of
the Affordable Care Act would have greatly increased the individuals
served in the Medicaid program in 2014 and thereafter.
The Affordable Care Act, as passed, required States to cover all
childless adults beginning in 2014 under Medicaid that heretofore had
not been covered.
The expansion to 138 percent of the poverty level was expected to
cover 16 million people.
States would get 100 percent of the cost of new individuals enrolled
paid for by the Federal Government for the first several years before
the Federal payment levels for those new individuals would fall to
approximately 92 percent.
The Supreme Court rejected the mandatory expansion.
Quoting from the Supreme Court ruling
The threatened loss of over 10 percent of a State's overall
budget is economic dragooning that leaves the States with no
real option but to acquiesce in the Medicaid expansion.
The Government claims that the expansion is properly viewed as only a
modification of the existing program, and that this modification is
permissible because Congress reserved the ``right to alter, amend, or
repeal any provision'' of Medicaid.
But the expansion accomplishes a shift in kind, not merely degree.
The original program was designed to cover medical services for
particular categories of vulnerable individuals.
Under the Affordable Care Act, Medicaid is transformed into a program
to meet the health care needs of the entire nonelderly population with
income below 133 percent of the poverty level.
A State could hardly anticipate that Congress's reservation of the
right to alter or amend the Medicaid program included the power to
transform it so dramatically.
The Medicaid expansion thus violates the Constitution by threatening
States with the loss of their existing Medicaid funding if they decline
to comply with the expansion.
As a result of the Supreme Court ruling, the Federal Government can
no longer threaten the States with withdrawal of all Federal Medicaid
funding if States do not expand their Medicaid programs.
States now have the option to expand coverage.
Several States have now suggested they will not expand in 2014.
The Congressional Budget Office now estimates that only one-third of
the potential newly eligible population will reside in States that
choose to fully extend coverage.
According to CBO, about one-half of the potential newly eligible
population will reside in States that only partially extend Medicaid
coverage.
The remainder, about one-sixth of the potential newly eligible
population, will reside in States that do not extend Medicaid coverage
at all in the next decade.
CBO's predicted Medicaid coverage under the Affordable Care Act has
been reduced by 35 percent.
Clearly CBO accepts the proposition that if States are not forced to
extend coverage to the ACA mandatory population, they will not.
Mr. President, right before the August recess my office released a
report from the Government Accountability Office on State capacity to
meet the Medicaid requirements under the ACA.
It shows why CBO's skepticism is appropriate.
The report discusses challenges States are facing with information
technology, guidance from CMS, and the budgetary uncertainty of
increased enrollment of those currently eligible for Medicaid.
The GAO surveyed the States and found that the vast majority expect
to have additional costs related to administering their current
program, developing eligibility systems, enrolling newly eligible
individuals and enrolling additional individuals who are currently
eligible.
The GAO focused particularly on the challenges faced by States in
updating their eligibility systems.
In the report, GAO found four main deterrents to States as they
consider the challenge of expanding their eligibility systems to meet
the goal of Medicaid expansion.
First, many States face a lengthy procurement process as they look to
upgrade their technology to handle expansion.
Second, designing new eligibility systems is complex and may involve
the replacement of existing, outdated systems.
Third, States often have systems that operate across multiple
programs further increasing the cost and complexity of upgrading.
Fourth, as States have fought against their own budgetary problems,
many have reduced personnel resources to manage projects as complex as
Medicaid expansion.
The GAO further found problems with the guidance CMS has been
providing the States.
30 of the 36 responding to the GAO survey found that CMS guidance was
only slightly useful or not useful at all.
Mr. President, many outside observers have treated the expansion of
Medicaid as a foregone conclusion, that States couldn't possibly turn
down so much supposedly ``free money.''
The evidence from CBO and GAO is crystal clear.
When the Federal Government is involved, there's no such thing as a
free lunch.
States absolutely can turn down the option to expand and every State
faces a difficult decision in how they choose to move forward.
However, Mr. President, the Medicaid expansion in the Affordable Care
Act is not the only fiscal pressure States face from the health care
administration.
One of the most expensive and complex populations receiving Federal
health care services are those dually eligible for Medicare and
Medicaid, commonly referred to as DUALS.
They are poorer, sicker and often in need of more extensive and
expensive coordinated care.
The inefficiency created in the misaligned incentives of the Medicare
and Medicaid programs is frequently cited as one of the areas in health
care in greatest need of reform.
The Affordable Care Act created an office in CMS charged with
creating demonstration projects to allow for greater coordination of
dual eligibles.
Those demonstration projects have been moving forward at breakneck
pace with as many as 26 States looking to participate.
Essentially all the demonstrations seek to give States greater
control of the acute care of dual eligibles.
CMS has legal authority under the ACA to take these demonstrations
nationally if they are successful.
Many outside groups are concerned about the size, scope and pace at
which demonstrations are proceeding citing California's initial
proposal to take control of one million dual eligibles as an example of
the outsized nature of the demonstrations.
In July, Senator Rockefeller wrote a strongly worded letter to CMS
suggesting they should halt the demonstrations for similar reasons.
Mr. President, no one argues that the way Medicare and Medicaid
coordinate for dual eligibles works.
Coordination today is akin to asking my wife and me to compose a
letter with her writing the consonants and my writing the vowels.
Giving the States greater control of duals may be the right answer,
but when you consider the fiscal challenges faced by States, this
should be a decision considered by Congress examining all possible
alternatives rather than something occurring through regulatory action.
Finally, the Affordable Care Act gives States broad leeway in
creating State-based Exchanges.
These State exchanges are the mechanism where people with incomes
above Medicaid eligibility will go to get health insurance.
[[Page 14794]]
It would be an understatement to say the States haven't moved very
rapidly to get these Exchanges up and running.
I do acknowledge that many States may have been waiting for the
Supreme Court ruling before moving ahead with their Exchanges.
However, I do think it remains equally plausible that States are
moving cautiously as they look at one more role in health care where
they are being asked to expand.
Mr. President, for the States, health care is a chaotic mess.
The Federal Government is asking the States to take greater roles in
administering coverage for the uninsured in Medicaid, the dually
eligible and the uninsured in the private sector.
As we move forward in 2013, we will revisit, perhaps repeal, the
Affordable Care Act.
We will examine proposals to reign in the cost of our heath care
entitlements.
Mr. President, as we do so, I strongly recommend we step back and
reconsider what is the appropriate role for health care in our Federal
system.
In July, Robert Samuelson wrote in the Washington Post about a
proposal often associated with my friend from Tennessee, Senator
Alexander, known as the ``grand swap.''
In this proposal, the Federal Government would assume all
responsibility for Medicaid and the States would assume all
responsibility for education.
Samuelson raises the proposal because, in his words,
Only the federal government can devise a solution to
control health costs; concentrating government health
spending at the federal level would intensify pressures to do
so.
States have tried mightily to control spending with at best
partial success.
For example, Medicaid reimbursement rates average only 72
percent of Medicare levels.
The low rates have caused some doctors not to accept
Medicaid patients.
Mr. President, Samuelson raises a significant question, which
Congress needs to consider in entitlement reform.
Congress should consider what States should do in health care and
what are reasonable expectations.
If Congress wants States to administer benefits for the aged, blind
and disabled, and low income individuals along with managing the
exchanges for individuals with incomes up to 400 percent of poverty,
Congress can do so.
If health care is the primary responsibility of States, it is because
of decisions made by Congress.
If States are being asked to do so while also overseeing education,
public safety, roads and bridges and meet in most cases a balanced
budget requirement, Congress should temper its expectations regarding
the resources States will be able to devote to health care.
With significant restructuring of Medicare and Medicaid possible in
2013, we should use this as an opportunity to reconsider the role of
the States in providing health care coverage inclusive of populations
and services.
What we ask of the States should be thoughtfully considered in any
reform discussion.
____________________
RECOGNIZING TAIWAN'S NATIONAL DAY
Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the people and
leaders of the Republic of China on Taiwan as they prepare to celebrate
the hundred-and-first anniversary of the founding of their country on
October 10.
I would like to highlight Taiwan's economic successes over the last
century--a success that has rightly been called a miracle. In just
several decades, the people of Taiwan have transformed their economy
from a recipient of American aid into one of our most important trade
partners. The world economy relies upon Taiwan's computer chip
foundries, and the whole world benefits from the entrepreneurial spirit
and inventiveness of Taiwan's people.
Looking forward to the future of our relationship with Taiwan, I
believe it will be essential to take bold new steps to strengthen the
ties between us. In particular, it is past time for Washington to
negotiate a free trade agreement with Taiwan. That would be the first
and most important step we could take to demonstrate our continued
dedication to this relationship.
I also wish to take this opportunity to congratulate Ambassador Jason
Yuan, who has ably represented Taiwan in the United States for the past
4 years, on his new appointment to serve as Secretary-General of the
National Security Council of Taiwan. I am deeply grateful for his hard
work to further strengthen the ties between our two countries, and I
wish Ambassador and Madame Yuan the very best of luck in their future
endeavors.
In closing, I urge my colleagues to join me in congratulating the
people of Taiwan on their many successes, and to recommit ourselves to
strengthening this essential relationship. As we look forward to
Taiwan's national celebration, the people of both the United States and
the Republic of China on Taiwan have much to celebrate.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO GENERAL NORTON A. SCHWARTZ
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today I rise to honor GEN Norton A.
Schwartz. General Schwartz will soon officially retire after 39 years
as an Air Force officer, the last 4 spent as Chief of Staff. Throughout
his career, on the front lines and in the ``corporate'' Air Force,
General Schwartz served our Nation selflessly and ably, with dedication
and distinction.
I came to know General Schwartz when he was appointed Chief of Staff
of the Air Force in August 2008. He began his leadership at a very
difficult time. Controversy surrounded the Air Force's acquisition
activities and the control of our Nation's nuclear arsenal. The Air
Force's attempt to acquire aerial refueling tanker aircraft had been
mired in scandal and missteps, while the service had just come off two
incidents of mishandling nuclear missiles and related materials.
General Schwartz established a command climate that helped the
service make the changes needed to address these issues. For example,
General Schwartz insisted on fully restoring excellence and integrity
to the Air Force's acquisition workforce and practices. He succeeded.
After years of failed attempts to get the tanker replacement program
under contract, the Air Force conducted a source-selection for the
program, under full-and-open competition, that serves as a textbook
example of how the Department of Defense should award contracts for its
largest and most expensive weapon systems. Today, the Air Force's
strategy to acquire these tankers is sound. It can certainly be said
that under General Schwartz's leadership, this program is, for the
first time in its checkered history, well-positioned for success.
Through his thoughtful temperament and purposeful humility, General
Schwartz also helped restore Congress's confidence in the Air Force's
acquisition practices and its management of the critical national
security resources entrusted to it. For this, both the warfighter and
the taxpayer will remain in his debt.
During public hearings before the Armed Services Committee and in our
private meetings, I always appreciated General Schwartz's ``straight
talk'' about Air Force programs and operations. Despite his unwavering
dedication to the Air Force, General Schwartz was never afraid to talk
about the hard truths, to propose solutions to problems, and to see
those solutions through. Neither was he shy about lauding the many
excellent people and accomplishments of the Air Force.
So I extend a grateful nation's thanks to GEN Norton A. Schwartz and
his wife Suzie for their service to our Nation and wish them every
success in the next chapter in their life together.
____________________
POSTAL REFORM
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, the Postal Service's financial crisis
continues to escalate.
At the end of this month, the U.S. Postal Service will miss the
deadline
[[Page 14795]]
for the required $5.6 billion payment toward its future retiree health
care obligations. In fact, the Postal Service will have defaulted on
more than $11 billion in payments to fund health care for future
retirees, raising concerns about its ability to keep promises to
current workers about their future benefits.
Five months ago, the Senate passed by a strong bipartisan vote
legislation to shore up the Postal Service. Yet the House has failed to
act. And unfortunately, the House is about to adjourn without taking up
either the Senate-passed postal bill or a House version.
I have implored House leaders to take up postal reform legislation--
any postal reform legislation--so the conference process and the
difficult negotiations involved in that process can begin in earnest.
No one should pretend this is not a crisis worthy of congressional
action.
The Postal Service has lost more than $13 billion during the past 2
years and is losing $25 million each day. It will reach its credit
limit of $15 billion by the end of the year. Despite the fact that
Congress has deferred or reduced the Postal Service's payments for
future retiree health benefits multiple times, the Postal Service has
still reported billions of dollars in deficits--clear evidence that its
fiscal woes go far beyond this requirement.
The Senate bill passed in April ensures those promises to future
retirees will be kept, while still providing financial relief by
restructuring the payment plan in a responsible way.
Much is at stake. Without legislative reforms, the universal mail
service that drives a trillion-dollar mail industry and supports more
than 8 million jobs will be in jeopardy.
A key reason for the Postal Service's crisis is simply a changing
world, where more and more communication is online rather than via
traditional mail. First-class mail volume has fallen by 26 percent over
the past 6 years and continues to decline. Reflecting that sharp drop
in volume, the Postal Service's revenue has also plummeted from $72.8
billion in 2006 to $65.7 billion in 2011.
Nearly 80 percent of the Postal Service's costs are workforce-
related, and so, as painful as it may be, finding a compassionate way
to reduce these costs is simply unavoidable. In doing so, however, it
is critical that the service on which many postal customers depend--
customers the Postal Service desperately needs to keep--be preserved.
The worst thing the Postal Service could do would be to drive more
customers out of the mail, causing revenues to decline further and
ensuring that the financial free fall continues. That would trigger a
death spiral from which the Postal Service might never recover.
We need to help put the Postal Service back on solid financial
footing, not only to help protect those who work in jobs related to
mailing industry but also so that taxpayers are not left holding the
bag.
The bill I coauthored along with Senators Lieberman, Carper, and
Scott Brown would do just that.
Our bill encourages the Postal Service to operate more like a
business by cutting internal costs first instead of driving away
customers with deep service cuts or steep price hikes.
Our bill would transfer to the Postal Service the nearly $11 billion
it has overpaid into the Federal Employee Retirement System and direct
the Postmaster General to use a portion of this money for retirement
and separation incentives in order to reduce the size of the workforce
in a compassionate way.
Let me emphasize: This refund is not taxpayer money. It was
contributed by the Postal Service using ratepayer dollars. It is an
overpayment that was identified and confirmed by the actuaries at OPM
and verified by the GAO. GAO recently confirmed OPM's assessment that
this figure now has risen to nearly $11 billion.
The Senate-passed bill also includes a new requirement that
arbitrators rendering binding decisions in labor disputes consider the
financial condition of the Postal Service. I know that it might defy
belief that an arbitrator would not automatically consider the looming
bankruptcy of the Postal Service when ruling on contract disputes. Some
previous arbitrators, however, have discounted this factor in their
decisions because the requirement to consider it was not explicitly
listed in law.
For the first time in 35 years, the bill also brings sorely needed,
commonsense reforms to the Federal Workers' Compensation Program, not
only at the Postal Service but across the entire Federal Government.
More than 45,500 people are on the long-term rolls for Federal workers'
comp, and 40 percent of those are Postal Service employees. The reforms
will help injured employees return to work and ensure that workers'
comp is not a substitute for retirement benefits.
The Senate bill would also rationalize what has been an erratic and
Draconian closure plan for thousands of rural post offices. While some
post offices can and should be closed, curbing access for customers
could well jeopardize revenue. Therefore, our bill would set up a new
process that would involve the consideration of alternatives to
closure, such as reducing hours, co-locating a post office at a nearby
pharmacy, or renting out excess space to other government agencies.
Perhaps most important, the process includes the requirement for the
views of the affected community to be heard and responded to prior to
any final decision.
Our bill would prevent the Postal Service from eliminating Saturday
delivery for the next 2 years. Instead, it directs the USPS to embark
on a period of aggressive cost-cutting and then would allow this
reduction in service only if the Government Accountability Office and
postal regulators both certify that elimination of Saturday delivery is
still necessary to achieve solvency.
The Senate's bipartisan postal reform bill preserves the Postal
Service and the critical economic activity it supports.
Now, the House must act. Failure to do so puts in peril American
commerce and could harm our fragile economy.
I am confident that, for the good of our country, we will be able to
come together with our House colleagues and work out our differences,
no matter how significant those differences may be. No doubt more
compromises will be required along the way, but it is critical that we
get a bill to the President for his signature as soon as possible.
Our task is urgent. Postal employees, businesses who rely on the U.S.
mail, and the American people should not have to wait any longer.
____________________
WORLD ALZHEIMER'S ACTION DAY
Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I wish to join my colleagues in
bringing attention to Alzheimer's disease and dementia, which
tragically affects so many people across our Nation, including in my
home State of Hawaii. Today, the Alzheimer's Association recognizes
World Alzheimer's Action Day as a way of raising awareness and reducing
the stigma associated with Alzheimer's. Sadly, this disease has touched
the lives of the families of so many of my friends, colleagues, and
staff.
In 2010, 27,000 people in Hawaii were living with Alzheimer's
disease. Their family members and loved ones sacrificed to help them
with nearly $800 million worth of unpaid care. Not only is this a
devastating disease for the people afflicted with it, but the emotional
and monetary costs to their families are enormous.
The reach of the disease continues to grow, and it is estimated that
the cost of caring for people with Alzheimer's and other dementia in
America will reach $1.1 trillion by 2050. Despite the fact that
Alzheimer's has affected so many, the disease itself remains poorly
understood. Not only does it cause memory loss and confusion, but it is
also the sixth leading cause of death nationwide.
During the last Congress, my colleagues and I worked together to pass
the National Alzheimer's Project Act, which President Obama signed into
law in 2011. This law created a national strategic plan to address the
crisis of Alzheimer's disease and to make ending Alzheimer's a national
priority. We
[[Page 14796]]
have a plan in place to fight this disease, but finding a cure will
require us to continue funding research into the disease. While we work
towards a cure, we must also support caregivers and raise public
awareness of the effects of this disease.
I would also like to express my profound gratitude to all those who
are caring for family members who are afflicted with Alzheimer's
disease and other forms of dementia. Many caregivers have one or more
jobs and other family members to care for and it can often be a
thankless job. So mahalo nui loa, thank you very much, for your
sacrifices. I call on my colleagues to continue supporting Alzheimer's
disease research and education so that we may find a cure and end this
devastating disease.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO ROBERT EPPLIN
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise to commemorate the distinguished
public service of Robert Epplin, who served for nearly 20 years as
staff in the Senate, and most recently for the past 3\1/2\ years as my
legislative director. Rob's service in the Senate, as well as his
service in the executive branch, has typified what a dedicated public
servant should be: he took pride in his work and faced challenges with
determination and tenacity; he recognized what an honor it was to serve
the people of this country and my constituents, in particular; and he
had a respect for and an unparalleled understanding of the Senate as an
institution. Because of these many fine qualities, Rob earned the
respect and admiration of so many of his staff colleagues, as well as
so many Senators.
Rob got his start in Washington in 1989 working as a research analyst
at the Republican National Committee. In 1991 he went to work at the
Department of Education, serving in the office of then-Secretary Lamar
Alexander.
Rob began his work in the Senate in 1993 when he served as an adviser
for budget, economic, foreign affairs, and defense issues for former
Senator Bob Packwood of Oregon. At the time he accepted the position, I
am sure he had little inkling that his work would lead to more than a
decade of service to the Oregon congressional delegation. In 1994, Rob
moved to the Senate Finance Committee, where he continued to work for
Senator Packwood as a professional staff member responsible for
pensions, benefits, social security, and economic issues. He then
worked for the Office of Management and Budget before returning in 1997
to the Senate and Oregon delegation as a senior adviser, and later
legislative director, to my friend and former colleague, Senator Gordon
Smith.
During his career in public service, Rob left his mark on issues
ranging from tax and national security to budget policy. But it was his
long fight for the passage of historic civil rights legislation,
including the repeal of the don't ask, don't tell law and hate crimes
legislation, that gives him the most pride. America now welcomes the
service of any qualified individual who is willing to put on the
uniform, and we no longer dismiss brave, dedicated, and skilled service
men and women simply because they are gay. In addition, those who
commit hate crimes against individuals based on their sexual
orientation can now be punished under Federal law.
As Rob leaves the Senate after nearly 20 years of hard work and
dedicated public service, he also leaves behind an impressive list of
accomplishments, and colleagues whose lives he touched because he was
such an exceptional role model and mentor. I wish him continued success
and every happiness in the years to come.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO MONTFORD POINT MARINE
Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, on the 25th day of June 1941, President
Franklin D. Roosevelt issued Executive Order No. 8802 establishing the
fair employment practice that began to erase discrimination in the
Armed Forces.
In 1942, President Roosevelt established a presidential directive
giving African Americans an opportunity to be recruited into the Marine
Corps. These African Americans, from all States, were not sent to the
traditional boot camps of Parris Island, SC and San Diego, CA. Instead,
African American Marines were segregated--experiencing basic training
at Montford Point--a facility at Camp Lejeune, NC. Approximately 20,000
African American Marines received basic training at Montford Point
between 1942 and 1949.
In July of 1948 President Harry S. Truman issued Executive Order No.
9981 negating segregation. In September of 1949, Montford Marine Camp
was deactivated, ending 7 years of segregation.
On April 19, 1974, Montford Point Camp was renamed Camp Johnson, in
honor of the late Sergeant Major, Gilbert H. ``Hashmark'' Johnson.
Johnson was one of the first African Americans to join the Corps, a
Distinguished Montford Point Drill Instructor and a Veteran of WWII and
Korea. The Camp remains the only Marine Corps installation named in
honor of an African American.
The awarding of the Congressional Gold Medal came to fruition after
the signing of H.R. 2447, Public Law 112-59 by President Obama on 23
Nov 11, which is the highest civilian honor for the distinguished
achievement. The Congressional Gold Medal was presented to 366 Original
Montford Point Marines, 27 June 2012 at the Capital Visitor's Center in
Washington, DC. The next day, replicas of this medal were presented to
these men at the Commandant of the Marine Corps' residence.
January of 2012 began the keeling of the USNS Montford Point, T-MLP-
1, the lead ship of her class of Mobile Landing Platforms, MLP, a ship
named in honor of the Original Montford Point Marines. Currently the
Montford Point Marine Association Inc is raising funds to build the
Montford Point Memorial at Camp Lejeune, NC.
Today, I would like to recognize the following Original Montford
Point Marines from Louisiana:
Henry Leonard Bart, New Orleans
Winston Joseph Burns, Sr., New Orleans
Cleauthor Sanders, Shreveport
Otis O'Neal Stewart, Baton Rouge
Ruffin Dawson, Mandeville
Joseph Bastian, New Iberia
Alcee Chriss, Sr., Baton Rouge
Walter Duhon, Fenton
William Joseph Brashear, Morgan City
____________________
RECOGNIZING THE JUNIOR LEAGUE
Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the Junior
League of Washington, JLW, as this organization honors 100 years of
community service and dedication to the greater Washington, DC, area.
The Junior League has approximately 300 organizations across the world,
including eight leagues in my home State of Louisiana. I know that the
women in these organizations make a profound impact on their
communities, and in particular, I recognize the positive impact the
women of the Junior League of Washington have made in communities
throughout our Nation's Capital since 1912.
The Junior League of Washington, JLW, is an organization of women
committed to promoting volunteerism, developing the potential of women,
and improving communities through the effective action and leadership
of trained volunteers. Its purpose is exclusively educational and
charitable. Throughout their history, the JLW has provided millions of
volunteer hours and more than $5.4 million to the community.
It was one woman, Miss Elizabeth Noyes, and her sewing circle, that
started the JLW in 1912. The League quickly grew to over 100 women
working for the welfare of children and serving the helpless and sick.
One hundred years later, the league is still going strong with over
2,300 members still striving to improve the lives of children and the
poor.
The league continues this mission and in the late 1990s chose to
focus its energies on literacy-related programs. The ability to read,
write, and communicate affects far more than a person's knowledge of
literacy masterpieces. It changes their access to jobs, health
[[Page 14797]]
care, and transportation, and the way they raise their children. The
JLW has adopted a broad approach to solving the literacy challenges
their community faces by addressing the issue from many angles: adult,
child, and cultural. The league is proud to partner with over 23
organizations throughout the area to achieve this laudable goal.
In addition, the league honors and celebrates diversity while
focusing on shared values, and it strives to create an environment in
which any woman committed to improving her community, regardless of
race, religion, or national origin, will feel welcome and be encouraged
to be part of the organization. The JLW is a vibrant presence in the
lives of the women and children in the greater metropolitan area of the
District of Columbia, serving as a resource throughout the community to
effect positive change, seek common ground, and inspire hope.
In honor of their centennial year, the women of the JLW have created
the Resolution Read Program, committing themselves to purchasing and
distributing 100,000 new books to needy children in the greater
Washington, DC, community. This is no small undertaking for a small
group of women, but by meeting this goal, many children throughout the
area will get a book to call their own. As such, JLW will continue to
make a lasting impact in their community by fostering a passion for
books and reading where it otherwise might not exist.
I would like to sincerely thank the volunteers of the Junior League
of Washington for their commitment to volunteerism, their community,
and the District of Columbia. Their efforts are extraordinary and
greatly appreciated. I congratulate the league on their 100 years of
success and look forward to hearing about all the wonderful things the
league will accomplish by their Bicentennial.
____________________
FEDERAL LONG TERM CARE INSURANCE
Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, 10 years have passed since the first
consumer enrolled in the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program, an
insurance option for Federal employees, retirees and their loved ones
created by the Long-Term Care Security Act. This law set a new standard
regarding providing for the unique and important medical needs of
seniors and individuals with disabilities. Participants in the program
are now confident that they will receive help financing the care that
they may require. I am pleased to recognize the 10th anniversary of the
first enrollment in this important program, and I am proud that its
administration is handled by Long Term Care Partners, LLC, which is
located in my home State of New Hampshire.
Today, 1 in 10 Americans aged 55 and older carries a long-term care
insurance policy; however, it is estimated that 70 percent of people
over age 65 will eventually require long-term care. Our Nation's
changing demographics and significant medical advances have contributed
to an aging population, and addressing the issue of how best to care
for seniors and individuals with disabilities should be part of our
national discourse on how we support ourselves and our families. These
services are critical for so many Americans who need assistance to
continue living independently and actively in their communities.
The Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program was the first benefit
offered to the Federal workforce that was completely employee-funded,
coming at no cost to the taxpayer. The program is unique in that, at
the time of its inception, it was the first benefit offered uniformly
to all Federal employees, including military personnel and staff of the
U.S. Postal Service. It is also the Nation's first successful large-
scale, long-term care insurance program with consistent benefits,
regardless of where the recipient lives.
With nearly 270,000 enrollees, the Federal Long Term Care Insurance
Program has made a difference in the lives of so many in the Federal
workforce. It is the largest group long-term care insurance program in
the country and has already paid nearly $215 million in claims. The
program helps its beneficiaries stay where they are most comfortable,
with more than 85 percent of these claims going to home and community-
based services.
Every family needs to plan for retirement and how to best care for
aging loved ones and those with disabilities. Long-term care insurance
is one way that millions of Americans get the support they need to
remain independent and active in their communities. For Federal
employees, the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program is an important
option that provides a sense of security and comfort in knowing that
family members will be cared for in times of need.
I stand today to recognize the Federal Long Term Care Insurance
Program's 10th anniversary and to wish the program continued success as
it embarks on its second decade of assisting Federal employees and
their families in planning for their retirements.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO PASTOR YOUCEF NADARKHANI
Mr. BLUNT. Mr. President, I would like to take a few moments to share
a rare piece of good news related to international religious freedom.
On October 11 of last year I submitted for the Record the story of a
Christian pastor in Iran who had been charged with apostasy and
sentenced to death. Earlier this month, after almost 3 years of
imprisonment, Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani has been released and is at home
with his family.
The good news for Pastor Youcef comes after years of struggle, and we
can only imagine the joy his own family feels after a long, difficult
fight for his freedom. Many organizations and individuals, often
risking their own lives, deserve thanks for their enduring commitment
to Pastor Youcef's cause. Pastor Youcef's enduring faith in God saw him
through this trying time and his experience is an inspiration to people
of faith everywhere.
This moment of relief and thanksgiving comes as a reminder that the
liberties we enjoy as Americans come at a high price to those who have
fought and continue to fight for our freedoms. And too many people in
countries like Iran, Iraq, Egypt, and Pakistan, to name a few, still do
not enjoy the basic human rights you and I have here at home.
The persecution of religious minorities and Christians like Pastor
Youcef abroad is unfortunately nothing new. That's why I introduced the
Near East and South Central Asia Religious Freedom Act in June of last
year. The bill came out of coordination with U.S. Congressman Frank
Wolf in the House and my colleague, U.S. Senator Carl Levin. It creates
a special envoy on religious freedom in the State Department to monitor
the status of religious minorities in these particularly vulnerable
regions.
We can and we must do more to advance religious freedom abroad. I am
sincerely committed to this effort and believe that it is essential to
promoting the God-given right to liberty around the world. My
colleagues and I are hopeful that the Senate can soon join the House in
passing this important legislation.
RECOGNIZING THE CITY CLUB OF CLEVELAND
Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize The City Club
of Cleveland, the oldest continuously operating free speech forum in
the country.
Often referred to as a ``Citadel of Free Speech,'' The City Club
offers an unbiased setting for dynamic discussions and exchange of
ideas on important issues of interest to citizens and communities
throughout Ohio and the United States. The City Club has succeeded in
its mission to inform, educate and inspire citizens by presenting
significant ideas and providing opportunities for dialog in a collegial
setting, and has secured its place in history as an impartial, vital
center for discussion of diverse topics.
The City Club forums encourage active debate and participation by the
audience. Over the years, local, national and international leaders
have
[[Page 14798]]
been featured as speakers and have addressed a wide variety of subjects
which have impacted our region, state and Nation. These sessions
encourage nonpartisan, spirited debate and discussion about important
topics. I have been honored to speak at the City Club on several
occasions and have enjoyed the robust dialog.
I would like to congratulate The City Club of Cleveland on 100 years
of success.
____________________
ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS
______
REMEMBERING JON HOLDER
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I would like to take a few moments
to pay tribute to Mr. Jon Frederick Holder, a man who was instrumental
in helping my staff prepare for a hearing the Senate Finance Committee
held on private long-term disability benefits in September 2010.
Jon died unexpectedly last spring at the youthful age of 71. The
world has lost a dedicated attorney, a civil rights activist who took
part in the Selma-Montgomery march, and an advocate who specialized in
disability law. Jon spent the last 30 years working alongside his wife
Kathleen at their small law firm in Maine defending people whose voices
are muffled in a process that can become mired in duplicative forms,
draconian due dates, and burdensome record collection.
Jon worked with my staff as the Committee's hearing date neared,
staying late into the evening to distil with witty anecdotes and a
razor sharp understanding, ERISA's complex statutory law, its
legislative history and the seminal judicial interpretations that
dramatically changed it. He described the insurance industry's
corporate structure and its goal to reduce the benefit ratio
percentage. Then he put flesh on that structure as he described what
achieving that reduction goal means to the individual whose disability
check suddenly stops arriving.
A philosophy major-turned-lawyer, an avid bicyclist who loved the
ocean, a husband and a father, Jon approached life with passion and
purpose questioning and challenging the status quo and always seeking
for ways to change or improve it. He will be missed by those close to
him, but his legacy of good works lives on.
____________________
GREENBELT, MARYLAND
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the 75th
anniversary of the city of Greenbelt, the first planned community in
the United States built by the Federal Government. Greenbelt was
envisioned as a social experiment by Rexford Guy Tugwell, a friend and
adviser to President Franklin D. Roosevelt. The town was built under
the authority of the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act. It was
designed to provide low-income housing and drew 5,700 applicants for
the original 885 residences. The first families arrived on October 1,
1937. They were chosen to meet income and other criteria, including a
demonstrated willingness to participate in community organizations.
Most early residents were under 30 years of age and were from diverse
religious backgrounds. They were blue and white collar workers, but due
to the segregation at the time, no African Americans were able to
purchase homes or live in Greenbelt. Physically, Greenbelt was designed
as a complete city with homes, businesses, schools, roads, recreation
facilities, and town government. Homes were clustered in
``superblocks'' with a system of interior walkways permitting residents
to go from home to town center without crossing a major street. Streets
were designed to separate pedestrians from vehicular traffic and
community amenities and businesses were centrally located for easy
access.
The first residents were pioneers in community engagement. They
quickly formed a government--the first city manager form of government
in the State of Maryland. They formed the first kindergarten in Prince
George's County, started a journalism club that today continues to
publish the weekly Greenbelt News Review, formed the Greenbelt Health
Association, established police, fire and rescue squads, and opened the
first public swimming pool in the Washington area in 1939. Greenbelt
Consumer Services, Inc. operated the grocery store, gas station, drug
and variety stores, barber and beauty shops, movie theater, valet shop,
and tobacco shop, and over the years, as needs arose, citizens formed
numerous cooperatives.
The Federal Government built an additional 1,000 homes in 1941 to
accommodate families coming to Washington in connection with the
defense programs of World War II. In 1952, Congress voted to sell off
the Greenbelt towns, and citizens in Greenbelt formed a housing
cooperative which purchased the homes. In 1997, when Greenbelt
celebrated its 60th anniversary, the U.S. Department of Interior
recognized Historic Greenbelt as a National Historic Landmark.
Today, many of the original features of this planned community still
exist, although the city itself has expanded to include additional
shopping centers, high-rise office buildings, garden apartments,
townhouses, and private development. Around a dozen original families
still live in Greenbelt, passing on the cooperative spirit and sense of
community that has made Greenbelt a thriving city and a special place
to call home.
I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating the residents and
the city of Greenbelt on successfully nurturing 75 years of community
planning, cooperation, and engagement.
____________________
REMEMBERING AL ADAMS
Ms. MURKOWSKI. I speak today to honor the memory of Al Adams,
an Alaska Native leader. In the Alaska legislature for some 20 years,
Al Adams was regarded as one of the most effective advocates for the
interests of rural Alaska. Senator Adams died on August 13 after a long
battle with cancer. Alaska's Governor ordered flags in the State
lowered to half staff in honor of Adams' service to Alaska. His
funeral, at ChangePoint Alaska in Anchorage, drew over 1,500 mourners.
A second funeral was conducted in Al's hometown of Kotzebue.
Al Adams was born in Kotzebue, AK in 1942. He attended Mt. Edgecumbe
High School in Sitka. Following high school, he attended the University
of Alaska Fairbanks and RCA Technical Institute. There is a back story
behind the RCA Technical Institute. Prior to enactment of the Alaska
Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971, one of the better jobs that a
Native person from rural Alaska could hope for was a job tracking
satellites at the Gilmore Creek Satellite Tracking Facility near
Fairbanks. Several of those who traveled with Al to Los Angeles for
training at the RCA Technical Institute would later become leading
players in the implementation of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement
Act.
Over the course of his career, Al would serve as president of
Kikiktagruk Inupiat Corporation and executive vice president of NANA
Regional Corporation, but his service in the Alaska legislature left
Al's most enduring legacies. Al served in the Alaska House of
Representatives from 1980-1988 and in the Alaska Senate from 1989-2000.
He was known as ``Mr. Finance.'' Al chaired the powerful House Finance
Committee. He served 18 years on the Legislative Budget and Audit
Committee and 12 years on the Operating Budget Conference Committee. As
a Representative and Senator from rural western Alaska he understood
the unique problems that his communities faced and ensured that they
received an equitable share of State funding.
Al's most enduring legislative accomplishment is the Power Cost
Equalization Program. One of the greatest impediments to the viability
of traditional Native communities in rural Alaska is the cost of
electricity. Since rural Alaska largely lives ``off the grid''
electricity must be generated locally by burning diesel fuel which is
transported long distances by barge. The Power Cost Equalization
Program protects rural communities by setting a cap on the price that
rural consumers pay for energy. It is a tremendously
[[Page 14799]]
important program and rural Alaska has Al Adams to thank for it.
Following his service as a legislator, Al became a lobbyist. We do
not commonly commend the work of lobbyists in the pages of the Record,
but Al was a special kind of lobbyist. He lobbied selectively for the
causes he believed in, representing the North Slope Borough and the
Northwest Arctic Borough. During this period he used his vast
legislative and political experience to educate his Native people on
how they can be more effective in the political arena. Just one
example, recognizing that rural Alaska's reliance on imported diesel
was ultimately unsustainable, he lobbied to develop local sources of
energy in western Alaska, at one time proposing an intraregional grid
to power remote communities. He lobbied to make it possible for the
tribal hospital in Kotzebue to build a new long-term care wing on their
hospital. Al Adams used his insider access and knowledge for good.
I would like to spend a moment to discuss Al on a personal level. I
will always remember his smile--that crinkly smile--and his sense of
humor which could defuse even the tensest of meetings. Al operated in
multiple worlds at once--the world of politics, the world of business--
but he never abandoned his Inupiaq roots. His official obituary relates
that Al often organized subsistence hunting and fishing trips for his
children, where he passed down traditional Inupiaq skills. He
coordinated all the logistics for these memorable outings and even
served as camp cook, making sure everyone else was well fed. Whether
dipnetting at the mouth of the Kenai, caribou hunting outside Kotzebue
or visiting the fish wheel at Chitina, he let his wife, children and
grandchildren know that they were loved and that they came first and
foremost in his life.
I have lost a dear friend, the Native community has lost a respected
leader, and all Alaska has lost a statesman whose legacies will long be
remembered. The Senate extends its condolences to the Al Adams family
and all who mourn the loss of this exemplary Alaskan.
____________________
REMEMBERING RICHARD FRANK
Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, the front page of this morning's
Fairbanks Daily News-Miner carries the sad news that Richard Frank, an
Athabascan elder, died at age 85.
Richard Frank is an individual of great significance in the history
of post-statehood Alaska. He was among the first Alaska Native leaders
to recognize the risk that development of the modern State of Alaska
posed to the subsistence lifestyle of traditional villages like his
home village of Minto in Interior Alaska. He was among the first Native
leaders to organize his people in opposition to State land selections
that would prejudice the eventual settlement of the aboriginal land
claims of Alaska Natives. And his leadership, recognized throughout the
State, is one of the reasons that the Native peoples of Alaska won
their battle for land claims with passage of the Alaska Native Claims
Settlement Act of 1971.
Richard Frank was born on August 27, 1927, in Old Minto. He was
educated at the village school. Some historians say that the village
school provided an education up to the third grade. Others say it was
the fourth. What is undisputed is that Richard Frank possessed a sense
of adventure and wisdom far beyond his formal education. Growing up
around the fishing and trapping camps of the Yukon River he gained an
appreciation of the interdependence between the land and the Native way
of life. But some would say it was his experience in the Army Air Corps
during World War II that best prepared him for the leadership role he
would occupy in the 1960s.
Richard's wartime experience is chronicled in Fern Chardonnet's book,
``Alaska at War, 1941-1945.'' She relates that World War II presented
an extraordinary opportunity for Alaska Natives. Many, for the first
time, received the same pay and benefits as White workers, and a chance
to acquire new skills and to build genuine self esteem. Richard Frank
was a case in point. Upon enlisting he was encouraged to pursue
specialized training as an aircraft mechanic. At first he said, ``No,''
but his commanding officer had confidence in Richard and he agreed to
pursue the training. Richard relates that the passing score in training
was 2.5 and he completed the course with a 3.9. He went on to service
P-47 fighters in the South Pacific.
Richard regarded himself as lucky. Service in the military showed
young men from the village that there was another option. After the war
Richard worked as a mechanic for Wien Alaska Airlines and Boeing,
though his heart remained in village Alaska.
The son of a traditional village chief, he found his calling in the
early 1960s as the battle for Alaska's lands was beginning. The Alaska
Statehood Act gave the State of Alaska the right to select lands but
left resolution of Alaska Native land claims for another day.
One of the areas where State land selections first conflicted with
Native hunting, fishing, and trapping activities was in the Minto Lakes
region of Interior Alaska. The State wanted to establish a recreation
area in 1961 near the Athabascan village of Minto and to construct a
road so that the region would be more easily accessible to Fairbanks
residents and visiting sportsmen. In addition, State officials believed
that the area held potential for future development of oil and other
resources.
Learning of these plans of the State, Minto filed a protest with the
U.S. Interior Department. The people of Minto had filed blanket claims
to the area in the 1930s, and Richard's father, then Traditional Chief,
delineated this area as belonging to the Minto people in 1951. Minto
asked the Federal agency to protect their rights to the region by
turning down the State's application for the land. Minto's attorney was
none other than the late Senator Ted Stevens who took up their cause
pro bono.
In response to the protest, a meeting of sportsmen, biologists,
conservationists, and State officials was held in 1963 to discuss the
proposed road and recreation area.
Richard argued that State development in the region would ruin the
subsistence way of life of the Natives and urged that the recreation
area be established elsewhere, where new hunting pressure would not
threaten the traditional economy. He said, ``A village is at stake. Ask
yourself this question, is a recreation area worth the future of a
village?''
He also took his cause to the Alaska Conservation Society in
Anchorage. He told the conservation society members that without the
use of the lakes, Minto's people would go hungry. Lael Morgan, in her
landmark book, ``The Life and Times of Howard Rock,'' relates Richard's
pleas for support. He said, ``Nothing is so sorrowful for a hunter,
empty handed, to be greeted by hungry children.''
A 1985 history of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act
characterized Minto's protest as a precursor of events to come. During
the years that followed, many other Native communities would protest
actions that threatened their lands. In 1966, Secretary of the Interior
Stewart Udall gave the land claims movement teeth by initiating a
freeze on the transfer of lands to the State which were protested by
the Native people.
As a well respected Native leader and elder, Richard went on to play
significant roles in the Tanana Chiefs Conference and the Fairbanks
Native Association. He served on the Governor's Veterans Advisory
Committee and founded the Alaska Native Veterans Association. It is
also appropriate to acknowledge Richard's role as the patriarch of one
of the truly great Fairbanks families. Richard's wife of 57 years,
Anna, became the first Native American woman ordained as a priest in
the Episcopal Church in 1983. Richard was the father of four and was
blessed with grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
As a significant figure in Alaska's history, Richard was generous to
collectors of oral history. One of those oral histories was done for
the Alaska Trappers Association, which notes,
[[Page 14800]]
``Richard freely shares insight into the Native view of the world. He
takes great pride in their dedication to family. He speaks often of the
lessons he learned from his elders.''
Alaska has truly lost a significant figure. If it is any condolence,
Richard's life experiences were rich, he accomplished a great deal for
his Native people, and he supported a truly wonderful family. Thanks to
modern technology, his stories and life experiences will live on for
eternity.
On behalf of the Senate I extend condolences to Reverend Anna,
Richard's family, and the Athabascan people of Interior Alaska who are
preparing to honor and celebrate Richard's life next week with a
Memorial Potlatch.
____________________
REMEMBERING BARNEY UHART
Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I was saddened to learn that
Barney Uhart of Anchorage, AK passed away on September 8, 2012 after a
long battle with cancer. Barney was President Emeritus of the Chugach
Alaska Corporation, one of the thirteen regional Alaska Native
Corporations. Chugach Alaska Corporation is owned by over 2,300
shareholders of Alutiiq, Eskimo and Indian heritage.
Barney was elected President and CEO of Chugach Alaska Corporation in
May 2000 and served in that role until July 2012. In July he announced
his retirement to focus on his health and spend time with his family.
But the Chugach Alaska Corporation board would not let him go. That is
how Barney earned the title of President Emeritus.
Barney was a master in administering Base Operations Services
contracts, a field he entered into on something of a lark. As the story
goes, while living in Hawaii he was delivering furniture with a friend
to a company called Kentron International. This was back in 1979. He
wondered what they did and slipped a resume under the door. A few days
later he learned that they managed remote sites and was on his way to
Wake Island. Over the course of his career Barney came to know more
about places like Wake Island, Midway Island and Amchitka than anyone I
know. He would return to Wake Island many times over the course of his
career, helping his successor employers win that Base Operations
Support contract. You might even call him the Mayor Emeritus of Wake
Island.
Barney joined the Chugach Alaska family in 1993 as an Operations
Manager with Chugach Development Corporation. Known as a charismatic
leader and a hard worker, he quickly rose through the ranks. Those at
Chugach Alaska tell me that his dedication to the company, its people
and employees was steadfast. His hard work and commitment helped
provide real, tangible, and ongoing benefits to the Native shareholders
of Chugach Alaska. He strove tirelessly to help fulfill the promise of
the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. His work in opening up the
8(a) program to meaningful participation by Alaska Natives, Lower 48
Indian tribes, and Native Hawaiians is recognized throughout the Native
American contractor community.
Barney Uhart will be remembered as a leader, a friend and a champion
of doing the right thing and doing things right. I express my
condolences to his wife Randi, his children Jordan, Abigail and Jacob,
and the shareholders of Chugach Alaska Corporation on the loss of this
exemplary Alaskan.
____________________
COAST GUARD PAY AND PERSONNEL CENTER
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the 30th
anniversary of the U.S. Coast Guard Pay and Personnel Center in Topeka,
KS. The Coast Guard's Pay and Personnel Center was first established in
1979 in the greater Washington, DC, area. In 1982 the center
permanently moved to the Frank Carlson Federal Building in Topeka. My
staff and I have the honor of working with this dedicated team of
leaders on a regular basis.
The Pay and Personnel Center offers a specific and imperative service
to more than 100,000 men and women of the U.S. Coast Guard. Spanning
from human resources, to processing, disbursement, and other services,
the Pay and Personnel Center has continued to operate without much
attention or fanfare but with the goal of providing the compensation
and services necessary to keep our Coast Guardians focused, secure, and
dedicated.
Today, I offer congratulations and accolades to the Pay and Personnel
Center on 30 years of hard work and superior service to our men and
women in the U.S. Coast Guard. The center is a shining example of the
Coast Guard motto, Semper Paratus, Always Ready.
____________________
AIR FORCE SPACE COMMAND
Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise today to pay
tribute to the outstanding accomplishments of Air Force Space Command.
And of course, I offer my deep respect and thanks to the 42,000 men and
women who keep constant watch over our most distant skies. These great
Americans are responsible for a staggering range of essential missions,
and this week, I join them in celebrating the 30th anniversary of the
command's creation.
Air Force Space Command was established in 1982 as our national
leaders recognized the growing need to dominate the space domain to
enhance our warfighting capabilities and to better protect our
servicemembers. The command's responsibilities and capabilities have
steadily increased over the past 30 years to keep pace with technology
and foreign threats, and from the outset, those missions have been a
critical part of our national defense architecture.
All day, every day, Air Force Space Command personnel provide our
warfighters with the space-based assets they require at the speed of
need. And at the same time, they keep a major portion of our economy,
travel, and transportation on track. They fly the GPS satellites that
make modern computing, air travel, and precision munitions possible.
Air Force Space Command provides our Nation with global ballistic
missile early warning and defense. Without Air Force Space Command,
there would be no military satellite communications and our
meteorological and navigational data would be far less advanced and
accurate. These airmen and civilians of Space Command demonstrate
amazing technical and scientific proficiency as they conduct space
based surveillance, land-based intercontinental ballistic missile
operations, and most recently, prosecute a cyber space mission that is
growing more essential to our security every day. Their capabilities
have strengthened our Nation's homeland defense, allowed disaster
relief efforts to be more timely and efficient, and enhanced America's
military operational capabilities in all stages of warfare. Simply put,
without Air Force Space Command, the strategic and technological
advantages enjoyed by both the military and civilian communities in the
United States would not be possible.
Of course, all of these tremendous accomplishments are due to the
remarkable devotion to duty, sacrifice, and dedication displayed by
Space Command personnel around the world every day. As we all know, our
service men and women, both active duty and those in the Reserve
component, aren't simply serving in the military--they are our
military. Additionally, civilian members of Air Force Space Command
provide the stability and corporate knowledge that's essential to the
command's enduring success. Yes, it's a true total force effort.
Colorado is the proud home of Air Force Space Command headquarters, but
right now, their personnel are deployed to every corner of the globe,
providing unparalleled space and cyber space expertise to combatant
commanders in every theater of operations. As they celebrate yet
another milestone, I would like to honor these patriots for their
selfless service and dedication to our Nation's security. On behalf of
all Coloradans and to every member of Air Force Space Command, past and
present: happy 30th anniversary.
[[Page 14801]]
____________________
REMEMBERING EDWARD D. PARE
Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, the State of Rhode Island has
lost a dear and dedicated public servant. Captain Edward D. Pare was a
sworn officer of the Rhode Island State Police for 2\1/2\ decades, from
1959 until his retirement in 1986.
Captain Pare was a true son of Rhode Island, born in Coventry, RI. In
addition to serving our State, he also served his country in the U.S.
Navy, sailing appropriately enough aboard the USS Pawcatuck, named for
the river that flows across the southern part of our State.
Captain Pare left an indelible mark on the force. He was captain of
detectives for many years prior to his retirement. In this important
role, Captain Pare had his hand in every major investigation undertaken
by the State police during that period. His leadership and commitment
were the hallmarks of his stint with the department and set an example
for a generation of officers. Even beyond his retirement, Captain Pare
was known in law enforcement circles and across Rhode Island as simply
``The Captain.''
During his tenure with the State police, Captain Pare acted as both
the head of the Rhode Island Division of Motor Vehicles and the
director of the Rhode Island Department of Transportation. There had
been concerns raised about mismanagement and corruption at these
agencies. Captain Pare, as the ``gold standard'' of competence, rigor,
and integrity, provided public assurance that any such problems would
be met and mastered.
Captain Pare's sense of public service was a family value, carried on
by his sons, Ed and Steven. During our Rhode Island banking crisis, I
had the pleasure of working alongside Ed at the Rhode Island Department
of Business Regulation, where he worked for the people of Rhode Island
for many years in a number of roles, including superintendent of
banking and superintendent of the securities division. Steven followed
his father's path into the State police, rising in his 26 years to the
rank of colonel and serving as State trooper, detective, and
superintendent of the force. Steven continues his work in law
enforcement and homeland security today as commissioner of public
safety for the city of Providence.
Captain Pare is survived by his beloved wife Phyllis, and in addition
to Ed and Steven, he leaves behind his daughter Diane, son Gary, and 12
grandchildren. The captain's impact on our communities was profound,
and his legacy of integrity and service to others will be remembered by
Rhode Islanders for a long time to come.
____________________
MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT
Messages from the President of the United States were communicated to
the Senate by Mr. Thomas, one of his secretaries.
____________________
EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED
As in executive session the Presiding Officer laid before the Senate
messages from the President of the United States submitting sundry
nominations which were referred to the appropriate committees.
(The messages received today are printed at the end of the Senate
proceedings.)
____________________
MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE
At 12:03 p.m., a message from the House of Representatives, delivered
by Mr. Novotny, one of its reading clerks, announced that the House has
passed the following joint resolution, in which it requests the
concurrence of the Senate:
H.J. Res. 118. Joint resolution providing for congressional
disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code,
of the rule submitted by the Office of Family Assistance of
the Administration for Children and Families of the
Department of Health and Human Services relating to waiver
and expenditure authority under section 1115 of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1315) with respect to the Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families program.
____________________
MEASURES PLACED ON THE CALENDAR
The following bill was read the second time, and placed on the
calendar:
S. 3607. A bill to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline.
____________________
EXECUTIVE AND OTHER COMMUNICATIONS
The following communications were laid before the Senate, together
with accompanying papers, reports, and documents, and were referred as
indicated:
EC-7698. A communication from the Associate General
Counsel, Office of the General Counsel, Department of
Agriculture, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report relative
to a vacancy in the position of Administrator, Rural
Services, in the Department of Agriculture received in the
Office of the President of the Senate on September 19, 2012;
to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
EC-7699. A communication from the Under Secretary of
Defense (Comptroller), transmitting, pursuant to law, a
report relative to a violation of the Antideficiency Act that
occurred in the Operation and Maintenance, Army (OMA)
appropriation, account 2172020, at the U.S. Army Installation
Management Command (IMCOM) during fiscal year 2007 and was
assigned Army case number 11-04; to the Committee on
Appropriations.
EC-7700. A communication from the Chief Counsel, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Suspension of Community Eligibility'' ((44 CFR Part 64)
(Docket No. FEMA-2012-0003)) received in the Office of the
President of the Senate on September 20, 2012; to the
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
EC-7701. A communication from the Secretary of the
Treasury, transmitting, pursuant to law, a six-month periodic
report on the national emergency declared in Executive Order
12978 of October 21, 1995, with respect to significant
narcotics traffickers centered in Colombia; to the Committee
on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
EC-7702. A communication from the Chairman and President of
the Export-Import Bank, transmitting, pursuant to law, a
report relative to a transaction involving U.S. exports to
the United Arab Emirates; to the Committee on Banking,
Housing, and Urban Affairs.
EC-7703. A communication from the Chairman and President of
the Export-Import Bank, transmitting, pursuant to law, a
report relative to a transaction involving U.S. exports to
Poland; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban
Affairs.
EC-7704. A communication from the Assistant Director for
Legislative Affairs, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the Charter of the Consumer
Advisory Board; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and
Urban Affairs.
EC-7705. A communication from the Acting Deputy Director,
Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South
Atlantic; Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources of the Gulf of
Mexico and South Atlantic; Trip Limit Reduction'' (RIN0648-
XC196) received in the Office of the President of the Senate
on September 19, 2012; to the Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation.
EC-7706. A communication from the Acting Deputy Director,
Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska;
Reallocation of Pacific Cod in the Western Regulatory Area of
the Gulf of Alaska Management Area'' (RIN0648-XC205) received
in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 19,
2012; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
EC-7707. A communication from the Acting Deputy Director,
Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska;
Reallocation of Pacific Cod in the Bering Sea and Aleutian
Islands Management Area'' (RIN0648-XC202) received in the
Office of the President of the Senate on September 19, 2012;
to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-7708. A communication from the Acting Deputy Director,
Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Fisheries Off West Coast States; Coastal Pelagic Species
Fisheries; Closure'' (RIN0648-XC166) received in the Office
of the President of the Senate on September 20, 2012; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-7709. A communication from the Acting Deputy Director,
Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South
Atlantic; South Atlantic Snapper-Grouper Fishery; 2012-2013
Accountability Measure and Closure for Recreational Black Sea
Bass in the South Atlantic''
[[Page 14802]]
(RIN0648-XC133) received in the Office of the President of
the Senate on September 20, 2012; to the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-7710. A communication from the Acting Deputy Director,
Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce,
transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``Fisheries Off West Coast States; Modifications of the West
Coast Commercial and Recreational Salmon Fisheries; Inseason
Actions 4 through 14'' (RIN0648-X121) received in the Office
of the President of the Senate on September 20, 2012; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-7711. A communication from the Director, Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of
the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and
Butterfish Fisheries; Framework Adjustment 6'' (RIN0648-BB99)
received in the Office of the President of the Senate on
September 20, 2012; to the Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation.
EC-7712. A communication from the Director, Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled
``International Fisheries; Western and Central Pacific
Fisheries for Highly Migratory Species; Bigeye Tuna Catch
Limit in Longline Fisheries for 2012'' (RIN0648-BC14)
received in the Office of the President of the Senate on
September 20, 2012; to the Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation.
EC-7713. A communication from the Director, Office of
Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of
the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and
Butterfish Fisheries; Specifications and Management
Measures'' (RIN0648-BB28) received in the Office of the
President of the Senate on September 20, 2012; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-7714. A communication from the Secretary of Energy,
transmitting, pursuant to law, a report entitled ``MOX Fuel
Fabrication Feedstock''; to the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources.
EC-7715. A communication from the Deputy Chief of the
National Forest System, Department of Agriculture,
transmitting, pursuant to law, a report of a technical
correction for the boundary for the McKenzie Wild and Scenic
River in Oregon; to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources.
EC-7716. A communication from the Deputy Chief of the
National Forest System, Department of Agriculture,
transmitting, pursuant to law, a report relative to the
detailed boundaries for the Au Sable, Bear Creek, Manistee,
and Pine Rivers in Michigan relative to the National Wild and
Scenic Rivers System; to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources.
EC-7717. A communication from the Deputy Chief of the
National Forest System, Department of Agriculture,
transmitting, pursuant to law, a report relative to the
detailed boundary for the White Salmon Wild and Scenic River,
Oregon relative to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers
System; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
EC-7718. A communication from the Director of Congressional
Affairs, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, transmitting,
pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``NRC
Procedures for Placement and Monitoring of Work with Federal
Agencies Other Than the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
Laboratory Work'' (Management Directive 11.8) received in the
Office of the President of the Senate on September 19, 2012;
to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
EC-7719. A communication from the Assistant Secretary of
the Army (Civil Works), transmitting, pursuant to law, a
report relative to the Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands Phase I
project in Miami-Dade County, Florida; to the Committee on
Environment and Public Works.
EC-7720. A communication from the Chief of the Trade and
Commercial Regulations Branch, Customs and Border Protection,
Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Extension of Import
Restrictions Imposed on Archaeological Material from Mali''
(RIN1515-AD91) received in the Office of the President of the
Senate on September 19, 2012; to the Committee on Finance.
EC-7721. A communication from the Chief of the Trade and
Commercial Regulations Branch, Customs and Border Protection,
Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``United States--Colombia
Trade Promotion Agreement'' (RIN1515-AD88) received in the
Office of the President of the Senate on September 20, 2012;
to the Committee on Finance.
EC-7722. A communication from the Chief of the Trade and
Commercial Regulations Branch, Customs and Border Protection,
Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to
law, the report of a rule entitled ``Technical Corrections
Relating to the Rules of Origin for Goods Imported Under the
NAFTA and for Textile and Apparel Products'' (CPB Dec. 12-15)
received in the Office of the President of the Senate on
September 19, 2012; to the Committee on Finance.
EC-7723. A communication from the Secretary of Health and
Human Services, transmitting, pursuant to law, an annual
report relative to the activities of the Office of the
Medicare Ombudsman; to the Committee on Finance.
EC-7724. A communication from the Assistant Secretary,
Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting,
pursuant to law, a report relative to groups designated by
the Secretary of State as Foreign Terrorist Organizations
(DCN OSS 2012-1472); to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
EC-7725. A communication from the Assistant Secretary,
Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting,
certification of a proposed permanent export license pursuant
to section 36(d) of the Arms Export Control Act (Transmittal
No. DDTC 12-096); to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
EC-7726. A communication from the Assistant Secretary,
Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting,
certification of proposed issuance of an export license
pursuant to section 36(d) of the Arms Export Control Act
(Transmittal No. DDTC 12-125); to the Committee on Foreign
Relations.
EC-7727. A communication from the Assistant Secretary,
Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting,
certification of proposed issuance of an export license
pursuant to section 36(d) of the Arms Export Control Act
(Transmittal No. DDTC 12-067); to the Committee on Foreign
Relations.
EC-7728. A communication from the Assistant Secretary,
Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting,
certification of proposed issuance of an export license
pursuant to section 36(d) of the Arms Export Control Act
(Transmittal No. DDTC 12-059); to the Committee on Foreign
Relations.
EC-7729. A communication from the Assistant Secretary,
Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting,
certification of proposed issuance of an export license
pursuant to section 36(d) of the Arms Export Control Act
(Transmittal No. DDTC 12-102); to the Committee on Foreign
Relations.
EC-7730. A joint communication from the Secretary of Energy
and the Secretary of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law,
a report relative to the New START Treaty; to the Committee
on Foreign Relations.
EC-7731. A communication from the Secretary of Health and
Human Services, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of
a petition to add workers at the Hanford Engineer Works in
Richland, Washington, to the Special Exposure Cohort; to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
EC-7732. A communication from the Secretary of Health and
Human Services, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of
a petition to add workers from Titanium Alloys Manufacturing,
to the Special Exposure Cohort; to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
EC-7733. A communication from the Secretary of Health and
Human Services, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of
a petition to add workers at the Clarksville Modification
Center, Ft. Campbell, in Clarksville, Tennessee, to the
Special Exposure Cohort; to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
EC-7734. A communication from the Secretary of Health and
Human Services, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of
a petition to add workers at the Winchester Engineering and
Analytical Center in the Winchester, Massachusetts, to the
Special Exposure Cohort; to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
EC-7735. A communication from the Secretary of Health and
Human Services, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of
a petition to add workers at the Medina Modification Center
in San Antonio, Texas, to the Special Exposure Cohort; to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
EC-7736. A communication from the Acting Assistant Attorney
General, Office of Legislative Affairs, Department of
Justice, transmitting, pursuant to law, an annual report
relative to the activities and operations of the Public
Integrity Section, Criminal Division, and the nationwide
federal law enforcement effort against public corruption; to
the Committee on the Judiciary.
EC-7737. A communication from the Director of the
Regulation Policy and Management Office of the General
Counsel, Veterans Health Administration, Department of
Veterans Affairs, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report
of a rule entitled ``Exempting In-Home Video Telehealth From
Copayments'' (RIN2900-AO26) received in the Office of the
President of the Senate on September 21, 2012; to the
Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
EC-7738. A communication from the Secretary of the Army,
transmitting, pursuant to law, a report relative to the
management of Arlington National Cemetery; to the Committee
on Veterans' Affairs.
____________________
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
The following reports of committees were submitted:
From the Committee on Indian Affairs, without amendment:
H.R. 2467. A bill to take certain Federal lands in Mono
County, California, into trust
[[Page 14803]]
for the benefit of the Bridgeport Indian Colony.
____________________
INTRODUCTION OF BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
The following bills and joint resolutions were introduced, read the
first and second times by unanimous consent, and referred as indicated:
By Mrs. GILLIBRAND (for herself, Mr. Durbin, Ms.
Landrieu, and Mr. Sanders):
S. 3608. A bill to modernize voter registration, promote
access to voting for individuals with disabilities, protect
the ability of individuals to exercise the right to vote in
elections for Federal office, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Rules and Administration.
By Mr. WYDEN:
S. 3609. A bill to adopt fair standards and procedures by
which determinations of Copyright Royalty Judges are made
with respect to webcasting, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. Merkley):
S. 3610. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
to deny the inclusion of any antidumping or countervailing
duties in the determination of the basis of any energy tax
credit property; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. Merkley):
S. 3611. A bill to prohibit executive agencies from
procuring merchandise subject to antidumping or
countervailing duty orders, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
By Mr. DeMINT (for himself, Mr. Coburn, Mr. Graham,
Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. Johnson of Wisconsin, Mr. Lee,
Mr. McCain, and Mr. Risch):
S. 3612. A bill to prohibit the payment of surcharges for
commemorative coin programs to private organizations or
entities, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
By Mr. BEGICH (for himself and Ms. Murkowski):
S. 3613. A bill to promote research, monitoring, and
observation of the Arctic and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
By Mr. REED (for himself and Mr. Johanns):
S. 3614. A bill to establish a pilot program to authorize
the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to make grants
to nonprofit organizations to rehabilitate and modify homes
of disabled and low--income veterans; to the Committee on
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
By Mr. BEGICH:
S. 3615. A bill to enhance national seafood marketing
efforts through the creation of a National Seafood Marketing
and Development Fund, Regional Seafood Marketing Boards and a
National Coordinating Committee and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
By Ms. LANDRIEU (for herself, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Blunt,
and Mrs. Hutchison):
S. 3616. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
to make permanent the expansion of tax benefits for adoption
enacted in 2001 and to permanently reinstate the expansion of
tax benefits for adoption enacted in 2010, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. CARDIN (for himself, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Harkin,
Mr. Brown of Ohio, Mr. Begich, Mr. Durbin, and Mr.
Akaka):
S. 3617. A bill to ensure sufficient sizing of the civilian
and contract services workforces of the Department of
Defense; to the Committee on Armed Services.
By Mrs. SHAHEEN (for herself, Ms. Collins, and Mr.
Whitehouse):
S. 3618. A bill to amend title 28, United States Code, to
prohibit the exclusion of individuals from service on a
Federal jury on account of sexual orientation or gender
identity; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. MANCHIN:
S. 3619. A bill to amend the Older Americans Act of 1965 to
provide for outreach, and coordination of services, to
veterans; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions.
By Mr. WICKER:
S. 3620. A bill to amend the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 to clarify provisions relating to the regulation of
municipal advisors, and for other purposes; to the Committee
on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
By Mr. MANCHIN:
S. 3621. A bill to amend the Older Americans Act of 1965 to
provide for a Seniors' Financial Bill of Rights, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions.
By Mr. SCHUMER (for himself, Mr. Merkley, and Mr.
Blumenthal):
S. 3622. A bill to prohibit prescription drug price-gouging
during states of market shortage; to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
By Mr. REED (for himself and Mr. Portman):
S. 3623. A bill to extend the authorizations of
appropriations for certain national heritage areas, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources.
By Ms. SNOWE (for herself, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Inhofe, Mr.
Rubio, Mr. Moran, Mr. Brown of Massachusetts, Mr.
Rockefeller, Mr. Begich, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Isakson,
and Mr. Brown of Ohio):
S. 3624. A bill to amend section 31311 of title 49, United
States Code, to permit States to issue commercial driver's
licenses to members of the Armed Forces whose duty station is
located in the State; considered and passed.
By Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself and Ms. Collins):
S. 3625. A bill to change the effective date for the
internet publication of certain information to prevent harm
to the national security or endangering the military officers
and civilian employees to whom the publication requirement
applies, and for other purposes; considered and passed.
____________________
SUBMISSION OF CONCURRENT AND SENATE RESOLUTIONS
The following concurrent resolutions and Senate resolutions were
read, and referred (or acted upon), as indicated:
By Mr. LUGAR (for himself and Mr. Kerry):
S. Res. 575. A resolution commending the 4 American public
servants who died in Benghazi, Libya, United States
Ambassador to Libya John Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith,
Tyrone Woods, and Glen Doherty, for their tireless efforts on
behalf of the American people, and condemning the violent
attack on the United States consulate in Benghazi; to the
Committee on Foreign Relations.
By Mr. COCHRAN (for himself, Mr. Wicker, Ms. Collins,
and Ms. Snowe):
S. Res. 576. A resolution celebrating the 50th anniversary
of the signing of Public Law 87--788, an Act commonly known
as the McIntire--Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act; considered
and agreed to.
By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself, Mr. Kerry, Mrs. Murray, Mr.
Tester, and Ms. Murkowski):
S. Res. 577. A resolution honoring the First Special
Service Force, in recognition of its superior service during
World War II; considered and agreed to.
By Ms. MURKOWSKI (for herself, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr.
Moran, and Mr. Begich):
S. Res. 578. A resolution supporting the goals and ideals
of Red Ribbon Week, 2012; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. GRAHAM (for himself, Mrs. Hagan, Mr. Alexander,
Mr. Blunt, Mr. Boozman, Mr. Brown of Ohio, Mr. Burr,
Mr. Casey, Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Coburn, Mr. Cochran,
Mr. Coons, Mr. Corker, Mr. Cornyn, Mrs. Hutchison,
Mr. Isakson, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Manchin, Mrs.
McCaskill, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr.
Portman, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Warner, Mr.
Webb, Mr. Wicker, Mr. Levin, and Mr. Cardin):
S. Res. 579. A resolution designating the week of September
24 through September 28, 2012, as ``National Historically
Black Colleges and Universities Week''; considered and agreed
to.
By Mr. COONS (for himself, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Cardin,
Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Brown of Massachusetts, Mr. Udall
of New Mexico, Ms. Snowe, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Alexander,
Mr. Reed, Mr. Cochran, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Kerry,
Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Leahy, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Bennet, Mr.
Blumenthal, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Wyden, Mr.
Whitehouse, Mr. Udall of Colorado, Mr. Johnson of
South Dakota, Mr. Bingaman, and Ms. Collins):
S. Res. 580. A resolution designating the week beginning on
October 14, 2012, as ``National Wildlife Refuge Week'';
considered and agreed to.
By Mr. HOEVEN (for himself, Mr. Conrad, Mr. Roberts,
Mr. Boozman, and Mr. Blunt):
S. Res. 581. A resolution designating October 26, 2012, as
``Day of the Deployed''; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. MENENDEZ (for himself, Mr. Reid, Mr. Cornyn, Ms.
Mikulski, Mr. Begich, Mr. Heller, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr.
Udall of New Mexico, Mrs. Hagan, Mr. Nelson of
Florida, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Crapo, Mr.
Merkley, Mr. Bennet, Mr. Udall of Colorado, Mr.
Akaka, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Rubio, Mrs.
Boxer, Mr. Casey, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr.
Reed, Mr. Bingaman, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Wyden, Mr.
Warner, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Brown of Ohio, and Mrs.
Feinstein):
S. Res. 582. A resolution recognizing Hispanic Heritage
Month and celebrating the
[[Page 14804]]
heritage and culture of Latinos in the United States and the
immense contributions of Latinos to the United States;
considered and agreed to.
By Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself, Ms. Collins, and Ms.
Landrieu):
S. Res. 583. A resolution designating September 2012 as
``National Preparedness Month''; considered and agreed to.
By Mrs. MURRAY (for herself, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Begich,
Mr. Kerry, Mr. Brown of Massachusetts, Mr. Wicker,
Mr. Bennet, and Mr. Cochran):
S. Res. 584. A resolution designating October 4, 2012, as
``Jumpstart's Read for the Record Day''; considered and
agreed to.
By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. Udall of New
Mexico):
S. Res. 585. A resolution recognizing the extraordinary
history and heritage of the State of New Mexico, and honoring
and commending the State of New Mexico and its people on its
centennial anniversary; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. CARDIN (for himself, Mr. Burr, and Mr.
Menendez):
S. Res. 586. A resolution expressing support for the goals
and ideals of National Infant Mortality Awareness Month,
2012; considered and agreed to.
By Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Ms. Collins, and Mr.
Whitehouse):
S. Res. 587. A resolution supporting ``Lights on
Afterschool'', a national celebration of afterschool
programs; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. LUGAR (for himself, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Reid, Mr.
McConnell, Mr. Akaka, Mr. Alexander, Ms. Ayotte, Mr.
Barrasso, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Begich, Mr. Bennet, Mr.
Bingaman, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Blunt, Mr. Boozman,
Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Brown of Massachusetts, Mr. Brown of
Ohio, Mr. Burr, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Carper,
Mr. Casey, Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Coats, Mr. Coburn, Mr.
Cochran, Ms. Collins, Mr. Conrad, Mr. Coons, Mr.
Corker, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Crapo, Mr. DeMint, Mr.
Durbin, Mr. Enzi, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Franken, Mrs.
Gillibrand, Mr. Graham, Mr. Grassley, Mrs. Hagan, Mr.
Harkin, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Heller, Mr. Hoeven, Mrs.
Hutchison, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Isakson, Mr.
Johanns, Mr. Johnson of Wisconsin, Mr. Johnson of
South Dakota, Mr. Kirk, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Kohl, Mr.
Kyl, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Leahy, Mr.
Lee, Mr. Levin, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Manchin, Mr.
McCain, Mrs. McCaskill, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Merkley,
Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Moran, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Murray,
Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr.
Paul, Mr. Portman, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Reed, Mr. Risch,
Mr. Roberts, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Rubio, Mr. Sanders,
Mr. Schumer, Mr. Sessions, Mrs. Shaheen, Mr. Shelby,
Ms. Snowe, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Tester, Mr. Thune, Mr.
Toomey, Mr. Udall of Colorado, Mr. Udall of New
Mexico, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Warner, Mr. Webb, Mr.
Whitehouse, Mr. Wicker, and Mr. Wyden):
S. Res. 588. A resolution commending the 4 American public
servants who died in Benghazi, Libya, United States
Ambassador to Libya John Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith,
Tyrone Woods, and Glen Doherty, for their tireless efforts on
behalf of the American people, and condemning the violent
attack on the United States consulate in Benghazi; considered
and agreed to.
By Ms. SNOWE (for herself, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Risch, Mr.
Kerry, Mr. Alexander, Mr. Lieberman, Mrs. Hutchison,
Mrs. Hagan, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Enzi,
Mr. Whitehouse, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Murray, Mr.
Hoeven, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Coons, Mr. Kirk,
Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Rubio, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Brown
of Massachusetts, Mr. Udall of New Mexico, Ms.
Ayotte, Mr. Begich, Mr. Portman, Mr. Manchin, Mr.
Boozman, Mr. Merkley, Mr. Menendez, Ms. Cantwell, Mr.
Durbin, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Levin, Mr. Warner, Mrs.
Feinstein, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Tester, Mrs. Shaheen, Ms.
Klobuchar, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Thune, Mr. Chambliss,
Mrs. Boxer, and Mr. Bennet):
S. Res. 589. A resolution designating November 24, 2012, as
``Small Business Saturday'' and supporting efforts to
increase awareness of the value of locally owned small
businesses; considered and agreed to.
____________________
ADDITIONAL COSPONSORS
S. 687
At the request of Mr. Conrad, the name of the Senator from Ohio (Mr.
Brown) was added as a cosponsor of S. 687, a bill to amend the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 15-year recovery period
for qualified leasehold improvement property, qualified restaurant
property, and qualified retail improvement property.
S. 738
At the request of Mr. Whitehouse, his name was added as a cosponsor
of S. 738, a bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to
provide for Medicare coverage of comprehensive Alzheimer's disease and
related dementia diagnosis and services in order to improve care and
outcomes for Americans living with Alzheimer's disease and related
dementias by improving detection, diagnosis, and care planning.
S. 891
At the request of Mr. Grassley, the name of the Senator from New York
(Mr. Schumer) was added as a cosponsor of S. 891, a bill to amend title
XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for the recognition of
attending physician assistants as attending physicians to serve hospice
patients.
S. 1281
At the request of Mr. Lautenberg, the name of the Senator from
Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1281, a bill
to amend title 49, United States Code, to prohibit the transportation
of horses in interstate transportation in a motor vehicle containing
two or more levels stacked on top of one another.
S. 1301
At the request of Mr. Leahy, the name of the Senator from Alaska (Ms.
Murkowski) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1301, a bill to authorize
appropriations for fiscal years 2012 through 2015 for the Trafficking
Victims Protection Act of 2000, to enhance measures to combat
trafficking in persons, and for other purposes.
S. 1366
At the request of Ms. Cantwell, the name of the Senator from
Minnesota (Ms. Klobuchar) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1366, a bill
to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to broaden the special rules
for certain governmental plans under section 105(j) to include plans
established by political subdivisions.
S. 1872
At the request of Mr. Casey, the names of the Senator from
Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr.
Menendez) were added as cosponsors of S. 1872, a bill to amend the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the tax treatment of ABLE
accounts established under State programs for the care of family
members with disabilities, and for other purposes.
S. 1910
At the request of Mr. Lieberman, the name of the Senator from New
York (Mr. Schumer) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1910, a bill to
provide benefits to domestic partners of Federal employees.
S. 1993
At the request of Mr. Nelson of Florida, the name of the Senator from
Ohio (Mr. Brown) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1993, a bill to
posthumously award a Congressional Gold Medal to Lena Horne in
recognition of her achievements and contributions to American culture
and the civil rights movement.
S. 2013
At the request of Mr. Brown of Massachusetts, his name was added as a
cosponsor of S. 2013, a bill to amend title 32, United States Code, the
body of laws of the United States dealing with the National Guard, to
recognize the City of Salem, Massachusetts, as the Birthplace of the
National Guard of the United States.
S. 2046
At the request of Ms. Mikulski, the name of the Senator from
Minnesota (Mr. Franken) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2046, a bill to
amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to modify the requirements of
the visa waiver program and for other purposes.
S. 2123
At the request of Mr. Menendez, the name of the Senator from New York
(Mr. Schumer) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2123, a bill to amend
title V of the Social Security Act to extend funding for family-to-
family health information centers to help families of children with
disabilities or special health care needs make informed choices about
health care for their children.
S. 2160
At the request of Mr. Moran, the name of the Senator from Wyoming
[[Page 14805]]
(Mr. Enzi) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2160, a bill to improve the
examination of depository institutions, and for other purposes.
S. 2620
At the request of Mr. Schumer, the names of the Senator from North
Carolina (Mrs. Hagan), the Senator from Missouri (Mrs. McCaskill) and
the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Blunt) were added as cosponsors of S.
2620, a bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide
for an extension of the Medicare-dependent hospital (MDH) program and
the increased payments under the Medicare low-volume hospital program.
S. 3231
At the request of Mr. Kerry, the name of the Senator from
Massachusetts (Mr. Brown) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3231, a bill
to provide for the issuance and sale of a semipostal by the United
States Postal Service to support effective programs targeted at
improving permanency outcomes for youth in foster care.
S. 3250
At the request of Mrs. McCaskill, her name was added as a cosponsor
of S. 3250, a bill to amend the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of
2000 to provide for Debbie Smith grants for auditing sexual assault
evidence backlogs and to establish a Sexual Assault Forensic Evidence
Registry, and for other purposes.
S. 3394
At the request of Mr. Johnson of South Dakota, the names of the
Senator from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr.
Inouye) and the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. Blumenthal) were added as
cosponsors of S. 3394, a bill to address fee disclosure requirements
under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, to amend the Federal Deposit
Insurance Act with respect to information provided to the Bureau of
Consumer Financial Protection, and for other purposes.
S. 3407
At the request of Mr. Wyden, the name of the Senator from New York
(Mr. Schumer) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3407, a bill to amend the
Public Health Service Act to increase the number of permanent faculty
in palliative care at accredited allopathic and osteopathic medical
schools, nursing schools, and other programs, to promote education in
palliative care and hospice, and to support the development of faculty
careers in academic palliative medicine.
S. 3461
At the request of Mr. Brown of Ohio, the name of the Senator from
Maine (Ms. Collins) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3461, a bill to
amend title IV of the Public Health Service Act to provide for a
National Pediatric Research Network, including with respect to
pediatric rare diseases or conditions.
S. 3498
At the request of Mr. Casey, the name of the Senator from Washington
(Ms. Cantwell) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3498, a bill to provide
humanitarian assistance and support a democratic transition in Syria,
and for other purposes.
S. 3522
At the request of Mr. Menendez, the name of the Senator from Rhode
Island (Mr. Whitehouse) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3522, a bill to
provide for the expansion of affordable refinancing of mortgages held
by the Federal National Mortgage Association and the Federal Home Loan
Mortgage Corporation.
S. 3525
At the request of Mr. Tester, the names of the Senator from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Casey) and the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Udall)
were added as cosponsors of S. 3525, a bill to protect and enhance
opportunities for recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting, and for
other purposes.
S. 3526
At the request of Mr. Wicker, the name of the Senator from Texas
(Mrs. Hutchison) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3526, a bill to amend
title 10, United States Code, to protect the rights of conscience of
members of the Armed Forces and chaplains of members of the Armed
Forces, and for other purposes.
S. 3541
At the request of Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, the names of the Senator
from South Dakota (Mr. Johnson), the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Roberts),
the Senator from Montana (Mr. Tester) and the Senator from Kansas (Mr.
Moran) were added as cosponsors of S. 3541, a bill to amend section 520
of the Housing Act of 1949 to revise the census data and population
requirements for areas to be considered as rural areas for purposes of
such Act.
S. 3551
At the request of Mr. DeMint, the name of the Senator from Iowa (Mr.
Grassley) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3551, a bill to require
investigations into and a report on the September 11-13, 2012, attacks
on the United States missions in Libya, Egypt, and Yemen, and for other
purposes.
S. 3555
At the request of Mr. Burr, the names of the Senator from
Massachusetts (Mr. Brown) and the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe)
were added as cosponsors of S. 3555, a bill to amend title 38, United
States Code, to require Federal agencies to hire veterans, to require
States to recognize the military experience of veterans when issuing
licenses and credentials to veterans, and for other purposes.
S. 3562
At the request of Mr. Sanders, the name of the Senator from New York
(Mr. Schumer) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3562, a bill to
reauthorize and improve the Older Americans Act of 1965, and for other
purposes.
S. 3565
At the request of Mr. Casey, the name of the Senator from Washington
(Mrs. Murray) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3565, a bill to eliminate
discrimination and promote women's health and economic security by
ensuring reasonable workplace accommodations for workers whose ability
to perform the functions of a job are limited by pregnancy, childbirth,
or a related medical condition.
S. 3574
At the request of Mr. Blunt, the name of the Senator from Tennessee
(Mr. Alexander) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3574, a bill to amend
section 403 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to improve and
clarify certain disclosure requirements for restaurants, similar retail
food establishments, and vending machines.
S. 3588
At the request of Mr. Levin, the name of the Senator from Minnesota
(Ms. Klobuchar) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3588, a bill to amend
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to protect and restore the
Great Lakes.
S. 3601
At the request of Mr. Vitter, the name of the Senator from Louisiana
(Ms. Landrieu) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3601, a bill to provide
tax relief with respect to the Hurricane Isaac disaster area.
S. 3605
At the request of Mr. Crapo, the name of the Senator from Oklahoma
(Mr. Inhofe) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3605, a bill to clarify
Congressional intent regarding the regulation of the use of pesticides
in or near navigable waters, and for other purposes.
S.J. RES. 41
At the request of Mr. Graham, the names of the Senator from New
Hampshire (Mrs. Shaheen) and the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Corker)
were added as cosponsors of S.J. Res. 41, a joint resolution expressing
the sense of Congress regarding the nuclear program of the Government
of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
At the request of Mr. Kerry, his name was added as a cosponsor of
S.J. Res. 41, supra.
S.J. RES. 45
At the request of Mrs. Hutchison, the name of the Senator from Kansas
(Mr. Moran) was added as a cosponsor of S.J. Res. 45, a joint
resolution amending title 36, United States Code, to designate June 19
as ``Juneteenth Independence Day''.
S. CON. RES. 50
At the request of Mr. McConnell, his name was added as a cosponsor of
S. Con. Res. 50, a concurrent resolution expressing the sense of
Congress regarding actions to preserve and advance the multistakeholder
governance
[[Page 14806]]
model under which the Internet has thrived.
S. RES. 466
At the request of Mr. Durbin, the names of the Senator from
California (Mrs. Boxer) and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez)
were added as cosponsors of S. Res. 466, a resolution calling for the
release from prison of former Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia
Tymoshenko.
S. RES. 543
At the request of Mrs. Boxer, the name of the Senator from Washington
(Ms. Cantwell) was added as a cosponsor of S. Res. 543, a resolution to
express the sense of the Senate on international parental child
abduction.
S. RES. 572
At the request of Mr. Cardin, the name of the Senator from Louisiana
(Ms. Landrieu) was added as a cosponsor of S. Res. 572, a resolution
designating September 2012 as the ``National Month of Voter
Registration''.
S. RES. 573
At the request of Mr. Menendez, the name of the Senator from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Casey) was added as a cosponsor of S. Res. 573, a
resolution designating the third week of January 2013, as ``Teen Cancer
Awareness Week''.
S. RES. 574
At the request of Mrs. Gillibrand, the names of the Senator from
Missouri (Mrs. McCaskill), the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman) and
the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski) were added as cosponsors of S.
Res. 574, a resolution calling on the United Nations to take concerted
actions against leaders in Iran for their statements calling for the
destruction of another United Nations Member State, Israel.
AMENDMENT NO. 2862
At the request of Mr. Portman, his name was added as a cosponsor of
amendment No. 2862 proposed to H.R. 4850, a bill to allow for
innovations and alternative technologies that meet or exceed desired
energy efficiency goals.
____________________
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. WYDEN:
S. 3609. A bill to adopt fair standards and procedures by which
determinations of Copyright Royalty Judges are made with respect to
webcasting, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce the Internet
Radio Fairness Act. The goal of this proposal is to help one of
America's oldest, most dynamic industries grow into the 21st Century.
Thanks to new digital music technologies, the ways in which consumers
can listen and buy music has been revolutionized.
Internet technology is even changing the music industry itself. The
Net is freeing artists from the shackles of major record label
middlemen by enabling artists to broadcast and sell directly to
consumers. In fact, right now bands on independent labels are
dominating the music charts. Artists like Amanda Palmer are leaving the
record labels behind by instead reaching for success by embracing
Internet platforms like Kickstarter to get her music heard.
I am a firm believer that further unleashing Internet technology will
expand the music marketplace to better reward Internet innovation and
musical artists.
The Internet has changed our lives. It is reshaping how people
communicate, collaborate and engage in commerce. The Internet empowers
the powerless, it gives everyone a voice, and it advances human rights
and the cause of freedom around the world. The growth and evolution of
the Internet comes from good, innovative ideas and from policy
environments that protect the Net from unfair and discriminatory taxes,
regulation, and legal liability.
Unfortunately, one area of the Internet ecosystem that is stifled is
the digital services of broadcast music. In 1998 Federal laws were
enacted to specifically thwart the development of Internet platforms
that are commercially viable as broadcasters of digital music. Since
then, concerns about online copyright infringement intensified, record
sales plummeted, and many commercially successful musicians are
struggling. Consumers and rightsholders are increasingly seeking
innovative, new models that can better promote music and compensate
artists. The Internet Radio Fairness Act intends to answer some of
these calls.
Under current law royalty rates prescribed for Internet Radio are
established based on what a panel of special copyright judges determine
to be the market rate for musical licenses. But there is no functioning
market for these licenses and these judges are left with very little
information to make reasonable conclusions. That is why Congress
routinely intervenes to correct the work of these judges. The current
method these judges use to establish royalty rates for Internet Radio
has led to webcasters paying five times the amount of royalties--as a
percentage of revenue--as other digital music broadcasters, like
satellite and cable. The long-established method that copyright judges
use to determine royalty rates for satellite and cable providers
enables a broader set of factors to be considered.
The Internet Radio Fairness Act would end the discrimination against
the Internet and Internet Radio in the digital marketplace. It would
treat Internet Radio, for purposes of establishing royalty rates, in
the same way that satellite and cable radio are treated. It would
enable the copyright judges the ability to consider factors they have
long been familiar with to establish royalty rates for Internet Radio
in the same way they have long done for other broadcasters.
Doing this can enable new Internet Radio startups to succeed and
create jobs, foster competition, and the expansion of the music
marketplace in part so that artists can obtain broader exposure and
more compensation.
I hope to work with you, with stakeholders, and with my Senate
colleagues to discuss this legislation and additional ideas that are
necessary to unleash the power of the Internet to foster a broader,
more dynamic marketplace for digital music.
______
By Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. Merkley):
S. 3610. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to deny
the inclusion of any antidumping or countervailing duties in the
determination of the basis of any energy tax credit property; to the
Committee on Finance.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I rise today to sponsor two important
pieces of legislation. My colleagues in this body are all aware of the
challenges that American manufacturers struggle with in the global
market. A particular challenge faces producers of renewable energy
technology. Not only do these producers compete against decades of
government subsidies provided to the oil and gas industry, these
manufacturers are increasingly competing against China's unfair trade
practices.
As my colleagues know, the record is clear that China is cheating.
China is illegally subsidizing their producers of solar and wind energy
technology. China is enabling solar panels and wind energy property to
be sold in the U.S. at below market value due to the government
subsidies they are provided by China.
The Department of Commerce is investigating these practices. The
Department has already found specific practices employed by China that
are against international trade rules. As a result the government will
soon assign antidumping and countervailing duties on solar panels, for
example, as they have been determined by the Department of Commerce to
be unfairly traded.
The first measure that I sponsored today is very simple. The
Investment Tax Credit Integrity Act, S. 3610, would simply say for
purposes of the tax credit that American buyers of solar panels and
other qualifying renewable energy can claim, taxpayers cannot use the
tax credit to offset the antidumping and countervailing duties that are
assigned to this merchandise. As you know, the rate of these duties is
designed to remedy the unfair trade that was exposed; it would be
counterproductive to allow the Investment Tax Credit to undermine the
purpose of these duties.
[[Page 14807]]
The second measure that I filed today, S. 3611, is equally important.
The Buy Fairly Traded Goods Act says that federal agencies should not,
with taxpayer money, buy merchandise, like Chinese subsidized solar
panels, that are subject to U.S. duties assigned to remedy the unfair
trade practices. Taxpayer money should not be used to buy property that
the Department of Commerce has determined is unfairly traded and which
is shown to harm U.S. manufacturers. This measure is written so there
may be limited exceptions in the event of a national security issue,
and it is crafted to comply with America's international trade
obligations. Importantly, this bill also instructs federal agencies to
use their contracting power to ensure that developers who are producing
renewable energy for use by the federal government do not buy property
for that purpose that is subject to trade remedies.
I am pleased that Senator Merkley has joined me in sponsoring these
proposals. Mr. Merkley has a strong record for standing up for American
businesses and the workers who are struggling during these difficult
times due to the unscrupulous trade practices employed by the People's
Republic of China.
______
By Mr. REED (for himself and Mr. Johanns):
S. 3614. A bill to establish a pilot program to authorize the
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to make grants to nonprofit
organizations to rehabilitate and modify homes of disabled and low-
income veterans; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban
Affairs.
Mr. REED. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Housing
Assistance for Veterans Act along with my colleague Senator Johanns.
Our veterans have made many personal sacrifices in service to our
nation. We must honor our commitment to provide them with the care they
have earned and deserved, in both word and deed. One such way is to
ensure that they have access to adequate housing.
According to Rebuilding Together, more than a quarter of all
veterans, about six million, are estimated to be disabled. In my home
State of Rhode Island, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, there are
more than 19,000 veterans with disabilities, each of whom face their
own unique challenges in terms of their housing needs.
The Department of Veterans Affairs, VA, has programs that assist
these veterans in adapting and improving their homes. Unfortunately,
these programs do not extend assistance to all veterans with
disabilities. It is clear we must do more, and with this legislation,
we are seeking to serve all veterans with disabilities, regardless of
the severity of the disability and whether the disability is service-
connected. The Housing Assistance for Veterans Act will give them the
opportunity to renovate and modify their existing homes by installing
wheelchair ramps, widening doors, re-equipping rooms, and making
necessary additions and adjustments to existing structures, all so that
these homes are both more suitable and safer for our veterans.
Our legislation encourages key stakeholders, such as the Department
of Housing and Urban Development, the VA, housing non-profits, and
veterans service organizations, to work together to serve our veterans.
In order to extend the reach of this Federal funding, grant recipients
would be expected to either match Federal funding or make in-kind
contributions, through encouraging volunteers to help make repairs or
engaging businesses to donate needed supplies.
This bill is supported by Rebuilding Together, VetsFirst, Vietnam
Veterans of America, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Paralyzed Veterans of
America, and Habitat for Humanity. I thank Senator Johanns for working
with me on this important bill, and I look forward to working with him
and the rest of our colleagues to pass this legislation.
____________________
SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS
______
SENATE RESOLUTION 575--COMMENDING THE 4 AMERICAN PUBLIC SERVANTS WHO
DIED IN BENGHAZI, LIBYA, UNITED STATES AMBASSADOR TO LIBYA JOHN
CHRISTOPHER STEVENS, SEAN SMITH, TYRONE WOODS, AND GLEN DOHERTY, FOR
THEIR TIRELESS EFFORTS ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, AND CONDEMNING
THE VIOLENT ATTACK ON THE UNITED STATES CONSULATE IN BENGHAZI
Mr. LUGAR (for himself and Mr. Kerry) submitted the following
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:
S. Res. 575
Whereas on September 11, 2012, 4 American public servants,
United States Ambassador to Libya John Christopher Stevens,
Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods, and Glen Doherty, were killed in a
reprehensible and vicious attack on the United States
consulate in Benghazi, Libya;
Whereas Ambassador Stevens--
(1) was a courageous and exemplary representative of the
United States;
(2) had spent 21 years in the Foreign Service;
(3) was deeply passionate about representing the United
States through his diplomatic service; and
(4) was an ardent friend of the Libyan people;
Whereas Ambassador Stevens served as Special Envoy to the
Libyan Transitional National Council in Benghazi during the
2011 Libyan revolution;
Whereas Ambassador Stevens was a dear friend of the Senate,
having served on the staff of the Committee on Foreign
Relations of the Senate in 2006 and 2007 as a distinguished
Pearson Fellow;
Whereas Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean
Smith--
(1) was a husband and a father of 2 children;
(2) joined the Department of State 10 years ago after
serving in the United States Air Force; and
(3) had served in the Foreign Service, before arriving in
Benghazi, in Baghdad, Pretoria, Montreal, and The Hague;
Whereas Tyrone Woods was a husband and a father of three
children, who, after two decades of service as a Navy SEAL
that included tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, began working
with the Department of State to protect United States
diplomatic personnel;
Whereas Glen Doherty, after 12 years of service as a Navy
SEAL that included tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, began
working with the Department of State to protect United States
diplomatic personnel;
Whereas the 4 Americans who perished in the Benghazi attack
made great sacrifices and showed bravery in taking on a
difficult post in Libya;
Whereas the violence in Benghazi coincided with an attack
on the United States Embassy in Cairo, Egypt, which was also
swarmed by an angry mob of protesters on September 11, 2012;
Whereas on a daily basis, United States diplomats, military
personnel, and other public servants risk their lives to
serve the American people; and
Whereas throughout this Nation's history, thousands of
Americans have sacrificed their lives for the ideals of
freedom, democracy, and partnership with nations and people
around the globe.
Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) recognizes the dedicated service and deep commitment of
Ambassador John Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone
Woods, and Glen Doherty in assisting the Libyan people as
they navigate the complex currents of democratic transition
marked in this case by profound instability;
(2) praises Ambassador Stevens, who represented the highest
tradition of American public service, for his extraordinary
record of dedication to the United States' interests in some
of the most difficult and dangerous posts around the globe;
(3) sends its deepest condolences to the families of those
American public servants killed in Benghazi;
(4) commends the bravery of Foreign Service Officers,
United States Armed Forces, and public servants serving in
harm's way around the globe and recognizes the deep
sacrifices made by their families; and
(5) condemns, in the strongest possible terms, the
despicable attacks on American diplomats and public servants
in Benghazi and calls for the perpetrators of such attacks to
be brought to justice.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 576--CELEBRATING THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE SIGNING
OF PUBLIC LAW 87-788, AN ACT COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE McINTIRE-STENNIS
COOPERATIVE FORESTRY ACT
Mr. COCHRAN (for himself, Mr. Wicker, Ms. Collins, and Ms. Snowe)
submitted the following resolution; which was:
[[Page 14808]]
S. Res. 576
Whereas October 10, 2012, marks the 50th anniversary of the
signing of Public Law 87-788 (commonly known as the
``McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act'') (16 U.S.C.
582a et seq.), which authorized the Secretary of Agriculture
to encourage and assist States in conducting a program of
forestry research;
Whereas the McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act was
named for the 2 primary, bipartisan sponsors of the Act,
Representative Clifford G. McIntire of Maine and Senator John
C. Stennis of Mississippi, who recognized that research in
forestry is the ``driving force behind progress in developing
and utilizing the Nation's forests'';
Whereas the McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act
recognized that forestry research would be more effective
nationwide if efforts among State-supported institutions of
higher education were partnered and more closely coordinated
with forestry research activities in the Federal Government;
Whereas Congressman McIntire and Senator Stennis stated a
clear intent to address the important need of the United
States for increased numbers of highly trained forestry
scientists and other research professionals;
Whereas the McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act has
provided 5 decades of base funding to establish and
strengthen research and training capacity in forestry at
State-supported institutions of higher education;
Whereas funds provided by the Act to State-supported
institutions of higher education are highly leveraged with
non-Federal funds;
Whereas university-based forestry research has provided an
accumulated wealth of science-based knowledge, skills, and
technologies that have been critical for sustaining United
States forests for economic, ecological, and social benefits;
Whereas funds provided by the McIntire-Stennis Cooperative
Forestry Act for forestry research at State-supported
institutions of higher education have provided significant
graduate student support over the last 50 years, resulting in
8,500 master's degrees and 2,600 doctoral degrees;
Whereas the State-supported institutions of higher
education that receive funds under the McIntire-Stennis
Cooperative Forestry Act conduct forestry research in all 50
States and 4 territories of the United States, and
disseminate the results of those efforts locally, regionally,
nationally, and globally for the betterment of the
communities of the institutions, the United States, and the
world; and
Whereas many State-supported institutions of higher
education are celebrating and commemorating the 50th
anniversary of the signing of the McIntire-Stennis
Cooperative Forestry Act: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) celebrates the 50th anniversary of the signing of
Public Law 87-788 (commonly known as the ``McIntire-Stennis
Cooperative Forestry Act'') (16 U.S.C. 582a et seq.) by
President John F. Kennedy;
(2) encourages the people of the United States to observe
and celebrate the 50th anniversary of the signing of the
McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act with appropriate
ceremonies and activities;
(3) affirms the continuing importance and vitality of the
State-supported institutions of higher education conducting
forestry research and training supported by the McIntire-
Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act; and
(4) respectfully requests that the Secretary of the Senate
transmit to the National Association of University Forest
Resources Programs an enrolled copy of this resolution for
appropriate display.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 577--HONORING THE FIRST SPECIAL SERVICE FORCE, IN
RECOGNITION OF ITS SUPERIOR SERVICE DURING WORLD WAR II
Mr. BAUCUS (for himself, Mr. Kerry, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Tester, and Ms.
Murkowski) submitted the following resolution; which was:
S. Res. 577
Whereas the First Special Service Force (referred to in
this preamble as the ``Force''), a military unit composed of
volunteers from the United States and Canada, was activated
in July 1942 at Fort Harrison near Helena, Montana;
Whereas the Force was initially intended to target military
and industrial installations that were supporting the German
war effort, including important hydroelectric plants, which
would severely limit the production of strategic materials
used by the Axis powers;
Whereas, from July 1942 through June 1943, volunteers of
the Force trained in hazardous, arctic conditions in the
mountains of western Montana, and in the waterways of Camp
Bradford, Virginia;
Whereas the combat echelon of the Force totaled 1,800
soldiers, half from the United States and half from Canada;
Whereas the Force also contained a service battalion,
composed of 800 members from the United States, that provided
important support for the combat troops;
Whereas a special bond developed between the Canadian and
United States soldiers, who were not segregated by country,
although the commander of the Force was a United States
colonel;
Whereas the Force was the only unit formed during World War
II that consisted of troops from Canada and the United
States;
Whereas, in October 1943, the Force went to Italy, where it
fought in battles south of Cassino, including Monte La
Difensa and Monte Majo, two mountain peaks that were a
critical anchor of the German defense line;
Whereas, during the night of December 3, 1943, the Force
ascended to the top of the precipitous face of Monte La
Difensa, where the Force suffered heavy casualties and
overcame fierce resistance to overtake the German line;
Whereas, after the battle for La Difensa, the Force
continued to fight tough battles at high altitudes, in rugged
terrain, and in severe weather;
Whereas, after battles on the strongly defended Italian
peaks of Sammucro, Vischiataro, and Remetanea, the size of
the Force had been reduced from 1,800 soldiers to fewer than
500;
Whereas, for 4 months in 1944, the Force engaged in raids
and aggressive patrols at the Anzio Beachhead;
Whereas, on June 4, 1944, members of the Force were among
the first Allied troops to liberate Rome;
Whereas, after liberating Rome, the Force moved to southern
Italy and prepared to assist in the liberation of France;
Whereas, during the early morning of August 15, 1944,
members of the Force made silent landings on Les Iles
D'Hyeres, small islands in the Mediterranean Sea along the
southern coast of France;
Whereas the Force faced a sustained and withering assault
from the German garrisons as the Force progressed from the
islands to the Franco-Italian border;
Whereas, after the Allied forces secured the Franco-Italian
border, the United States Army ordered the disbandment of the
Force on December 5, 1944, in Nice, France;
Whereas, during 251 days of combat, the Force suffered
2,314 casualties, or 134 percent of its authorized strength,
captured thousands of prisoners, won 5 United States campaign
stars and 8 Canadian battle honors, and never failed a
mission;
Whereas the United States is forever indebted to the acts
of bravery and selflessness of the troops of the Force, who
risked their lives for the cause of freedom;
Whereas the efforts of the Force along the seas and skies
of Europe were critical in repelling the advance of Nazi
Germany and liberating numerous communities in France and
Italy;
Whereas the bond between the members of the Force from the
United States and those from Canada has endured over the
decades, as the members meet every year for a reunion,
alternating between the United States and Canada; and
Whereas the traditions and honors exhibited by the Force
are carried on by 2 outstanding active units of 2 great
democracies, the Special Forces of the United States and the
Canadian Special Operations Regiment: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate recognizes and honors the
superior service of the First Special Service Force during
World War II.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 578--SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF RED RIBBON
WEEK, 2012
Ms. MURKOWSKI (for herself, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Moran, and Mr.
Begich) submitted the following resolution; which was:
S. Res. 578
Whereas the Red Ribbon Campaign was established to
commemorate the service of Enrique ``Kiki'' Camarena, a
special agent of the Drug Enforcement Administration for 11
years who was murdered in the line of duty in 1985 while
engaged in the battle against illicit drugs;
Whereas the Red Ribbon Campaign was established by the
National Family Partnership to preserve the memory of Special
Agent Camarena and further the cause for which he gave his
life;
Whereas the Red Ribbon Campaign has been nationally
recognized since 1988 and is now the oldest and largest drug
prevention program in the United States, reaching millions of
young people each year during Red Ribbon Week;
Whereas the Drug Enforcement Administration, established in
1973, aggressively targets organizations involved in the
growing, manufacturing, and distribution of controlled
substances and has been a steadfast partner in commemorating
Red Ribbon Week;
Whereas the Governors and attorneys general of the States,
the National Family Partnership, Parent Teacher Associations,
Boys and Girls Clubs of America, PRIDE Youth Programs, Young
Marines, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and hundreds of
other
[[Page 14809]]
organizations throughout the United States annually celebrate
Red Ribbon Week during the period of October 23 through
October 31;
Whereas the objective of Red Ribbon Week is to promote the
creation of drug-free communities through drug prevention
efforts, education, parental involvement, and community-wide
support;
Whereas drug abuse is one of the major challenges that the
United States faces in securing a safe and healthy future for
families in the United States;
Whereas drug abuse and alcohol abuse contribute to domestic
violence and sexual assault and place the lives of children
at risk;
Whereas emerging drug threats and growing epidemics demand
attention, with a particular focus on prescription
medications, the second most abused drug by young people in
the United States, and synthetic drugs;
Whereas, since the majority of teenagers abusing
prescription medications get the medications from family,
friends, and home medicine cabinets, the Drug Enforcement
Administration will host a National Take Back Day on
September 29, 2012, for the public to safely dispose of
unused or expired prescription medications that can lead to
accidental poisoning, overdose, and abuse;
Whereas synthetic marijuana, also known as ``K2'' or
``Spice'', has become especially popular, particularly among
teenagers and young adults, and in 2011 poison centers across
the United States responded to about 6,960 calls related to
synthetic marijuana, up from approximately 2,900 calls in
2010;
Whereas Congress recently enacted the Food and Drug
Administration Safety and Innovation Act (Public Law 112-144;
126 Stat. 993), which adds 26 synthetic drugs to the
Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), including
the drugs commonly found in products marketed as K2, Spice,
and bath salts; and
Whereas parents, young people, schools, businesses, law
enforcement agencies, religious institutions, service
organizations, senior citizens, medical and military
personnel, sports teams, and individuals throughout the
United States will demonstrate their commitment to healthy,
productive, and drug-free lifestyles by wearing and
displaying red ribbons during the week-long celebration of
Red Ribbon Week: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) supports the goals and ideals of Red Ribbon Week, 2012;
(2) encourages children and teenagers to choose to live
drug-free lives; and
(3) encourages the people of the United States--
(A) to promote the creation of drug-free communities; and
(B) to participate in drug prevention activities to show
support for healthy, productive, and drug-free lifestyles.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 579--DESIGNATING THE WEEK OF SEPTEMBER 24 THROUGH
SEPTEMBER 28, 2012, AS ``NATIONAL HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND
UNIVERSITIES WEEK''
Mr. Graham (for himself, Mrs. Hagan, Mr. Alexander, Mr. Blunt, Mr.
Boozman, Mr. Brown of Ohio, Mr. Burr, Mr. Casey, Mr. Chambliss, Mr.
Coburn, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Coons, Mr. Corker, Mr. Cornyn, Mrs. Hutchison,
Mr. Isakson, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Manchin, Mrs. McCaskill, Ms. Mikulski,
Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr. Portman, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Sessions, Mr.
Warner, Mr. Webb, Mr. Wicker, Mr. Levin, and Mr. Cardin) submitted the
following resolution; which was:
S. Res. 579
Whereas there are 105 historically Black colleges and
universities in the United States;
Whereas historically Black colleges and universities
provide the quality education essential to full participation
in a complex, highly technological society;
Whereas historically Black colleges and universities have a
rich heritage and have played a prominent role in the history
of the United States;
Whereas historically Black colleges and universities allow
talented and diverse students, many of whom represent
underserved populations, to attain their full potential
through higher education; and
Whereas the achievements and goals of historically Black
colleges and universities are deserving of national
recognition: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates the week of September 24 through September
28, 2012, as ``National Historically Black Colleges and
Universities Week''; and
(2) calls on the people of the United States and interested
groups to observe the week with appropriate ceremonies,
activities, and programs to demonstrate support for
historically Black colleges and universities in the United
States.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 580--DESIGNATING THE WEEK BEGINNING ON OCTOBER 14,
2012, AS ``NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE WEEK''
Mr. COONS (for himself, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Lieberman, Mr.
Brown of Massachusetts, Mr. Udall of New Mexico, Ms. Snowe, Mrs.
Murray, Mr. Alexander, Mr. Reed, Mr. Cochran, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr.
Kerry, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Leahy, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Bennet, Mr. Blumenthal,
Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Udall of
Colorado, Mr. Johnson of South Dakota, Mr. Bingaman, and Ms. Collins)
submitted the following resolution; which was:
S. Res. 580
Whereas, in 1903, President Theodore Roosevelt established
the first national wildlife refuge on Florida's Pelican
Island;
Whereas, in 2012, the National Wildlife Refuge System,
administered by the Fish and Wildlife Service, is the premier
system of lands and waters to conserve wildlife in the world,
and has grown to more than 150,000,000 acres, 558 national
wildlife refuges, and 38 wetland management districts in
every State and territory of the United States;
Whereas national wildlife refuges are important
recreational and tourism destinations in communities across
the United States, and these protected lands offer a variety
of recreational opportunities, including 6 wildlife-dependent
uses that the National Wildlife Refuge System manages:
hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, photography,
environmental education, and interpretation;
Whereas more than 360 units of the National Wildlife Refuge
System have hunting programs and more than 300 units of the
National Wildlife Refuge System have fishing programs,
averaging more than 2,500,000 hunting visits and more than
7,000,000 fishing visits each year;
Whereas the National Wildlife Refuge System experienced
more than 30,000,000 wildlife observation visits during
fiscal year 2012;
Whereas national wildlife refuges are important to local
businesses and gateway communities;
Whereas, for every $1 appropriated, national wildlife
refuges generate $4 in economic activity;
Whereas the National Wildlife Refuge System experiences
approximately 47,000,000 visits each year, which generated
nearly $2,100,000,000 and more than 35,000 jobs in local
economies during fiscal year 2012;
Whereas the National Wildlife Refuge System encompasses
every kind of ecosystem in the United States, including
temperate, tropical, and boreal forests, wetlands, deserts,
grasslands, arctic tundras, and remote islands, and spans 12
time zones from the Virgin Islands to Guam;
Whereas national wildlife refuges are home to more than 700
species of birds, 220 species of mammals, 250 species of
reptiles and amphibians, and more than 1,000 species of fish;
Whereas national wildlife refuges are the primary Federal
lands that foster production, migration, and wintering
habitat for waterfowl;
Whereas, since 1934, the sale of the Federal Duck Stamp to
outdoor enthusiasts has generated more than $850,000,000 in
funds, which has enabled the purchase or lease of more than
5,500,000 acres of waterfowl habitat in the National Wildlife
Refuge System;
Whereas 59 refuges were established specifically to protect
imperiled species, and of the more than 1,300 federally
listed threatened and endangered species in the United
States, 280 species are found on units of the National
Wildlife Refuge System;
Whereas national wildlife refuges are cores of conservation
for larger landscapes and resources for other agencies of the
Federal Government and State governments, private landowners,
and organizations in their efforts to secure the wildlife
heritage of the United States;
Whereas more than 42,000 volunteers and approximately 220
national wildlife refuge ``Friends'' organizations contribute
nearly 1,600,000 hours annually, the equivalent of 766 full-
time employees, and provide an important link to local
communities;
Whereas national wildlife refuges provide an important
opportunity for children to discover and gain a greater
appreciation for the natural world;
Whereas, because there are national wildlife refuges
located in several urban and suburban areas and 1 refuge
located within an hour's drive of every metropolitan area in
the United States, national wildlife refuges employ, educate,
and engage young people from all backgrounds in exploring,
connecting with, and preserving the natural heritage of the
United States;
Whereas, since 1995, refuges across the United States have
held festivals, educational programs, guided tours, and other
events to celebrate National Wildlife Refuge Week during the
second full week of October;
Whereas the Fish and Wildlife Service will continue to seek
stakeholder input on the implementation of ``Conserving the
Future: Wildlife Refuges and the Next Generation'', an update
to the strategic plan of the Fish
[[Page 14810]]
and Wildlife Service for the future of the National Wildlife
Refuge System;
Whereas the week beginning on October 14, 2012, has been
designated as ``National Wildlife Refuge Week'' by the Fish
and Wildlife Service; and
Whereas the designation of National Wildlife Refuge Week by
the Senate would recognize more than a century of
conservation in the United States, raise awareness about the
importance of wildlife and the National Wildlife Refuge
System, and celebrate the myriad recreational opportunities
available to enjoy this network of protected lands: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates the week beginning on October 14, 2012, as
``National Wildlife Refuge Week'';
(2) encourages the observance of National Wildlife Refuge
Week with appropriate events and activities;
(3) acknowledges the importance of national wildlife
refuges for their recreational opportunities and contribution
to local economies across the United States;
(4) pronounces that national wildlife refuges play a vital
role in securing the hunting and fishing heritage of the
United States for future generations;
(5) identifies the significance of national wildlife
refuges in advancing the traditions of wildlife observation,
photography, environmental education, and interpretation;
(6) recognizes the importance of national wildlife refuges
to wildlife conservation and the protection of imperiled
species and ecosystems, as well as compatible uses;
(7) acknowledges the role of national wildlife refuges in
conserving waterfowl and waterfowl habitat pursuant to the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (40 Stat. 755, chapter 128);
(8) reaffirms the support of the Senate for wildlife
conservation and the National Wildlife Refuge System; and
(9) expresses the intent of the Senate--
(A) to continue working to conserve wildlife; and
(B) to manage the National Wildlife Refuge System for
current and future generations.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 581--DESIGNATING OCTOBER 26, 2012, AS ``DAY OF THE
DEPLOYED''
Mr. HOEVEN (for himself, Mr. Conrad, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Boozman, and
Mr. Blunt) submitted the following resolution; which was:
S. Res. 581
Whereas more than 2,500,000 people serve as members of the
United States Armed Forces;
Whereas several hundred thousand members of the Armed
Forces rotate each year through deployments to 150 countries
in every region of the world;
Whereas more than 2,300,000 members of the Armed Forces
have deployed to the area of operations of the United States
Central Command since the September 11, 2001, terrorist
attacks;
Whereas the United States is kept strong and free by the
loyal military personnel who protect our precious heritage
through their positive declaration and actions;
Whereas members of the Armed Forces serving at home and
abroad have courageously answered the call to duty to defend
the ideals of the United States and to preserve peace and
freedom around the world;
Whereas members of the Armed Forces personify the virtues
of patriotism, service, duty, courage, and sacrifice;
Whereas the families of members of the Armed Forces make
important and significant sacrifices for the United States;
Whereas in 2010, 40 States designated October 26 as ``Day
of the Deployed'' following the first recognition of a ``Day
of the Deployed'' by North Dakota on October 26, 2006; and
Whereas the Senate designated October 26, 2011, as ``Day of
the Deployed'': Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) honors the members of the United States Armed Forces
who are deployed;
(2) calls on the people of the United States to reflect on
the service of those members of the United States Armed
Forces, wherever they serve, past, present, and future;
(3) designates October 26, 2012, as ``Day of the
Deployed''; and
(4) encourages the people of the United States to observe
``Day of the Deployed'' with appropriate ceremonies and
activities.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 582--RECOGNIZING HISPANIC HERITAGE MONTH AND
CELEBRATING THE HERITAGE AND CULTURE OF LATINOS IN THE UNITED STATES
AND THE IMMENSE CONTRIBUTIONS OF LATINOS TO THE UNITED STATES
Mr. MENENDEZ (for himself, Mr. Reid, Mr. Cornyn, Ms. Mikulski, Mr.
Begich, Mr. Heller, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. Udall of New Mexico, Mrs.
Hagan, Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Crapo, Mr.
Merkley, Mr. Bennet, Mr. Udall of Colorado, Mr. Akaka, Mr. Whitehouse,
Mr. Durbin, Mr. Rubio, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Casey, Mr. Inouye, Mr.
Lautenberg, Mr. Reed, Mr. Bingaman, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Wyden, Mr.
Warner, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Brown of Ohio, and Mrs. Feinstein) submitted
the following resolution; which was:
S. Res. 582
Whereas beginning on September 15, 2012, through October
15, 2012, the United States celebrates Hispanic Heritage
Month;
Whereas the Census Bureau estimates the Hispanic population
in the United States at over 52,000,000 people, making
Hispanic Americans the largest racial or ethnic minority
group within the United States overall and in 25 individual
States;
Whereas Latinos accounted for over \1/2\ of all population
growth from July 1, 2010, to July 1, 2011;
Whereas the Hispanic population in the United States is
projected to grow to 132,800,000 by July 1, 2050, at which
point the Hispanic population will comprise 30 percent of the
total population in the United States;
Whereas nearly 1 in 4 United States public school students
is Hispanic, and the total number of Hispanic students
enrolled in public schools in the United States is expected
to reach 28,000,000 by 2050;
Whereas 16.5 percent of all college students between the
age of 18 and 24 years old are Hispanics, making Hispanics
the largest racial or ethnic minority group on college
campuses in the United States, including both 2-year
community colleges and 4-year colleges and universities;
Whereas the purchasing power of Hispanic Americans was
$1,000,000,000,000 in 2010 and is expected to grow 50 percent
to $1,500,000,000 by 2015;
Whereas there are approximately 2,300,000 Hispanic-owned
firms in the United States, supporting millions of employees
nationwide and greatly contributing to the economic sector,
especially retail trade, wholesale trade, food services, and
construction;
Whereas as of June 2012, nearly 25,000,0000 Hispanic
workers represented 16 percent of the total labor force in
the United States, with the share of Latino labor force
participation expected to grow to 18 percent by 2018;
Whereas Hispanic Americans serve in all branches of the
Armed Forces and have bravely fought in every war in the
history of the United States;
Whereas as of July 2012, 143,054 Hispanic active duty
service members served with distinction in the United States
Armed Forces in fiscal year 2012;
Whereas as of June 30, 2012, there were 19,752 Hispanics
serving in Afghanistan;
Whereas as of May 7, 2012, 645 United States military
fatalities in Iraq and Afghanistan have been Hispanic;
Whereas more than 80,000 Hispanics served in the Vietnam
War, representing 5.5 percent of individuals who made the
ultimate sacrifice for their country in that conflict even
though Hispanics comprised only 4.5 percent of the United
States population at the time;
Whereas 140,000 Hispanic soldiers served in the Korean War;
Whereas as of September 2012, there are approximately
1,300,000 living Hispanic veterans of the United States Armed
Forces;
Whereas 44 Hispanic Americans have received the
Congressional Medal of Honor, the highest award for valor in
action against an enemy force that can be bestowed on an
individual serving in the United States Armed Forces;
Whereas Hispanic Americans are dedicated public servants,
holding posts at the highest levels of government, including
1 seat on the Supreme Court, 2 seats in the Senate, 29 seats
in the House of Representatives, and 2 seats in the Cabinet;
and
Whereas Hispanic Americans harbor a deep commitment to
family and community, an enduring work ethic, and a
perseverance to succeed and contribute to society: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) recognizes the celebration of Hispanic Heritage Month
from September 15, 2012, through October 15, 2012;
(2) esteems the integral role of Latinos and the manifold
heritage of Latinos in the economy, culture, and identity of
the United States; and
(3) urges the people of the United States to observe
Hispanic Heritage Month with appropriate programs and
activities that appreciate the cultural contributions of
Latinos to American life.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 583--DESIGNATING SEPTEMBER 2012 AS ``NATIONAL
PREPAREDNESS MONTH''
Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself, Ms. Collins, and Ms. Landrieu) submitted
the following resolution; which was:
S. Res. 583
Whereas a terrorist attack, natural disaster, or other
emergency could strike any part of the United States at any
time;
Whereas natural and manmade emergencies disrupt hundreds of
thousands of
[[Page 14811]]
lives each year, costing lives and causing serious injuries
and billions of dollars in property damage;
Whereas Federal, State, and local officials, as well as
private and nonprofit organizations, are working to mitigate
against, prevent, and respond to all types of emergencies;
Whereas the people of the United States can help promote
the overall emergency preparedness of the United States by
being prepared for all types of emergencies;
Whereas National Preparedness Month provides an opportunity
to highlight the importance of public emergency preparedness
and to encourage the people of the United States to take
steps to be better prepared for emergencies at home, work,
and school;
Whereas the people of the United States can prepare for
emergencies by taking steps, such as assembling emergency
supply kits, creating family emergency plans, staying
informed about possible emergencies, and obtaining reasonable
levels of insurance; and
Whereas additional information about public emergency
preparedness may be obtained through the Ready Campaign of
the Department of Homeland Security at www.ready.gov or the
American Red Cross at www.redcross.org/prepare: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates September 2012 as ``National Preparedness
Month''; and
(2) encourages the Federal Government, States, localities,
schools, nonprofit organizations, businesses, and other
applicable entities, along with the people of the United
States, to observe National Preparedness Month with
appropriate events and activities to promote emergency
preparedness.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 584--DESIGNATING OCTOBER 4, 2012, AS ``JUMPSTART'S
READ FOR THE RECORD DAY''
Mrs. MURRAY (for herself, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Begich, Mr. Kerry, Mr.
Brown of Massachusetts, Mr. Wicker, Mr. Bennet, and Mr. Cochran)
submitted the following resolution; which was:
S. Res. 584
Whereas Jumpstart, a national early education organization,
is working to ensure that every child in the United States
enters school prepared to succeed;
Whereas Jumpstart delivers a year-round research-based and
cost-effective program by training college students and
community volunteers to serve preschool age children in low-
income neighborhoods, helping them to develop the language
and literacy skills necessary to succeed in school and in
life;
Whereas, since 1993, Jumpstart has trained nearly 25,000
college students and community volunteers to transform the
lives of more than 42,000 preschool children in communities
across the United States;
Whereas Jumpstart's Read for the Record, presented in
partnership with the Pearson Foundation, is a national
campaign that culminates in one day of the year when millions
of people in the United States come together to celebrate
literacy and support Jumpstart in its efforts to promote
early childhood education;
Whereas the goals of the campaign are to raise awareness in
the United States of the importance of early childhood
education, support Jumpstart's early education programs in
preschools in low-income neighborhoods through donations and
sponsorship, and celebrate the commencement of Jumpstart's
program year;
Whereas October 4, 2012, is an appropriate date to
designate as ``Jumpstart's Read for the Record Day'' because
it is the date Jumpstart aims to set the world record for the
largest shared reading experience; and
Whereas Jumpstart hopes to engage more than 2,200,000
children in reading ``Ladybug Girl and the Bug Squad'' by
David Soman and Jacky Davis during this record-breaking
celebration of reading and service, all in support of
preschool children in the United States: Now, therefore, be
it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates October 4, 2012, as ``Jumpstart's Read for
the Record Day'';
(2) commends Jumpstart's Read for the Record on its seventh
year;
(3) encourages adults, including grandparents, parents,
teachers, and college students--
(A) to join children in creating the world's largest shared
reading experience; and
(B) to show their support for literacy and Jumpstart's
early education programming for young children in low-income
communities; and
(4) requests the Secretary of the Senate to transmit a copy
of this resolution to Jumpstart, one of the leading nonprofit
organizations in the United States in the field of early
childhood education.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 585--RECOGNIZING THE EXTRAORDINARY HISTORY AND
HERITAGE OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO, AND HONORING AND COMMENDING THE
STATE OF NEW MEXICO AND ITS PEOPLE ON ITS CENTENNIAL ANNIVERSARY
Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. Udall of New Mexico) submitted the
following resolution; which was:
S. Res. 585
Whereas New Mexico has a rich heritage and history, dating
as far back as 11,000 B.C. when the Clovis people left the
earliest evidence of human existence in what is now New
Mexico;
Whereas Santa Fe, the capital of New Mexico, was
established in 1610 and is the oldest capital city in the
United States, as well as the highest in elevation at 7,000
feet above sea level;
Whereas, on September 9, 1850, the portion of the
Compromise of 1850 (9 Stat. 446) that created the New Mexico
Territory was enacted;
Whereas, on January 6, 1912, President William Howard Taft
signed the proclamation making New Mexico the 47th State of
the Union;
Whereas the nickname of New Mexico is the ``Land of
Enchantment'' because of its scenic beauty and rich history
and culture;
Whereas the natural wonder of New Mexico is preserved by a
broad range of national parks, forests, wilderness areas, and
wildlife refuge centers;
Whereas the diverse cultural roots of New Mexico come from
the many different groups of people who have inhabited the
State, notably the strong tribal and Hispanic cultural
influences in the State;
Whereas New Mexico has one of the richest indigenous tribal
populations in the United States, including 19 Pueblo
nations, 2 Apache nations, and the Navajo Nation;
Whereas the Hispanic population of New Mexico has rich and
distinct cultural roots in its historic land grants as
recognized by the Treaty of Peace, Friendship, Limits, and
Settlement between the United States and Mexico, signed at
Guadalupe Hidalgo February 2, 1848, and entered into force
May 30, 1848 (9. Stat. 922) (commonly referred to as the
``Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo'');
Whereas New Mexico continues to derive strength from the
new Hispanic communities in the State with roots in Latin
America;
Whereas New Mexico has an extensive variety of prehistoric,
tribal, and Hispanic archaeological ruins;
Whereas New Mexico has a long tradition of artistic
expression inspired by its natural beauty, unique
architecture, and diverse people;
Whereas the people of New Mexico have a proud history of
military service, predating and continuing after statehood,
including the participation of the people of New Mexico in
every major war of the United States since the Civil War,
with notable participation by the people of New Mexico in
Teddy Roosevelt's Rough Riders, the Navajo Code Talkers, the
defense of Bataan and Corregidor, the wars in Korea and
Vietnam, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan;
Whereas New Mexico is a center for scientific innovation
and laboratory research, serving as the home to the Los
Alamos National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories;
Whereas, on July 16, 1945, the United States Army conducted
the Trinity test, the first test of a nuclear weapon, which
was developed at Los Alamos National Laboratory and tested at
the White Sands Proving Ground in New Mexico;
Whereas, in 1980, New Mexico dedicated the Very Large
Array, one of the world's premier astronomical radio
observatories that studies the history of the universe;
Whereas, in October 2011, New Mexico dedicated Spaceport
America, propelling New Mexico into the future with the first
commercial spaceport;
Whereas New Mexico is home to the Albuquerque International
Balloon Fiesta, the largest hot air balloon event in the
world, which is also considered to be the most photographed
event in the world;
Whereas New Mexico has a long history of agricultural
sustainability and productivity, supporting cattle and dairy,
as well as many crops, including chile, corn, wheat, onions,
peanuts, pistachios, pecans, hay, cotton, and beans;
Whereas the Hatch Valley of New Mexico, known as the
``Chile Capital of the World'', is recognized worldwide for
its bountiful chile crop; and
Whereas New Mexico celebrated the centennial anniversary of
its admission to the Union as the 47th State of the United
States on January 6, 2012: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate recognizes the extraordinary
history and heritage of the State of New Mexico, and honors
and commends the State of New Mexico and its people on its
centennial anniversary.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 586--EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR THE GOALS AND IDEALS OF
NATIONAL INFANT MORTALITY AWARENESS MONTH, 2012
Mr. CARDIN (for himself, Mr. Burr, and Mr. Menendez) submitted the
following resolution; which was:
[[Page 14812]]
S. Res. 586
Whereas the term ``infant mortality'' refers to the death
of a baby before the first birthday of the baby;
Whereas the United States ranks 49th among countries in the
rate of infant mortality;
Whereas high rates of infant mortality are especially
prevalent in African American, Native American, Alaskan
Native, Latino, Asian, and Hawaiian and other Pacific
Islander communities, communities with high rates of
unemployment and poverty, and communities with limited access
to safe housing and medical providers;
Whereas premature birth is a leading cause of infant
mortality;
Whereas, according to the Institute of Medicine of the
National Academies, premature birth costs the United States
more than $26,000,000,000 annually;
Whereas infant mortality can be substantially reduced
through community-based services, such as outreach, home
visitation, case management, health education, and
interconceptional care;
Whereas support for community-based programs to reduce
infant mortality may result in lower future spending on
medical interventions, special education, and other social
services that may be needed for infants and children who are
born with a low birth weight;
Whereas the Department of Health and Human Services, acting
through the Office of Minority Health, has implemented the
``A Healthy Baby Begins With You'' campaign;
Whereas the Maternal and Child Health Bureau of the Health
Resources and Services Administration has provided national
leadership on the issue of infant mortality;
Whereas the Advisory Committee on Infant Mortality provides
advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Health and
Human Services on reducing infant mortality and improving the
health status of infants and pregnant women;
Whereas the Advisory Committee on Infant Mortality provides
advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Health and
Human Services with respect to developing a national strategy
for reducing infant mortality;
Whereas public awareness and education campaigns on infant
mortality are held during the month of September each year;
and
Whereas September 2012 has been designated as ``National
Infant Mortality Awareness Month'': Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) supports--
(A) the goals and ideals of National Infant Mortality
Awareness Month, 2012;
(B) efforts to educate people in the United States about
infant mortality and the factors that contribute to infant
mortality; and
(C) efforts to reduce infant deaths, low birth weight, pre-
term births, and disparities in perinatal outcomes;
(2) recognizes the critical importance of including efforts
to reduce infant mortality and the factors that contribute to
infant mortality as part of prevention and wellness
strategies; and
(3) calls on the people of the United States to observe
National Infant Mortality Awareness Month with appropriate
programs and activities.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 587--SUPPORTING ``LIGHTS ON AFTERSCHOOL'', A NATIONAL
CELEBRATION OF AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAMS
Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Ms. Collins, and Mr. Whitehouse) submitted
the following resolution; which was:
S. Res. 587
Whereas high-quality afterschool programs provide safe,
challenging, engaging, and fun learning experiences that help
children and youth develop social, emotional, physical,
cultural, and academic skills;
Whereas high-quality afterschool programs support working
families by ensuring that the children in those families are
safe and productive after the regular school day ends;
Whereas high-quality afterschool programs build stronger
communities by involving students, parents, business leaders,
and adult volunteers in the lives of children in the United
States, thereby promoting positive relationships among
children, youth, families, and adults;
Whereas high-quality afterschool programs engage families,
schools, and diverse community partners in advancing the
well-being of children in the United States;
Whereas ``Lights On Afterschool'', a national celebration
of afterschool programs held on October 18, 2012, highlights
the critical importance of high-quality afterschool programs
in the lives of children, their families, and their
communities;
Whereas more than 28,000,000 children in the United States
have parents who work outside the home and approximately
15,100,000 children in the United States have no place to go
after school; and
Whereas nearly 2 in 5 afterschool programs report that
their budgets are in worse condition today than at the height
of the recession in 2008, and more than 3 in 5 afterschool
programs report that their level of funding is lower than it
was 3 years ago, making it difficult for afterschool programs
across the United States to keep their doors open and their
lights on: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate supports ``Lights On
Afterschool'', a national celebration of afterschool programs
held on October 18, 2012.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 588--COMMENDING THE 4 AMERICAN PUBLIC SERVANTS WHO
DIED IN BENGHAZI, LIBYA, UNITED STATES AMBASSADOR TO LIBYA JOHN
CHRISTOPHER STEVENS, SEAN SMITH, TYRONE WOODS, AND GLEN DOHERTY, FOR
THEIR TIRELESS EFFORTS ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, AND CONDEMNING
THE VIOLENT ATTACK ON THE UNITED STATES CONSULATE IN BENGHAZI
Mr. LUGAR (for himself, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Reid of Nevada, Mr. McConnell,
Mr. Akaka, Mr. Alexander, Ms. Ayotte, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Baucus, Mr.
Begich, Mr. Bennet, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Blunt, Mr.
Boozman, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Brown of Massachusetts, Mr. Brown of Ohio, Mr.
Burr, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Carper, Mr. Casey, Mr. Chambliss,
Mr. Coats, Mr. Coburn, Mr. Cochran, Ms. Collins, Mr. Conrad, Mr. Coons,
Mr. Corker, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Crapo, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Enzi,
Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Franken, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. Graham, Mr. Grassley,
Mrs. Hagan, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Heller, Mr. Hoeven, Mrs.
Hutchison, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Johanns, Mr.
Johnson of Wisconsin, Mr. Johnson of South Dakota, Mr. Kirk, Ms.
Klobuchar, Mr. Kohl, Mr. Kyl, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Leahy,
Mr. Lee, Mr. Levin, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Manchin, Mr. McCain, Mrs.
McCaskill, Mr. Menendez, Mr. Merkley, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Moran, Ms.
Murkowski, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, Mr. Nelson of Florida,
Mr. Paul, Mr. Portman, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Reed of Rhode Island, Mr. Risch,
Mr. Roberts, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Rubio, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Schumer, Mr.
Sessions, Mrs. Shaheen, Mr. Shelby, Ms. Snowe, Ms. Stabenow, Mr.
Tester, Mr. Thune, Mr. Toomey, Mr. Udall of Colorado, Mr. Udall of New
Mexico, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Warner, Mr. Webb, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Wicker,
and Mr. Wyden) submitted the following resolution; which was:
S. Res. 588
Whereas on September 11, 2012, 4 American public servants,
United States Ambassador to Libya John Christopher Stevens,
Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods, and Glen Doherty, were killed in a
reprehensible and vicious attack on the United States
consulate in Benghazi, Libya;
Whereas Ambassador Stevens--
(1) was a courageous and exemplary representative of the
United States;
(2) had spent 21 years in the Foreign Service;
(3) was deeply passionate about representing the United
States through his diplomatic service; and
(4) was an ardent friend of the Libyan people;
Whereas Ambassador Stevens served as Special Envoy to the
Libyan Transitional National Council in Benghazi during the
2011 Libyan revolution;
Whereas Ambassador Stevens was a dear friend of the Senate,
having served on the staff of the Committee on Foreign
Relations of the Senate in 2006 and 2007 as a distinguished
Pearson Fellow;
Whereas Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean
Smith--
(1) was a husband and a father of 2 children;
(2) joined the Department of State 10 years ago after
serving in the United States Air Force; and
(3) had served in the Foreign Service, before arriving in
Benghazi, in Baghdad, Pretoria, Montreal, and The Hague;
Whereas Tyrone Woods was a husband and a father of three
children, who, after two decades of service as a Navy SEAL
that included tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, began working
with the Department of State to protect United States
diplomatic personnel;
Whereas Glen Doherty, after 12 years of service as a Navy
SEAL that included tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, began
working with the Department of State to protect United States
diplomatic personnel;
Whereas the 4 Americans who perished in the Benghazi attack
made great sacrifices
[[Page 14813]]
and showed bravery in taking on a difficult post in Libya;
Whereas the violence in Benghazi coincided with an attack
on the United States Embassy in Cairo, Egypt, which was also
swarmed by an angry mob of protesters on September 11, 2012;
Whereas on a daily basis, United States diplomats, military
personnel, and other public servants risk their lives to
serve the American people; and
Whereas throughout this Nation's history, thousands of
Americans have sacrificed their lives for the ideals of
freedom, democracy, and partnership with nations and people
around the globe.
Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) recognizes the dedicated service and deep commitment of
Ambassador John Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone
Woods, and Glen Doherty in assisting the Libyan people as
they navigate the complex currents of democratic transition
marked in this case by profound instability;
(2) praises Ambassador Stevens, who represented the highest
tradition of American public service, for his extraordinary
record of dedication to the United States' interests in some
of the most difficult and dangerous posts around the globe;
(3) sends its deepest condolences to the families of those
American public servants killed in Benghazi;
(4) commends the bravery of Foreign Service Officers,
United States Armed Forces, and public servants serving in
harm's way around the globe and recognizes the deep
sacrifices made by their families; and
(5) condemns, in the strongest possible terms, the
despicable attacks on American diplomats and public servants
in Benghazi and calls for the perpetrators of such attacks to
be brought to justice.
____________________
SENATE RESOLUTION 589--DESIGNATING NOVEMBER 24, 2012, AS ``SMALL
BUSINESS SATURDAY'' AND SUPPORTING EFFORTS TO INCREASE AWARENESS OF THE
VALUE OF LOCALLY OWNED SMALL BUSINESSES
Ms. SNOWE (for herself, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Risch, Mr. Kerry, Mr.
Alexander, Mr. Lieberman, Mrs. Hutchison, Mrs. Hagan, Mr. Barrasso, Mr.
Blumenthal, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Whitehouse, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Murray, Mr.
Hoeven, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Coons, Mr. Kirk, Mr. Lautenberg,
Mr. Rubio, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Brown of Massachusetts, Mr. Udall of
New Mexico, Ms. Ayotte, Mr. Begich, Mr. Portman, Mr. Manchin, Mr.
Boozman, Mr. Merkley, Mr. Menendez, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Durbin, Mr.
Baucus, Mr. Levin, Mr. Warner, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Tester,
Mrs. Shaheen, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Thune, Mr. Chambliss,
Mrs. Boxer, and Mr. Bennet) submitted the following resolution; which
was:
S. Res. 589
Whereas small businesses represent 99.7 percent of all
businesses having employees (commonly referred to as
``employer firms'') in the United States;
Whereas small businesses employ \1/2\ of the employees in
the private sector in the United States;
Whereas small businesses pay 44 percent of the total
payroll of the employees in the private sector in the United
States;
Whereas small businesses are responsible for more than 50
percent of the private, nonfarm product of the gross domestic
product;
Whereas small businesses generated 65 percent of net new
jobs during the last 17 years;
Whereas small businesses generate 60 to 80 percent of all
new jobs annually;
Whereas small businesses focus on 2 key strategies:
deepening relationships with customers and creating value for
customers;
Whereas, for every $100 spent with locally owned,
independent stores, $68 returns to the community through
local taxes, payroll, and other expenditures;
Whereas 92 percent of consumers in the United States agree
that the success of small businesses is critical to the
overall economic health of the United States;
Whereas 93 percent of consumers in the United States agree
that small businesses contribute positively to the local
community by supplying jobs and generating tax revenue;
Whereas 91 percent of consumers in the United States have
small businesses in their community that the consumers would
miss if the small businesses closed;
Whereas 99 percent of consumers in the United States agree
that it is important to support the small businesses in their
community; and
Whereas 90 percent of consumers in the United States are
willing to pledge support for a ``buy local'' movement: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates November 24, 2012, as ``Small Business
Saturday''; and
(2) supports efforts--
(A) to encourage consumers to shop locally; and
(B) to increase awareness of the value of locally owned
small businesses and the impact of locally owned small
businesses on the economy of the United States.
____________________
AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED AND PROPOSED
SA 2849. Mr. PAUL submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3576, to provide limitations
on United States assistance, and for other purposes; which
was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 2850. Ms. MURKOWSKI (for herself and Mr. Manchin)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the
bill S. 3525, to protect and enhance opportunities for
recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting, and for other
purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 2851. Mr. HATCH submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3525, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 2852. Mr. HATCH submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3525, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 2853. Mr. HATCH submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3525, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 2854. Mr. HATCH submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3525, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 2855. Mr. HATCH submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3525, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 2856. Mr. HATCH submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3525, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 2857. Mr. HATCH submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3525, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 2858. Mr. HATCH submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by him to the bill S. 3525, supra; which was ordered
to lie on the table.
SA 2859. Mr. REID (for Mr. Cardin) proposed an amendment to
the bill S. 1956, to prohibit operators of civil aircraft of
the United States from participating in the European Union's
emissions trading scheme, and for other purposes.
SA 2860. Mr. REID (for Mr. Merkley) proposed an amendment
to the bill S. 1956, to prohibit operators of civil aircraft
of the United States from participating in the European
Union's emissions trading scheme, and for other purposes.
SA 2861. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Bingaman) proposed an amendment
to the bill H.R. 4850, to allow for innovations and
alternative technologies that meet or exceed desired energy
efficiency goals.
SA 2862. Mr. PRYOR (for Mrs. Shaheen) proposed an amendment
to the bill H.R. 4850, to allow for innovations and
alternative technologies that meet or exceed desired energy
efficiency goals.
SA 2863. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Durbin) proposed an amendment
to S. Res. 466, calling for the release from prison of former
Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko.
SA 2864. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Akaka) proposed an amendment to
the bill S. 3193, to make technical corrections to the legal
description of certain land to be held in trust for the
Barona Band of Mission Indians, and for other purposes.
SA 2865. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Blumenthal) proposed an
amendment to the bill H.R. 2453, to require the Secretary of
the Treasury to mint coins in commemoration of Mark Twain.
SA 2866. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Lieberman) proposed an
amendment to S. 3315, to repeal or modify certain mandates of
the Government Accountability Office.
SA 2867. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Rockefeller) proposed an
amendment to the bill H.R. 2838, to authorize appropriations
for the Coast Guard for fiscal years 2013 through 2014, and
for other purposes.
SA 2868. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Rockefeller) proposed an
amendment to the bill H.R. 2838, supra.
SA 2869. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Bingaman) proposed an amendment
to the bill H.R. 2606, to authorize the Secretary of the
Interior to allow the construction and operation of natural
gas pipeline facilities in the Gateway National Recreation
Area, and for other purposes.
SA 2870. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Enzi) proposed an amendment to
the resolution S. Res. 472, designating October 7, 2012, as
``Operation Enduring Freedom Veterans Day''.
____________________
TEXT OF AMENDMENTS
SA 2849. Mr. PAUL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3576, to provide limitations on United States
assistance, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the
table; as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
[[Page 14814]]
SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON FOREIGN ASSISTANCE.
(a) Prohibition.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided under paragraph (2),
beginning 60 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, no amounts may be obligated or expended to provide any
direct United States assistance, loan guarantee, or debt
relief to a Government described under subsection (b).
(2) Exception.--With respect to the Government of Pakistan,
the prohibition under paragraph (1) shall be effective as of
the date of the enactment of this Act.
(b) Covered Governments.--The Governments referred to in
subsection (a) are as follows:
(1) The Government of Libya.
(2) The Government of Egypt.
(3) The Government of Pakistan.
(c) Certification.--The President may certify to Congress
that a Government described under subsection (b)--
(1) is cooperating or has cooperated fully with
investigations into an attack, trespass, breach, or attempted
attack, trespass, or breach;
(2) is facilitating or has facilitated any security
improvements at United States diplomatic facilities, as
requested by the United States Government; and
(3) is taking or has taken sufficient steps to strengthen
and improve reliability of local security in order to prevent
any future attack, trespass, or breach.
(d) Request To Suspend Prohibition on Foreign Assistance.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided under paragraph (2),
upon submitting a certification under subsection (c) with
respect to a Government described under subsection (b), the
President may submit a request to Congress to suspend the
prohibition on foreign assistance to the Government.
(2) Pakistan.--No request under paragraph (1) may be
submitted with respect to the Government of Pakistan until--
(A) Dr. Shakil Afridi has been released alive from prison
in Pakistan;
(B) any criminal charges brought against Dr. Afridi,
including treason, have been dropped; and
(C) if necessary to ensure his freedom, Dr. Afridi has been
allowed to leave Pakistan alive.
(e) Expedited Consideration of Presidential Request.--
(1) In general.--For purposes of this subsection, the term
``joint resolution'' means only a joint resolution introduced
in the period beginning on the date on which a request under
subsection (d) is received by Congress and ending 60 days
thereafter (excluding days either House of Congress is
adjourned for more than 3 days during a session of Congress),
the matter after the resolving clause of which is as follows:
``That Congress approves the request submitted by the
President to suspend the prohibition on foreign assistance to
the Government of __ in effect since __, and such prohibition
shall have no force or effect.''(The blank spaces being
appropriately filled in).
(2) Referral.--A joint resolution described in paragraph
(1) shall be referred to the committees in each House of
Congress with jurisdiction.
(3) Submission date defined.--For purposes of this section,
the term ``submission date'' means the date on which a House
of Congress receives the request submitted under subsection
(d).
(4) Discharge of senate committee.--In the Senate, if the
committee to which is referred a joint resolution described
in paragraph (1) has not reported such joint resolution (or
an identical joint resolution) at the end of 20 calendar days
after the submission date, such committee may be discharged
from further consideration of such joint resolution upon a
petition supported in writing by 30 Senators, and such joint
resolution shall be placed on the calendar.
(5) Senate consideration of resolution.--
(A) Motions.--In the Senate, when the committee to which a
joint resolution is referred has reported, or when a
committee is discharged (under paragraph (4)) from further
consideration of a joint resolution described in paragraph
(1), it is at any time thereafter in order (even though a
previous motion to the same effect has been disagreed to) for
a motion to proceed to the consideration of the joint
resolution, and all points of order against the joint
resolution (and against consideration of the joint
resolution) are waived. The motion is not subject to
amendment, or to a motion to postpone, or to a motion to
proceed to the consideration of other business. A motion to
reconsider the vote by which the motion is agreed to or
disagreed to shall not be in order. If a motion to proceed to
the consideration of the joint resolution is agreed to, the
joint resolution shall remain the unfinished business of the
Senate until disposed of.
(B) Debate.--In the Senate, debate on the joint resolution,
and on all debatable motions and appeals in connection
therewith, shall be limited to not more than 10 hours, which
shall be divided equally between those favoring and those
opposing the joint resolution. A motion further to limit
debate is in order and not debatable. An amendment to, or a
motion to postpone, or a motion to proceed to the
consideration of other business, or a motion to recommit the
joint resolution is not in order.
(C) Vote on final passage.--In the Senate, immediately
following the conclusion of the debate on a joint resolution
described in paragraph (1), and a single quorum call at the
conclusion of the debate if requested in accordance with the
rules of the Senate, the vote on final passage of the joint
resolution shall occur.
(D) Appeals of decisions of the chair.--Appeals from the
decisions of the Chair relating to the application of the
rules of the Senate to the procedure relating to a joint
resolution described in paragraph (1) shall be decided
without debate.
(6) Inapplicability of certain provisions.--In the Senate,
the procedures specified in paragraph (4) or (5) shall not
apply to the consideration of a joint resolution respecting a
request--
(A) after the expiration of the 60 session days beginning
with the applicable submission date; or
(B) if the request submitted under subsection (d) was
submitted during the period beginning on the date occurring--
(i) in the case of the Senate, 60 session days, or
(ii) in the case of the House of Representatives, 60
legislative days,
before the date the Congress adjourns a session of Congress
through the date on which the same or succeeding Congress
first convenes its next session, after the expiration of the
60 session days beginning on the 15th session day after the
succeeding session of Congress first convenes.
(7) Receipt of joint resolution from other house.--If,
before the passage by one House of a joint resolution of that
House described in paragraph (1), that House receives from
the other House a joint resolution described in paragraph
(1), then the following procedures shall apply:
(A) The joint resolution of the other House shall not be
referred to a committee.
(B) With respect to a joint resolution described in
paragraph (1) of the House receiving the joint resolution--
(i) the procedure in that House shall be the same as if no
joint resolution had been received from the other House; but
(ii) the vote on final passage shall be on the joint
resolution of the other House.
(f) Report on Unsecured Weapons in Libya.--Not later than
90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
President shall submit a report to Congress examining the
extent to which advanced weaponry remaining unsecured after
the fall of Moammar Qaddafi was used by the individuals
responsible for the September 11, 2012, attack on the United
States consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
(g) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section may be
construed as an authorization for the use of military force.
______
SA 2850. Ms. MURKOWSKI (for herself and Mr. Manchin) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 3525, to
protect and enhance opportunities for recreational hunting, fishing,
and shooting, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the
table; as follows:
On page 7, after line 21, add the following:
SEC. 104. HERITAGE OF RECREATIONAL FISHING, HUNTING, AND
RECREATIONAL SHOOTING ON FEDERAL LAND.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Federal public land.--
(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
the term ``Federal public land'' means any land or water that
is--
(i) owned by the United States; and
(ii) managed by a Federal agency (including the Department
of the Interior and the Forest Service) for purposes that
include the conservation of natural resources.
(B) Exclusions.--The term ``Federal public land'' does not
include--
(i) land or water held or managed in trust for the benefit
of Indians or other Native Americans;
(ii) land managed by the Director of the National Park
Service or the Director of the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service;
(iii) fish hatcheries; or
(iv) conservation easements on private land.
(2) Hunting.--
(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
the term ``hunting'' means use of a firearm, bow, or other
authorized means in the lawful--
(i) pursuit, shooting, capture, collection, trapping, or
killing of wildlife; or
(ii) attempt to pursue, shoot, capture, collect, trap, or
kill wildlife.
(B) Exclusion.--The term ``hunting'' does not include the
use of skilled volunteers to cull excess animals (as defined
by other Federal law).
(3) Recreational fishing.--The term ``recreational
fishing'' means--
(A) an activity for sport or for pleasure that involves--
(i) the lawful catching, taking, or harvesting of fish; or
(ii) the lawful attempted catching, taking, or harvesting
of fish; or
(B) any other activity for sport or pleasure that can
reasonably be expected to result in the lawful catching,
taking, or harvesting of fish.
[[Page 14815]]
(4) Recreational shooting.--The term ``recreational
shooting'' means any form of sport, training, competition, or
pastime, whether formal or informal, that involves the
discharge of a rifle, handgun, or shotgun, or the use of a
bow and arrow.
(b) Recreational Fishing, Hunting, and Recreational
Shooting.--
(1) In general.--Subject to valid existing rights, and in
cooperation with the respective State and fish and wildlife
agency, a Federal public land management official shall
exercise the authority of the official under existing law
(including provisions regarding land use planning) to
facilitate use of and access to Federal public land for
recreational fishing, hunting, and recreational shooting
except as limited by--
(A) any law that authorizes action or withholding action
for reasons of national security, public safety, or resource
conservation;
(B) any other Federal law that precludes recreational
fishing, hunting, or recreational shooting on specific
Federal public land or water or units of Federal public land;
and
(C) discretionary limitations on recreational fishing,
hunting, and recreational shooting determined to be necessary
and reasonable as supported by the best scientific evidence
and advanced through a transparent public process.
(2) Management.--Consistent with paragraph (1), the head of
each Federal public land management agency shall exercise the
land management discretion of the head--
(A) in a manner that supports and facilitates recreational
fishing, hunting, and recreational shooting opportunities;
(B) to the extent authorized under applicable State law;
and
(C) in accordance with applicable Federal law.
(3) Planning.--
(A) Effects of plans and activities.--
(i) Evaluation of effects on opportunities to engage in
recreational fishing, hunting, or recreational shooting.--
Federal public land planning documents (including land
resources management plans, resource management plans, travel
management plans, and energy development plans) shall include
a specific evaluation of the effects of the plans on
opportunities to engage in recreational fishing, hunting, or
recreational shooting.
(ii) Other activity not considered.--
(I) In general.--Federal public land management officials
shall not be required to consider the existence or
availability of recreational fishing, hunting, or
recreational shooting opportunities on private or public land
that is located adjacent to, or in the vicinity of, Federal
public land for purposes of--
(aa) planning for or determining which units of Federal
public land are open for recreational fishing, hunting, or
recreational shooting; or
(bb) setting the levels of use for recreational fishing,
hunting, or recreational shooting on Federal public land.
(II) Enhanced opportunities.--Federal public land
management officials may consider the opportunities described
in subclause (I) if the combination of those opportunities
would enhance the recreational fishing, hunting, or shooting
opportunities available to the public.
(B) Use of volunteers.--If hunting is prohibited by law,
all Federal public land planning document described in
subparagraph (A)(i) of an agency shall, after appropriate
coordination with State fish and wildlife agencies, allow the
participation of skilled volunteers in the culling and other
management of wildlife populations on Federal public land
unless the head of the agency demonstrates, based on the best
scientific data available or applicable Federal law, why
skilled volunteers should not be used to control
overpopulation of wildlife on the land that is the subject of
the planning document.
(4) Bureau of land management and forest service land.--
(A) Land open.--
(i) In general.--Land under the jurisdiction of the Bureau
of Land Management or the Forest Service (including a
component of the National Wilderness Preservation System,
land designated as a wilderness study area or
administratively classified as wilderness eligible or
suitable, and primitive or semiprimitive areas, but excluding
land on the outer Continental Shelf) shall be open to
recreational fishing, hunting, and recreational shooting
unless the managing Federal public land agency acts to close
the land to such activity.
(ii) Motorized access.--Nothing in this subparagraph
authorizes or requires motorized access or the use of
motorized vehicles for recreational fishing, hunting, or
recreational shooting purposes within land designated as a
wilderness study area or administratively classified as
wilderness eligible or suitable.
(B) Closure or restriction.--Land described in subparagraph
(A) may be subject to closures or restrictions if determined
by the head of the agency to be necessary and reasonable and
supported by facts and evidence for purposes including
resource conservation, public safety, energy or mineral
production, energy generation or transmission infrastructure,
water supply facilities, protection of other permittees,
protection of private property rights or interests, national
security, or compliance with other law, as determined
appropriate by the Director of the Bureau of Land Management
or the Chief of the Forest Service, as applicable.
(C) Shooting ranges.--
(i) In general.--Except as provided in clause (iii), the
head of each Federal public land agency may use the
authorities of the head, in a manner consistent with this
section and other applicable law--
(I) to lease or permit use of land under the jurisdiction
of the head for shooting ranges; and
(II) to designate specific land under the jurisdiction of
the head for recreational shooting activities.
(ii) Limitation on liability.--Any designation under clause
(i)(II) shall not subject the United States to any civil
action or claim for monetary damages for injury or loss of
property or personal injury or death caused by any
recreational shooting activity occurring at or on the
designated land.
(iii) Exception.--The head of each Federal public land
agency shall not lease or permit use of Federal public land
for shooting ranges or designate land for recreational
shooting activities within including a component of the
National Wilderness Preservation System, land designated as a
wilderness study area or administratively classified as
wilderness eligible or suitable, and primitive or
semiprimitive areas.
(5) Report.--Not later than October 1 of every other year,
beginning with the second October 1 after the date of
enactment of this Act, the head of each Federal public land
agency who has authority to manage Federal public land on
which recreational fishing, hunting, or recreational shooting
occurs shall submit to the Committee on Natural Resources of
the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources of the Senate a report that describes--
(A) any Federal public land administered by the agency head
that was closed to recreational fishing, hunting, or
recreational shooting at any time during the preceding year;
and
(B) the reason for the closure.
(6) Closures or significant restrictions of 1,280 or more
acres.--
(A) In general.--Other than closures established or
prescribed by land planning actions referred to in paragraph
(4)(B) or emergency closures described in subparagraph (C), a
permanent or temporary withdrawal, change of classification,
or change of management status of Federal public land or
water that effectively closes or significantly restricts
1,280 or more contiguous acres of Federal public land or
water to access or use for recreational fishing or hunting or
activities relating to fishing or hunting shall take effect
only if, before the date of withdrawal or change, the head of
the Federal public land agency that has jurisdiction over the
Federal public land or water--
(i) publishes appropriate notice of the withdrawal or
change, respectively;
(ii) demonstrates that coordination has occurred with a
State fish and wildlife agency; and
(iii) submits to the Committee on Natural Resources of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources of the Senate written notice of the
withdrawal or change, respectively.
(B) Aggregate or cumulative effects.--If the aggregate or
cumulative effect of separate withdrawals or changes
effectively closes or significant restrictions affects 1,280
or more acres of land or water, the withdrawals and changes
shall be treated as a single withdrawal or change for
purposes of subparagraph (A).
(C) Emergency closures.--
(i) In general.--Nothing in this section prohibits a
Federal public land management agency from establishing or
implementing emergency closures or restrictions of the
smallest practicable area of Federal public land to provide
for public safety, resource conservation, national security,
or other purposes authorized by law.
(ii) Termination.--An emergency closure under clause (i)
shall terminate after a reasonable period of time unless the
temporary closure is converted to a permanent closure
consistent with this subsection.
(7) No priority.--Nothing in this section requires a
Federal agency to give preference to recreational fishing,
hunting, or recreational shooting over other uses of Federal
public land or over land or water management priorities
established by other Federal law.
(8) Consultation with councils.--In carrying out this
section, the heads of Federal public land agencies shall
consult with the appropriate advisory councils established
under Executive Order 12962 (16 U.S.C. 1801 note; relating to
recreational fisheries) and Executive Order 13443 (16 U.S.C.
661 note; relating to facilitation of hunting heritage and
wildlife conservation).
(9) Authority of states.--
(A) In general.--Nothing in this section interferes with,
diminishes, or conflicts with the authority, jurisdiction, or
responsibility of any State to manage, control, or regulate
fish and wildlife under State law (including regulations) on
land or water within the State, including on Federal public
land.
[[Page 14816]]
(B) Federal licenses.--
(i) In general.--Except as provided in clause (ii), nothing
in this section authorizes the head of a Federal public land
agency head to require a license, fee, or permit to fish,
hunt, or trap on land or water in a State, including on
Federal public land in the State.
(ii) Migratory bird stamps.--This subparagraph shall not
affect any migratory bird stamp requirement of the Migratory
Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Act (16 U.S.C. 718a et
seq.).
______
SA 2851. Mr. HATCH submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3525, to protect and enhance opportunities for
recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the end, add the following:
TITLE III--LAND CONVEYANCE
SEC. 301. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) City.--The term ``City'' means the city of Fruit
Heights, Utah.
(2) Map.--The term ``map'' means the map entitled
``Proposed Fruit Heights City Conveyance'' and dated 2012.
(3) National forest system land.--The term ``National
Forest System land'' means the approximately 100 acres of
National Forest System land, as depicted on the map.
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Agriculture.
SEC. 302. CONVEYANCE OF CERTAIN LAND TO THE CITY OF FRUIT
HEIGHTS, UTAH.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall convey to the City,
without consideration, all right, title, and interest of the
United States in and to the National Forest System land.
(b) Survey.--
(1) In general.--If determined by the Secretary to be
necessary, the exact acreage and legal description of the
National Forest System land shall be determined by a survey
approved by the Secretary.
(2) Costs.--The City shall pay the reasonable survey and
other administrative costs associated with a survey conducted
under paragraph (1).
(c) Use of National Forest System Land.--As a condition of
the conveyance under subsection (a), the City shall use the
National Forest System land only for public purposes.
______
SA 2852. Mr. HATCH submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3525, to protect and enhance opportunities for
recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the end, add the following:
TITLE III--LAND CONVEYANCE
SEC. 301. LAND CONVEYANCE, UINTA-WASATCH-CACHE NATIONAL
FOREST, UTAH.
(a) Conveyance Required.--On the request of Brigham Young
University submitted to the Secretary of Agriculture not
later than one year after the date of the enactment of this
Act, the Secretary shall convey, not later than one year
after receiving the request, to Brigham Young University all
right, title, and interest of the United States in and to an
approximately 80-acre parcel of National Forest System land
in the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest in the State of
Utah consisting of the SE\1/4\SE\1/4\ of section 32, T. 6 S.,
R. 3 E., and the NE\1/4\NE\1/4\ of section 5, T. 7 S., R. 3
E., Salt Lake Base & Meridian. The conveyance shall be
subject to valid existing rights and shall be made by
quitclaim deed.
(b) Consideration.--
(1) Consideration required.--As consideration for the land
conveyed under subsection (a), Brigham Young University shall
pay to the Secretary an amount equal to the fair market value
of the land, as determined by an appraisal approved by the
Secretary and conducted in conformity with the Uniform
Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions and section
206 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43
U.S.C. 1716).
(2) Deposit.--The consideration received by the Secretary
under paragraph (1) shall be deposited in the general fund of
the Treasury to reduce the Federal deficit.
(c) Guaranteed Public Access to Y Mountain Trail.--After
the conveyance under subsection (a), Brigham Young University
represents that it will--
(1) continue to allow the same reasonable public access to
the trailhead and portion of the Y Mountain Trail already
owned by Brigham Young University as of the date of the
enactment of this Act that Brigham Young University has
historically allowed; and
(2) allow that same reasonable public access to the portion
of the Y Mountain Trail and the ``Y'' symbol located on the
land described in subsection (a).
(d) Survey and Administrative Costs.--The exact acreage and
legal description of the land to be conveyed under subsection
(a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory to the
Secretary. Brigham Young University shall pay the reasonable
costs of survey, appraisal, and any administrative analyses
required by law.
______
SA 2853. Mr. HATCH submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3525, to protect and enhance opportunities for
recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the end, add the following:
TITLE III--NATIONAL MONUMENTS IN UTAH
SEC. 301. LIMITATION ON FURTHER EXTENSION OR ESTABLISHMENT OF
NATIONAL MONUMENTS IN UTAH.
This proviso of the last sentence of the first section of
the Act of September 14, 1950 (64 Stat. 849, chapter 950; 16
U.S.C. 431a), is amended by inserting ``or Utah'' after
``Wyoming''.
______
SA 2854. Mr. HATCH submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3525, to protect and enhance opportunities for
recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the end, add the following:
TITLE III--LAND CONVEYANCE
SEC. 301. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) Federal land.--The term ``Federal land'' means any land
(including mineral rights) under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary in the State, including any public land in the
State (as defined in section 103 of the Federal Land Policy
And Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1702)).
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.
(3) State.--The term ``State'' means the state of Utah.
SEC. 302. CONVEYANCE OF FEDERAL LAND TO THE STATE OF UTAH.
(a) In General.--Not later than December 31, 2014, the
Secretary shall convey to the State all right, title, and
interest of the United States in and to the Federal land.
(b) Reconveyance.--If the State reconveys any Federal land
conveyed to the State under subsection (a), the State shall,
as soon as practicable after the date of the reconveyance,
pay to the Secretary concerned an amount equal to 95 percent
of the amount received by the State in consideration for the
Federal land reconveyed.
______
SA 2855. Mr. HATCH submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3525, to protect and enhance opportunities for
recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the end, add the following:
TITLE III--CLARIFICATION OF AUTHORITY, UINTAH AND OURAY INDIAN
RESERVATION
SEC. 301. CLARIFICATION OF AUTHORITY.
The Act entitled ``An Act to define the exterior boundary
of the Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation in the State of
Utah, and for other purposes'', approved March 11, 1948 (62
Stat. 72), as amended by the Act entitled ``An Act to amend
the Act extending the exterior boundary of the Uintah and
Ouray Indian Reservation in the State of Utah so as to
authorize such State to exchange certain mineral lands for
other lands mineral in character'' approved August 9, 1955,
(69 Stat. 544), is further amended by adding at the end the
following:
``Sec. 5. In order to further clarify authorizations under
this Act, the State of Utah is hereby authorized to
relinquish to the United States, for the benefit of the Ute
Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation, State
school trust or other State-owned subsurface mineral lands
located beneath the surface estate delineated in Public Law
440 (approved March 11, 1948) and south of the border between
Grand County, Utah, and Uintah County, Utah, and select in
lieu of such relinquished lands, on an acre-for-acre basis,
any subsurface mineral lands of the United States located
beneath the surface estate delineated in Public Law 440
(approved March 11, 1948) and north of the border between
Grand County, Utah, and Uintah County, Utah, subject to the
following conditions:
``(1) Reservation by united states.--The Secretary of the
Interior shall reserve an overriding interest in that portion
of the mineral estate comprised of minerals subject to
leasing under the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 171 et seq)
in any mineral lands conveyed to the State.
``(2) Extent of overriding interest.--The overriding
interest reserved by the United States under paragraph (1)
shall consist of--
``(A) 50 percent of any bonus bid or other payment received
by the State as consideration for securing any lease or
authorization to develop such mineral resources;
``(B) 50 percent of any rental or other payments received
by the State as consideration for the lease or authorization
to develop such mineral resources;
``(C) a 6.25 percent overriding royalty on the gross
proceeds of oil and gas production
[[Page 14817]]
under any lease or authorization to develop such oil and gas
resources; and
``(D) an overriding royalty on the gross proceeds of
production of such minerals other than oil and gas, equal to
50 percent of the royalty rate established by the Secretary
of the Interior by regulation as of October 1, 2011.
``(3) Reservation by state of utah.--The State of Utah
shall reserve, for the benefit of its State school trust, an
overriding interest in that portion of the mineral estate
comprised of minerals subject to leasing under the Mineral
Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq) in any mineral lands
relinquished by the State to the United States.
``(4) Extent of overriding interest.--The overriding
interest reserved by the State under paragraph (3) shall
consist of--
``(A) 50 percent of any bonus bid or other payment received
by the United States as consideration for securing any lease
or authorization to develop such mineral resources on the
relinquished lands;
``(B) 50 percent of any rental or other payments received
by the United States as consideration for the lease or
authorization to develop such mineral resources;
``(C) a 6.25 percent overriding royalty on the gross
proceeds of oil and gas production under any lease or
authorization to develop such oil and gas resources; and
``(D) an overriding royalty on the gross proceeds of
production of such minerals other than oil and gas, equal to
50 percent of the royalty rate established by the Secretary
of the Interior by regulation as of October 1, 2011.
``(5) No obligation to lease.--Neither the United States
nor the State shall be obligated to lease or otherwise
develop oil and gas resources in which the other party
retains an overriding interest under this section.
``(6) Cooperative agreements.--The Secretary of the
Interior is authorized to enter into cooperative agreements
with the State and the Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and
Ouray Reservation to facilitate the relinquishment and
selection of lands to be conveyed under this section, and the
administration of the overriding interests reserved
hereunder.
``(7) Termination.--The overriding interest reserved by the
Secretary of the Interior under paragraph (1), and the
overriding interest reserved by the State under paragraph
(3), shall automatically terminate 30 years after the date of
enactment of this section.''.
______
SA 2856. Mr. HATCH submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3525, to protect and enhance opportunities for
recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the end, add the following:
TITLE III--TIMBER SALE CONTRACTS
SEC. 301. EXTENDING NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM TIMBER SALE
CONTRACTS.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Qualifying contract.--The term ``qualifying contract''
means a contract (including an integrated resource timber
contract) for the sale of timber on National Forest System
land--
(A) that was awarded before January 1, 2010;
(B) for which the original contract term was for 2 or more
years;
(C) for which there is unharvested volume of timber
remaining;
(D) for which, not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the contract awardee makes a written
request to the Secretary for an extension of time;
(E) for which the Secretary determines there is not an
urgent need to harvest due to deteriorating timber
conditions;
(F) for which the Secretary determines there is not an
urgent need to harvest to accomplish fuel reduction
objectives in wildland-urban interface areas; and
(G) that is not in breach or default.
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Agriculture, acting through the Chief of the Forest
Service.
(3) Wildland-urban interface.--The term ``wildland-urban
interface'' has the meaning given the term in section 101 of
the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6511).
(b) Extension of Time.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law
and subject to the conditions described in paragraph (2), the
Secretary may extend the term of a qualifying contract for
not more than 2 years after the applicable contract
termination date.
(2) Conditions.--An extension of a qualifying contract
under paragraph (1) shall be subject to the following
conditions:
(A) The total contract term shall not exceed 10 years,
including the extension granted under this section.
(B) A qualifying contract that receives a 1-year
substantial overriding public interest extension authorized
by the Chief of the Forest Service in 2012 may only receive
an extension of 1 year under this section.
(C) Periodic payment dates that have not been reached as of
the date of a request by a contract awardee under this
section shall be adjusted in accordance with applicable law
and policies.
(c) Effect.--
(1) No surrender of claims.--Nothing in this section shall
result in the surrendering of any claim by the United States
against any contract awardee that arose under a qualifying
contract before the date on which the Secretary extends the
qualifying contract term under this section.
(2) Release of liability.--Before receiving an extension of
a contract term under this section, the contract awardee
shall release the United States from all liability, including
further consideration or compensation, resulting from--
(A) the extension of the qualifying contract term; or
(B) a determination by the Secretary under this section to
not extend the contract term.
(3) Future administrative actions.--Nothing in this section
precludes the Secretary from modifying a qualifying contract
extended under this section to grant administrative relief
consistent with applicable law (including regulations) and
policy.
______
SA 2857. Mr. HATCH submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3525, to protect and enhance opportunities for
recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
On page 100, after line 13, add the following:
SEC. 249. REMOVAL OF GRAY WOLF IN THE STATE OF UTAH FROM THE
LIST OF ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Gray wolf.--The term ``gray wolf'' means any taxonomic
group traditionally associated with the gray wolf, including
Canus lupus baileyi, regardless of specific taxonomy of any
particular gray wolf variety as a species, subspecies, or
other designation.
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' has the meaning
given the term in section 3 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973 (16 U.S.C. 1532).
(b) Removal of Gray Wolf in the State of Utah From the List
of Endangered or Threatened Species.--Notwithstanding any
other provision of law, not later than 60 days after the date
of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall promulgate
regulations removing from the list of endangered or
threatened species under section 4(c) of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1533(c)) the gray wolf within
the borders of the State of Utah.
______
SA 2858. Mr. HATCH submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 3525, to protect and enhance opportunities for
recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting, and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table.
At the end, add the following:
TITLE III--PUTTING THE GULF OF MEXICO BACK TO WORK
SEC. 301. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Putting the Gulf of Mexico
Back to Work Act''.
SEC. 302. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) Covered civil action.--The term ``covered civil
action'' means a civil action containing a claim under
section 702 of title 5, United States Code, regarding agency
action (as defined for the purposes of that section)
affecting a covered energy project in the Gulf of Mexico.
(2) Covered energy project.--
(A) In general.--The term ``covered energy project'' means
the leasing of Federal land of the outer Continental Shelf
for the exploration, development, production, processing, or
transmission of oil, natural gas, wind, or any other source
of energy in the Gulf of Mexico, and any action under a
lease.
(B) Exclusion.--The term ``covered energy project'' does
not include any dispute between the parties to a lease
regarding the obligations under the lease, including any
alleged breach of the lease.
(3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.
Subtitle A--Outer Continental Shelf Land
SEC. 311. DRILLING PERMITS.
Section 11 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1340) is amended by striking subsection (d) and
inserting the following:
``(d) Drilling Permits.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall by regulation
require that any lessee operating under an approved
exploration plan--
``(A) obtain a permit before drilling any well in
accordance with the plan; and
``(B) obtain a new permit before drilling any well of a
design that is significantly different than the design for
which the existing permit was issued.
``(2) Safety review required.--The Secretary shall not
issue a permit under paragraph (1) without ensuring that the
proposed drilling operations meet all--
``(A) critical safety system requirements, including
blowout prevention; and
``(B) oil spill response and containment requirements.
``(3) Timeline.--
[[Page 14818]]
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall determine whether to
issue a permit under paragraph (1) not later than 30 days
after the date on which the Secretary receives the
application for a permit.
``(B) Extension of time.--
``(i) In general.--The Secretary may extend the period in
which to consider an application for a permit for up to 2
periods of 15 days each if the Secretary has given written
notice of the delay to the applicant.
``(ii) Notice.--The notice described in clause (i) shall--
``(I) be in the form of a letter from the Secretary or a
designee of the Secretary; and
``(II) include--
``(aa) the name and title of each individual processing the
application;
``(bb) the reason for the delay; and
``(cc) the date on which the Secretary expects to make a
final decision on the application.
``(4) Denial of application.--If the Secretary denies the
application, the Secretary shall provide the applicant--
``(A) a written statement that provides clear and
comprehensive reasons why the application was not accepted
and detailed information concerning any deficiency; and
``(B) an opportunity to remedy any deficiencies.
``(5) Failure to make decision within 60 days.--If the
Secretary does not make a decision on the application by the
date that is 60 days from the date on which the Secretary
receives the application, the application shall be considered
approved.''.
Subtitle B--Judicial Review of Agency Actions Relating to Outer
Continental Shelf Activities in Gulf of Mexico
SEC. 322. EXCLUSIVE VENUE FOR CERTAIN CIVIL ACTIONS RELATING
TO COVERED ENERGY PROJECTS IN GULF OF MEXICO.
A covered civil action shall be brought only in a judicial
district in the Fifth Circuit unless there is no district in
that circuit in which the action may be brought.
SEC. 323. TIME LIMITATION ON FILING.
A covered civil action is barred unless the action is filed
not later than the date that is 60 days after the date of the
final Federal agency action.
SEC. 324. EXPEDITION IN HEARING AND DETERMINING ACTION.
A court shall endeavor to hear and determine any covered
civil action as expeditiously as practicable.
SEC. 325. STANDARD OF REVIEW.
(a) In General.--In any judicial review of a covered civil
action, administrative findings and conclusions relating to
the challenged Federal action or decision shall be presumed
to be correct.
(b) Standard.--The presumption described in subsection (a)
may be rebutted only by a preponderance of the evidence
contained in the administrative record.
SEC. 326. LIMITATION ON PROSPECTIVE RELIEF.
In a covered civil action, a court shall not grant or
approve any prospective relief unless the court finds that
the relief is narrowly drawn, extends no further than
necessary to correct the violation of a legal requirement,
and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct that
violation.
SEC. 327. LIMITATION ON ATTORNEYS' FEES.
(a) In General.--Sections 504 of title 5 and 2412 of title
28, United States Code, do not apply to a covered civil
action.
(b) Payment From Federal Government.--No party to a covered
civil action shall receive from the Federal Government
payment for attorneys' fees, expenses, and other court costs.
TITLE IV--RESTARTING AMERICAN OFFSHORE LEASING NOW
SEC. 401. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Restarting American
Offshore Leasing Now Act''.
SEC. 402. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) Environmental impact statement for the 2007-2012 5-year
ocs plan.--The term ``environmental impact statement for the
2007-2012 5-Year OCS plan'' means the final environmental
impact statement prepared by the Secretary entitled ``Outer
Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program: 2007-2012'',
and dated April 2007.
(2) Multisale environmental impact statement.--The term
``multisale environmental impact statement'' means the
environmental impact statement prepared by the Secretary
relating to proposed Western Gulf of Mexico OCS Oil and Gas
Lease Sales 204, 207, 210, 215, and 218, and proposed Central
Gulf of Mexico OCS Oil and Gas Lease Sales 205, 206, 208,
213, 216, and 222, and dated September 2008.
(3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.
SEC. 403. REQUIREMENT TO CONDUCT PROPOSED OIL AND GAS LEASE
SALE 216 IN CENTRAL GULF OF MEXICO.
(a) In General.--As soon as practicable, but not later than
60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretary shall conduct offshore oil and gas Lease Sale 216
under section 8 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (33
U.S.C. 1337) .
(b) Environmental Review.--For the purposes of the lease
sale described in subsection (a), the environmental impact
statement for the 2007-2012 5-Year OCS plan and the multisale
environmental impact statement shall be considered to satisfy
the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
SEC. 404. REQUIREMENT TO CONDUCT PROPOSED OIL AND GAS LEASE
SALE 220 ON OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF OFFSHORE
VIRGINIA.
(a) In General.--As soon as practicable, but not later than
1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary
shall conduct offshore oil and gas Lease Sale 220 under
section 8 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (33 U.S.C.
1337).
(b) Environmental Review.--For the purposes of the lease
sale described in subsection (a), the environmental impact
statement for the 2007-2012 5-Year OCS plan and the multisale
environmental impact statement shall be considered to satisfy
the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
SEC. 405. REQUIREMENT TO CONDUCT PROPOSED OIL AND GAS LEASE
SALE 222 IN CENTRAL GULF OF MEXICO.
(a) In General.--As soon as practicable, but not later than
60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretary shall conduct offshore oil and gas Lease Sale 222
under section 8 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (33
U.S.C. 1337).
(b) Environmental Review.--For the purposes of the lease
sale described in subsection (a), the environmental impact
statement for the 2007-2012 5-Year OCS plan and the multisale
environmental impact statement shall be considered to satisfy
the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
TITLE V--REVERSING PRESIDENT OBAMA'S OFFSHORE MORATORIUM
SEC. 501. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Reversing President
Obama's Offshore Moratorium Act''.
SEC. 502. OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF LEASING PROGRAM.
Section 18(a) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1344(a)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(5)(A) In each oil and gas leasing program under this
section, the Secretary shall make available for leasing and
conduct lease sales that include--
``(i) at least 50 percent of the available unleased acreage
within each outer Continental Shelf planning area considered
to have the largest undiscovered, technically recoverable oil
and gas resources (on a total btu basis) based upon the most
recent national geological assessment of the outer
Continental Shelf, with an emphasis on offering the most
geologically prospective parts of the planning area; and
``(ii) any State subdivision of an outer Continental Shelf
planning area that the Governor of the State that represents
that subdivision requests be made available for leasing.
``(B) In this paragraph, the term `available unleased
acreage' means that portion of the outer Continental Shelf
that is not under lease at the time of a proposed lease sale,
and that has not otherwise been made unavailable for leasing
by law.
``(6)(A) For the 2012-2017 5-year oil and gas leasing
program, the Secretary shall make available for leasing any
outer Continental Shelf planning areas that are estimated to
contain more than--
``(i) 2,500,000,000 barrels of oil; or
``(ii) 7,500,000,000,000 cubic feet of natural gas.
``(B) To determine the planning areas described in
subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall use the document
entitled `Minerals Management Service Assessment of
Undiscovered Technically Recoverable Oil and Gas Resources of
the Nation's Outer Continental Shelf, 2006'.''.
SEC. 503. DOMESTIC OIL AND NATURAL GAS PRODUCTION GOAL.
Section 18 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1344) is amended by striking subsection (b) and
inserting the following:
``(b) Domestic Oil and Natural Gas Production Goal.---
``(1) In general.--In developing a 5-year oil and gas
leasing program, subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary
shall determine a domestic strategic production goal for the
development of oil and natural gas as a result of that
program, which goal shall be--
``(A) the best estimate of the practicable increase in
domestic production of oil and natural gas from the outer
Continental Shelf;
``(B) focused on meeting domestic demand for oil and
natural gas and reducing the dependence of the United States
on foreign energy; and
``(C) focused on the production increases achieved by the
leasing program at the end of the 15-year period beginning on
the effective date of the program.
``(2) 2012-2017 program goal.--For purposes of the 2012-
2017 5-year oil and gas leasing program, the production goal
referred to in paragraph (1) shall be an increase by 2027 of
not less than--
``(A) 3,000,000 barrels in the quantity of oil produced per
day; and
[[Page 14819]]
``(B) 10,000,000,000 cubic feet in the quantity of natural
gas produced per day.
``(3) Reporting.--Beginning at the end of the 5-year period
for which the program applies and annually thereafter, the
Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Natural Resources
of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy
and Natural Resources of the Senate a report on the progress
of the program in meeting the production goal that includes
an identification of projections for production and any
problems with leasing, permitting, or production that will
prevent meeting the goal.''.
TITLE VI--JOBS AND ENERGY PERMITTING
SEC. 601. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Jobs and Energy Permitting
Act of 2012''.
SEC. 602. AIR QUALITY MEASUREMENT.
Section 328(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.
7627(a)(1)) is amended in the second sentence by inserting
before the period at the end the following: ``, except that
any air quality impact of any OCS source shall be measured or
modeled, as appropriate, and determined solely with respect
to the impacts in the corresponding onshore area''.
SEC. 603. OCS SOURCE.
Section 328(a)(4)(C) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.
7627(a)(4)(C)) is amended in the second sentence of the
matter following clause (iii) by striking ``shall be
considered direct emissions from the OCS source'' and
inserting ``shall be considered direct emissions from the OCS
source but shall not be subject to any emission control
requirement applicable to the source under subpart 1 of part
C of title I of this Act. For platform or drill ship
exploration, an OCS source is established at the point in
time when drilling commences at a location and ceases to
exist when drilling activity ends at the location or is
temporarily interrupted because the platform or drill ship
relocates for weather or other reasons''.
SEC. 604. PERMITS.
(a) Permits.--Section 328 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.
7627) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(d) Permit Application.--In the case of a completed
application for a permit under this Act for platform or drill
ship exploration for an OCS source--
``(1) final agency action (including any reconsideration of
the issuance or denial of such a permit) shall be taken not
later than 180 days after the date on which the completed
application is filed;
``(2) the Environmental Appeals Board of the Environmental
Protection Agency shall have no authority to consider any
matter regarding the consideration, issuance, or denial of
the permit;
``(3) no administrative stay of the effectiveness of the
permit may extend beyond the date that is 180 days after the
date on which the completed application is filed;
``(4) that final agency action shall be considered to be
nationally applicable under section 307(b); and
``(5) judicial review of that final agency action shall be
available only in accordance with section 307(b) without
additional administrative review or adjudication.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 328(a)(4) of the Clean
Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7627(a)(4)) is amended by striking ``For
purposes of subsections (a) and (b) of this section--'' and
inserting ``For purposes of subsections (a), (b), and (d):''.
TITLE VII--SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY WATER RELIABILITY
SEC. 701. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Sacramento-San Joaquin
Valley Water Reliability Act''.
Subtitle A--Central Valley Project Water Reliability
SEC. 711. AMENDMENT TO PURPOSES.
Section 3402 of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act
(Public Law 102-575; 106 Stat. 4706) is amended--
(1) in subsection (f), by striking the period at the end;
and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(g) to ensure that water dedicated to fish and wildlife
purposes by this title is replaced and provided to Central
Valley Project water contractors not later than December 31,
2016, at the lowest cost reasonably achievable; and
``(h) to facilitate and expedite water transfers in
accordance with this title.''.
SEC. 712. AMENDMENT TO DEFINITION.
Section 3403 of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act
(Public Law 102-575; 106 Stat. 4707) is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following:
``(a) the term `anadromous fish' means those native stocks
of salmon (including steelhead) and sturgeon that--
``(1) as of October 30, 1992, were present in the
Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers and the tributaries of the
Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers; and
``(2) ascend those rivers and tributaries to reproduce
after maturing in San Francisco Bay or the Pacific Ocean;'';
(2) by redesignating subsections (i) through (m) as
subsections (j) through (n), respectively; and
(3) by inserting after subsection (h) the following:
``(i) the term `reasonable flows' means water flows capable
of being maintained taking into account competing consumptive
uses of water and economic, environmental, and social
factors.''.
SEC. 713. CONTRACTS.
Section 3404 of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act
(Public Law 102-575; 106 Stat. 4708) is amended to read as
follows:
``SEC. 3404. CONTRACTS.
``(a) Renewal of Existing Long-term Contracts.--On request
of the contractor, the Secretary shall renew any existing
long-term repayment or water service contract that provides
for the delivery of water from the Central Valley Project for
a period of 40 years.
``(b) Administration of Contracts.--Except as expressly
provided by this title, any existing long-term repayment or
water service contract for the delivery of water from the
Central Valley Project shall be administered pursuant to the
Act of July 2, 1956 (chapter 492; 70 Stat. 483).
``(c) Delivery Charge.--Beginning on the date of enactment
of this Act, a contract entered into or renewed pursuant to
this section shall include a provision that requires the
Secretary to charge any other party to the contract only for
water actually delivered by the Secretary.''.
SEC. 714. WATER TRANSFERS, IMPROVED WATER MANAGEMENT, AND
CONSERVATION.
Section 3405 of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act
(Public Law 102-575; 106 Stat. 4709) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in the second sentence, by striking ``Except as
provided herein'' and inserting ``The Secretary shall take
all actions necessary to facilitate and expedite transfers of
Central Valley Project water in accordance with this title or
any other provision of Federal reclamation law and the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.). Except as provided in this subsection,'';
(B) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking ``to combination'' and
inserting ``or combination'';
(C) in paragraph (2), by adding at the end the following:
``(E) Written transfer proposals.--
``(i) In general.--The contracting district from which the
water is supplied, the agency, or the Secretary, as
applicable, shall determine whether a written transfer
proposal is complete not later than 45 days after the date on
which the proposal is submitted.
``(ii) Determination.--If the contracting district, the
agency, or the Secretary determines that the proposal
described in clause (i) is incomplete, the contracting
district, agency, or Secretary shall state, in writing and
with specificity, the conditions under which the proposal
would be considered complete.
``(F) No mitigation requirements.--
``(i) In general.--Except as provided in this section, the
Secretary shall not impose mitigation or other requirements
on a proposed transfer.
``(ii) Applicability.--This section shall have no effect on
the authority of the contracting district from which the
water is supplied or the agency under State law to approve or
condition a proposed transfer.''; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
``(4) Applicability.--Notwithstanding any other provision
of Federal reclamation law--
``(A) the authority to transfer, exchange, bank, or make
recharging arrangements using Central Valley Project water
that could have been carried out before October 30, 1992, is
valid, and those transfers, exchanges, or arrangements shall
not be subject to, limited, or conditioned by this title; and
``(B) this title does not supersede or revoke the authority
to transfer, exchange, bank, or recharge Central Valley
Project water in effect before October 30, 1992.'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in the heading, by striking ``METERING'' and inserting
``MEASUREMENT'';
(B) in the first sentence, by striking ``All Central
Valley'' and inserting the following:
``(1) In general.--All Central Valley'';
(C) in the second sentence, by striking ``The contracting
district'' and inserting the following:
``(3) Annual report.--The contracting district''; and
(D) by inserting after paragraph (1) (as designated by
subparagraph (B)) the following:
``(2) Measurement requirements.--The contracting district
or agency, not including contracting districts serving
multiple agencies with separate governing boards, shall
ensure that all contractor-owned water delivery systems
within the boundaries of the contracting district or agency
measure surface water at the facilities of the contracting
district or agency up to the point at which the surface water
is commingled with other water supplies.'';
(3) by striking subsection (d);
(4) by redesignating subsections (e) and (f) as subsections
(d) and (e), respectively; and
(5) by striking subsection (e) (as redesignated by
paragraph (4)) and inserting the following:
``(e) Increased Revenues.--All revenues received by the
Secretary that exceed the
[[Page 14820]]
cost-of-service rates applicable to the delivery of water
transferred from irrigation use to municipal and industrial
use under subsection (a) shall be covered to the Restoration
Fund.''.
SEC. 715. FISH, WILDLIFE, AND HABITAT RESTORATION.
Section 3406 of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act
(Public Law 102-575; 106 Stat. 4714) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking paragraph (1)(B) and inserting the
following:
``(B) Administration.--
``(i) In general.--As needed to carry out the goals of the
Central Valley Project, the Secretary may modify Central
Valley Project operations to provide reasonable flows of
suitable quality, quantity, and timing to protect all life
stages of anadromous fish.
``(ii) Requirements.--The flows under clause (i) shall be
provided from the quantity of water dedicated to fish,
wildlife, and habitat restoration purposes under paragraph
(2) from the water supplies acquired pursuant to paragraph
(3) and from other sources which do not conflict with
fulfillment of the remaining contractual obligations of the
Secretary to provide Central Valley Project water for other
authorized purposes.
``(iii) Determination of needs.--The Secretary shall
determine the instream reasonable flow needs for all Central
Valley Project controlled streams and rivers based on
recommendations of the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service after
consultation with the United States Geological Survey.''; and
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A)--
(I) in the first sentence, by striking ``primary purpose''
and inserting ``purposes'';
(II) by striking ``but not limited to additional
obligations under the Federal Endangered Species Act'' and
inserting ``additional obligations under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)''; and
(III) by adding at the end the following: ``All Central
Valley Project water used for the purposes specified in this
paragraph shall be credited to the quantity of Central Valley
Project yield dedicated and managed under this paragraph by
determining how the dedication and management of that water
would affect the delivery capability of the Central Valley
Project yield. To the maximum extent practicable and in
accordance with section 3411, Central Valley Project water
dedicated and managed pursuant to this paragraph shall be
reused to fulfill the remaining contractual obligations of
the Secretary to provide Central Valley Project water for
agricultural or municipal and industrial purposes.''; and
(ii) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the
following:
``(C) Mandatory reduction.--If on March 15 of a given year,
the quantity of Central Valley Project water forecasted to be
made available to water service or repayment contractors in
the Delta Division of the Central Valley Project is less than
75 percent of the total quantity of water to be made
available under those contracts, the quantity of Central
Valley Project yield dedicated and managed for that year
under this paragraph shall be reduced by 25 percent.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(i) Satisfaction of Purposes.--In carrying out this
section, the Secretary shall be considered to have met the
mitigation, protection, restoration, and enhancement purposes
of this title.''.
SEC. 716. RESTORATION FUND.
(a) In General.--Section 3407(a) of the Central Valley
Project Improvement Act (Public Law 102-575; 106 Stat. 4726)
is amended--
(1) by striking ``There is hereby'' and inserting the
following:
``(1) Establishment.--
``(A) In general.--There is'';
(2) in paragraph (1)(A) (as designated by paragraph (1)),
by striking ``Not less than 67 percent'' and all that follows
through ``Monies'' and inserting the following:
``(B) Use of donated amounts.--Amounts''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Restrictions.--The Secretary may not directly or
indirectly require a donation or other payment (including
environmental restoration or mitigation fees not otherwise
provided by law) to the Restoration Fund--
``(A) as a condition of--
``(i) providing for the storage or conveyance of non-
Central Valley Project water pursuant to Federal reclamation
laws; or
``(ii) the delivery of water pursuant to section 215 of the
Reclamation Reform Act of 1982 (Public Law 97-293; 96 Stat.
1270); or
``(B) for any water that is delivered with the sole intent
of groundwater recharge.''.
(b) Certain Payments.--Section 3407(c)(1) of the Central
Valley Project Improvement Act (Public Law 102-575; 106 Stat.
4726) is amended--
(1) by striking ``mitigation and restoration payments, in
addition to charges provided for or'' and inserting
``payments, in addition to charges''; and
(2) by striking ``of fish, wildlife'' and all that follows
through the period and inserting ``of carrying out this
title.''.
(c) Adjustment and Assessment of Mitigation and Restoration
Payments.--Section 3407(d) of the Central Valley Project
Improvement Act (Public Law 102-575; 106 Stat. 4727) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (2)(A)--
(A) by striking ``, and $12 per acre-foot (October 1992
price levels) for municipal and industrial water sold and
delivered by the Central Valley Project'' and inserting ``$12
per acre-foot (October 1992 price levels) for municipal and
industrial water sold and delivered by the Central Valley
Project, and after October 1, 2013, $4 per megawatt-hour for
Central Valley Project power sold to power contractors
(October 2013 price levels)''; and
(B) by inserting `` but not later than December 31, 2020,''
after ``That upon the completion of the fish, wildlife, and
habitat mitigation and restoration actions mandated under
section 3406 of this title,''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(g) Report on Expenditure of Funds.--
``(1) In general.--For each fiscal year, the Secretary, in
consultation with the Advisory Board, shall submit to
Congress a plan for the expenditure of all of the funds
deposited in the Restoration Fund during the preceding fiscal
year.
``(2) Contents.--The plan shall include an analysis of the
cost-effectiveness of each expenditure.
``(h) Advisory Board.--
``(1) Establishment.--There is established the Restoration
Fund Advisory Board (referred to in this section as the
`Advisory Board'), which shall be composed of 12 members
appointed by the Secretary.
``(2) Membership.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall appoint members to
the Advisory Board that represent the various Central Valley
Project stakeholders, of whom--
``(i) 4 members shall be agricultural users of the Central
Valley Project;
``(ii) 3 members shall be municipal and industrial users of
the Central Valley Project;
``(iii) 3 members shall be power contractors of the Central
Valley Project; and
``(iv) 2 members shall be appointed at the discretion of
the Secretary.
``(B) Observers.--The Secretary and the Secretary of
Commerce may each designate a representative to act as an
observer of the Advisory Board.
``(C) Chairman.--The Secretary shall appoint 1 of the
members described in subparagraph (A) to serve as Chairman of
the Advisory Board.
``(3) Terms.--The term of each member of the Advisory Board
shall be for a period of 4 years.
``(4) Duties.--The duties of the Advisory Board are--
``(A) to meet not less frequently than semiannually to
develop and make recommendations to the Secretary regarding
priorities and spending levels on projects and programs
carried out under this title;
``(B) to ensure that any advice given or recommendation
made by the Advisory Board reflects the independent judgment
of the Advisory Board;
``(C) not later than December 31, 2013, and annually
thereafter, to submit to the Secretary and Congress the
recommendations under subparagraph (A); and
``(D) not later than December 31, 2013, and biennially
thereafter, to submit to Congress a report that details the
progress made in achieving the actions required under section
3406.
``(5) Administration.--With the consent of the appropriate
agency head, the Advisory Board may use the facilities and
services of any Federal agency.''.
SEC. 717. ADDITIONAL AUTHORITIES.
(a) Authority for Certain Activities.--Section 3408 of the
Central Valley Project Improvement Act (Public Law 102-575;
106 Stat. 4728) is amended by striking subsection (c) and
inserting the following:
``(c) Contracts for Additional Storage and Delivery of
Water.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary may enter into contracts
under the reclamation laws and this title with any Federal
agency, California water user or water agency, State agency,
or private organization for the exchange, impoundment,
storage, carriage, and delivery of nonproject water for
domestic, municipal, industrial, fish and wildlife, and any
other beneficial purpose.
``(2) Limitation.--Nothing in this subsection supersedes
section 2(d) of the Act of August 26, 1937 (chapter 832; 50
Stat. 850; 100 Stat. 3051).
``(3) Authority for certain activities.--The Secretary
shall use the authority granted by this subsection in
connection with requests to exchange, impound, store, carry,
or deliver nonproject water using Central Valley Project
facilities for any beneficial purpose.
``(4) Rates.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall develop rates not to
exceed the amount required to recover the reasonable costs
incurred by the Secretary in connection with a beneficial
purpose under this subsection.
``(B) Administration.--The rates shall be charged to a
party using Central Valley Project facilities for a
beneficial purpose, but the costs described in subparagraph
(A) shall not include any donation or other payment to the
Restoration Fund.
``(5) Construction.--This subsection shall be construed and
implemented to facilitate
[[Page 14821]]
and encourage the use of Central Valley Project facilities to
exchange, impound, store, carry, or deliver nonproject water
for any beneficial purpose.''.
(b) Reporting Requirements.--Section 3408(f) of the Central
Valley Project Improvement Act (Public Law 102-575; 106 Stat.
4729) is amended--
(1) in the first sentence, by striking ``Interior and
Insular Affairs and the Committee on Merchant Marine and
Fisheries'' and inserting ``Natural Resources'';
(2) in the second sentence, by inserting ``, including
progress on the plan under subsection (j)'' before the period
at the end; and
(3) by adding at the end the following: ``The filing and
adequacy of the report shall be personally certified to the
Committees by the Regional Director of the Mid-Pacific Region
of the Bureau of Reclamation.''.
(c) Project Yield Increase.--Section 3408(j) of the Central
Valley Project Improvement Act (Public Law 102-575; 106 Stat.
4730) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (7) as
subparagraphs (A) through (G), respectively, and indenting
appropriately;
(2) by striking ``In order to minimize adverse effects, if
any, upon'' and inserting the following:
``(1) In general.--In order to minimize adverse effects
upon'';
(3) in the second sentence, by striking ``The plan'' and
all that follows through ``options:'' and inserting the
following:
``(2) Contents.--The plan shall include recommendations on
appropriate cost-sharing arrangements and authorizing
legislation or other measures needed to implement the intent,
purposes, and provisions of this subsection, as well as a
description of how the Secretary intends to use--'';
(4) in paragraph (1) (as designated by paragraph (2))--
(A) by striking ``needs, the Secretary, shall'' and all
that follows through ``to the Congress,'' and inserting
``needs, the Secretary, on a priority basis and not later
than September 30, 2013, shall submit to Congress''; and
(B) by striking ``increase,'' and all that follows through
``under this title'' and inserting ``increase, as soon as
practicable, but not later than September 30, 2016 (except
that the construction of new facilities shall not be limited
by that deadline), the water of the Central Valley Project by
the quantity dedicated and managed for fish and wildlife
purposes under this title and otherwise required to meet the
purposes of the Central Valley Project, including satisfying
contractual obligations'';
(5) in paragraph (2)(A) (as designated by paragraph (1)),
by inserting ``and construction of new water storage
facilities'' before the semicolon;
(6) in paragraph (2)(F) (as designated by paragraph (1)),
by striking ``and'' at the end;
(7) in paragraph (2)(G) (as designated by paragraph (1)),
by striking the period and all that follows through the end
of the subsection and inserting ``; and''; and
(8) by adding after paragraph (2)(G) the following:
``(H) water banking and recharge.
``(3) Implementation of plan.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall implement the plan
under paragraph (1) beginning on October 1, 2013.
``(B) Coordination.--In carrying out this subsection, the
Secretary shall coordinate with the State of California in
implementing measures for the long-term resolution of
problems in the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta Estuary.
``(4) Failure of plan.--Notwithstanding any other provision
of the reclamation laws, if by September 30, 2016, the plan
under paragraph (1) fails to increase the annual delivery
capability of the Central Valley Project by 800,000 acre-
feet, implementation of any nonmandatory action under section
3406(b)(2) shall be suspended until the date on which the
plan achieves an increase in the annual delivery capability
of the Central Valley Project of 800,000 acre-feet.''.
(d) Technical Corrections.--Section 3408(h) of the Central
Valley Project Improvement Act (Public Law 102-575; 106 Stat.
4729) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``paragraph (h)(2)'' and
inserting ``paragraph (2)''; and
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``paragraph (h)(i)'' and
inserting ``paragraph (1)''.
(e) Water Storage Project Construction.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior, acting
through the Commissioner of Reclamation, may partner or enter
into an agreement relating to the water storage projects
described in section 103(d)(1) of the Water Supply,
Reliability, and Environmental Improvement Act (Public Law
108-361; 118 Stat. 1684) with local joint powers authorities
formed under State law by irrigation districts and other
local governments or water districts within the applicable
hydrological region to advance those water storage projects.
(2) No additional federal amounts.--
(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), no additional
Federal amounts are authorized to be appropriated to carry
out the activities described in clauses (i) through (iii) of
sections 103(d)(1)(A) of the Water Supply, Reliability, and
Environmental Improvement Act (Public Law 108-361; 118 Stat.
1684) Public Law 108-361.
(B) Exception.--Additional Federal amounts may be
appropriated for construction of a project described in
subparagraph (A) if non-Federal amounts are used to finance
and construct the project.
SEC. 718. BAY-DELTA ACCORD.
(a) Congressional Direction Regarding Central Valley
Project and California State Water Project Operations.--
(1) In general.--The Central Valley Project and the
California State Water Project shall be operated strictly in
accordance with the water quality standards and operational
constraints described in the ``Principles for Agreement on
the Bay-Delta Standards Between the State of California and
the Federal Government'' dated December 15, 1994.
(2) Applicability of other law.--The Endangered Species Act
of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and other applicable law
shall not apply to operations described in paragraph (1).
(3) Implementation.--Implementation of the ``Principles for
Agreement on the Bay-Delta Standards Between the State of
California and the Federal Government'' dated December 15,
1994, shall be in strict compliance with the water rights
priority system and statutory protections for areas of
origin.
(b) Application of Laws to Others.--
(1) In general.--As a condition of the receipt of Federal
amounts for the Central Valley Project and the California
State Water Project, the State of California (including any
agency or board of the State of California), on any water
right obtained pursuant to State law, including a pre-1914
appropriative right, shall not--
(A) impose any condition that restricts the exercise of
that water right that is affected by operations of the
Central Valley Project or California State Water Project;
(B) restrict under the Public Trust Doctrine any public
trust value imposed in order to conserve, enhance, recover,
or otherwise protect any species.
(2) Federal agencies.--The prohibition under paragraph
(1)(A) shall apply to Federal agencies.
(c) Costs.--No cost associated with the implementation of
this section shall be imposed directly or indirectly on any
Central Valley Project contractor, or any other person or
entity, unless those costs are incurred on a voluntary basis.
(d) Native Species Protection.--This section preempts any
law of the State California law restricting the quantity or
size of a nonnative fish that is taken or harvested that
preys on 1 or more native fish species that occupy the
Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers and the tributaries of
those rivers or the Sacramento-San Joaquin Rivers Delta.
SEC. 719. NATURAL AND ARTIFICIALLY SPAWNED SPECIES.
After the date of enactment of this Act, and regardless of
the date of listing, the Secretaries of the Interior and
Commerce shall not distinguish between natural-spawned and
hatchery-spawned (or otherwise artificially propagated
strains of a species) in making any determination under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) that
relates to an anadromous fish species present in the
Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers or the tributaries of those
rivers and that ascends those rivers and tributaries to
reproduce after maturing in San Francisco Bay or the Pacific
Ocean.
SEC. 720. AUTHORIZED SERVICE AREA.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of the Interior, acting
through the Commissioner of Reclamation, shall include in the
service area of the Central Valley Project authorized under
the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (Public Law 102-
575; 106 Stat. 4706) the area within the boundaries of the
Kettleman City Community Services District, California, as
those boundaries are defined as of the date of enactment of
this Act.
(b) Long-term Contract.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding the Central Valley Project
Improvement Act (Public Law 102-575; 106 Stat. 4706) and
subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary, in accordance with
the reclamation laws, shall enter into a long-term contract
with the Kettleman City Community Services District or the
delivery of not more than 900 acre-feet of Central Valley
Project water for municipal and industrial use.
(2) Reduction in contract.--The Secretary may temporarily
reduce deliveries of the quantity of water made available
under paragraph (1) by not more than 25 percent of the total
whenever reductions due to hydrologic circumstances are
imposed on agricultural deliveries of Central Valley Project
water.
(c) Additional Cost.--If any additional infrastructure or
related costs are needed to implement this section, those
costs shall be the responsibility of the non-Federal entity.
SEC. 721. REGULATORY STREAMLINING.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) CVP.--The term ``CVP'' means the Central Valley
Project.
(2) Project.--The term ``project''--
(A) means an activity that--
(i) is undertaken by a public agency, funded by a public
agency, or requires the issuance of a permit by a public
agency;
(ii) has a potential to result in a physical change to the
environment; and
(iii) may be subject to several discretionary approvals by
governmental agencies;
[[Page 14822]]
(B) may include construction activities, clearing or
grading of land, improvements to existing structures, and
activities or equipment involving the issuance of a permit;
or
(C) has the meaning given the term defined in section 21065
of the California Public Resource Code.
(b) Applicability of Certain Laws.--The filing of a notice
of determination or a notice of exemption for any project,
including the issuance of a permit under State law, for any
project of the CVP or the delivery of water from the CVP in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
shall be considered to meet the requirements for that project
or permit under section 102(2)(C) of the National
Environmental Protection Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)).
(c) Continuation of Project.--The Bureau of Reclamation
shall not be required to cease or modify any major Federal
action or other activity for any project of the CVP or the
delivery of water from the CVP pending completion of judicial
review of any determination made under the National
Environmental Protection Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.).
Subtitle B--San Joaquin River Restoration
SEC. 731. REPEAL OF THE SAN JOAQUIN RIVER SETTLEMENT.
As of the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary
shall cease any action to implement the Stipulation of
Settlement, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v.
Rodgers, No. Civ. S-88-1658 LKK/GGH (E.D. Cal. Sept. 13,
2006).
SEC. 732. PURPOSE.
Section 10002 of the San Joaquin River Restoration
Settlement Act (Public Law 111-11; 123 Stat. 1349) is amended
by striking ``implementation of the Settlement'' and
inserting ``restoration of the San Joaquin River''.
SEC. 733. DEFINITIONS.
Section 10003 of the San Joaquin River Restoration
Settlement Act (Public Law 111-11; 123 Stat. 1349) is
amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs
(3) and (4), respectively;
(2) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
``(1) Critical water year.--The term `critical water year'
means a year in which the total unimpaired runoff at Friant
Dam is less than 400,000 acre-feet, as forecasted as of March
1 of that water year by the California Department of Water
Resources.
``(2) Restoration flows.--The term `Restoration Flows'
means the additional water released or bypassed from Friant
Dam to ensure that the target flow entering Mendota Pool,
located approximately 62 river miles downstream from Friant
Dam, does not fall below a speed of 50 cubic feet per
second.''; and
(3) by striking paragraph (4) (as redesignated by paragraph
(1)) and inserting the following:
``(4) Water year.--The term `water year' means the period
beginning March 1 of a given year and ending on the last day
of February of the following calendar year.''.
SEC. 734. IMPLEMENTATION OF RESTORATION.
Section 10004 of the San Joaquin River Restoration
Settlement Act (Public Law 111-11; 123 Stat. 1350) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking ``hereby authorized and directed'' and all
that follows through ``in the Settlement:'' and inserting
``may carry out the following:'';
(B) by striking paragraphs (1), (2), (4), and (5);
(C) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (1);
(D) in paragraph (1) (as redesignated by subparagraph (C)),
by striking ``paragraph 13 of the Settlement'' and inserting
``this part''; and
(E) by adding at the end the following :
``(2) In each water year, beginning in the water year
commencing on March 1, 2013, the Secretary--
``(A) shall modify Friant Dam operations to release the
Restoration Flows for that water year, unless the year is a
critical water year;
``(B) shall ensure that--
``(i) the release of Restoration Flows are maintained at
the level prescribed by this part; and
``(ii) Restoration Flows do not reach downstream of Mendota
Pool;
``(C) shall release the Restoration Flows in a manner that
improves the fishery in the San Joaquin River below Friant
Dam and upstream of Gravelly Ford, Nevada, as in existence on
the date of the enactment of the Sacramento and San Joaquin
Valleys Water Reliability Act, including the associated
riparian habitat; and
``(D) may, without limiting the actions required under
subparagraphs (A) and (C) and subject to paragraph (3) and
subsection (l), use the Restoration Flows to enhance or
restore a warm water fishery downstream of Gravelly Ford,
Nevada, including to Mendota Pool, if the Secretary
determines that the action is reasonable, prudent, and
feasible.
``(3) Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of
the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys Water Reliability Act,
the Secretary shall develop and implement, in cooperation
with the State of California, a reasonable plan--
``(A) to fully recirculate, recapture, reuse, exchange, or
transfer all Restoration Flows; and
``(B) to provide the recirculated, recaptured, reused,
exchanged, or transferred flows to those contractors within
the Friant Division, Hidden Unit, and Buchanan Unit of the
Central Valley Project that relinquished the Restoration
Flows that were recirculated, recaptured, reused, exchanged,
or transferred.
``(4) The plan described in paragraph (3) shall--
``(A) address any impact on groundwater resources within
the service area of the Friant Division, Hidden Unit, and
Buchanan Unit of the Central Valley Project and mitigation
may include groundwater banking and recharge projects;
``(B) not impact the water supply or water rights of any
entity outside the Friant Division, Hidden Unit, and Buchanan
Unit of the Central Valley Project; and
``(C) be subject to applicable provisions of California
water law and the use by the Secretary of the Interior of
Central Valley Project facilities to make Project water
(other than water released from Friant Dam under this part)
and water acquired through transfers available to existing
south of Delta Central Valley Project contractors.'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``the Settlement'' and
inserting ``this part''; and
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``the Settlement'' and
inserting ``this part'';
(3) in subsection (c), by striking ``the Settlement'' and
inserting ``this part'';
(4) by striking subsection (d) and inserting the following:
``(d) Mitigation of Impacts.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than October 1, 2013 and
subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary shall identify--
``(A) the impacts associated with the release of
Restoration Flows prescribed in this part; and
``(B) the measures to be implemented to mitigate impacts on
adjacent and downstream water users, landowners, and agencies
as a result of Restoration Flows.
``(2) Mitigation measures.--Before implementing a decision
or agreement to construct, improve, operate, or maintain a
facility that the Secretary determines is necessary to
implement this part, the Secretary shall implement all
mitigation measures identified in paragraph (1)(B) before the
date on which Restoration Flows are commenced.'';
(5) in subsection (e), by striking ``the Settlement'' and
inserting ``this part'';
(6) in subsection (f), by striking ``the Settlement and
section 10011'' and inserting ``this part'';
(7) in subsection (g)--
(A) by striking ``the Settlement and''; and
(B) by striking ``or exchange contract'' and inserting
``exchange contract, water rights settlement, or holding
contract'';
(8) in subsection (h)--
(A) by striking ``Interim'' in the header;
(B) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking
``Interim Flows under the Settlement'' and inserting
``Restoration Flows under this part'';
(ii) in subparagraph (C)--
(I) in clause (i), by striking ``Interim'' and inserting
``Restoration''; and
(II) in clause (ii), by inserting ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(iii) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``and'' at the end;
and
(iv) by striking subparagraph (E);
(C) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
``(2) Conditions for release.--The Secretary may release
Restoration Flows to the extent that the flows would not
exceed existing downstream channel capacities.'';
(D) in paragraph (3), by striking ``Interim'' and inserting
``Restoration''; and
(E) by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following:
``(4) Claims.--Not later than 60 days after the date of
enactment of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys Water
Reliability Act, the Secretary shall issue, by regulation, a
claims process to address claims, including groundwater
seepage, flooding, or levee instability damages caused as a
result of, arising out of, or related to implementation of
this subtitle.'';
(9) in subsection (i)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking
``the Settlement and parts I and III'' and inserting ``this
part'';
(ii) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(iii) in subparagraph (B)--
(I) by striking ``additional amounts authorized to be
appropriated, including the''; and
(II) by striking ``; and'' and inserting a period; and
(iv) by striking subparagraph (C); and
(B) by striking paragraph (3); and
(10) by adding at the end the following:
``(k) No Impacts on Other Interests.--
``(1) In general.--No Central Valley Project or other water
(other than San Joaquin River water impounded by or bypassed
from Friant Dam) shall be used to implement subsection (a)(2)
unless the use is on a voluntary basis.
``(2) Involuntary costs.--No cost associated with the
implementation of this section
[[Page 14823]]
shall be imposed directly or indirectly on any Central Valley
Project contractor, or any other person or entity, outside
the Friant Division, the Hidden Unit, or the Buchanan Unit,
unless the cost is incurred on a voluntary basis.
``(3) Reduction in water supplies.--The implementation of
this part shall not directly or indirectly reduce any water
supply or water reliability on any Central Valley Project
contractor, any State Water Project contractor, or any other
person or entity, outside the Friant Division, the Hidden
Unit, or the Buchanan Unit, unless the reduction or cost is
incurred on a voluntary basis.
``(l) Priority.--Each action taken under this part shall be
subordinate to the use by the Secretary of Central Valley
Project facilities to make Project water available to Project
contractors, other than water released from the Friant Dam
under this part.
``(m) Applicability.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding section 8 of the Act of
June 17, 1902 (32 Stat. 390, chapter 1093), except as
provided in this part and subtitle D of the Sacramento and
San Joaquin Valleys Water Reliability Act, this part--
``(A) preempts and supersedes any State law, regulation, or
requirement that imposes more restrictive requirements or
regulations on the activities authorized under this part; and
``(B) does not alter or modify any obligation of the Friant
Division, Hidden Unit, and Buchanan Unit of the Central
Valley Project, or other water users on the San Joaquin
River, or tributaries of the San Joaquin River, under any
order issued by the State Water Resources Control Board under
the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (California
Water Code section 13000 et seq.).
``(2) Applicability.--An order described in paragraph
(1)(B) shall be consistent with any congressional
authorization for any affected Federal facility relating to
the Central Valley Project.
``(n) Project Implementation.--Any project to implement
this part shall be phased such that each project shall
include--
``(1) the project purpose and need;
``(2) identification of mitigation measures;
``(3) appropriate environmental review; and
``(4) prior to releasing Restoration Flows under this part
the completion of the any required mitigation measures and
the completion of the project.''.
SEC. 735. DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY; TITLE TO FACILITIES.
Section 10005 of the San Joaquin River Restoration
Settlement Act (Public Law 111-11; 123 Stat. 1353) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``the Settlement
authorized by this part'' and inserting ``this part'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) by striking ``(1) In general.--The Secretary'' and
inserting ``The Secretary''; and
(ii) by striking ``the Settlement authorized by this part''
and inserting ``this part''; and
(B) by striking paragraph (2); and
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``the Settlement'' and
inserting ``this part'';
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) by striking ``through the exercise of its eminent
domain authority''; and
(ii) by striking ``the Settlement'' and inserting ``this
part''; and
(C) in paragraph (3), by striking ``section 10009(c)'' and
inserting ``section 10009''.
SEC. 736. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAW.
Section 10006 of the San Joaquin River Restoration
Settlement Act (Public Law 111-11; 123 Stat. 1354) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``, unless otherwise
provided by this part'' before the period at the end; and
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``the Settlement'' and
inserting ``this part'';
(2) in subsection (b), by inserting ``, unless otherwise
provided by this part'' before the period at the end;
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (2), by striking ``section 10004'' and
inserting ``this part''; and
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``the Settlement'' and
inserting ``this part''; and
(4) in subsection (d)--
(A) by inserting ``, including, without limitation, the
costs of implementing subsections (d) and (h)(4) of section
10004,'' after ``implementing this part''; and
(B) by striking ``for implementation of the Settlement,''.
SEC. 737. COMPLIANCE WITH CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT IMPROVEMENT
ACT.
Section 10007 of the San Joaquin River Restoration
Settlement Act (Public Law 111-11; 123 Stat. 1354) is
amended--
(1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``the Settlement'' and inserting ``the
enactment of this part''; and
(B) by inserting: ``and the obligations of the Secretary
and all other parties to protect and keep in good condition
any fish that may be planted or exist below Friant Dam,
including any obligations under section 5937 of the
California Fish and Game Code and the public trust doctrine,
and those of the Secretary and all other parties under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)''
before ``, provided''; and
(2) in paragraph (1), by striking ``, as provided in the
Settlement''.
SEC. 738. NO PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION.
Section 10008(a) of the San Joaquin River Restoration
Settlement Act (Public Law 111-11; 123 Stat. 1355) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``not a party to the Settlement''; and
(2) by striking ``or the Settlement'' and inserting
``unless otherwise provided by this part, but any Central
Valley Project long-term water service or repayment
contractor within the Friant Division, Hidden unit, or
Buchanan unit adversely affected by the failure of the
Secretary to comply with section 10004(a)(3) may bring an
action against the Secretary for injunctive relief, damages,
or both.''.
SEC. 739. IMPLEMENTATION.
Section 10009 of the San Joaquin River Restoration
Settlement Act (Public Law 111-11; 123 Stat. 1355) is
amended--
(1) in the section heading, by striking ``; SETTLEMENT
FUND'';
(2) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) by striking ``the Settlement'' the first place it
appears and inserting ``this part'';
(ii) by striking ``, estimated to total'' and all that
follows through ``subsection (b)(1),''; and
(iii) by striking ``; provided however,'' and all that
follows through ``$110,000,000 of State funds'';
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``(A) In general.--The
Secretary'' and inserting ``The Secretary''; and
(ii) by striking subparagraph (B); and
(C) in paragraph (3)--
(i) by striking ``Except as provided in the Settlement,
to'' and inserting ``To''; and
(ii) by striking ``this Settlement'' and inserting ``this
part'';
(3) in subsection (b)(1)--
(A) by striking ``In addition'' and all that follows
through ``however, that the'' and inserting ``The'';
(B) by striking ``such additional appropriations only in
amounts equal to''; and
(C) by striking ``or the Settlement'';
(4) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking
``the Settlement'' and inserting ``this part'';
(ii) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``from the sale of
water pursuant to the Settlement, or''; and
(iii) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``the Settlement''
and inserting ``this part'';
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``the Settlement and'';
and
(5) by striking subsections (d) through (f).
SEC. 740. REPAYMENT CONTRACTS AND ACCELERATION OF REPAYMENT
OF CONSTRUCTION COSTS.
Section 10010 of the San Joaquin River Restoration
Settlement Act (Public Law 111-11; 123 Stat. 1358) is
amended--
(1) in paragraphs (3)(D) and (4)(C) of subsection (a), by
striking ``the Settlement and'' each place it appears;
(2) in subsection (c), by striking paragraph (3);
(3) in subsection (d)(1), by striking ``the Settlement''
each place it appears and inserting ``this part'';
(4) in subsection (e)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) by striking ``Interim Flows or Restoration Flows,
pursuant to paragraphs 13 or 15 of the Settlement'' and
inserting ``Restoration Flows, pursuant to this part'';
(ii) by striking ``Interim Flows or'' before ``Restoration
Flows''; and
(iii) by striking ``the Interim Flows or Restoration Flows
or is intended to otherwise facilitate the Water Management
Goal, as described in the Settlement'' and inserting
``Restoration Flows''; and
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) by striking ``except as provided in paragraph 16(b) of
the Settlement''; and
(ii) by striking ``the Interim Flows or Restoration Flows
or to facilitate the Water Management Goal'' and inserting
``Restoration Flows''.
SEC. 741. REPEAL.
Section 10011 of the San Joaquin River Restoration
Settlement Act (Public Law 111-11; 123 Stat. 1362) is
repealed.
SEC. 742. WATER SUPPLY MITIGATION.
Section 10202(b) of the San Joaquin River Restoration
Settlement Act (Public Law 111-11; 123 Stat. 1365) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``the Interim or
Restoration Flows authorized in part I of this subtitle'' and
inserting ``Restoration Flows authorized in this part'';
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``the Interim or
Restoration Flows authorized in part I of this subtitle'' and
inserting ``Restoration Flows authorized in this part''; and
(3) in paragraph (3)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``meet the Restoration
Goal as described in part I of this subtitle'' and inserting
``recover Restoration Flows as described in this part'';
(B) in subparagraph (C)--
(i) by striking ``the Interim or Restoration Flows
authorized in part I of this subtitle'' and inserting
``Restoration Flows authorized in this part''; and
(ii) by striking ``, and for ensuring appropriate
adjustment in the recovered water account pursuant to section
10004(a)(5)''.
[[Page 14824]]
SEC. 743. ADDITIONAL AUTHORITIES.
Section 10203 of the San Joaquin River Restoration
Settlement Act (Public Law 111-11; 123 Stat. 1367) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``section 10004(a)(4)'' and inserting
``section 10004(a)(3)''; and
(B) by striking ``, provided'' and all that follows through
``section 10009(f)(2)''; and
(2) by striking subsection (c).
Subtitle C--Repayment Contracts and Acceleration of Repayment of
Construction Costs
SEC. 751. REPAYMENT CONTRACTS AND ACCELERATION OF REPAYMENT
OF CONSTRUCTION COSTS.
(a) Conversion of Contracts.--
(1) Certain contracts.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior, on the
request of a contractor, shall convert all existing long-term
Central Valley Project contracts entered into under section
9(e) of the Act of August 4, 1939 (53 Stat. 1196, chapter
418), to a contract under section 9(d) of that Act (53 Stat.
1195), under mutually agreeable terms and conditions.
(B) Restrictions.--A contract converted under subparagraph
(A) shall--
(i) require the repayment, either in lump sum or by
accelerated prepayment, of the remaining amount of
construction costs identified in the most current version of
the Central Valley Project Schedule of Irrigation Capital
Allocations by Contractor, as adjusted to reflect payments
not reflected in that schedule and properly assignable for
ultimate return by the contractor, not later than January 31,
2013 (or if made in approximately equal annual installments,
not later than January 31, 2016), which amount shall be
discounted by the Treasury rate (defined as the 20-year
Constant Maturity Treasury rate published by the Department
of the Treasury as of October 1, 2012);
(ii) require that, notwithstanding subsection (c)(2),
construction costs or other capitalized costs incurred after
the effective date of the converted contract or not reflected
in the schedule described in clause (i) and properly
assignable to that contractor, shall be repaid--
(I) in not more than 5 years after the date on which the
contractor is notified of the allocation if that amount is a
result of a collective annual allocation of capital costs to
the contractors exercising contract conversions under this
subsection of less than $5,000,000; or
(II) if the allocation of capital costs described in
subclause (I) equal $5,000,000 or more, as provided by
applicable reclamation law, subject to the condition that the
reference to the amount of $5,000,000 shall not be a
precedent in any other context; and
(iii) provide that power revenues will not be available to
aid in the repayment of construction costs allocated to
irrigation under the contract.
(C) Estimate.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall
provide to each contractor an estimate of the remaining
amount of construction costs under subparagraph (B)(i) as of
January 31, 2013, as adjusted.
(2) Other contracts.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, on the request of a contractor, the
Secretary may convert any Central Valley Project long-term
contract entered into under section 9(c)(2) of the Act of
August 4, 1939 (chapter 418; 53 Stat. 1194) to a contract
under section 9(c)(1) of that Act, under mutually agreeable
terms and conditions.
(B) Restrictions.--A contract converted under subparagraph
(A) shall--
(i) require the repayment in lump sum of the remaining
amount of construction costs identified in the most current
version of the Central Valley Project Schedule of Municipal
and Industrial Water Rates, as adjusted to reflect payments
not reflected in that schedule and properly assignable for
ultimate return by the contractor, not later than January 31,
2016; and
(ii) require that, notwithstanding subsection (c)(2),
construction costs or other capitalized costs incurred after
the effective date of the contract or not reflected in the
Schedule described in clause (i), and properly assignable to
that contractor, shall be repaid--
(I) in not more than 5 years after the date on which the
contractor is notified of the allocation if the amount is a
result of a collective annual allocation of capital costs to
the contractors exercising contract conversions under this
subsection of less than $5,000,000; or
(II) if the allocation of capital costs described in
subclause (I) equal $5,000,000 or more, as provided by
applicable reclamation law, subject to the condition that the
reference to the amount of $5,000,000 shall not be a
precedent in any other context.
(C) Estimate.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall
provide to each contractor an estimate of the remaining
amount of construction costs under subparagraph (B)(i) as of
January 31, 2016, as adjusted.
(b) Final Adjustment.--
(1) In general.--The amounts paid pursuant to subsection
(a) shall be subject to adjustment following a final cost
allocation by the Secretary of the Interior on completion of
the construction of the Central Valley Project.
(2) Repayment obligation.--
(A) In general.--If the final cost allocation indicates
that the costs properly assignable to the contractor are
greater than the amount that has been paid by the contractor,
the contractor shall pay the remaining allocated costs.
(B) Terms.--The term of an additional repayment contract
described in subparagraph (A) shall be--
(i) for not less than 1 year and not more than 10 years;
and
(ii) based on mutually agreeable provisions regarding the
rate of repayment of the amount developed by the parties.
(3) Credits.--If the final cost allocation indicates that
the costs properly assignable to the contractor are less than
the amount that the contractor has paid, the Secretary of the
Interior shall credit the amount of the overpayment as an
offset against any outstanding or future obligation of the
contractor.
(c) Applicability of Certain Provisions.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any repayment obligation
under subsection (a)(1)(B)(ii) or subsection (b), on the
compliance of a contractor with and discharge of the
obligation of repayment of the construction costs under that
subsection, the ownership and full-cost pricing limitations
of any provision of the reclamation laws shall not apply to
land in that district.
(2) Other contracts.--Notwithstanding any repayment
obligation under paragraph (1)(B)(ii) or (2)(B)(ii) of
subsection (a) or subsection (b), on the compliance of a
contractor with and discharge of the obligation of repayment
of the construction costs under that subsection, the
contractor shall continue to pay applicable operation and
maintenance costs and other charges applicable to the
repayment contracts pursuant to then-current rate-setting
policy and applicable law.
(d) Certain Repayment Obligations Not Altered.--This
section does not--
(1) alter the repayment obligation of any other long-term
water service or repayment contractor receiving water from
the Central Valley Project; or
(2) shift any costs that would otherwise have been properly
assignable to a contractor absent this section, including
operations and maintenance costs, construction costs, or
other capitalized costs incurred after the date of enactment
of this Act, to other contractors.
(e) Statutory Interpretation.--Nothing in this subtitle
affects the right of any long-term contractor to use a
particular type of financing to make the payments required in
paragraph (1)(B)(i) or (2)(B)(i) of subsection (a).
Subtitle D--Bay-Delta Watershed Water Rights Preservation and
Protection
SEC. 761. WATER RIGHTS AND AREA-OF-ORIGIN PROTECTIONS.
Notwithstanding the provisions of this title, Federal
reclamation law, or the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)--
(1) the Secretary of the Interior shall, in the operation
of the Central Valley Project--
(A) strictly adhere to State water rights law governing
water rights priorities by honoring water rights senior to
those belonging to the Central Valley Project, regardless of
the source of priority; and
(B) strictly adhere to and honor water rights and other
priorities that are obtained or exist pursuant to the
California Water Code, including sections 10505, 10505:5,
11128, 11460, 11463, and 12220; and
(2) any action that affects the diversion of water or
involves the release of water from any Central Valley Project
water storage facility taken by the Secretary of the Interior
or the Secretary of Commerce to conserve, enhance, recover,
or otherwise protect any species listed under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) shall be applied
in a manner that is consistent with water right priorities
established by State law.
SEC. 762. SACRAMENTO RIVER SETTLEMENT CONTRACTS.
(a) In General.--In carrying out the Endangered Species Act
of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) in the Bay-Delta and on the
Sacramento River, the Secretary of the Interior and the
Secretary of Commerce shall apply any limitations on the
operation of the Central Valley Project or relating to the
formulation of any reasonable prudent alternative associated
with the operation of the Central Valley Project in a manner
that strictly adheres to and applies the water rights
priorities for project water and base supply as provided in
the Sacramento River Settlement Contracts.
(b) Applicability.--Article 3(i) of the Sacramento River
Settlement Contracts shall not be used by the Secretary of
the Interior or any other Federal agency head as means to
provide shortages that are different from those provided for
in Article 5(a) of the Sacramento River Settlement Contracts.
[[Page 14825]]
SEC. 763. SACRAMENTO RIVER WATERSHED WATER SERVICE
CONTRACTORS.
(a) Existing Central Valley Project Agricultural Water
Service Contractors Within Sacramento River Watershed.--In
this section, the term ``existing Central Valley Project
agricultural water service contractors within the Sacramento
River Watershed'' means water service contractors within the
Shasta, Trinity, and Sacramento River Divisions of the
Central Valley Project that have a water service contract in
effect on the date of enactment of this Act that provides
water for irrigation.
(b) Allocation of Water.--Subject to subsection (c) and the
absolute priority of the Sacramento River Settlement
Contractors to Sacramento River supplies over Central Valley
Project diversions and deliveries to other contractors, the
Secretary of the Interior shall, in the operation of the
Central Valley Project, allocate water provided for
irrigation purposes to existing Central Valley Project
agricultural water service contractors within the Sacramento
River Watershed as follows:
(1) Not less than 100 percent of the contract quantities in
a ``Wet'' year (as that term is defined in the Sacramento
Valley Water Year Type (40-30-30) Index).
(2) Not less than 100 percent of the contract quantities in
an ``Above Normal'' year (as that term is defined in the
Sacramento Valley Water Year Type (40-30-30) Index).
(3) Not less than 100 percent of the contract quantities in
a ``Below Normal'' year (as that term is defined in the
Sacramento Valley Water Year Type (40-30-30) Index).
(4) Not less than 75 percent of the contract quantities in
a ``Dry'' year (as that term is defined in the Sacramento
Valley Water Year Type (40-30-30) Index).
(5) Not less than 50 percent of the contract quantities in
a ``Critically Dry'' year (as that term is defined in the
Sacramento Valley Water Year Type (40-30-30) Index).
(c) Protection of Municipal and Industrial Supplies.--
(1) In general.--Nothing in this section--
(A) modifies any provision of a water service contract that
addresses municipal and industrial water shortage policies of
the Secretary of the Interior;
(B) affects or limits the authority of the Secretary of the
Interior--
(i) to adopt or modify municipal and industrial water
shortage policies; or
(ii) to implement municipal and industrial water shortage
policies; or
(C) affects allocations to Central Valley Project municipal
and industrial contractors pursuant to the water shortage
policies of the Secretary of the Interior.
(2) Applicability.--This section does not constrain,
govern, or affect, directly or indirectly, the operations of
the American River Division of the Central Valley Project or
any deliveries from that Division, including the units and
facilities of that Division.
SEC. 764. NO REDIRECTED ADVERSE IMPACTS.
The Secretary of the Interior shall ensure that there are
no redirected adverse water supply or fiscal impacts to the
State Water Project or to individuals within the Sacramento
River or San Joaquin River watershed arising from the
operation of the Secretary of the Central Valley Project to
meet legal obligations imposed by or through any Federal or
State agency, including--
(1) the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.);
(2) this title; and
(3) actions or activities implemented to meet the twin
goals of improving water supply and addressing the
environmental needs of the Bay-Delta.
Subtitle E--Miscellaneous
SEC. 771. PRECEDENT.
Congress finds that--
(1) coordinated operations between the Central Valley
Project and the State Water Project, as consented to and
requested by the State of California and the Federal
Government, require the assertion of Federal supremacy to
protect existing water rights throughout the system, a
circumstance that is unique to the State of California; and
(2) this title should not serve as precedent for similar
operations in any other State.
TITLE VIII--REDUCING REGULATORY BURDENS
SEC. 801. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Reducing Regulatory
Burdens Act of 2012''.
SEC. 802. USE OF AUTHORIZED PESTICIDES.
Section 3(f) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136a(f)) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(5) Use of authorized pesticides.--Except as provided in
section 402(s) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33
U.S.C. 1342(s)), the Administrator or a State may not require
a permit under that Act for a discharge from a point source
into navigable waters of a pesticide authorized for sale,
distribution, or use under this Act, or the residue of the
pesticide, resulting from the application of the
pesticide.''.
SEC. 803. DISCHARGES OF PESTICIDES.
Section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33
U.S.C. 1342) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(s) Discharges of Pesticides.--
``(1) No permit requirement.--Except as provided in
paragraph (2), a permit shall not be required by the
Administrator or a State under this Act for a discharge from
a point source into navigable waters of a pesticide
authorized for sale, distribution, or use under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136 et
seq.), or the residue of the pesticide, resulting from the
application of the pesticide.
``(2) Exceptions.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the
following discharges of a pesticide or pesticide residue:
``(A) A discharge resulting from the application of a
pesticide in violation of a provision of the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136 et
seq.) that is relevant to protecting water quality, if--
``(i) the discharge would not have occurred but for the
violation; or
``(ii) the quantity of a pesticide or pesticide residue in
the discharge is greater than would have occurred without the
violation.
``(B) Stormwater discharges subject to regulation under
subsection (p).
``(C) The following discharges subject to regulation under
this section:
``(i) Manufacturing or industrial effluent.
``(ii) Treatment works effluent.
``(iii) Discharges incidental to the normal operation of a
vessel, including a discharge resulting from ballasting
operations or vessel biofouling prevention.''.
TITLE IX--FARM DUST REGULATION PREVENTION
SEC. 901. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Farm Dust Regulation
Prevention Act of 2012''.
SEC. 902. TEMPORARY PROHIBITION AGAINST REVISING ANY NATIONAL
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD APPLICABLE TO
COARSE PARTICULATE MATTER.
Before the date that is 1 year after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency (referred to in this title as the
``Administrator'') may not propose, finalize, implement, or
enforce any regulation revising the national primary ambient
air quality standard or the national secondary ambient air
quality standard applicable to particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter greater than 2.5 micrometers under
section 109 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7409).
SEC. 903. NUISANCE DUST.
Part A of title I of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et
seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 132. REGULATION OF NUISANCE DUST PRIMARILY BY STATE,
TRIBAL, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.
``(a) Definition of Nuisance Dust.--In this section:
``(1) In general.--The term `nuisance dust' means
particulate matter that--
``(A) is generated primarily from natural sources, unpaved
roads, agricultural activities, earth moving, or other
activities typically conducted in rural areas;
``(B) consists primarily of soil, other natural or
biological materials, or some combination of those materials;
``(C) is not emitted directly into the ambient air from
combustion, such as exhaust from combustion engines and
emissions from stationary combustion processes; and
``(D) is not comprised of residuals from the combustion of
coal.
``(2) Exclusion.--The term `nuisance dust' does not include
radioactive particulate matter produced from uranium mining
or processing.
``(b) Applicability.--Except as provided in subsection (c),
this Act does not apply to, and references in this Act to
particulate matter are deemed to exclude, nuisance dust.
``(c) Exception.--Subsection (a) does not apply with
respect to any geographical area in which nuisance dust is
not regulated under State, tribal, or local law insofar as
the Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of
Agriculture, finds that--
``(1) nuisance dust (or any subcategory of nuisance dust)
causes substantial adverse public health and welfare effects
at ambient concentrations; and
``(2) the benefits of applying standards and other
requirements of this Act to nuisance dust (or a subcategory
of nuisance dust) outweigh the costs (including local and
regional economic and employment impacts) of applying those
standards and other requirements to nuisance dust (or a
subcategory).''.
SEC. 904. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
It is the sense of Congress that the Administrator should
implement an approach to excluding so-called ``exceptional
events'', or events that are not reasonably controllable or
preventable, from determinations of whether an area is in
compliance with any national ambient air quality standard
applicable to coarse particulate matter that--
(1) maximizes transparency and predictability for States,
Indian tribes, and local governments; and
(2) minimizes the regulatory and cost burdens States,
Indian tribes, and local governments bear in excluding those
events.
SEC. 905. IMPACTS OF EPA REGULATORY ACTIVITY ON EMPLOYMENT
AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITY IN AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
[[Page 14826]]
(1) Covered action.--The term ``covered action'' means any
of the following actions taken by the Administrator under the
Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.) relating to
agriculture and the national primary ambient air quality
standard or the national secondary ambient air quality
standard for particulate matter:
(A) Promulgating or issuing a regulation, policy statement,
guidance, response to a petition, or other requirement.
(B) Implementing a new or substantially altered program.
(2) More than a de minimis negative impact.--The term
``more than a de minimis negative impact'' means--
(A) with respect to employment levels, a loss of more than
100 jobs relating to the agriculture industry, as calculated
by excluding consideration of any offsetting job gains that
result from the hypothetical creation of new jobs through new
technologies or government employment; and
(B) with respect to economic activity, a decrease in
agricultural economic activity of more than $1,000,000 over
any calendar year, as calculated by excluding consideration
of any offsetting economic activity that results from the
hypothetical creation of new economic activity through new
technologies or government employment.
(b) Analysis of Impacts of Actions on Employment and
Economic Activity in the Agriculture Community.--
(1) Analysis.--Before taking a covered action, the
Administrator shall analyze the impact, disaggregated by
State, of the covered action on--
(A) employment levels in the agriculture industry; and
(B) agricultural economic activity, including estimated job
losses and decreased economic activity relating to
agriculture.
(2) Economic models.--
(A) In general.--In carrying out paragraph (1), the
Administrator shall use the best available economic models.
(B) Annual gao report.--Not later than December 31 of each
year, the Comptroller General of the United States shall
submit to Congress a report on the economic models used by
the Administrator to carry out this subsection.
(3) Availability of information.--With respect to any
covered action, the Administrator shall--
(A) post the analysis under paragraph (1) as a link on the
main page of the public Internet website of the Environmental
Protection Agency;
(B) request the Secretary of Agriculture to post the
analysis under paragraph (1) as a link on the main page of
the public Internet website of the Department of Agriculture;
and
(C) request that the Governor of any State experiencing
more than a de minimis negative impact post the analysis on
the main page of the public Interest website of the State.
(c) Public Hearings.--
(1) In general.--If the Administrator concludes under
subsection (a)(1) that a covered action will have more than a
de minimis negative impact on agricultural employment levels
or agricultural economic activity in a State, the
Administrator shall hold a public hearing in each such State
at least 30 days before the effective date of the covered
action.
(2) Time, location, and selection.--A public hearing
required under paragraph (1) shall be held at--
(A) a convenient time and location for impacted residents;
and
(B) at such location selected by the Administrator as shall
give priority to locations in the State that will experience
the greatest number of job losses.
(d) Notification.--If the Administrator concludes under
subsection (b)(1) that a covered action will have more than a
de minimis negative impact on agricultural employment levels
or agricultural economic activity in any State, the
Administrator shall give notice of the impact to the
congressional delegation, Governor, and legislature of the
State at least 45 days before the effective date of the
covered action.
TITLE X--ENERGY TAX PREVENTION
SEC. 1001. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Energy Tax Prevention Act
of 2012''.
SEC. 1002. NO REGULATION OF EMISSIONS OF GREENHOUSE GASES.
Title III of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7601 et seq.) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 330. NO REGULATION OF EMISSIONS OF GREENHOUSE GASES.
``(a) Definition.--In this section, the term `greenhouse
gas' means any of the following:
``(1) Water vapor.
``(2) Carbon dioxide.
``(3) Methane.
``(4) Nitrous oxide.
``(5) Sulfur hexafluoride.
``(6) Hydrofluorocarbons.
``(7) Perfluorocarbons.
``(8) Any other substance subject to, or proposed to be
subject to, regulation, action, or consideration under this
Act to address climate change.
``(b) Limitation on Agency Action.--
``(1) Limitation.--
``(A) In general.--The Administrator may not, under this
Act, promulgate any regulation concerning, take action
relating to, or take into consideration the emission of a
greenhouse gas to address climate change.
``(B) Air pollutant definition.--The definition of the term
`air pollutant' in section 302(g) does not include a
greenhouse gas. Notwithstanding the previous sentence, such
definition may include a greenhouse gas for purposes of
addressing concerns other than climate change.
``(2) Exceptions.--Paragraph (1) does not prohibit the
following:
``(A) Notwithstanding paragraph (4)(B), implementation and
enforcement of the rule entitled `Light-Duty Vehicle
Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel
Economy Standards' (75 Fed. Reg. 25324 (May 7, 2010) and
without further revision) and finalization, implementation,
enforcement, and revision of the proposed rule entitled
`Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel Efficiency
Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles'
published at 75 Fed. Reg. 74152 (November 30, 2010).
``(B) Implementation and enforcement of section 211(o).
``(C) Statutorily authorized Federal research, development,
and demonstration programs addressing climate change.
``(D) Implementation and enforcement of title VI to the
extent such implementation or enforcement only involves one
or more class I or class II substances (as such terms are
defined in section 601).
``(E) Implementation and enforcement of section 821 (42
U.S.C. 7651k note) of Public Law 101-549 (commonly referred
to as the `Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990').
``(3) Inapplicability of provisions.--Nothing listed in
paragraph (2) shall cause a greenhouse gas to be subject to
part C of title I (relating to prevention of significant
deterioration of air quality) or considered an air pollutant
for purposes of title V (relating to air permits).
``(4) Certain prior agency actions.--The following rules,
and actions (including any supplement or revision to such
rules and actions) are repealed and shall have no legal
effect:
``(A) `Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases', published
at 74 Fed. Reg. 56260 (October 30, 2009).
``(B) `Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for
Greenhouse Gases under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act'
published at 74 Fed. Reg. 66496 (Dec. 15, 2009).
``(C) `Reconsideration of the Interpretation of Regulations
That Determine Pollutants Covered by Clean Air Act Permitting
Programs' published at 75 Fed. Reg. 17004 (April 2, 2010) and
the memorandum from Stephen L. Johnson, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator, to EPA Regional
Administrators, concerning `EPA's Interpretation of
Regulations that Determine Pollutants Covered by Federal
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Permit Program'
(Dec. 18, 2008).
``(D) `Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V
Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule', published at 75 Fed. Reg.
31514 (June 3, 2010).
``(E) `Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under
the Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program to
Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Finding of Substantial
Inadequacy and SIP Call', published at 75 Fed. Reg. 77698
(December 13, 2010).
``(F) `Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under
the Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program to
Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Finding of Failure to
Submit State Implementation Plan Revisions Required for
Greenhouse Gases', published at 75 Fed. Reg. 81874 (December
29, 2010).
``(G) `Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under
the Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program to
Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Federal Implementation
Plan', published at 75 Fed. Reg. 82246 (December 30, 2010).
``(H) `Action To Ensure Authority To Implement Title V
Permitting Programs Under the Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule',
published at 75 Fed. Reg. 82254 (December 30, 2010).
``(I) `Determinations Concerning Need for Error Correction,
Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval, and Federal
Implementation Plan Regarding Texas Prevention of Significant
Deterioration Program', published at 75 Fed. Reg. 82430
(December 30, 2010).
``(J) `Limitation of Approval of Prevention of Significant
Deterioration Provisions Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-
Sources in State Implementation Plans; Final Rule', published
at 75 Fed. Reg. 82536 (December 30, 2010).
``(K) `Determinations Concerning Need for Error Correction,
Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval, and Federal
Implementation Plan Regarding Texas Prevention of Significant
Deterioration Program; Proposed Rule', published at 75 Fed.
Reg. 82365 (December 30, 2010).
``(L) Except for action listed in paragraph (2), any other
Federal action under this Act occurring before the date of
enactment of this section that applies a stationary source
permitting requirement or an emissions standard for a
greenhouse gas to address climate change.
[[Page 14827]]
``(5) State action.--
``(A) No limitation.--This section does not limit or
otherwise affect the authority of a State to adopt, amend,
enforce, or repeal State laws and regulations pertaining to
the emission of a greenhouse gas.
``(B) Exception.--
``(i) Rule.--Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), any
provision described in clause (ii)--
``(I) is not federally enforceable;
``(II) is not deemed to be a part of Federal law; and
``(III) is deemed to be stricken from the plan described in
clause (ii)(I) or the program or permit described in clause
(ii)(II), as applicable.
``(ii) Provisions defined.--For purposes of clause (i), the
term `provision' means any provision that--
``(I) is contained in a State implementation plan under
section 110 and authorizes or requires a limitation on, or
imposes a permit requirement for, the emission of a
greenhouse gas to address climate change; or
``(II) is part of an operating permit program under title
V, or a permit issued pursuant to title V, and authorizes or
requires a limitation on the emission of a greenhouse gas to
address climate change.
``(C) Action by administrator.--The Administrator may not
approve or make federally enforceable any provision described
in subparagraph (B)(ii).''.
SEC. 1003. PRESERVING ONE NATIONAL STANDARD FOR AUTOMOBILES.
Section 209(b) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7543) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(4) With respect to standards for emissions of greenhouse
gases (as defined in section 330) for model year 2017 or any
subsequent model year for new motor vehicles and new motor
vehicle engines--
``(A) the Administrator may not waive application of
subsection (a); and
``(B) no waiver granted prior to the date of enactment of
this paragraph may be considered to waive the application of
subsection (a).''.
______
SA 2859. Mr. REID (for Mr. Cardin) proposed an amendment to the bill
S. 1956, to prohibit operators of civil aircraft of the United States
from participating in the European Union's emissions trading scheme,
and for other purposes.
Beginning on page 5, strike line 14 and all that follows
through page 6, line 2, and insert the following:
SEC. 3. NEGOTIATIONS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation, the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, and
other appropriate officials of the United States Government--
(1) should, as appropriate, use their authority to conduct
international negotiations, including using their authority
to conduct international negotiations to pursue a worldwide
approach to address aircraft emissions, including the
environmental impact of aircraft emissions; and
(2) shall, as appropriate and except as provided in
subsection (b), take other actions under existing authorities
that are in the public interest necessary to hold operators
of civil aircraft of the United States harmless from the
emissions trading scheme referred to under section 2.
(b) Exclusion of Payment of Taxes and Penalties.--Actions
taken under subsection (a)(2) may not include the obligation
or expenditure of any amounts in the Airport and Airway Trust
Fund established under section 9905 of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, or amounts otherwise made available to the
Department of Transportation or any other Federal agency
pursuant to appropriations Acts, for the payment of any tax
or penalty imposed on an operator of civil aircraft of the
United States pursuant to the emissions trading scheme
referred to under section 2.
______
SA 2860. Mr. REID (for Mr. Merkley) proposed an amendment to the bill
S. 1956, to prohibit operators of civil aircraft of the United States
from participating in the European Union's emissions trading scheme,
and for other purposes.
On page 5, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
(c) Reassessment of Determination of Public Interest.--The
Secretary--
(1) may reassess a determination under subsection (a) that
a prohibition under that subsection is in the public interest
at any time after making such a determination; and
(2) shall reassess such a determination after--
(A) any amendment by the European Union to the EU Directive
referred to in subsection (a);
(B) the adoption of any international agreement pursuant to
section 3(1); or
(C) enactment of a public law or issuance of a final rule
after formal agency rulemaking, in the United States to
address aircraft emissions.
______
SA 2861. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Bingaman) proposed an amendment to the
bill H.R. 4850, to allow for innovations and alternative technologies
that meet or exceed desired energy efficiency goals.
At the end of the bill, add the following:
SEC. 3. UNIFORM EFFICIENCY DESCRIPTOR FOR COVERED WATER
HEATERS.
Section 325(e) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act
(42 U.S.C. 6295(e)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(5) Uniform efficiency descriptor for covered water
heaters.--
``(A) Definitions.--In this paragraph:
``(i) Covered water heater.--The term `covered water
heater' means--
``(I) a water heater; and
``(II) a storage water heater, instantaneous water heater,
and unfired water storage tank (as defined in section 340).
``(ii) Final rule.--The term `final rule' means the final
rule published under this paragraph.
``(B) Publication of final rule.--Not later than 180 days
after the date of enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary
shall publish a final rule that establishes a uniform
efficiency descriptor and accompanying test methods for
covered water heaters.
``(C) Purpose.--The purpose of the final rule shall be to
replace with a uniform efficiency descriptor--
``(i) the energy factor descriptor for water heaters
established under this subsection; and
``(ii) the thermal efficiency and standby loss descriptors
for storage water heaters, instantaneous water heaters, and
unfired water storage tanks established under section
342(a)(5).
``(D) Effect of final rule.--
``(i) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
this title, effective beginning on the effective date of the
final rule, the efficiency standard for covered water heaters
shall be denominated according to the efficiency descriptor
established by the final rule.
``(ii) Effective date.--The final rule shall take effect 1
year after the date of publication of the final rule under
subparagraph (B).
``(E) Conversion factor.--
``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall develop a
mathematical conversion factor for converting the measurement
of efficiency for covered water heaters from the test
procedures in effect on the date of enactment of this
paragraph to the new energy descriptor established under the
final rule.
``(ii) Application.--The conversion factor shall apply to
models of covered water heaters affected by the final rule
and tested prior to the effective date of the final rule.
``(iii) Effect on efficiency requirements.--The conversion
factor shall not affect the minimum efficiency requirements
for covered water heaters otherwise established under this
title.
``(iv) Use.--During the period described in clause (v), a
manufacturer may apply the conversion factor established by
the Secretary to rerate existing models of covered water
heaters that are in existence prior to the effective date of
the rule described in clause (v)(II) to comply with the new
efficiency descriptor.
``(v) Period.--Subclause (E) shall apply during the
period--
``(I) beginning on the date of publication of the
conversion factor in the Federal Register; and
``(II) ending on April 16, 2015.
``(F) Exclusions.--The final rule may exclude a specific
category of covered water heaters from the uniform efficiency
descriptor established under this paragraph if the Secretary
determines that the category of water heaters--
``(i) does not have a residential use and can be clearly
described in the final rule; and
``(ii) are effectively rated using the thermal efficiency
and standby loss descriptors applied (as of the date of
enactment of this paragraph) to the category under section
342(a)(5).
``(G) Options.--The descriptor set by the final rule may
be--
``(i) a revised version of the energy factor descriptor in
use as of the date of enactment of this paragraph;
``(ii) the thermal efficiency and standby loss descriptors
in use as of that date;
``(iii) a revised version of the thermal efficiency and
standby loss descriptors;
``(iv) a hybrid of descriptors; or
``(v) a new approach.
``(H) Application.--The efficiency descriptor and
accompanying test method established under the final rule
shall apply, to the maximum extent practicable, to all water
heating technologies in use as of the date of enactment of
this paragraph and to future water heating technologies.
``(I) Participation.--The Secretary shall invite interested
stakeholders to participate in the rulemaking process used to
establish the final rule.
``(J) Testing of alternative descriptors.--In establishing
the final rule, the Secretary shall contract with the
National Institute of Standards and Technology, as necessary,
to conduct testing and simulation of alternative descriptors
identified for consideration.
``(K) Existing covered water heaters.--A covered water
heater shall be considered to comply with the final rule on
and after the
[[Page 14828]]
effective date of the final rule and with any revised
labeling requirements established by the Federal Trade
Commission to carry out the final rule if the covered water
heater--
``(i) was manufactured prior to the effective date of the
final rule; and
``(ii) complied with the efficiency standards and labeling
requirements in effect prior to the final rule.''.
SEC. 4. SERVICE OVER THE COUNTER, SELF-CONTAINED, MEDIUM
TEMPERATURE COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATORS.
Section 342(c) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act
(42 U.S.C. 6313(c)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (E);
and
(B) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
``(C) The term `service over the counter, self-contained,
medium temperature commercial refrigerator' or `(SOC-SC-M)'
means a medium temperature commercial refrigerator--
``(i) with a self-contained condensing unit and equipped
with sliding or hinged doors in the back intended for use by
sales personnel, and with glass or other transparent material
in the front for displaying merchandise; and
``(ii) that has a height not greater than 66 inches and is
intended to serve as a counter for transactions between sales
personnel and customers.
``(D) The term `TDA' means the total display area (ft\2\)
of the refrigerated case, as defined in AHRI Standard
1200.'';
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as paragraphs
(5) and (6), respectively; and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
``(4) Each SOC-SC-M manufactured on or after January 1,
2012, shall have a total daily energy consumption (in
kilowatt hours per day) of not more than 0.6 x TDA + 1.0.''.
SEC. 5. SMALL DUCT HIGH VELOCITY SYSTEMS AND ADMINISTRATIVE
CHANGES.
(a) Through-the-Wall Central Air Conditioners, Through-the-
Wall Central Air Conditioning Heat Pumps, and Small Duct,
High Velocity Systems.--Section 325(d) of the Energy Policy
and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6295(d)) is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(4) Standards for through-the-wall central air
conditioners, through-the-wall central air conditioning heat
pumps, and small duct, high velocity systems.--
``(A) Definitions.--In this paragraph:
``(i) Small duct, high velocity system.--The term `small
duct, high velocity system' means a heating and cooling
product that contains a blower and indoor coil combination
that--
``(I) is designed for, and produces, at least 1.2 inches of
external static pressure when operated at the certified air
volume rate of 220-350 CFM per rated ton of cooling; and
``(II) when applied in the field, uses high velocity room
outlets generally greater than 1,000 fpm that have less than
6.0 square inches of free area.
``(ii) Through-the-wall central air conditioner; through-
the-wall central air conditioning heat pump.--The terms
`through-the-wall central air conditioner' and `through-the-
wall central air conditioning heat pump' mean a central air
conditioner or heat pump, respectively, that is designed to
be installed totally or partially within a fixed-size opening
in an exterior wall, and--
``(I) is not weatherized;
``(II) is clearly and permanently marked for installation
only through an exterior wall;
``(III) has a rated cooling capacity no greater than 30,000
Btu/hr;
``(IV) exchanges all of its outdoor air across a single
surface of the equipment cabinet; and
``(V) has a combined outdoor air exchange area of less than
800 square inches (split systems) or less than 1,210 square
inches (single packaged systems) as measured on the surface
area described in subclause (IV).
``(iii) Revision.--The Secretary may revise the definitions
contained in this subparagraph through publication of a final
rule.
``(B) Small-duct high-velocity systems.--
``(i) Seasonal energy efficiency ratio.--The seasonal
energy efficiency ratio for small-duct high-velocity systems
shall be not less than--
``(I) 11.00 for products manufactured on or after January
23, 2006; and
``(II) 12.00 for products manufactured on or after January
1, 2015.
``(ii) Heating seasonal performance factor.--The heating
seasonal performance factor for small-duct high-velocity
systems shall be not less than--
``(I) 6.8 for products manufactured on or after January 23,
2006; and
``(II) 7.2 for products manufactured on or after January 1,
2015.
``(C) Subsequent rulemakings.--The Secretary shall conduct
subsequent rulemakings for through-the-wall central air
conditioners, through-the-wall central air conditioning heat
pumps, and small duct, high velocity systems as part of any
rulemaking under this section used to review or revise
standards for other central air conditioners and heat
pumps.''.
(b) Duty to Review Commercial Equipment.--Section 342(a)(6)
of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A)(i), by inserting ``the standard
levels or design requirements applicable under that standard
to'' immediately before ``any small commercial''; and
(2) in subparagraph (C)--
(A) in clause (i)--
(i) by striking ``Not later than 6 years after issuance of
any final rule establishing or amending a standard, as
required for a product under this part,'' and inserting
``Every 6 years,''; and
(ii) by inserting after ``the Secretary shall'' the
following: ``conduct an evaluation of each class of covered
equipment and shall''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(vi) For any covered equipment as to which more than 6
years has elapsed since the issuance of the most recent final
rule establishing or amending a standard for the product as
of the date of enactment of this clause, the first notice
required under clause (i) shall be published by December 31,
2013.''.
(c) Petition for Amended Standards.--Section 325(n) of the
Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6295(n)) is
amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (5); and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
``(3) Notice of decision.--Not later than 180 days after
the date of receiving a petition, the Secretary shall publish
in the Federal Register a notice of, and explanation for, the
decision of the Secretary to grant or deny the petition.
``(4) New or amended standards.--Not later than 3 years
after the date of granting a petition for new or amended
standards, the Secretary shall publish in the Federal
Register--
``(A) a final rule that contains the new or amended
standards; or
``(B) a determination that no new or amended standards are
necessary.''.
SEC. 6. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.
(a) Title III of Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007--Energy Savings Through Improved Standards for
Appliances and Lighting.--
(1) Section 325(u) of the Energy Policy and Conservation
Act (42 U.S.C. 6295(u)) (as amended by section 301(c) of the
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (121 Stat.
1550)) is amended--
(A) by redesignating paragraph (7) as paragraph (4); and
(B) in paragraph (4) (as so redesignated), by striking
``supplies is'' and inserting ``supply is''.
(2) Section 302(b) of the Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1551) is amended by striking
``6313(a)'' and inserting ``6314(a)''.
(3) Section 342(a)(6) of the Energy Policy and Conservation
Act (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)) (as amended by section 305(b)(2)
of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (121
Stat. 1554)) is amended--
(A) in subparagraph (B)--
(i) by striking ``If the Secretary'' and inserting the
following:
``(i) In general.--If the Secretary'';
(ii) by striking ``clause (ii)(II)'' and inserting
``subparagraph (A)(ii)(II)'';
(iii) by striking ``clause (i)'' and inserting
``subparagraph (A)(i)''; and
(iv) by adding at the end the following:
``(ii) Factors.--In determining whether a standard is
economically justified for the purposes of subparagraph
(A)(ii)(II), the Secretary shall, after receiving views and
comments furnished with respect to the proposed standard,
determine whether the benefits of the standard exceed the
burden of the proposed standard by, to the maximum extent
practicable, considering--
``(I) the economic impact of the standard on the
manufacturers and on the consumers of the products subject to
the standard;
``(II) the savings in operating costs throughout the
estimated average life of the product in the type (or class)
compared to any increase in the price of, or in the initial
charges for, or maintenance expenses of, the products that
are likely to result from the imposition of the standard;
``(III) the total projected quantity of energy savings
likely to result directly from the imposition of the
standard;
``(IV) any lessening of the utility or the performance of
the products likely to result from the imposition of the
standard;
``(V) the impact of any lessening of competition, as
determined in writing by the Attorney General, that is likely
to result from the imposition of the standard;
``(VI) the need for national energy conservation; and
``(VII) other factors the Secretary considers relevant.
``(iii) Administration.--
``(I) Energy use and efficiency.--The Secretary may not
prescribe any amended standard under this paragraph that
increases the maximum allowable energy use, or decreases the
minimum required energy efficiency, of a covered product.
``(II) Unavailability.--
``(aa) In general.--The Secretary may not prescribe an
amended standard under this subparagraph if the Secretary
finds (and publishes the finding) that interested persons
[[Page 14829]]
have established by a preponderance of the evidence that a
standard is likely to result in the unavailability in the
United States in any product type (or class) of performance
characteristics (including reliability, features, sizes,
capacities, and volumes) that are substantially the same as
those generally available in the United States at the time of
the finding of the Secretary.
``(bb) Other types or classes.--The failure of some types
(or classes) to meet the criterion established under this
subclause shall not affect the determination of the Secretary
on whether to prescribe a standard for the other types or
classes.''; and
(B) in subparagraph (C)(iv), by striking ``An amendment
prescribed under this subsection'' and inserting
``Notwithstanding subparagraph (D), an amendment prescribed
under this subparagraph''.
(4) Section 342(a)(6)(B)(iii) of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (as added by section 306(c) of the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1559)) is
transferred and redesignated as clause (vi) of section
342(a)(6)(C) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (as
amended by section 305(b)(2) of the Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1554)).
(5) Section 345 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act
(42 U.S.C. 6316) (as amended by section 312(e) of the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1567)) is
amended--
(A) by striking ``subparagraphs (B) through (G)'' each
place it appears and inserting ``subparagraphs (B), (C), (D),
(I), (J), and (K)'';
(B) by striking ``part A'' each place it appears and
inserting ``part B''; and
(C) in subsection (a)--
(i) in paragraph (8), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(ii) in paragraph (9), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; and''; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following:
``(10) section 327 shall apply with respect to the
equipment described in section 340(1)(L) beginning on the
date on which a final rule establishing an energy
conservation standard is issued by the Secretary, except that
any State or local standard prescribed or enacted for the
equipment before the date on which the final rule is issued
shall not be preempted until the energy conservation standard
established by the Secretary for the equipment takes
effect.'';
(D) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``section 325(p)(5)''
and inserting ``section 325(p)(4)''; and
(E) in subsection (h)(3), by striking ``section 342(f)(3)''
and inserting ``section 342(f)(4)''.
(6) Section 321(30)(D)(i)(III) of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(D)(i)(III)) (as amended
by section 321(a)(1)(A) of the Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1574)) is amended by
inserting before the semicolon the following: ``or, in the
case of a modified spectrum lamp, not less than 232 lumens
and not more than 1,950 lumens''.
(7) Section 321(30)(T) of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(T)) (as amended by
section 321(a)(1)(B) of the Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1574)) is amended--
(A) in clause (i)--
(i) by striking the comma after ``household appliance'' and
inserting ``and''; and
(ii) by striking ``and is sold at retail,''; and
(B) in clause (ii), by inserting ``when sold at retail,''
before ``is designated''.
(8) Section 325(l)(4)(A) of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(4)(A)) (as amended by
section 321(a)(3)(B) of the Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1581)) is amended by striking
``only''.
(9) Section 327(b)(1)(B) of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6297(b)(1)(B)) (as amended by
section 321(d)(3) of the Energy Independence and Security Act
of 2007 (121 Stat. 1585)) is amended--
(A) in clause (i), by inserting ``and'' after the semicolon
at the end;
(B) in clause (ii), by striking ``; and'' and inserting a
period; and
(C) by striking clause (iii).
(10) Section 321(30)(C)(ii) of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(C)(ii)) (as amended by
section 322(a)(1)(B) of the Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1587)) is amended by inserting a
period after ``40 watts or higher''.
(11) Section 322(b) of the Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1588) is amended by striking
``6995(i)'' and inserting ``6295(i)''.
(12) Section 325(b) of the Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1596) is amended by striking
``6924(c)'' and inserting ``6294(c)''.
(13) This subsection and the amendments made by this
subsection take effect as if included in the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-140;
121 Stat. 1492).
(b) Energy Policy Act of 2005.--
(1) Section 325(g)(8)(C)(ii) of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6295(g)(8)(C)(ii)) (as added by
section 135(c)(2)(B) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005) is
amended by striking ``20F'' and inserting ``20F''.
(2) This subsection and the amendment made by this
subsection take effect as if included in the Energy Policy
Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-58; 119 Stat. 594).
(c) Energy Policy and Conservation Act.--
(1) Section 340(2)(B) of the Energy Policy and Conservation
Act (42 U.S.C. 6311(2)(B)) is amended--
(A) in clause (xi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in clause (xii), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(xiii) other motors.''.
(2) Section 343(a) of the Energy Policy and Conservation
Act (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)) is amended by striking ``Air-
Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute'' each place it
appears in paragraphs (4)(A) and (7) and inserting ``Air-
Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute''.
______
SA 2862. Mr. PRYOR (for Mrs. Shaheen) proposed an amendment to the
bill H.R. 4850, to allow for innovations and alternative technologies
that meet or exceed desired energy efficiency goals.
At the end of the bill, add the following:
TITLE II--INDUSTRIAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY
SEC. 201. COORDINATION OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF ENERGY
EFFICIENT TECHNOLOGIES FOR INDUSTRY.
(a) In General.--As part of the research and development
activities of the Industrial Technologies Program of the
Department of Energy, the Secretary of Energy (referred to in
this title as the ``Secretary'') shall establish, as
appropriate, collaborative research and development
partnerships with other programs within the Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy (including the Building
Technologies Program), the Office of Electricity Delivery and
Energy Reliability, and the Office of Science that--
(1) leverage the research and development expertise of
those programs to promote early stage energy efficiency
technology development;
(2) support the use of innovative manufacturing processes
and applied research for development, demonstration, and
commercialization of new technologies and processes to
improve efficiency (including improvements in efficient use
of water), reduce emissions, reduce industrial waste, and
improve industrial cost-competitiveness; and
(3) apply the knowledge and expertise of the Industrial
Technologies Program to help achieve the program goals of the
other programs.
(b) Reports.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this Act and biennially thereafter, the
Secretary shall submit to Congress a report that describes
actions taken to carry out subsection (a) and the results of
those actions.
SEC. 202. REDUCING BARRIERS TO THE DEPLOYMENT OF INDUSTRIAL
ENERGY EFFICIENCY.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Industrial energy efficiency.--The term ``industrial
energy efficiency'' means the energy efficiency derived from
commercial technologies and measures to improve energy
efficiency or to generate or transmit electric power and
heat, including electric motor efficiency improvements,
demand response, direct or indirect combined heat and power,
and waste heat recovery.
(2) Industrial sector.--The term ``industrial sector''
means any subsector of the manufacturing sector (as defined
in North American Industry Classification System codes 31-33
(as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act))
establishments of which have, or could have, thermal host
facilities with electricity requirements met in whole, or in
part, by onsite electricity generation, including direct and
indirect combined heat and power or waste recovery.
(b) Report on the Deployment of Industrial Energy
Efficiency.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate a report describing--
(A) the results of the study conducted under paragraph (2);
and
(B) recommendations and guidance developed under paragraph
(3).
(2) Study.--The Secretary, in coordination with the
industrial sector, shall conduct a study of the following:
(A) The legal, regulatory, and economic barriers to the
deployment of industrial energy efficiency in all electricity
markets (including organized wholesale electricity markets,
and regulated electricity markets), including, as applicable,
the following:
(i) Transmission and distribution interconnection
requirements.
(ii) Standby, back-up, and maintenance fees (including
demand ratchets).
(iii) Exit fees.
(iv) Life of contract demand ratchets.
(v) Net metering.
(vi) Calculation of avoided cost rates.
(vii) Power purchase agreements.
(viii) Energy market structures.
(ix) Capacity market structures.
[[Page 14830]]
(x) Other barriers as may be identified by the Secretary,
in coordination with the industrial sector.
(B) Examples of --
(i) successful State and Federal policies that resulted in
greater use of industrial energy efficiency;
(ii) successful private initiatives that resulted in
greater use of industrial energy efficiency; and
(iii) cost-effective policies used by foreign countries to
foster industrial energy efficiency.
(C) The estimated economic benefits to the national economy
of providing the industrial sector with Federal energy
efficiency matching grants of $5,000,000,000 for 5- and 10-
year periods, including benefits relating to--
(i) estimated energy and emission reductions;
(ii) direct and indirect jobs saved or created;
(iii) direct and indirect capital investment;
(iv) the gross domestic product; and
(v) trade balance impacts.
(D) The estimated energy savings available from increased
use of recycled material in energy-intensive manufacturing
processes.
(3) Recommendations and guidance.--The Secretary, in
coordination with the industrial sector, shall develop policy
recommendations regarding the deployment of industrial energy
efficiency, including proposed regulatory guidance to States
and relevant Federal agencies to address barriers to
deployment.
SEC. 203. STUDY OF ADVANCED ENERGY TECHNOLOGY MANUFACTURING
CAPABILITIES IN THE UNITED STATES.
(a) In General.--Not later than 60 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall enter into an
arrangement with the National Academy of Sciences under which
the Academy shall conduct a study of the development of
advanced manufacturing capabilities for various energy
technologies, including--
(1) an assessment of the manufacturing supply chains of
established and emerging industries;
(2) an analysis of--
(A) the manner in which supply chains have changed over the
25-year period ending on the date of enactment of this Act;
(B) current trends in supply chains; and
(C) the energy intensity of each part of the supply chain
and opportunities for improvement;
(3) for each technology or manufacturing sector, an
analysis of which sections of the supply chain are critical
for the United States to retain or develop to be competitive
in the manufacturing of the technology;
(4) an assessment of which emerging energy technologies the
United States should focus on to create or enhance
manufacturing capabilities; and
(5) recommendations on leveraging the expertise of energy
efficiency and renewable energy user facilities so that best
materials and manufacturing practices are designed and
implemented.
(b) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date on which
the Secretary enters into the agreement with the Academy
described in subsection (a), the Academy shall submit to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate, the
Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives, and the Secretary a report describing the
results of the study required under this section, including
any findings and recommendations.
SEC. 204. INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES STEERING COMMITTEE.
The Secretary shall establish an advisory steering
committee that includes national trade associations
representing energy-intensive industries or energy service
providers to provide recommendations to the Secretary on
planning and implementation of the Industrial Technologies
Program of the Department of Energy.
TITLE III--FEDERAL AGENCY ENERGY EFFICIENCY
SEC. 301. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR DESIGN UPDATES.
Section 3307 of title 40, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (d) through (h) as
subsections (e) through (i), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
``(d) Availability of Funds for Design Updates.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), for any
project for which congressional approval is received under
subsection (a) and for which the design has been
substantially completed but construction has not begun, the
Administrator of General Services may use appropriated funds
to update the project design to meet applicable Federal
building energy efficiency standards established under
section 305 of the Energy Conservation and Production Act (42
U.S.C. 6834) and other requirements established under section
3312.
``(2) Limitation.--The use of funds under paragraph (1)
shall not exceed 125 percent of the estimated energy or other
cost savings associated with the updates as determined by a
life-cycle cost analysis under section 544 of the National
Energy Conservation Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 8254).''.
SEC. 302. BEST PRACTICES FOR ADVANCED METERING.
Section 543(e) of the National Energy Conservation Policy
Act (42 U.S.C. 8253(e) is amended by striking paragraph (3)
and inserting the following:
``(3) Plan.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date
on which guidelines are established under paragraph (2), in a
report submitted by the agency under section 548(a), each
agency shall submit to the Secretary a plan describing the
manner in which the agency will implement the requirements of
paragraph (1), including--
``(i) how the agency will designate personnel primarily
responsible for achieving the requirements; and
``(ii) a demonstration by the agency, complete with
documentation, of any finding that advanced meters or
advanced metering devices (as those terms are used in
paragraph (1)), are not practicable.
``(B) Updates.--Reports submitted under subparagraph (A)
shall be updated annually.
``(4) Best practices report.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary of Energy, in
consultation with the Secretary of Defense and the
Administrator of General Services, shall develop, and issue a
report on, best practices for the use of advanced metering of
energy use in Federal facilities, buildings, and equipment by
Federal agencies.
``(B) Updating.--The report described under subparagraph
(A) shall be updated annually.
``(C) Components.--The report shall include, at a minimum--
``(i) summaries and analysis of the reports by agencies
under paragraph (3);
``(ii) recommendations on standard requirements or
guidelines for automated energy management systems,
including--
``(I) potential common communications standards to allow
data sharing and reporting;
``(II) means of facilitating continuous commissioning of
buildings and evidence-based maintenance of buildings and
building systems; and
``(III) standards for sufficient levels of security and
protection against cyber threats to ensure systems cannot be
controlled by unauthorized persons; and
``(iii) an analysis of--
``(I) the types of advanced metering and monitoring systems
being piloted, tested, or installed in Federal buildings; and
``(II) existing techniques used within the private sector
or other non-Federal government buildings.''.
SEC. 303. FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT AND DATA COLLECTION
STANDARD.
Section 543 of the National Energy Conservation Policy Act
(42 U.S.C. 8253) is amended--
(1) by redesignating the second subsection (f) (as added by
section 434(a) of Public Law 110-140 (121 Stat. 1614)) as
subsection (g); and
(2) in subsection (f)(7), by striking subparagraph (A) and
inserting the following:
``(A) In general.--For each facility that meets the
criteria established by the Secretary under paragraph (2)(B),
the energy manager shall use the web-based tracking system
under subparagraph (B)--
``(i) to certify compliance with the requirements for--
``(I) energy and water evaluations under paragraph (3);
``(II) implementation of identified energy and water
measures under paragraph (4); and
``(III) follow-up on implemented measures under paragraph
(5); and
``(ii) to publish energy and water consumption data on an
individual facility basis.''.
SEC. 304. FEDERAL PURCHASE REQUIREMENT.
Section 203 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C.
15852) is amended--
(1) in subsections (a) and (b)(2), by striking ``electric
energy'' each place it appears and inserting ``electric,
direct, and thermal energy'';
(2) in subsection (b)(2)--
(A) by inserting ``, or avoided by,'' after ``generated
from''; and
(B) by inserting ``(including ground-source, reclaimed, and
ground water)''after ``geothermal'';
(3) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); and
(4) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
``(d) Separate Calculation.--Renewable energy produced at a
Federal facility, on Federal land, or on Indian land (as
defined in section 2601 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (25
U.S.C. 3501))--
``(1) shall be calculated (on a BTU-equivalent basis)
separately from renewable energy used; and
``(2) may be used individually or in combination to comply
with subsection (a).''.
SEC. 305. STUDY ON FEDERAL DATA CENTER CONSOLIDATION.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Energy shall conduct a
study on the feasibility of a government-wide data center
consolidation, with an overall Federal target of a minimum of
800 Federal data center closures by October 1, 2015.
(b) Coordination.--In conducting the study, the Secretary
shall coordinate with
[[Page 14831]]
Federal data center program managers, facilities managers,
and sustainability officers.
(c) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress
a report that describes the results of the study, including a
description of agency best practices in data center
consolidation.
______
SA 2863. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Durbin) proposed an amendment to S. Res.
466, calling for the release from prison of former Prime Minister of
Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko.
On page 9, strike lines 1 through 14 and insert the
following:
(2) expresses its deep concern that the politicized nature
of prosecutions and detention of Ms. Tymoshenko and other
members of her party took place in a country that is
scheduled to assume chairmanship of the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in 2013;
(3) expresses its deep concern that the politicized
detention of Ms. Tymoshenko threatens to jeopardize ties
between the United States and Ukraine;
(4) calls for the Government of Ukraine to release Ms.
Tymoshenko from her current incarceration based on
politicized charges, to provide Ms. Tymoshenko with timely
access to medical care, and to conduct the October
parliamentary elections in a fair and transparent manner
consistent with OSCE standards; and
______
SA 2864. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Akaka) proposed an amendment to the bill
S. 3193, to make technical corrections to the legal description of
certain land to be held in trust for the Barona Band of Mission
Indians, and for other purposes.
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Barona Band of Mission
Indians Land Transfer Clarification Act of 2012''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS; PURPOSES.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) the legal description of land previously taken into
trust by the United States for the benefit of the Barona Band
of Mission Indians may be interpreted to refer to private,
nontribal land;
(2) there is a continued, unresolved disagreement between
the Barona Band of Mission Indians and certain off-
reservation property owners relating to the causes of
diminishing native groundwater;
(3) Congress expresses no opinion, nor should an opinion of
Congress be inferred, relating to the disagreement described
in paragraph (2); and
(4) it is the intent of Congress that, if the land
described in section 121(b) of the Native American Technical
Corrections Act of 2004 (118 Stat. 544) (as amended by
section 3) is used to bring water to the Barona Indian
Reservation, the effort is authorized only if the effort also
addresses water availability for neighboring off-reservation
land located along Old Barona Road that is occupied as of the
date of enactment of this Act by providing guaranteed access
to that water supply at a mutually agreeable site on the
southwest boundary of the Barona Indian Reservation.
(b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are--
(1) to clarify the legal description of the land placed
into trust for the Barona Band of Mission Indians in 2004;
and
(2) to remove all doubt relating to the specific parcels of
land that Congress has placed into trust for the Barona Band
of Mission Indians.
SEC. 3. LAND TRANSFER.
Section 121 of the Native American Technical Corrections
Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-204; 118 Stat. 544) is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:
``(b) Description of Land.--The land referred to in
subsection (a) is land comprising approximately 86.87 acres
in T. 14 S., R. 1 E., San Bernardino Meridian, San Diego
County, California, and described more particularly as
follows:
``(1) The approximately 69.85 acres located in Section 21
and described as--
``(A) SW\1/4\ SW\1/4\, excepting the north 475 feet;
``(B) W\1/2\ SE\1/4\ SW\1/4\, excepting the north 475 feet;
``(C) E\1/2\ SE\1/4\ SW\1/4\, excepting the north 350 feet;
and
``(D) the portion of W\1/2\ SE\1/4\ that lies southwesterly
of the following line: Beginning at the intersection of the
southerly line of said SE\1/4\ of Section 21 with the
westerly boundary of Rancho Canada De San Vicente Y Mesa Del
Padre Barona as shown on United States Government Resurvey
approved January 21, 1939, and thence northwesterly along
said boundary to an intersection with the westerly line of
said SE\1/4\.
``(2) The approximately 17.02 acres located in Section 28
and described as NW\1/4\ NW\1/4\, excepting the east 750
feet.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(d) Clarifications.--
``(1) Effect on section.--The provisions of subsection (c)
shall apply to the land described in subsection (b), as in
effect on the day after the date of enactment of the Barona
Band of Mission Indians Land Transfer Clarification Act of
2012.
``(2) Effect on private land.--The parcel of private, non-
Indian land referenced in subsection (a) and described in
subsection (b), as in effect on the day before the date of
enactment of the Barona Band of Mission Indians Land Transfer
Clarification Act of 2012, but excluded from the revised
description of the land in subsection (b) was not intended to
be--
``(A) held in trust by the United States for the benefit of
the Band; or
``(B) considered to be a part of the reservation of the
Band.''.
______
SA 2865. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Blumenthal) proposed an amendment to the
bill H.R. 2453, to require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins
in commemoration of Mark Twain.
On page 7, strike lines 5 through 7 and insert the
following:
(2) One-quarter of the surcharges, to the University of
California, Berkeley, California, for the benefit of the Mark
Twain Project at the Bancroft Library to support programs to
study and promote the legacy of Mark Twain.
At the end, add the following:
SEC. 8. NO NET COST.
The Secretary shall take such actions as may be necessary
to ensure that--
(1) minting and issuing coins under this Act will not
result in any net cost to the United States Government; and
(2) no funds, including applicable surcharges, are
disbursed to any recipient designated in section 7 until the
total cost of designing and issuing all of the coins
authorized by this Act (including labor, materials, dies, use
of machinery, overhead expenses, marketing, and shipping) is
recovered by the United States Treasury, consistent with
sections 5112(m) and 5134(f) of title 31, United States Code.
______
SA 2866. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Lieberman) proposed an amendment to S.
3315, to repeal or modify certain mandates of the Government
Accountability Office.
On page 2, line 11, insert ``, the Secretary of the Senate,
or the Clerk of the House of Representatives'' after ``House
of Representatives''.
On page 5, line 1, insert ``or the Secretary of the
Senate'' after ``the Senate''.
______
SA 2867. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Rockefeller) proposed an amendment to the
bill H.R. 2838, to authorize appropriations for the Coast Guard for
fiscal years 2013 through 2014, and for other purposes.
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Coast
Guard Authorization Act of 2012''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
TITLE I--AUTHORIZATION
Sec. 101. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 102. Authorized levels of military strength and training.
TITLE II--ORGANIZATION
Sec. 201. Coast Guard authority to operate and maintain Coast Guard
assets.
Sec. 202. Clarification of Coast Guard ice operations mission.
TITLE III--PERSONNEL
Sec. 301. Acquisition workforce expedited hiring authority.
Sec. 302. Officers recommended for promotion.
Sec. 303. Original appointment of permanent commissioned officers.
Sec. 304. Academy pay, allowances, and emoluments.
Sec. 305. Academy policy on sexual harassment and sexual violence.
Sec. 306. Coast Guard auxiliarists enrollment eligibility.
TITLE IV--ADMINISTRATION
Sec. 401. Advance procurement funding.
Sec. 402. Multiyear procurement authority for Coast Guard National
Security Cutters.
Sec. 403. Requirement to maintain United States polar icebreaking
capability.
Sec. 404. National response functions.
Sec. 405. National Response Center notification requirements.
Sec. 406. Conforming amendment.
TITLE V--SHIPPING AND NAVIGATION
Sec. 501. Central Bering Sea potential place of refuge.
Sec. 502. Protection and fair treatment of seafarers.
Sec. 503. Delegation of authority.
Sec. 504. Report on establishment of arctic deep water port.
Sec. 505. Risk analysis of transporting Canadian oil sands.
[[Page 14832]]
Sec. 506. Eligibility to receive surplus training equipment.
TITLE VI--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION AUTHORIZATION
Sec. 601. Short title; amendment of title 46, United States Code.
Sec. 602. Marine transportation system.
Sec. 603. Short sea transportation program amendments.
Sec. 604. Maritime environmental and technical assistance program.
Sec. 605. Waiver of navigation and vessel-inspection laws.
Sec. 606. Extension of maritime security fleet program.
Sec. 607. Maritime workforce study.
Sec. 608. Maritime administration vessel recycling contract award
practices.
Sec. 609. Requirement for barge design.
TITLE VII--MISCELLANEOUS
Sec. 701. Limitation on availability of funds for procurement of
alternative fuel.
Sec. 702. Passenger vessel security and safety requirements.
Sec. 703. Oil spill liability trust fund investment amount.
Sec. 704. Vessel determinations.
Sec. 705. Alteration of bridge obstructing navigation.
Sec. 706. Notice of arrival.
Sec. 707. Waivers.
Sec. 708. Budgetary effects.
Sec. 709. Technical amendments.
TITLE I--AUTHORIZATION
SEC. 101. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) Fiscal Year 2013.--Funds are authorized to be
appropriated for fiscal year 2013 for necessary expenses of
the Coast Guard as follows:
(1) For the operation and maintenance of the Coast Guard,
$7,077,783,000 of which $24,500,000 is authorized to be
derived from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to carry out
the purposes of section 1012(a)(5) of the Oil Pollution Act
of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2712(a)(5)).
(2) For the acquisition, construction, rebuilding,
renovation, and improvement of aids to navigation, shore and
offshore facilities, vessels, and aircraft, including
equipment related thereto, $1,421,924,000 of which--
(A) $20,000,000 shall be derived from the Oil Spill
Liability Trust Fund to carry out the purposes of section
1012(a)(5) of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C.
2712(a)(5)), to remain available until expended;
(B) $642,000,000 is authorized to acquire, effect major
repairs to, renovate, or improve vessels, small boats, and
related equipment;
(C) $289,000,000 is authorized to acquire, effect major
repairs to, renovate, or improve aircraft or increase
aviation capability;
(D) $166,140,000 is authorized for other equipment;
(E) $213,692,000 is authorized for shore facilities, aids
to navigation facilities, and military housing, of which not
more than $14,000,000 shall be derived from the Coast Guard
Housing Fund; and
(F) $110,192,000 is authorized for personnel compensation
and benefits and related costs.
(3) For research, development, testing, and evaluation of
technologies, materials, and human factors directly related
to improving the performance of the Coast Guard's mission in
search and rescue, aids to navigation, marine safety, marine
environmental protection, enforcement of laws and treaties,
ice operations, oceanographic research, and defense
readiness, $19,779,000.
(4) For retired pay (including the payment of obligations
otherwise chargeable to lapsed appropriations for this
purpose), payments under the Retired Serviceman's Family
Protection and Survivor Benefit Plans, and payments for
medical and dental care of retired personnel and their
dependents under chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code,
$1,440,157,000, to remain available until expended.
(5) For alteration or removal of bridges over navigable
waters of the United States constituting obstructions to
navigation, and for personnel and administrative costs
associated with the Alteration of Bridges Program,
$16,000,000.
(6) For environmental compliance and restoration functions
under chapter 19 of title 14, United States Code,
$16,699,000.
(7) For operation and maintenance of the Coast Guard
Reserve program, $136,778,000.
(b) Fiscal Year 2014.--Funds are authorized to be
appropriated for fiscal year 2014 for necessary expenses of
the Coast Guard as follows:
(1) For the operation and maintenance of the Coast Guard,
$7,077,783,000 of which $24,500,000 is authorized to be
derived from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to carry out
the purposes of section 1012(a)(5) of the Oil Pollution Act
of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2712(a)(5)).
(2) For the acquisition, construction, rebuilding,
renovation, and improvement of aids to navigation, shore and
offshore facilities, vessels, and aircraft, including
equipment related thereto, $1,421,924,000 of which--
(A) $20,000,000 shall be derived from the Oil Spill
Liability Trust Fund to carry out the purposes of section
1012(a)(5) of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C.
2712(a)(5)), to remain available until expended;
(B) $642,000,000 is authorized to acquire, effect major
repairs, renovate, or improve vessels, small boats, and
related equipment;
(C) $289,000,000 is authorized to acquire, effect major
repairs, renovate, or improve aircraft or increase aviation
capability;
(D) $166,140,000 is authorized for other equipment;
(E) $213,692,000 is authorized for shore facilities, aids
to navigation facilities, and military housing, of which not
more than $14,000,000 shall be derived from the Coast Guard
Housing Fund; and
(F) $110,192,000 is authorized for personnel compensation
and benefits and related costs.
(3) For research, development, testing, and evaluation of
technologies, materials, and human factors directly related
to improving the performance of the Coast Guard's mission in
search and rescue, aids to navigation, marine safety, marine
environmental protection, enforcement of laws and treaties,
ice operations, oceanographic research, and defense
readiness, $19,779,000.
(4) For retired pay (including the payment of obligations
otherwise chargeable to lapsed appropriations for this
purpose), payments under the Retired Serviceman's Family
Protection and Survivor Benefit Plans, and payments for
medical and dental care of retired personnel and their
dependents under chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code,
$1,440,157,000 to remain available until expended.
(5) For alteration or removal of bridges over navigable
waters of the United States constituting obstructions to
navigation, and for personnel and administrative costs
associated with the Alteration of Bridges Program,
$16,000,000.
(6) For environmental compliance and restoration functions
under chapter 19 of title 14, United States Code,
$16,699,000.
(7) For operation and maintenance of the Coast Guard
Reserve program, $136,778,000.
SEC. 102. AUTHORIZED LEVELS OF MILITARY STRENGTH AND
TRAINING.
(a) Fiscal Year 2013.--
(1) Active duty strength.--The Coast Guard is authorized an
end-of-year strength for active duty personnel of 47,000 for
the fiscal year ending on September 30, 2013.
(2) Military training student loads.--For fiscal year 2013,
the Coast Guard is authorized average military training
student loads as follows:
(A) For recruit and special training, 2,500 student years.
(B) For flight training, 165 student years.
(C) For professional training in military and civilian
institutions, 350 student years.
(D) For officer acquisition, 1,200 student years.
(b) Fiscal Year 2014.--
(1) Active duty strength.--The Coast Guard is authorized an
end-of-year strength for active duty personnel of 49,350 for
the fiscal year ending on September 30, 2014.
(2) Military training student loads.--For fiscal year 2014,
the Coast Guard is authorized average military training
student loads as follows:
(A) For recruit and special training, 2,625 student years.
(B) For flight training, 173 student years.
(C) For professional training in military and civilian
institutions, 368 student years.
(D) For officer acquisition, 1,260 student years.
TITLE II--ORGANIZATION
SEC. 201. COAST GUARD AUTHORITY TO OPERATE AND MAINTAIN COAST
GUARD ASSETS.
(a) In General.--Section 93 of title 14, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Operation and Maintenance of Coast Guard Assets and
Facilities.--All authority, including programmatic budget
authority, for the operation and maintenance of Coast Guard
vessels, aircraft, systems, aids to navigation,
infrastructure, and any other Coast Guard assets or
facilities, shall be allocated to and vested in the Coast
Guard and the department in which the Coast Guard is
operating.''.
SEC. 202. CLARIFICATION OF COAST GUARD ICE OPERATIONS
MISSION.
(a) Coast Guard Provision of Federal Icebreaking
Services.--Chapter 5 of title 14, United States Code, is
amended by inserting after section 86 the following:
``Sec. 87. Provision of icebreaking services
``(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, except as provided in subsection (b), the Coast Guard
shall be the sole supplier of icebreaking services, on an
advancement or reimbursable basis, to each Federal agency
that requires icebreaking services.
``(b) Exception.--In the event that a Federal agency
requires icebreaking services and the Coast Guard is unable
to provide the services, the Federal agency may acquire
icebreaking services from another entity.''.
(b) Priority of Coast Guard Missions in Polar Regions.--
(1) Section 110.--Section 110(b)(2) of the Arctic Research
and Policy Act of 1984 (15 U.S.C. 4109(b)(2)) is amended--
(A) by inserting ``to execute the statutory missions of the
Coast Guard and'' after ``needed''; and
(B) by inserting ``and all budget authority related to such
operations'' after ``projects,''.
(2) Section 312.--Section 312(c) of the Antarctic Marine
Living Resources Convention Act of 1984 (16 U.S.C. 2441(c))
is amended by inserting ``to execute the statutory missions
of the Coast Guard and'' after ``needed''.
[[Page 14833]]
(c) Conforming Amendment.--The table of contents for
chapter 5 of title 14, United States Code, is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 86 the
following:
``87. Provision of icebreaking services.''.
TITLE III--PERSONNEL
SEC. 301. ACQUISITION WORKFORCE EXPEDITED HIRING AUTHORITY.
Section 404 of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010
(124 Stat. 2950) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``as shortage
category positions'' and inserting ``as positions for which
there is a shortage of candidates or a critical hiring
need''; and
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``paragraph'' and inserting ``section'';
and
(B) by striking ``2012'' and inserting ``2015''.
SEC. 302. OFFICERS RECOMMENDED FOR PROMOTION.
Section 259(c)(1) of title 14, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``After selecting'' and inserting ``In
selecting''.
SEC. 303. ORIGINAL APPOINTMENT OF PERMANENT COMMISSIONED
OFFICERS.
Section 211 of title 14, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(d) For purposes of this section, the term `original'
with respect to the appointment of a member of the Coast
Guard refers to the member's most recent appointment in the
Coast Guard that is neither a promotion nor a demotion.''.
SEC. 304. ACADEMY PAY, ALLOWANCES, AND EMOLUMENTS.
Section 195 of title 14, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``person'' each place it appears and
inserting ``foreign national''; and
(2) by striking ``pay and allowances'' each place it
appears and inserting ``pay, allowances, and emoluments''.
SEC. 305. ACADEMY POLICY ON SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND SEXUAL
VIOLENCE.
(a) Establishment.--Chapter 9 of title 14, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 200. Policy on sexual harassment and sexual violence
``(a) Required Policy.--The Commandant shall direct the
Superintendent of the Coast Guard Academy to prescribe a
policy on sexual harassment and sexual violence applicable to
the cadets and other personnel of the Coast Guard Academy.
``(b) Matters to Be Specified in Policy.--The policy on
sexual harassment and sexual violence under this section
shall include specification of the following:
``(1) Programs to promote awareness of the incidence of
rape, acquaintance rape, and other sexual offenses of a
criminal nature that involve cadets or other Academy
personnel.
``(2) Information about how the Coast Guard and the Academy
will protect the confidentiality of victims, including how
any records, statistics, or reports intended for public
release will be formatted such that the confidentiality of
victims is not jeopardized.
``(3) Procedures that a cadet or other Academy personnel
should follow in the case of an occurrence of sexual
harassment or sexual violence, including--
``(A) if the cadet or other Academy personnel chooses to
report an occurrence of sexual harassment or sexual violence,
a specification of the person or persons to whom the alleged
offense should be reported and options for confidential
reporting, including written information to be given to
victims which explains how the Coast Guard and the Academy
will protect the confidentiality of victims;
``(B) a specification of any other person whom the victim
should contact; and
``(C) procedures on the preservation of evidence
potentially necessary for proof of criminal sexual assault.
``(4) Procedures for disciplinary action in cases of
criminal sexual assault involving a cadet or other Academy
personnel.
``(5) Any other sanction authorized to be imposed in a
substantiated case of sexual harassment or sexual violence
involving a cadet or other Academy personnel in rape,
acquaintance rape, or other criminal sexual offence, whether
forcible or nonforcable.
``(6) Required training on the policy for all cadets and
other Academy personnel who process allegations of sexual
harassment or sexual violence involving a cadet or other
Academy personnel.
``(c) Assessment.--
``(1) In general.--The Commandant shall direct the
Superintendent to conduct at the Academy during each Academy
program year an assessment to determine the effectiveness of
the policies of the Academy with respect to sexual harassment
and sexual violence involving cadets and other Academy
personnel.
``(2) Biennial survey.--For the assessment at the Academy
under paragraph (1) with respect to an Academy program year
that begins in an odd-numbered calendar year, the
Superintendent shall conduct a survey of cadets and other
Academy personnel--
``(A) to measure--
``(i) the incidence, during that program year, of sexual
harassment and sexual violence events, on or off the Academy
reservation, that have been reported to an official of the
Academy; and
``(ii) the incidence, during that program year, of sexual
harassment and sexual violence, on or off the Academy
reservation, that have not been reported to an official of
the Academy; and
``(B) to assess the perceptions of the cadets and other
Academy personnel of--
``(i) the policies, training, and procedures on sexual
harassment and sexual violence involving cadets and other
Academy personnel;
``(ii) the enforcement of such policies;
``(iii) the incidence of sexual harassment and sexual
violence involving cadets and other Academy personnel; and
``(iv) any other issues relating to sexual harassment and
sexual violence involving cadets and other Academy personnel.
``(d) Report.--
``(1) In general.--The Commandant shall direct the
Superintendent of the Coast Guard Academy to submit to the
Commandant a report on sexual harassment and sexual violence
involving cadets or other Academy personnel for each Academy
program year.
``(2) Report specifications.--Each report under paragraph
(1) shall include, for the Academy program year covered by
the report, the following:
``(A) The number of sexual assaults, rapes, and other
sexual offenses involving cadets or other Academy personnel
that have been reported to Coast Guard Academy officials
during the Academy program year and, of those reported cases,
the number that have been substantiated.
``(B) A plan for the actions that are to be taken in the
following Academy program year regarding prevention of and
response to sexual harassment and sexual violence involving
cadets or other Academy personnel.
``(3) Biennial survey.--Each report under paragraph (1) for
an Academy year that begins in an odd-numbered calendar year
shall include the results of the survey conducted in that
Academy program year under subsection (c)(2).
``(4) Transmission of report.--The Commandant shall
transmit each report received by the Commandant under this
subsection, together with the Commandant's comments on the
report to--
``(A) the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate; and
``(B) the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of
the House of Representatives.
``(5) Focus groups.--
``(A) In general.--In each even-numbered calendar year that
the Superintendent is not required to conduct a survey at the
Academy under subsection (c)(2), the Commandant shall require
focus groups to be conducted at the Academy for the purposes
of ascertaining information relating to sexual assault and
sexual harassment issues at the Academy.
``(B) Inclusion in reports.--Information derived from a
focus group under subparagraph (A) shall be included in the
Commandant's report under this subsection.
``(e) Victim Confidentiality.--To the extent that
information collected under authority of this section is
reported or otherwise made available to the public, such
information shall be provided in a form that is consistent
with applicable privacy protections under Federal law and
does not jeopardize the confidentiality of victims.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of contents for
chapter 9 of title 14, United States Code, is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 199 the
following:
``200. Policy on sexual harassment and sexual violence.''.
SEC. 306. COAST GUARD AUXILIARISTS ENROLLMENT ELIGIBILITY.
Section 823 of title 14, United States Code, is amended to
read as follows:
``Sec. 823. Eligibility, enrollments
``The Auxiliary shall be composed of nationals of the
United States, as defined in section 101(a)(22) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(22)), and
of aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence, as
defined in section 101(a)(20) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(20))--
``(1) who are owners, sole or part, of motorboats, yachts,
aircraft, or radio stations; or
``(2) who by reason of their special training or experience
are deemed by the Commandant to be qualified for duty in the
Auxiliary, and who may be enrolled therein pursuant to
applicable regulations.''.
TITLE IV--ADMINISTRATION
SEC. 401. ADVANCE PROCUREMENT FUNDING.
With respect to any Coast Guard vessel for which amounts
are appropriated or otherwise made available for vessels for
the Coast Guard in any fiscal year, the Secretary may enter
into a contract or place an order, in advance of a contract
or order for construction of a vessel, for--
(1) materials, parts, components, and effort for the
vessel;
(2) advance construction of parts or components for the
vessel;
(3) protection and storage of materials, parts, or
components for the vessel; and
(4) production planning, design, and other related support
services that reduce the overall procurement lead time of the
vessel.
[[Page 14834]]
SEC. 402. MULTIYEAR PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY FOR COAST GUARD
NATIONAL SECURITY CUTTERS.
(a) In General.--Beginning with the fiscal year 2013
program year, the Secretary of the department in which the
Coast Guard is operating may enter, under section 2306b of
title 10, United States Code, into a multiyear contract for
the procurement of Coast Guard National Security Cutters and
government-furnished equipment associated with the National
Security Cutter program.
(b) Limitation.--The Secretary may not enter into a
contract under subsection (a) until--
(1) the Secretary submits to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives a certification that the Secretary has made,
with respect to the contract, each of the findings under
section 2306b(a) of title 10, United States Code, such as the
analysis referred to under subsection (c) of this section;
and
(2) a period of 30 days has elapsed after the date that the
Secretary submits the certification under paragraph (1).
(c) Determination of Substantial Savings.--In conducting an
analysis of substantial savings under section 2306b(a)(1) of
title 10, United States Code, the Secretary--
(1) may not limit the analysis to a simple percentage-based
metric; and
(2) shall employ a full-scale analysis of cost avoidance--
(A) based on a multiyear procurement; and
(B) taking into account the potential benefit any accrued
savings might have for future shipbuilding programs if the
cost avoidance savings were subsequently utilized for further
ship construction.
SEC. 403. REQUIREMENT TO MAINTAIN UNITED STATES POLAR
ICEBREAKING CAPABILITY.
(a) Current Icebreaker Maintenance.--Until new heavy
icebreakers are acquired for operation by the Coast Guard, in
order to meet Coast Guard mission requirements, the
Commandant of the Coast Guard may not--
(1) transfer, relinquish ownership of, dismantle, or
recycle the POLAR SEA or POLAR STAR;
(2) remove any part of the POLAR SEA unless it will be
installed on the POLAR STAR before it is put in ``active''
status and the Commandant certifies to the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
of Representatives that it is not possible for the POLAR STAR
to function properly without doing so;
(3) change the existing homeport of any Coast Guard
icebreaker; or
(4) expend any funds--
(A) for any expenses directly or indirectly associated with
the decommissioning of either of the vessels, including
expenses for dock use or other goods and services;
(B) for any personnel expenses directly or indirectly
associated with the decommissioning of either of the vessels,
including expenses for a decommissioning officer;
(C) for any expenses associated with a decommissioning
ceremony for either of the vessels;
(D) to appoint a decommissioning officer to be affiliated
with either of the vessels; or
(E) to place either of the vessels in inactive status.
(b) Reimbursement.--Nothing in this section shall preclude
the Secretary from seeking reimbursement for operation and
maintenance costs of the polar icebreakers from other Federal
agencies and entities, including foreign governments, that
benefit from the use of the polar icebreakers.
SEC. 404. NATIONAL RESPONSE FUNCTIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 311 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1321) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking paragraph (23); and
(B) redesignating paragraphs (24) through (26) as
paragraphs (23) through (25), respectively;
(2) in subsection (j)(2), by striking ``National Response
Unit.'' through ``acting through the National Response Unit''
and inserting the following:
``(2) National response functions.--The Secretary of the
department in which the Coast Guard is operating--''; and
(3) in subsection (j)(4)(C)(vi), by striking ``, and into
operating procedures of the National Response Unit''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 4202(b) of the Oil
Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 1321 note) is amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (2); and
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs
(2) and (3), respectively.
SEC. 405. NATIONAL RESPONSE CENTER NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
The Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission,
established pursuant to the Ohio River Valley Water
Sanitation Compact authorized by House Joint Resolution 377,
74th Congress, agreed to June 8, 1936 (49 Stat. 1490), and
consented to and approved by Congress in the Act of July 11,
1940 (54 Stat. 752), is deemed a Government agency for
purposes of the notification requirements of section 103 of
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9603). The National Response
Center shall convey notification, including complete and un-
redacted incident reports, expeditiously to the Commission
regarding each release in or affecting the Ohio River Basin
for which notification to all appropriate Government agencies
is required.
SEC. 406. CONFORMING AMENDMENT.
Section 210 of the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation
Act of 2006 (14 U.S.C. 93 note) is repealed.
TITLE V--SHIPPING AND NAVIGATION
SEC. 501. CENTRAL BERING SEA POTENTIAL PLACE OF REFUGE.
(a) Consultation.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Commandant of the Coast Guard
shall consult with appropriate Federal agencies and with
State and local interests to determine what improvements, if
any, are necessary to designate existing ice-free facilities
(or infrastructure) in the Central Bering Sea as a fully
functional, year-round Potential Place of Refuge for vessels
with drafts up to 25 feet and lengths overall of up to 450
feet.
(b) Purposes.--The purposes of the consultation under
subsection (a) shall be to enhance safety of human life at
sea and protect the marine environment in the Central Bering
Sea.
(c) Report.--Not later than 90 days after making the
determination under subsection (a), the Commandant shall
inform the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure of the House of Representatives in writing of
the findings under subsection (a).
SEC. 502. PROTECTION AND FAIR TREATMENT OF SEAFARERS.
(a) In General.--Chapter 111 of title 46, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 11113. Protection and fair treatment of seafarers
``(a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section shall be to
ensure the protection and fair treatment of seafarers.
``(b) Special Fund.--
``(1) Establishment.--There is established in the Treasury
a special fund known as the Support of Seafarers Fund.
``(2) Use of amounts in fund.--The amounts deposited into
the Fund shall be available to the Secretary, without fiscal
year limitation, to--
``(A) pay necessary support under subsection (c)(1); and
``(B) reimburse a shipowner for necessary support under
subsection (c)(2).
``(3) Amounts credited to fund.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, the Fund may receive--
``(A) any moneys ordered to be paid to the Fund in the form
of community service under section 8B1.3 of the United States
Sentencing Guidelines Manual or to the extent permitted under
paragraph (4); and
``(B) amounts reimbursed or recovered under subsection (e).
``(4) Prerequisite for community service credits.--The Fund
may receive credits under paragraph (3)(A) if the unobligated
balance of the Fund is less than $5,000,000.
``(5) Authorization of appropriation.--There are authorized
to be appropriated, from the Fund, for each fiscal year such
sums as may be necessary for the purposes set forth in
paragraph (2).
``(6) Report required.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall submit to Congress,
concurrent with the President's budget submission for a given
fiscal year, a report that describes--
``(i) the amounts credited to the Fund under paragraph (3)
for the preceding fiscal year;
``(ii) in detail, the activities for which amounts were
charged; and
``(iii) the projected level of expenditures from the Fund
for the upcoming fiscal year, based on--
``(I) on-going activities; and
``(II) new cases, derived from historic data.
``(B) Exception.--Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to
obligations during the first fiscal year during which amounts
are credited to the Fund.
``(7) Fund manager.--The Secretary shall designate a Fund
manager. The Fund manager shall--
``(A) ensure the visibility and accountability of
transactions utilizing the Fund;
``(B) prepare the report under paragraph (6);
``(C) monitor the unobligated balance of the Fund; and
``(D) provide notice to the Secretary and the Attorney
General whenever the unobligated balance of the Fund is less
than $5,000,000.
``(c) Authority.--The Secretary may--
``(1) pay, from amounts appropriated from the Fund,
necessary support of--
``(A) a seafarer that--
``(i) enters, remains, or is paroled into the United
States; and
``(ii) is involved in an investigation, reporting,
documentation, or adjudication of any matter that is related
to the administration or enforcement of any treaty, law, or
regulation by the Coast Guard; and
``(B) a seafarer that the Secretary determines was
abandoned in the United States; and
``(2) reimburse, from amounts appropriated from the Fund, a
shipowner that has provided necessary support of a seafarer
who
[[Page 14835]]
has been paroled into the United States to facilitate an
investigation, reporting, documentation, or adjudication of
any matter that is related to the administration or
enforcement of any treaty, law, or regulation by the Coast
Guard, for the costs of necessary support if the Secretary
determines that reimbursement is necessary to avoid serious
injustice.
``(d) Limitation.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed--
``(1) to create a right, benefit, or entitlement to
necessary support; or
``(2) to compel the Secretary to pay or reimburse the cost
of necessary support.
``(e) Reimbursement; Recovery.--
``(1) In general.--A shipowner shall reimburse the Fund an
amount equal to the total amount paid from the Fund for
necessary support of a seafarer plus a surcharge of 25
percent of the total amount if--
``(A) the shipowner--
``(i) during the course of an investigation, reporting,
documentation, or adjudication of any matter that the Coast
Guard referred to a United States Attorney or the Attorney
General, fails to provide necessary support of a seafarer who
was paroled into the United States to facilitate the
investigation, reporting, documentation, or adjudication; and
``(ii) subsequently receives a criminal penalty; or
``(B) the shipowner, under any circumstance, abandons a
seafarer in the United States, as determined by the
Secretary.
``(2) Enforcement.--If a shipowner fails to reimburse the
Fund under paragraph (1), the Secretary may--
``(A) proceed in rem against any vessel of the shipowner in
the Federal district court for the district in which the
vessel is found; and
``(B) withhold or revoke the clearance required under
section 60105 of any vessel of the shipowner wherever the
vessel is found.
``(3) Remedy.--A vessel may obtain clearance from the
Secretary after it is withheld or revoked under paragraph
(2)(B) if the shipowner reimburses the Fund the amount
required under paragraph (1).
``(f) Bond and Surety.--
``(1) Authority.--The Secretary may require a bond or a
surety satisfactory as an alternative to withholding or
revoking clearance under subsection (e) if, in the opinion of
the Secretary, the bond or surety satisfactory is necessary
to facilitate an investigation, reporting, documentation, or
adjudication of any matter that is related to the
administration or enforcement of any treaty, law, or
regulation by the Coast Guard.
``(2) Surety corporations.--A surety corporation may
provide a bond or surety satisfactory under paragraph (1) if
the surety corporation is authorized by the Secretary of the
Treasury under section 9305 of title 31 to provide surety
bonds under section 9304 of title 31.
``(3) Application.--The authority to require a bond or
surety satisfactory or to request the withholding or
revocation of the clearance under subsection (e) applies to
any investigation, reporting, documentation, or adjudication
of any matter that is related to the administration or
enforcement of any treaty, law, or regulation by the Coast
Guard.
``(g) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Abandons; abandoned.--The term `abandons' or
`abandoned' means--
``(A) a shipowner's unilateral severance of ties with a
seafarer; or
``(B) a shipowner's failure to provide necessary support of
a seafarer.
``(2) Bond or surety satisfactory.--The term `bond or
surety satisfactory' means a negotiated instrument, the terms
of which may, at the discretion of the Secretary, include
provisions that require a shipowner--
``(A) to provide necessary support of a seafarer who has or
may have information pertinent to an investigation,
reporting, documentation, or adjudication of any matter that
is related to the administration or enforcement of any
treaty, law, or regulation by the Coast Guard;
``(B) to facilitate an investigation, reporting,
documentation, or adjudication of any matter that is related
to the administration or enforcement of any treaty, law, or
regulation by the Coast Guard;
``(C) to stipulate to certain incontrovertible facts,
including the ownership or operation of the vessel, or the
authenticity of documents and things from the vessel;
``(D) to facilitate service of correspondence and legal
papers;
``(E) to enter an appearance in United States district
court;
``(F) to comply with directions regarding payment of funds;
``(G) to name an agent in the United States for service of
process;
``(H) to stipulate in United States district court as to
the authenticity of certain documents;
``(I) to provide assurances that no discriminatory or
retaliatory measures will be taken against a seafarer
involved in an investigation, reporting, documentation, or
adjudication of any matter that is related to the
administration or enforcement of any treaty, law, or
regulation by the Coast Guard;
``(J) to provide financial security in the form of cash,
bond, or other means acceptable to the Secretary; and
``(K) to provide for any other appropriate measures as the
Secretary considers necessary to ensure the Government is not
prejudiced by granting the clearance required under section
60105 of title 46.
``(3) Fund.--The term `Fund' means the Support of Seafarers
Fund established under this section.
``(4) Necessary support.--The term `necessary support'
means normal wages, lodging, subsistence, clothing, medical
care (including hospitalization), repatriation, and any other
expense the Secretary considers appropriate.
``(5) Seafarer.--The term `seafarer' means an alien crewman
who is employed or engaged in any capacity on board a vessel
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. A seafarer
is a claimant for the purposes of section 30509.
``(6) Shipowner.--The term `shipowner' means an individual
or entity that owns, has an ownership interest in, or
operates a vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United
States.
``(7) Vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the united
states.--The term `vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States' has the meaning given the term in section
70502(c), except that it excludes--
``(A) a vessel--
``(i) that is owned by the United States, a State or
political subdivision thereof, or a foreign nation; and
``(ii) that is not engaged in commerce; and
``(B) a bareboat--
``(i) that is chartered and operated by the United States,
a State or political subdivision thereof, or a foreign
nation; and
``(ii) that is not engaged in commerce.
``(h) Regulations.--The Secretary may prescribe regulations
to implement this section.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of contents for
chapter 111 of title 46, United States Code, is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 11112 the
following:
``11113. Protection and fair treatment of seafarers.''.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to the Support of Seafarers Fund
$1,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2013 and 2014.
SEC. 503. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY.
Section 3316 of title 46, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(2)--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (A);
(B) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (B)
and inserting ``; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(C) if the Secretary of State determines that the foreign
classification society does not provide comparable services
in or for the government of a country designated by the
Secretary of State as a State Sponsor of Terrorism.'';
(2) in subsection (d)(2)--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (A);
(B) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (B)
and inserting ``; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(C) if the Secretary of State determines that the foreign
classification society does not provide comparable services
in or for the government of a country designated by the
Secretary of State as a State Sponsor of Terrorism.''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following--
``(e) The Secretary shall revoke an existing delegation
made to a classification society under subsection (b) or (d)
if the Secretary of State determines that the classification
society provides comparable services in or for the government
of a country designated by the Secretary of State as a State
Sponsor of Terrorism.''.
SEC. 504. REPORT ON ESTABLISHMENT OF ARCTIC DEEP WATER PORT.
(a) Study.--The Commandant of the Coast Guard shall conduct
a study on the feasibility and potential of establishing a
deep water sea port in the Arctic to protect and advance
strategic United States interests within the Arctic region.
(b) Scope.--The study under subsection (a) shall include an
analysis of--
(1) the capability that a deep water sea port would
provide;
(2) the potential and optimum locations for the port;
(3) the resources needed to establish the port;
(4) the time frame needed to establish the port;
(5) the infrastructure required to support the port; and
(6) any other issues the Secretary considers necessary to
complete the study.
(c) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Commandant shall submit a report
on the findings of the study under subsection (a) to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
of the House of Representatives.
SEC. 505. RISK ANALYSIS OF TRANSPORTING CANADIAN OIL SANDS.
(a) In General.--The Commandant of the Coast Guard shall
assess the increased vessel traffic in the Salish Sea
(including the Puget Sound, the Strait of Georgia, Haro
Strait, Rosario Strait, and the Strait of Juan de
[[Page 14836]]
Fuca), that may occur from the transport of Canadian oil
sands oil.
(b) Scope.--The analysis required under subsection (a)
shall, at a minimum, consider--
(1) the extent to which vessel (barge, tanker, and
supertanker) traffic may increase due to Canadian oil sands
development;
(2) whether transport of Canadian oil sands within the
Salish Sea is likely to require navigation through United
States territorial waters;
(3) the rules and regulations that restrict supertanker
traffic in United States waters, including an assessment of
whether there are methods to bypass those rules in such
waterways and adjacent Canadian waters;
(4) the rules and regulations that restrict the amount of
oil transported in tankers or barges in United States waters,
including an assessment of whether there are methods to
bypass those rules in such waterways and adjacent Canadian
waters;
(5) the spill response capability throughout the shared
water of the United States and Canada, including oil spill
response planning requirements for vessels bound for one
nation transiting through the waters of the other nation;
(6) the vessel emergency response towing capability at the
entrance to the Strait of Juan de Fuca;
(7) the agreement between the United States and Canada that
outlines requirements for laden tank vessels to be escorted
by tug boats;
(8) whether oil extracted from oil sands has different
properties from other types of oil, including toxicity and
other properties, which may require different maritime clean
up technologies;
(9) a risk assessment of the increasing supertanker,
tanker, and barge traffic associated with Canadian oil sands
development or expected to be associated with Canadian oil
sands development; and
(10) the potential costs and benefits to the U.S. public
and the private sector of maritime transportation of oil
sands products.
(c) Consultation Requirement.--In conducting the analysis
required under this section, the Commandant shall consult
with the State of Washington and affected tribal governments.
The Commandant is also strongly encouraged to consult with
the Secretary of State.
(d) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Commandant shall submit a report
based on the analysis required under this section to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
of the House of Representatives.
SEC. 506. ELIGIBILITY TO RECEIVE SURPLUS TRAINING EQUIPMENT.
Section 51103(b)(2)(C) of title 46, United States Code, is
amended by inserting ``or a training institution that is an
instrumentality of a State, Territory, or Commonwealth of the
United States or District of Columbia or a unit of local
government thereof'' after ``a non-profit training
institution''.
TITLE VI--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION AUTHORIZATION
SEC. 601. SHORT TITLE; AMENDMENT OF TITLE 46, UNITED STATES
CODE.
(a) Short Title.--This title may be cited as the ``Maritime
Administration Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013''.
(b) Amendment of Title 46, United States Code.--Except as
otherwise expressly provided, whenever in this title an
amendment or repeal is expressed in terms of an amendment to,
or a repeal of, a section or other provision, the reference
shall be considered to be made to a section or other
provision of title 46, United States Code.
SEC. 602. MARINE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM.
(a) Report on Status of System.--Section 50109(d) is
amended to read as follows:
``(d) Marine Transportation System.--
``(1) Report on waterways.--Not later than October 1, 2013,
the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense
and the commanding officer of the Army Corps of Engineers,
and with the concurrence of the Secretary of the department
in which the Coast Guard is operating, shall submit a report
to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of
the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services and the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
of Representatives on the status of the Nation's coastal and
inland waterways that--
``(A) describes the state of the United States' marine
transportation infrastructure, including intercoastal
infrastructure, intracoastal infrastructure, inland waterway
infrastructure, ports, and marine facilities;
``(B) provides estimates of the investment levels
required--
``(i) to maintain the infrastructure; and
``(ii) to improve the infrastructure; and
``(C) describes the overall environmental management of the
maritime transportation system and the integration of
environmental stewardship into the overall system.
``(2) Marine transportation.--The Secretary may
investigate, make determinations concerning, and develop a
repository of statistical information relating to marine
transportation, including its relationship to transportation
by land and air, to facilitate research, assessment, and
maintenance of the maritime transportation system. As used in
this paragraph, the term `marine transportation' includes
intercoastal transportation, intracoastal transportation,
inland waterway transportation, ports, and marine facilities.
``(3) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary such sums as
may be necessary to carry out this subsection.''.
(b) Container-on-barge Transportation.--
(1) Assessment and report.--Not later than 6 months after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Maritime
Administration shall assess the potential for using
container-on-barge transportation on the inland waterways
system and submit a report, together with the
Administration's findings, conclusions, and recommendations,
to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of
the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services and the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
of Representatives. If the Administration determines that it
would be in the public interest, the report may include
recommendations for a plan to increase awareness of the
potential for use of such container-on-barge transportation
and recommendations for the development and implementation of
such a plan.
(2) Factors.--In conducting the assessment, the
Administration shall consider--
(A) the environmental benefits of increasing container-on-
barge movements on our inland and intracoastal waterways
system;
(B) the regional differences in the inland waterways
system;
(C) the existing programs established at coastal and Great
Lakes ports for establishing awareness of deep sea shipping
operations;
(D) the mechanisms to ensure that implementation of the
plan will not be inconsistent with antitrust laws; and
(E) the potential frequency of service at inland river
ports.
SEC. 603. SHORT SEA TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM AMENDMENTS.
(a) Program Purpose.--Section 55601(a) is amended by
inserting ``and to promote more efficient use of the
navigable waters of the United States'' after ``congestion''.
(b) Designation of Routes.--Section 55601(c) is amended by
inserting ``and to promote more efficient use of the
navigable waters of the United States'' after ``coastal
corridors''.
(c) Project Designation.--Section 55601(d) is amended to
read as follows:
``(d) Project Designation.--The Secretary may designate a
project as a short sea transportation project if the
Secretary determines that the project--
``(1) mitigates landside congestion; or
``(2) promotes more efficient use of the navigable waters
of the United States.''.
(d) Documentation.--Section 55605 is amended by striking
``by vessel'' and inserting ``by a documented vessel''.
SEC. 604. MARITIME ENVIRONMENTAL AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--Chapter 503 is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``Sec. 50307. Maritime environmental and technical assistance
program
``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation may
establish a maritime environmental and technical assistance
program to engage in the environmental study, research,
development, assessment, and deployment of emerging marine
technologies and practices related to the marine
transportation system through the use of public vessels under
the control of the Maritime Administration or private vessels
under Untied States registry, and through partnerships and
cooperative efforts with academic, public, private, and non-
governmental entities and facilities.
``(b) Program Requirements.--The program shall--
``(1) identify, study, evaluate, test, demonstrate, or
improve emerging marine technologies and practices that are
likely to achieve environmental improvements by--
``(A) reducing air emissions, water emissions, or other
ship discharges;
``(B) increasing fuel economy or the use of alternative
fuels and alternative energy (including the use of shore
power); or
``(C) controlling aquatic invasive species; and
``(2) be coordinated with the Environmental Protection
Agency, the United States Coast Guard, and other Federal,
State, local, or tribal agencies, as appropriate.
``(c) Program Coordination.--Program coordination under
subsection (b)(2) may include--
``(1) activities that are associated with the development
or approval of validation and testing regimes; and
``(2) certification or validation of emerging technologies
or practices that demonstrate significant environmental
benefits.
``(d) Funding and Fees.--
``(1) In general.--In carrying out the maritime
environmental and technical assistance program, the Secretary
of Transportation may apply such funds as may be appropriated
and such funds or resources as may become available by gift,
cooperative agreement, or otherwise, including the collection
of fees, for the purposes of the program and its
administration.
[[Page 14837]]
``(2) Establishment of fees.--Pursuant to section 9701 of
title 31, the Secretary of Transportation may promulgate
regulations establishing fees to recover reasonable costs to
the Secretary and to academic, public, and non-governmental
entities associated with the program.
``(3) Fee deposit.--Any fees collected under this section
shall be deposited in a special fund of the United States
Treasury for services rendered under the program, which
thereafter shall remain available until expended to carry out
the Secretary of Transportation's activities for which the
fees were collected.
``(e) Report.--The Secretary of Transportation shall report
on the activities, expenditures, and results of the maritime
environmental and technical assistance program during the
preceding fiscal year in the annual budget submission to
Congress.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of contents for
chapter 503 is amended by inserting after the item relating
to section 50306 the following:
``50307. Maritime environmental and technical assistance program.''.
SEC. 605. WAIVER OF NAVIGATION AND VESSEL-INSPECTION LAWS.
Section 501(b) is amended by adding ``A waiver shall be
accompanied by a certification by the individual and the
Administrator to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation and the Committee on Armed Services of the
Senate, and the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure and the Committee on Armed Services of the
House of Representatives that it is not possible to use a
United States flag vessel or United States flag vessels
collectively to meet the national defense requirements.''
after ``prescribes.''.
SEC. 606. EXTENSION OF MARITIME SECURITY FLEET PROGRAM.
(a) Section 53101 is amended--
(1) by amending paragraph (4) to read as follows:
``(4) Foreign commerce.--The term `foreign commerce'
means--
``(A) commerce or trade between the United States, its
territories or possessions, or the District of Columbia, and
a foreign country; and
``(B) commerce or trade between foreign countries.'';
(2) by striking paragraph (5);
(3) by redesignating paragraphs (6) through (13) as
paragraphs (5) through (12), respectively; and
(4) by amending paragraph (5), as redesignated, to read as
follows:
``(5) Participating fleet vessel.--The term `participating
fleet vessel' means any vessel that--
``(A) on October 1, 2015--
``(i) meets the requirements of paragraph (1), (2), (3), or
(4) of section 53102(c); and
``(ii) is less than 20 years of age if the vessel is a tank
vessel, or is less than 25 years of age for all other vessel
types; and
``(B) on December 31, 2014, is covered by an operating
agreement under this chapter.''.
(b) Section 53102(b) is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Vessel Eligibility.--A vessel is eligible to be
included in the Fleet if--
``(1) the vessel meets the requirements of paragraph (1),
(2), (3), or (4) of subsection (c);
``(2) the vessel is operated (or in the case of a vessel to
be constructed, will be operated) in providing transportation
in foreign commerce;
``(3) the vessel is self-propelled and--
``(A) is a tank vessel that is 10 years of age or less on
the date the vessel is included in the Fleet; or
``(B) is any other type of vessel that is 15 years of age
or less on the date the vessel is included in the Fleet;
``(4) the vessel--
``(A) is suitable for use by the United States for national
defense or military purposes in time of war or national
emergency, as determined by the Secretary of Defense; and
``(B) is commercially viable, as determined by the
Secretary; and
``(5) the vessel--
``(A) is a United States-documented vessel; or
``(B) is not a United States-documented vessel, but--
``(i) the owner of the vessel has demonstrated an intent to
have the vessel documented under chapter 121 of this title if
it is included in the Fleet; and
``(ii) at the time an operating agreement for the vessel is
entered into under this chapter, the vessel is eligible for
documentation under chapter 121 of this title.''.
(c) Section 53103 is amended--
(1) by amending subsection (b) to read as follows:
``(b) Extension of Existing Operating Agreements.--
``(1) Offer to extend.--Not later than 60 days after the
date of enactment of the Maritime Administration
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, the Secretary shall
offer, to an existing contractor, to extend, through
September 30, 2025, an operating agreement that is in
existence on the date of enactment of that Act. The terms and
conditions of the extended operating agreement shall include
terms and conditions authorized under this chapter, as
amended from time to time.
``(2) Time limit.--An existing contractor shall have not
later than 120 days after the date the Secretary offers to
extend an operating agreement to agree to the extended
operating agreement.
``(3) Subsequent award.--The Secretary may award an
operating agreement to an applicant that is eligible to enter
into an operating agreement for fiscal years 2016 through
2025 if the existing contractor does not agree to the
extended operating agreement under paragraph (2).''; and
(2) by amending subsection (c) to read as follows:
``(c) Procedure for Awarding New Operating Agreements.--The
Secretary may enter into a new operating agreement with an
applicant that meets the requirements of section 53102(c)
(for vessels that meet the qualifications of section
53102(b)) on the basis of priority for vessel type
established by military requirements of the Secretary of
Defense. The Secretary shall allow an applicant at least 30
days to submit an application for a new operating agreement.
After consideration of military requirements, priority shall
be given to an applicant that is a U.S. citizen under section
50501 of this title. The Secretary may not approve an
application without the consent of the Secretary of Defense.
The Secretary shall enter into an operating agreement with
the applicant or provide a written reason for denying the
application.''.
(d) Section 53104 is amended--
(1) in subsection (c), by striking paragraph (3); and
(2) in subsection (e), by striking ``an operating agreement
under this chapter is terminated under subsection (c)(3), or
if''.
(e) Section 53105 is amended--
(1) by amending subsection (e) to read as follows:
``(e) Transfer of Operating Agreements.--A contractor under
an operating agreement may transfer the agreement (including
all rights and obligations under the operating agreement) to
any person that is eligible to enter into the operating
agreement under this chapter if the Secretary and the
Secretary of Defense determine that the transfer is in the
best interests of the United States. A transaction shall not
be considered a transfer of an operating agreement if the
same legal entity with the same vessels remains the
contracting party under the operating agreement.''; and
(2) by amending subsection (f) to read as follows:
``(f) Replacement Vessels.--A contractor may replace a
vessel under an operating agreement with another vessel that
is eligible to be included in the Fleet under section
53102(b), if the Secretary, in conjunction with the Secretary
of Defense, approves the replacement of the vessel.''.
(f) Section 53106 is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``and (C) $3,100,000
for each of fiscal years 2012 through 2025.'' and inserting
the following:
``(C) $3,100,000 for each of fiscal years 2012, 2013, 2014,
2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018;
``(D) $3,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2019, 2020, and
2021; and
``(E) $3,700,000 for each of fiscal years 2022, 2023, 2024,
and 2025.'';
(2) in subsection (c)(3)(C), by striking ``a LASH vessel.''
and inserting ``a lighter aboard ship vessel.''; and
(3) by striking subsection (f).
(g) Section 53107(b)(1) is amended to read as follows:
``(1) In general.--An Emergency Preparedness Agreement
under this section shall require that a contractor for a
vessel covered by an operating agreement under this chapter
shall make commercial transportation resources (including
services) available, upon request by the Secretary of Defense
during a time of war or national emergency, or whenever the
Secretary of Defense determines that it is necessary for
national security or contingency operation (as that term is
defined in section 101 of title 10, United States Code).''.
(h) Section 53109 is repealed.
(i) Section 53111 is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (2); and
(2) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
``(3) $186,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2012, 2013,
2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018;
``(4) $210,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2019, 2020, and
2021; and
``(5) $222,000,000 for each fiscal year thereafter through
fiscal year 2025.''.
(j) Authorization of Appropriations; Maintenance and Repair
Reimbursement Pilot Program.--Section 3517(i) of the Maritime
Security Act of 2003 (46 U.S.C. 53101 note) is amended by
striking ``2011'' and inserting ``2025''.
(k) Effective Date of Amendments.--The amendments made by--
(1) paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) of section 606(a) of this
Act take effect on December 31, 2014; and
(2) section 606(f)(2) of this Act take effect on December
31, 2014.
SEC. 607. MARITIME WORKFORCE STUDY.
(a) Training Study.--The Comptroller General of the United
States shall conduct a study on the training needs of the
maritime workforce.
[[Page 14838]]
(b) Study Components.--The study shall--
(1) analyze the impact of training requirements imposed by
domestic and international regulations and conventions,
companies, and government agencies that charter or operate
vessels;
(2) evaluate the ability of the Nation's maritime training
infrastructure to meet the current needs of the maritime
industry;
(3) evaluate the ability of the Nation's maritime training
infrastructure to effectively meet the needs of the maritime
industry in the future;
(4) identify trends in maritime training;
(5) compare the training needs of U.S. mariners with the
vocational training and educational assistance programs
available from Federal agencies to evaluate the ability of
Federal programs to meet the training needs of U.S. mariners;
(6) include recommendations for future programs to enhance
the capabilities of the Nation's maritime training
infrastructure; and
(7) include recommendations for future programs to assist
U.S. mariners and those entering the maritime profession
achieve the required training.
(c) Final Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit a
report on the results of the study to the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
of Representatives.
SEC. 608. MARITIME ADMINISTRATION VESSEL RECYCLING CONTRACT
AWARD PRACTICES.
(a) In General.--Not later than 12 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Inspector General of the
Department of Transportation shall conduct an assessment of
the source selection procedures and practices used to award
the Maritime Administration's National Defense Reserve Fleet
vessel recycling contracts. The Inspector General shall
assess the process, procedures, and practices used for the
Maritime Administration's qualification of vessel recycling
facilities. The Inspector General shall report the findings
to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and
the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate, and the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the
Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives.
(b) Assessment.--The assessment under subsection (a) shall
include a review of whether the Maritime Administration's
contract source selection procedures and practices are
consistent with law, the Federal Acquisition Regulations
(FAR), and Federal best practices associated with making
source selection decisions.
(c) Considerations.--In making the assessment under
subsection (a), the Inspector General may consider any other
aspect of the Maritime Administration's vessel recycling
process that the Inspector General deems appropriate to
review.
SEC. 609. REQUIREMENT FOR BARGE DESIGN.
Not later than 9 months after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Administrator of the Maritime Administration shall
complete the design for a containerized articulated barge
identified in the Dual Use Vessel Study carried out by the
Administrator and the Secretary of Defense that is able to
utilize roll-on, roll-off or load-on, load-off technology for
use in marine highway maritime commerce.
TITLE VII--MISCELLANEOUS
SEC. 701. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR PROCUREMENT
OF ALTERNATIVE FUEL.
None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act
or otherwise made available during fiscal year 2013 or 2014
for the Coast Guard may be obligated or expended for the
production or purchase of any alternative fuel if the cost of
producing or purchasing the alternative fuel exceeds the cost
of producing or purchasing a traditional fossil fuel that
would be used for the same purpose as the alternative fuel.
SEC. 702. PASSENGER VESSEL SECURITY AND SAFETY REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Vessel Design, Equipment, Construction, and
Retrofitting Requirements.--Section 3507(a) of title 46,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking
``to which this subsection applies'' and inserting ``to which
this section applies'';
(B) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) by striking ``The vessel'' and inserting ``Each
exterior deck of a vessel''; and
(ii) by striking the period at the end and inserting
``unless the height requirement would interfere with the
deployment of a lifesaving device or other emergency
equipment as identified by the Commandant.''; and
(C) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``entry doors that
include peep holes or other means of visual identification.''
and inserting ``an entry door that includes a peep hole or
other means of visual identification that provides an
unobstructed view of the area outside the stateroom or crew
cabin. For purposes of this subparagraph, the addition of an
optional privacy cover on the interior side of the entry
shall not in and of itself constitute an obstruction.''; and
(2) in paragraph (3)--
(A) by striking ``subparagraph (B)'' in subparagraph (A)
and inserting ``subparagraphs (B) and (C)''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(C) Ship rail, entry door, and technology requirements.--
The requirements of subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph
(1) take effect on the date of enactment of the Coast Guard
Authorization Act of 2012.''.
(b) Video Recording.--Section 3507(b)(1) of title 46,
United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(1) Requirement to maintain surveillance.--
``(A) In general.--The owner of a vessel to which this
section applies shall maintain a video surveillance system to
assist in documenting crimes on the vessel and in providing
evidence for the prosecution of such crimes, as determined by
the Secretary.
``(B) Assessment.--Not later than 120 days after the date
of enactment of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2012,
the owner of a vessel to which this section applies shall
perform and submit to the Commandant a criminal and passenger
safety risk assessment to determine the appropriate placement
of video surveillance equipment on the vessel. The assessment
shall require consideration of camera placement in areas
where video surveillance may assist in documenting crimes on
the vessel and in providing evidence of such crimes. The
assessment shall make recommendations as to the appropriate
placement of video surveillance equipment throughout the
vessel, including passenger and crew common areas where there
is no expectation of privacy, as to the frequency or
infrequency of crimes in areas of the vessel, and as to the
use of cameras in areas of perceived higher risk. The
Commandant shall have authority to review, modify, and
require modifications to the assessment to provide for
additional video coverage of a vessel.
``(C) Interim retention requirements.--The owner of a
vessel to which this section applies shall retain all video
images for a voyage for not less than 10 days after the date
that the images are recorded. If an incident described in
subsection (g)(3)(A)(i) is alleged and reported to law
enforcement, all video images for a voyage that the Federal
Bureau of Investigation determines relevant shall--
``(i) be provided to the Federal Bureau of Investigation;
and
``(ii) be preserved by the vessel owner for not less than 3
years from the date of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's
determination.
``(D) Retention requirements.--Not later than 3 years after
the date of enactment of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of
2012, the Commandant, in consultation with the Federal Bureau
of Investigation, shall promulgate standards for the
retention of video surveillance records. The Commandant shall
consider factors that would aid in the investigation of
serious crimes, including crimes that go unreported until
after the completion of a voyage. The Commandant shall
consider the different types of video surveillance systems
and storage requirements in creating standards both for
vessels currently in operation and for vessels newly
built.''.
(c) Sexual Assault.--Section 3507(d)(1) of title 46, United
States Code, is amended by inserting ``(taking into
consideration the length of the voyage and the number of
passengers and crewmembers that the vessel can accommodate)''
after ``a sexual assault''.
(d) Crew Access to Passenger Staterooms.--Section
3507(f)(2) of title 46, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``are fully and properly implemented and
periodically reviewed.'' and inserting ``are fully and
properly implemented, reviewed annually, and updated as
necessary.''.
(e) Log Book and Reporting Requirements.--Section 3507(g)
of title 46, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by amending paragraph (1) to read as follows:
``(1) In general.--The owner of a vessel to which this
section applies shall--
``(A) record in a log book, either electronically or
otherwise, a report on--
``(i) all complaints of crimes described in paragraph
(3)(A)(i);
``(ii) all complaints of theft of property valued in excess
of $1,000; and
``(iii) all complaints of other crimes committed on any
voyage that embarks or disembarks passengers in the United
States; and
``(B) make the log book and all entries therein available,
whether the log book and entries are maintained onboard the
vessel or at a centralized location off the vessel, upon
request to--
``(i) any agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation
performing official duties in the course and scope of an
investigation;
``(ii) any member of the United States Coast Guard
performing official duties in the course and scope of an
investigation; and
``(iii) any law enforcement officer performing official
duties in the course and scope of an investigation.'';
(2) in paragraph (3)(A)--
(A) in clause (i), by striking ``as soon as possible after
the occurrence on board the
[[Page 14839]]
vessel of an incident'' and inserting ``not later than 24
hours after the vessel is notified of an incident on board
the vessel''; and
(B) in clause (ii), by striking ``the incident'' and
inserting ``each incident under clause (i), including the
details under paragraph (2),''; and
(3) in paragraph (4)--
(A) by amending subparagraph (A) to read as follows:
``(A) Website.--
``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall maintain a
statistical compilation of all incidents described in
paragraph (3)(A)(i) on an Internet site that provides a
numerical accounting of the missing persons and alleged
crimes recorded in each report filed under paragraph
(3)(A)(i). Each such incident shall be included in the
statistical compilation regardless of whether the incident is
under investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation or
not, unless the Bureau determines through the investigative
process the report to be unfounded. If determined to be
unfounded, the incident shall not be included in the
statistical compilation or shall be removed when the
determination is made. The data shall be updated no less
frequently than quarterly, aggregated by cruise line, each
cruise line shall be identified by name and each crime and
alleged crime shall be identified as to whether it was
committed or allegedly committed by a passenger or crew
member and against a passenger or crew member. The Secretary
shall also include on the Internet site a rate of crime,
comparable to that provided under the Uniform Crime Reporting
Program, as determined by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation. The rate shall take into account the total
number of passengers and crew members carried by each
reporting cruise line on voyages that embark or disembark in
the United States during the reporting period, and shall be
adjusted by the Bureau to reflect the average length of time
such persons were on board, as documented to the Secretary by
each reporting cruise line.
``(ii) Definition of unfounded.--For purposes of this
subparagraph, the term `unfounded' means an allegation that
is determined through the course of an investigation to be
false or baseless.'';
(B) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C);
(C) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:
``(B) Reports of incidents.--The Federal Bureau of
Investigation shall furnish quarterly to the Secretary, the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the
Committee on Judiciary of the Senate, and the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on
Judiciary of the House of Representatives a numerical
accounting of each incident reported to a Federal Bureau of
Investigation Field Office under paragraph (3)(A)(i) that
quarter.''; and
(D) in subparagraph (C), as redesignated--
(i) by striking ``taking on or discharging'' and inserting
``that takes on or discharges''; and
(ii) by striking ``a link'' and inserting ``, on any
Internet site that the cruise line maintains to purchase or
book cruises on any vessel that the cruise line owns or
operates, and to which this section applies, a prominently
accessible link''.
(f) Procedures.--Section 3507(i) of title 46, United States
Code, is amended by striking ``Within 6 months after the date
of enactment of the Cruise Vessel Security and Safety Act of
2010, the'' and inserting ``The''.
(g) Regulations.--Section 3507(j) of title 46, United
States Code, is amended by striking ``shall each'' and
inserting ``are authorized each to''.
(h) Definitions.--Section 3507(l) of title 46, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3);
(2) by inserting before paragraph (3), as redesignated, the
following:
``(2) Exterior deck.--The term `exterior deck' means any
exterior weather deck on which a passenger may be present,
including passenger stateroom balconies, exterior promenades
on passenger decks, muster stations, and similar exterior
weather deck areas.''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(4) Time-sensitive key technology.--The term `time-
sensitive key technology' means an electronic lock or key, or
both that may be programmed to prohibit a person that lacks
permission to enter a guest stateroom or crew cabin.''.
SEC. 703. OIL SPILL LIABILITY TRUST FUND INVESTMENT AMOUNT.
Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of the Treasury shall increase the amount
invested in income producing securities under section 5006(b)
of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2736(b)) by
$12,851,340.
SEC. 704. VESSEL DETERMINATIONS.
(a) Vessels Deemed New Vessels.--The vessel with United
States official number 981472 and the vessel with United
States official number 988333 shall each be deemed to be a
new vessel effective on the date of delivery after January 1,
2008, from a privately owned United States shipyard if no
encumbrances are on record with the United States Coast Guard
at the time of the issuance of the new vessel certificate of
documentation for each vessel.
(b) Safety Inspection.--Each vessel under subsection (a)
shall be subject to the vessel safety and inspection
requirements of title 46, United States Code (as in effect on
the day before the date of enactment of this Act), applicable
to any such vessel.
SEC. 705. ALTERATION OF BRIDGE OBSTRUCTING NAVIGATION.
(a) Requirement to Commence Administrative Review.--Not
later than 15 days after the date of enactment of this Act,
the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is
operating shall certify to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives that the Coast Guard has commenced the
required interagency administrative review of the pending
proposal to alter the bridge that is unreasonably obstructing
navigation and that spans the Kill Van Kull, connecting
Bayonne, New Jersey, and Staten Island, New York.
(b) Expedited Process.--The Commandant--
(1) shall expedite the interagency administrative review
under subsection (a); and
(2) may use any resources offered to the Coast Guard by the
bridge owner for the purpose of paragraph (1).
(c) Deadline for Completion.--Not later than November 30,
2012, the Coast Guard shall complete the interagency
administrative review under subsection (a).
SEC. 706. NOTICE OF ARRIVAL.
The regulations required under section 109(a) of the
Security and Accountability For Every Port Act of 2006 (33
U.S.C. 1223 note) dealing with notice of arrival requirements
for foreign vessels on the Outer Continental Shelf shall not
apply to a vessel documented under section 12105 of title 46,
United States Code, unless the vessel arrives from a foreign
port or place.
SEC. 707. WAIVERS.
(a) F/V TEXAS STAR CASINO.--Notwithstanding subchapter II
of chapter 121 and chapter 551 of title 46, United States
Code, the Secretary of the department in which the Coast
Guard is operating may issue a fishery endorsement and a
license under chapter 121 for the fishing vessel TEXAS STAR
CASINO (IMO number 7722047).
(b) RANGER III.--Section 3703a of title 46, United States
Code, does not apply to the passenger vessel RANGER III
(United States official number 277361), so long as it is
owned and operated by the National Park Service.
SEC. 708. BUDGETARY EFFECTS.
The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of
complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (2
U.S.C. 931 et seq.), shall be determined by reference to the
latest statement titled ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO
Legislation'' for this Act, submitted for printing in the
Congressional Record by the Chairman of the Senate Budget
Committee, provided that such statement has been submitted
prior to the vote on passage.
SEC. 709. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.
(a) Continuation on Active Duty.--Section 290(a) of title
14, United States Code, is amended in the second sentence by
striking ``in the grade of vice admiral'' and inserting ``in
or above the grade of vice admiral''.
(b) Failure of Selection and Removal From Active Status.--
Section 740(d) of title 14, United States Code, is amended by
striking ``that appointment'' and inserting ``that Reserve
appointment''.
(c) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for chapter
17 of title 14, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking the item relating to section 669 and
inserting the following:
``669. Telephone installation and charges.''; and
(2) by striking the item relating to section 674 and
inserting the following:
``674. Small boat station rescue capability.''.
(d) Waiver.--Section 7(c) of the America's Cup Act of 2011
(125 Stat. 755) is amended by inserting ``located in
Ketchikan, Alaska'' after ``moorage''.
______
SA 2868. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Rockefeller) proposed an amendment to the
bill H.R. 2838, supra.
Amend the title so as to read: ``An Act to authorize
appropriations for the Coast Guard for fiscal years 2013
through 2014, and for other purposes.''.
______
SA 2869. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Bingaman) proposed an amendment to the
bill H.R. 2606, to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to allow the
construction and operation of natural gas pipeline facilities in the
Gateway National Recreation Area, and for other purposes.
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``New York City Natural Gas
Supply Enhancement Act''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Permittee.--The term ``permittee'' means the
Transcontinental Gas Pipeline
[[Page 14840]]
Company, LLC, (Transco), its successors or assigns.
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR PERMIT.
(a) In General.--The Secretary may issue permits for
rights-of-way or other necessary authorizations to allow the
permittee to construct, operate, and maintain a natural gas
pipeline and related facilities within the Gateway National
Recreation Area in New York, as described in Federal
Regulatory Commission Docket No. PF09-8.
(b) Terms and Conditions.--A permit issued under this
section shall be--
(1) consistent with the laws and regulations generally
applicable to utility rights-of-way within units of the
National Park System; and
(2) subject to such terms and conditions as the Secretary
deems appropriate.
(c) Fees.--The Secretary shall charge a fee for any permit
issued under this section. The fee shall be based on fair
market value and shall also provide for recovery of costs
incurred by the National Park Service associated with the
processing, issuance, and monitoring of the permit. The
Secretary shall retain any fees associated with the recovery
of costs.
(d) Term.--Any permit issued under this section shall be
for a term of 10 years. The permit may be renewed at the
discretion of the Secretary in accordance with this section.
SEC. 4. LEASE OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS AT FLOYD BENNETT FIELD.
(a) In General.--The Secretary may enter into a non-
competitive lease with the permittee to allow the occupancy
and use of buildings and associated property at Floyd Bennett
Field within the Gateway National Recreation Area to house
meter and regulating equipment and other equipment necessary
to the operation of the natural gas pipeline described in
section 3(a).
(b) Terms and Conditions.--A lease entered into under this
section shall--
(1) be in accordance with section 3(k) of the National Park
System General Authorities Act (16 U.S.C. 1a-2(k)), except
that the proceeds from rental payments may be used for
infrastructure needs, resource protection and restoration,
and visitor services at Gateway National Recreation Area; and
(2) provide for the restoration and maintenance of the
buildings and associated property in accordance with section
106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C.
470f) and applicable regulations and programmatic agreements.
SEC. 5. ENFORCEMENT.
The Secretary may impose citations or fines, or suspend or
revoke any authority under a permit or lease issued in
accordance with this Act for failure to comply with, or a
violation of any term or condition of such permit or lease.
______
SA 2870. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Enzi) proposed an amendment to the
resolution S. Res. 472, designating October 7, 2012, as ``Operation
Enduring Freedom Veterans Day''.
In the fifth whereas clause, strike ``nearly 1,800'' and
insert ``some 2,000''.
____________________
PRIVILEGES OF THE FLOOR
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Abby Duggan,
Anne Berry, and Nikki Hurt of my staff be granted floor privileges for
the duration of today's proceedings.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
ENABLING ENERGY SAVING INNOVATIONS ACT
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Energy
Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 4850, and
the Senate proceed to its consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk
will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 4850) to allow for innovations and alternative
technologies that meet or exceed desired energy efficiency
goals.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent a Bingaman amendment, which is at
the desk, be agreed to, that a Shaheen-Portman amendment which is at
the desk be agreed to, the bill as amended be read a third time and
passed, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no
intervening action or debate, and any statements be printed in the
Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 2861) was agreed to.
(The text of the amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text
of Amendments.'')
The amendment (No. 2862) was agreed to.
(The text of the amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text
of Amendments.'')
The amendments were ordered to be engrossed and the bill read a third
time.
The bill (H.R. 4850), as amended, was read the third time and passed,
as follows:
H.R. 4850
Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representatives
(H.R. 4850) entitled ``An Act to allow for innovations and
alternative technologies that meet or exceed desired energy
efficiency goals.'', do pass with the following amendment:
At the end of the bill, add the following:
SEC. 3. UNIFORM EFFICIENCY DESCRIPTOR FOR COVERED WATER
HEATERS.
Section 325(e) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act
(42 U.S.C. 6295(e)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(5) Uniform efficiency descriptor for covered water
heaters.--
``(A) Definitions.--In this paragraph:
``(i) Covered water heater.--The term `covered water
heater' means--
``(I) a water heater; and
``(II) a storage water heater, instantaneous water heater,
and unfired water storage tank (as defined in section 340).
``(ii) Final rule.--The term `final rule' means the final
rule published under this paragraph.
``(B) Publication of final rule.--Not later than 180 days
after the date of enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary
shall publish a final rule that establishes a uniform
efficiency descriptor and accompanying test methods for
covered water heaters.
``(C) Purpose.--The purpose of the final rule shall be to
replace with a uniform efficiency descriptor--
``(i) the energy factor descriptor for water heaters
established under this subsection; and
``(ii) the thermal efficiency and standby loss descriptors
for storage water heaters, instantaneous water heaters, and
unfired water storage tanks established under section
342(a)(5).
``(D) Effect of final rule.--
``(i) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
this title, effective beginning on the effective date of the
final rule, the efficiency standard for covered water heaters
shall be denominated according to the efficiency descriptor
established by the final rule.
``(ii) Effective date.--The final rule shall take effect 1
year after the date of publication of the final rule under
subparagraph (B).
``(E) Conversion factor.--
``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall develop a
mathematical conversion factor for converting the measurement
of efficiency for covered water heaters from the test
procedures in effect on the date of enactment of this
paragraph to the new energy descriptor established under the
final rule.
``(ii) Application.--The conversion factor shall apply to
models of covered water heaters affected by the final rule
and tested prior to the effective date of the final rule.
``(iii) Effect on efficiency requirements.--The conversion
factor shall not affect the minimum efficiency requirements
for covered water heaters otherwise established under this
title.
``(iv) Use.--During the period described in clause (v), a
manufacturer may apply the conversion factor established by
the Secretary to rerate existing models of covered water
heaters that are in existence prior to the effective date of
the rule described in clause (v)(II) to comply with the new
efficiency descriptor.
``(v) Period.--Subclause (E) shall apply during the
period--
``(I) beginning on the date of publication of the
conversion factor in the Federal Register; and
``(II) ending on April 16, 2015.
``(F) Exclusions.--The final rule may exclude a specific
category of covered water heaters from the uniform efficiency
descriptor established under this paragraph if the Secretary
determines that the category of water heaters--
``(i) does not have a residential use and can be clearly
described in the final rule; and
``(ii) are effectively rated using the thermal efficiency
and standby loss descriptors applied (as of the date of
enactment of this paragraph) to the category under section
342(a)(5).
``(G) Options.--The descriptor set by the final rule may
be--
``(i) a revised version of the energy factor descriptor in
use as of the date of enactment of this paragraph;
``(ii) the thermal efficiency and standby loss descriptors
in use as of that date;
``(iii) a revised version of the thermal efficiency and
standby loss descriptors;
``(iv) a hybrid of descriptors; or
``(v) a new approach.
``(H) Application.--The efficiency descriptor and
accompanying test method established under the final rule
shall apply, to the maximum extent practicable, to all water
heating technologies in use as of the date of enactment of
this paragraph and to future water heating technologies.
``(I) Participation.--The Secretary shall invite interested
stakeholders to participate in the rulemaking process used to
establish the final rule.
[[Page 14841]]
``(J) Testing of alternative descriptors.--In establishing
the final rule, the Secretary shall contract with the
National Institute of Standards and Technology, as necessary,
to conduct testing and simulation of alternative descriptors
identified for consideration.
``(K) Existing covered water heaters.--A covered water
heater shall be considered to comply with the final rule on
and after the effective date of the final rule and with any
revised labeling requirements established by the Federal
Trade Commission to carry out the final rule if the covered
water heater--
``(i) was manufactured prior to the effective date of the
final rule; and
``(ii) complied with the efficiency standards and labeling
requirements in effect prior to the final rule.''.
SEC. 4. SERVICE OVER THE COUNTER, SELF-CONTAINED, MEDIUM
TEMPERATURE COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATORS.
Section 342(c) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act
(42 U.S.C. 6313(c)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (E);
and
(B) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
``(C) The term `service over the counter, self-contained,
medium temperature commercial refrigerator' or `(SOC-SC-M)'
means a medium temperature commercial refrigerator--
``(i) with a self-contained condensing unit and equipped
with sliding or hinged doors in the back intended for use by
sales personnel, and with glass or other transparent material
in the front for displaying merchandise; and
``(ii) that has a height not greater than 66 inches and is
intended to serve as a counter for transactions between sales
personnel and customers.
``(D) The term `TDA' means the total display area (ft\2\)
of the refrigerated case, as defined in AHRI Standard
1200.'';
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as paragraphs
(5) and (6), respectively; and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
``(4) Each SOC-SC-M manufactured on or after January 1,
2012, shall have a total daily energy consumption (in
kilowatt hours per day) of not more than 0.6 x TDA + 1.0.''.
SEC. 5. SMALL DUCT HIGH VELOCITY SYSTEMS AND ADMINISTRATIVE
CHANGES.
(a) Through-the-Wall Central Air Conditioners, Through-the-
Wall Central Air Conditioning Heat Pumps, and Small Duct,
High Velocity Systems.--Section 325(d) of the Energy Policy
and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6295(d)) is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(4) Standards for through-the-wall central air
conditioners, through-the-wall central air conditioning heat
pumps, and small duct, high velocity systems.--
``(A) Definitions.--In this paragraph:
``(i) Small duct, high velocity system.--The term `small
duct, high velocity system' means a heating and cooling
product that contains a blower and indoor coil combination
that--
``(I) is designed for, and produces, at least 1.2 inches of
external static pressure when operated at the certified air
volume rate of 220-350 CFM per rated ton of cooling; and
``(II) when applied in the field, uses high velocity room
outlets generally greater than 1,000 fpm that have less than
6.0 square inches of free area.
``(ii) Through-the-wall central air conditioner; through-
the-wall central air conditioning heat pump.--The terms
`through-the-wall central air conditioner' and `through-the-
wall central air conditioning heat pump' mean a central air
conditioner or heat pump, respectively, that is designed to
be installed totally or partially within a fixed-size opening
in an exterior wall, and--
``(I) is not weatherized;
``(II) is clearly and permanently marked for installation
only through an exterior wall;
``(III) has a rated cooling capacity no greater than 30,000
Btu/hr;
``(IV) exchanges all of its outdoor air across a single
surface of the equipment cabinet; and
``(V) has a combined outdoor air exchange area of less than
800 square inches (split systems) or less than 1,210 square
inches (single packaged systems) as measured on the surface
area described in subclause (IV).
``(iii) Revision.--The Secretary may revise the definitions
contained in this subparagraph through publication of a final
rule.
``(B) Small-duct high-velocity systems.--
``(i) Seasonal energy efficiency ratio.--The seasonal
energy efficiency ratio for small-duct high-velocity systems
shall be not less than--
``(I) 11.00 for products manufactured on or after January
23, 2006; and
``(II) 12.00 for products manufactured on or after January
1, 2015.
``(ii) Heating seasonal performance factor.--The heating
seasonal performance factor for small-duct high-velocity
systems shall be not less than--
``(I) 6.8 for products manufactured on or after January 23,
2006; and
``(II) 7.2 for products manufactured on or after January 1,
2015.
``(C) Subsequent rulemakings.--The Secretary shall conduct
subsequent rulemakings for through-the-wall central air
conditioners, through-the-wall central air conditioning heat
pumps, and small duct, high velocity systems as part of any
rulemaking under this section used to review or revise
standards for other central air conditioners and heat
pumps.''.
(b) Duty to Review Commercial Equipment.--Section 342(a)(6)
of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A)(i), by inserting ``the standard
levels or design requirements applicable under that standard
to'' immediately before ``any small commercial''; and
(2) in subparagraph (C)--
(A) in clause (i)--
(i) by striking ``Not later than 6 years after issuance of
any final rule establishing or amending a standard, as
required for a product under this part,'' and inserting
``Every 6 years,''; and
(ii) by inserting after ``the Secretary shall'' the
following: ``conduct an evaluation of each class of covered
equipment and shall''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(vi) For any covered equipment as to which more than 6
years has elapsed since the issuance of the most recent final
rule establishing or amending a standard for the product as
of the date of enactment of this clause, the first notice
required under clause (i) shall be published by December 31,
2013.''.
(c) Petition for Amended Standards.--Section 325(n) of the
Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6295(n)) is
amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (5); and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
``(3) Notice of decision.--Not later than 180 days after
the date of receiving a petition, the Secretary shall publish
in the Federal Register a notice of, and explanation for, the
decision of the Secretary to grant or deny the petition.
``(4) New or amended standards.--Not later than 3 years
after the date of granting a petition for new or amended
standards, the Secretary shall publish in the Federal
Register--
``(A) a final rule that contains the new or amended
standards; or
``(B) a determination that no new or amended standards are
necessary.''.
SEC. 6. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.
(a) Title III of Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007--Energy Savings Through Improved Standards for
Appliances and Lighting.--
(1) Section 325(u) of the Energy Policy and Conservation
Act (42 U.S.C. 6295(u)) (as amended by section 301(c) of the
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (121 Stat.
1550)) is amended--
(A) by redesignating paragraph (7) as paragraph (4); and
(B) in paragraph (4) (as so redesignated), by striking
``supplies is'' and inserting ``supply is''.
(2) Section 302(b) of the Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1551) is amended by striking
``6313(a)'' and inserting ``6314(a)''.
(3) Section 342(a)(6) of the Energy Policy and Conservation
Act (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)) (as amended by section 305(b)(2)
of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (121
Stat. 1554)) is amended--
(A) in subparagraph (B)--
(i) by striking ``If the Secretary'' and inserting the
following:
``(i) In general.--If the Secretary'';
(ii) by striking ``clause (ii)(II)'' and inserting
``subparagraph (A)(ii)(II)'';
(iii) by striking ``clause (i)'' and inserting
``subparagraph (A)(i)''; and
(iv) by adding at the end the following:
``(ii) Factors.--In determining whether a standard is
economically justified for the purposes of subparagraph
(A)(ii)(II), the Secretary shall, after receiving views and
comments furnished with respect to the proposed standard,
determine whether the benefits of the standard exceed the
burden of the proposed standard by, to the maximum extent
practicable, considering--
``(I) the economic impact of the standard on the
manufacturers and on the consumers of the products subject to
the standard;
``(II) the savings in operating costs throughout the
estimated average life of the product in the type (or class)
compared to any increase in the price of, or in the initial
charges for, or maintenance expenses of, the products that
are likely to result from the imposition of the standard;
``(III) the total projected quantity of energy savings
likely to result directly from the imposition of the
standard;
``(IV) any lessening of the utility or the performance of
the products likely to result from the imposition of the
standard;
``(V) the impact of any lessening of competition, as
determined in writing by the Attorney General, that is likely
to result from the imposition of the standard;
``(VI) the need for national energy conservation; and
``(VII) other factors the Secretary considers relevant.
``(iii) Administration.--
``(I) Energy use and efficiency.--The Secretary may not
prescribe any amended standard under this paragraph that
increases the maximum allowable energy use, or decreases the
minimum required energy efficiency, of a covered product.
``(II) Unavailability.--
``(aa) In general.--The Secretary may not prescribe an
amended standard under this subparagraph if the Secretary
finds (and publishes the finding) that interested persons
have established by a preponderance of the evidence that
[[Page 14842]]
a standard is likely to result in the unavailability in the
United States in any product type (or class) of performance
characteristics (including reliability, features, sizes,
capacities, and volumes) that are substantially the same as
those generally available in the United States at the time of
the finding of the Secretary.
``(bb) Other types or classes.--The failure of some types
(or classes) to meet the criterion established under this
subclause shall not affect the determination of the Secretary
on whether to prescribe a standard for the other types or
classes.''; and
(B) in subparagraph (C)(iv), by striking ``An amendment
prescribed under this subsection'' and inserting
``Notwithstanding subparagraph (D), an amendment prescribed
under this subparagraph''.
(4) Section 342(a)(6)(B)(iii) of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (as added by section 306(c) of the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1559)) is
transferred and redesignated as clause (vi) of section
342(a)(6)(C) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (as
amended by section 305(b)(2) of the Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1554)).
(5) Section 345 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act
(42 U.S.C. 6316) (as amended by section 312(e) of the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1567)) is
amended--
(A) by striking ``subparagraphs (B) through (G)'' each
place it appears and inserting ``subparagraphs (B), (C), (D),
(I), (J), and (K)'';
(B) by striking ``part A'' each place it appears and
inserting ``part B''; and
(C) in subsection (a)--
(i) in paragraph (8), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(ii) in paragraph (9), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; and''; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following:
``(10) section 327 shall apply with respect to the
equipment described in section 340(1)(L) beginning on the
date on which a final rule establishing an energy
conservation standard is issued by the Secretary, except that
any State or local standard prescribed or enacted for the
equipment before the date on which the final rule is issued
shall not be preempted until the energy conservation standard
established by the Secretary for the equipment takes
effect.'';
(D) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``section 325(p)(5)''
and inserting ``section 325(p)(4)''; and
(E) in subsection (h)(3), by striking ``section 342(f)(3)''
and inserting ``section 342(f)(4)''.
(6) Section 321(30)(D)(i)(III) of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(D)(i)(III)) (as amended
by section 321(a)(1)(A) of the Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1574)) is amended by
inserting before the semicolon the following: ``or, in the
case of a modified spectrum lamp, not less than 232 lumens
and not more than 1,950 lumens''.
(7) Section 321(30)(T) of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(T)) (as amended by
section 321(a)(1)(B) of the Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1574)) is amended--
(A) in clause (i)--
(i) by striking the comma after ``household appliance'' and
inserting ``and''; and
(ii) by striking ``and is sold at retail,''; and
(B) in clause (ii), by inserting ``when sold at retail,''
before ``is designated''.
(8) Section 325(l)(4)(A) of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(4)(A)) (as amended by
section 321(a)(3)(B) of the Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1581)) is amended by striking
``only''.
(9) Section 327(b)(1)(B) of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6297(b)(1)(B)) (as amended by
section 321(d)(3) of the Energy Independence and Security Act
of 2007 (121 Stat. 1585)) is amended--
(A) in clause (i), by inserting ``and'' after the semicolon
at the end;
(B) in clause (ii), by striking ``; and'' and inserting a
period; and
(C) by striking clause (iii).
(10) Section 321(30)(C)(ii) of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(C)(ii)) (as amended by
section 322(a)(1)(B) of the Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1587)) is amended by inserting a
period after ``40 watts or higher''.
(11) Section 322(b) of the Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1588) is amended by striking
``6995(i)'' and inserting ``6295(i)''.
(12) Section 325(b) of the Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 (121 Stat. 1596) is amended by striking
``6924(c)'' and inserting ``6294(c)''.
(13) This subsection and the amendments made by this
subsection take effect as if included in the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-140;
121 Stat. 1492).
(b) Energy Policy Act of 2005.--
(1) Section 325(g)(8)(C)(ii) of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6295(g)(8)(C)(ii)) (as added by
section 135(c)(2)(B) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005) is
amended by striking ``20F'' and inserting ``20F''.
(2) This subsection and the amendment made by this
subsection take effect as if included in the Energy Policy
Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-58; 119 Stat. 594).
(c) Energy Policy and Conservation Act.--
(1) Section 340(2)(B) of the Energy Policy and Conservation
Act (42 U.S.C. 6311(2)(B)) is amended--
(A) in clause (xi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in clause (xii), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(xiii) other motors.''.
(2) Section 343(a) of the Energy Policy and Conservation
Act (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)) is amended by striking ``Air-
Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute'' each place it
appears in paragraphs (4)(A) and (7) and inserting ``Air-
Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute''.
TITLE II--INDUSTRIAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY
SEC. 201. COORDINATION OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF ENERGY
EFFICIENT TECHNOLOGIES FOR INDUSTRY.
(a) In General.--As part of the research and development
activities of the Industrial Technologies Program of the
Department of Energy, the Secretary of Energy (referred to in
this title as the ``Secretary'') shall establish, as
appropriate, collaborative research and development
partnerships with other programs within the Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy (including the Building
Technologies Program), the Office of Electricity Delivery and
Energy Reliability, and the Office of Science that--
(1) leverage the research and development expertise of
those programs to promote early stage energy efficiency
technology development;
(2) support the use of innovative manufacturing processes
and applied research for development, demonstration, and
commercialization of new technologies and processes to
improve efficiency (including improvements in efficient use
of water), reduce emissions, reduce industrial waste, and
improve industrial cost-competitiveness; and
(3) apply the knowledge and expertise of the Industrial
Technologies Program to help achieve the program goals of the
other programs.
(b) Reports.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this Act and biennially thereafter, the
Secretary shall submit to Congress a report that describes
actions taken to carry out subsection (a) and the results of
those actions.
SEC. 202. REDUCING BARRIERS TO THE DEPLOYMENT OF INDUSTRIAL
ENERGY EFFICIENCY.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Industrial energy efficiency.--The term ``industrial
energy efficiency'' means the energy efficiency derived from
commercial technologies and measures to improve energy
efficiency or to generate or transmit electric power and
heat, including electric motor efficiency improvements,
demand response, direct or indirect combined heat and power,
and waste heat recovery.
(2) Industrial sector.--The term ``industrial sector''
means any subsector of the manufacturing sector (as defined
in North American Industry Classification System codes 31-33
(as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act))
establishments of which have, or could have, thermal host
facilities with electricity requirements met in whole, or in
part, by onsite electricity generation, including direct and
indirect combined heat and power or waste recovery.
(b) Report on the Deployment of Industrial Energy
Efficiency.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the
Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate a report describing--
(A) the results of the study conducted under paragraph (2);
and
(B) recommendations and guidance developed under paragraph
(3).
(2) Study.--The Secretary, in coordination with the
industrial sector, shall conduct a study of the following:
(A) The legal, regulatory, and economic barriers to the
deployment of industrial energy efficiency in all electricity
markets (including organized wholesale electricity markets,
and regulated electricity markets), including, as applicable,
the following:
(i) Transmission and distribution interconnection
requirements.
(ii) Standby, back-up, and maintenance fees (including
demand ratchets).
(iii) Exit fees.
(iv) Life of contract demand ratchets.
(v) Net metering.
(vi) Calculation of avoided cost rates.
(vii) Power purchase agreements.
(viii) Energy market structures.
(ix) Capacity market structures.
(x) Other barriers as may be identified by the Secretary,
in coordination with the industrial sector.
(B) Examples of--
(i) successful State and Federal policies that resulted in
greater use of industrial energy efficiency;
(ii) successful private initiatives that resulted in
greater use of industrial energy efficiency; and
(iii) cost-effective policies used by foreign countries to
foster industrial energy efficiency.
(C) The estimated economic benefits to the national economy
of providing the industrial sector with Federal energy
efficiency matching grants of $5,000,000,000 for 5- and 10-
year periods, including benefits relating to--
(i) estimated energy and emission reductions;
(ii) direct and indirect jobs saved or created;
(iii) direct and indirect capital investment;
(iv) the gross domestic product; and
(v) trade balance impacts.
(D) The estimated energy savings available from increased
use of recycled material in energy-intensive manufacturing
processes.
[[Page 14843]]
(3) Recommendations and guidance.--The Secretary, in
coordination with the industrial sector, shall develop policy
recommendations regarding the deployment of industrial energy
efficiency, including proposed regulatory guidance to States
and relevant Federal agencies to address barriers to
deployment.
SEC. 203. STUDY OF ADVANCED ENERGY TECHNOLOGY MANUFACTURING
CAPABILITIES IN THE UNITED STATES.
(a) In General.--Not later than 60 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall enter into an
arrangement with the National Academy of Sciences under which
the Academy shall conduct a study of the development of
advanced manufacturing capabilities for various energy
technologies, including--
(1) an assessment of the manufacturing supply chains of
established and emerging industries;
(2) an analysis of--
(A) the manner in which supply chains have changed over the
25-year period ending on the date of enactment of this Act;
(B) current trends in supply chains; and
(C) the energy intensity of each part of the supply chain
and opportunities for improvement;
(3) for each technology or manufacturing sector, an
analysis of which sections of the supply chain are critical
for the United States to retain or develop to be competitive
in the manufacturing of the technology;
(4) an assessment of which emerging energy technologies the
United States should focus on to create or enhance
manufacturing capabilities; and
(5) recommendations on leveraging the expertise of energy
efficiency and renewable energy user facilities so that best
materials and manufacturing practices are designed and
implemented.
(b) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date on which
the Secretary enters into the agreement with the Academy
described in subsection (a), the Academy shall submit to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate, the
Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives, and the Secretary a report describing the
results of the study required under this section, including
any findings and recommendations.
SEC. 204. INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES STEERING COMMITTEE.
The Secretary shall establish an advisory steering
committee that includes national trade associations
representing energy-intensive industries or energy service
providers to provide recommendations to the Secretary on
planning and implementation of the Industrial Technologies
Program of the Department of Energy.
TITLE III--FEDERAL AGENCY ENERGY EFFICIENCY
SEC. 301. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR DESIGN UPDATES.
Section 3307 of title 40, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (d) through (h) as
subsections (e) through (i), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
``(d) Availability of Funds for Design Updates.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), for any
project for which congressional approval is received under
subsection (a) and for which the design has been
substantially completed but construction has not begun, the
Administrator of General Services may use appropriated funds
to update the project design to meet applicable Federal
building energy efficiency standards established under
section 305 of the Energy Conservation and Production Act (42
U.S.C. 6834) and other requirements established under section
3312.
``(2) Limitation.--The use of funds under paragraph (1)
shall not exceed 125 percent of the estimated energy or other
cost savings associated with the updates as determined by a
life-cycle cost analysis under section 544 of the National
Energy Conservation Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 8254).''.
SEC. 302. BEST PRACTICES FOR ADVANCED METERING.
Section 543(e) of the National Energy Conservation Policy
Act (42 U.S.C. 8253(e) is amended by striking paragraph (3)
and inserting the following:
``(3) Plan.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date
on which guidelines are established under paragraph (2), in a
report submitted by the agency under section 548(a), each
agency shall submit to the Secretary a plan describing the
manner in which the agency will implement the requirements of
paragraph (1), including--
``(i) how the agency will designate personnel primarily
responsible for achieving the requirements; and
``(ii) a demonstration by the agency, complete with
documentation, of any finding that advanced meters or
advanced metering devices (as those terms are used in
paragraph (1)), are not practicable.
``(B) Updates.--Reports submitted under subparagraph (A)
shall be updated annually.
``(4) Best practices report.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary of Energy, in
consultation with the Secretary of Defense and the
Administrator of General Services, shall develop, and issue a
report on, best practices for the use of advanced metering of
energy use in Federal facilities, buildings, and equipment by
Federal agencies.
``(B) Updating.--The report described under subparagraph
(A) shall be updated annually.
``(C) Components.--The report shall include, at a minimum--
``(i) summaries and analysis of the reports by agencies
under paragraph (3);
``(ii) recommendations on standard requirements or
guidelines for automated energy management systems,
including--
``(I) potential common communications standards to allow
data sharing and reporting;
``(II) means of facilitating continuous commissioning of
buildings and evidence-based maintenance of buildings and
building systems; and
``(III) standards for sufficient levels of security and
protection against cyber threats to ensure systems cannot be
controlled by unauthorized persons; and
``(iii) an analysis of--
``(I) the types of advanced metering and monitoring systems
being piloted, tested, or installed in Federal buildings; and
``(II) existing techniques used within the private sector
or other non-Federal government buildings.''.
SEC. 303. FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT AND DATA COLLECTION
STANDARD.
Section 543 of the National Energy Conservation Policy Act
(42 U.S.C. 8253) is amended--
(1) by redesignating the second subsection (f) (as added by
section 434(a) of Public Law 110-140 (121 Stat. 1614)) as
subsection (g); and
(2) in subsection (f)(7), by striking subparagraph (A) and
inserting the following:
``(A) In general.--For each facility that meets the
criteria established by the Secretary under paragraph (2)(B),
the energy manager shall use the web-based tracking system
under subparagraph (B)--
``(i) to certify compliance with the requirements for--
``(I) energy and water evaluations under paragraph (3);
``(II) implementation of identified energy and water
measures under paragraph (4); and
``(III) follow-up on implemented measures under paragraph
(5); and
``(ii) to publish energy and water consumption data on an
individual facility basis.''.
SEC. 304. FEDERAL PURCHASE REQUIREMENT.
Section 203 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C.
15852) is amended--
(1) in subsections (a) and (b)(2), by striking ``electric
energy'' each place it appears and inserting ``electric,
direct, and thermal energy'';
(2) in subsection (b)(2)--
(A) by inserting ``, or avoided by,'' after ``generated
from''; and
(B) by inserting ``(including ground-source, reclaimed, and
ground water)''after ``geothermal'';
(3) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); and
(4) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
``(d) Separate Calculation.--Renewable energy produced at a
Federal facility, on Federal land, or on Indian land (as
defined in section 2601 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (25
U.S.C. 3501))--
``(1) shall be calculated (on a BTU-equivalent basis)
separately from renewable energy used; and
``(2) may be used individually or in combination to comply
with subsection (a).''.
SEC. 305. STUDY ON FEDERAL DATA CENTER CONSOLIDATION.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Energy shall conduct a
study on the feasibility of a government-wide data center
consolidation, with an overall Federal target of a minimum of
800 Federal data center closures by October 1, 2015.
(b) Coordination.--In conducting the study, the Secretary
shall coordinate with Federal data center program managers,
facilities managers, and sustainability officers.
(c) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress
a report that describes the results of the study, including a
description of agency best practices in data center
consolidation.
____________________
JAIME ZAPATA BORDER ENFORCEMENT SECURITY TASK FORCE ACT
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed
to consideration of Calendar No. 497, H.R. 915.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 915) to establish a Border Enforcement
Security Task Force program to enhance border security by
fostering coordinated efforts among Federal, State, and local
border and law enforcement officials to protect United States
border cities and communities from trans-national crime,
including violence associated with drug trafficking, arms
smuggling, illegal alien trafficking and smuggling, violence,
and kidnapping along and across the international borders of
the United States, and for other purposes.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill
which has been reported from the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs, with an amendment to
[[Page 14844]]
strike all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Jaime Zapata Border
Enforcement Security Task Force Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND DECLARATION OF PURPOSES.
Congress finds the following:
(1) The Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) overriding
mission is to lead a unified national effort to protect the
United States. United States Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE) is the largest investigative agency within
DHS and is charged with enforcing a wide array of laws,
including laws related to securing the border and combating
criminal smuggling.
(2) Mexico's northern border with the United States has
experienced a dramatic surge in border crime and violence in
recent years due to intense competition between Mexican drug
cartels and criminal smuggling organizations that employ
predatory tactics to realize their profits.
(3) Law enforcement agencies at the United States northern
border also face challenges from transnational smuggling
organizations.
(4) In response, DHS has partnered with Federal, State,
local, tribal, and foreign law enforcement counterparts to
create the Border Enforcement Security Task Force (BEST)
initiative as a comprehensive approach to addressing border
security threats. These multi-agency teams are designed to
increase information-sharing and collaboration among the
participating law enforcement agencies.
(5) BEST teams incorporate personnel from ICE, United
States Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATFE), the Federal Bureau
of Investigation (FBI), the United States Coast Guard (USCG),
and the U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO), along with other key
Federal, State and local law enforcement agencies.
(6) Foreign law enforcement agencies participating in BEST
include Mexico's Secretaria de Seguridad Publica (SSP), the
Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), the Ontario Provincial
Police (OPP), and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).
SEC. 3. BORDER ENFORCEMENT SECURITY TASK FORCE.
(a) In General.--Subtitle C of title IV of the Homeland
Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 231 et seq.) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 432. BORDER ENFORCEMENT SECURITY TASK FORCE.
``(a) Establishment.--There is established within the
Department a program to be known as the Border Enforcement
Security Task Force (referred to in this section as `BEST').
``(b) Purpose.--The purpose of BEST is to establish units
to enhance border security by addressing and reducing border
security threats and violence by--
``(1) facilitating collaboration among Federal, State,
local, tribal, and foreign law enforcement agencies to
execute coordinated activities in furtherance of border
security, and homeland security; and
``(2) enhancing information-sharing, including the
dissemination of homeland security information among such
agencies.
``(c) Composition and Establishment of Units.--
``(1) Composition.--BEST units may be comprised of
personnel from--
``(A) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement;
``(B) U.S. Customs and Border Protection;
``(C) the United States Coast Guard;
``(D) other Department personnel, as appropriate
``(E) other Federal agencies, as appropriate;
``(F) appropriate State law enforcement agencies;
``(G) foreign law enforcement agencies, as appropriate;
``(H) local law enforcement agencies from affected border
cities and communities; and
``(I) appropriate tribal law enforcement agencies.
``(2) Establishment of units.--The Secretary is authorized
to establish BEST units in jurisdictions in which such units
can contribute to BEST missions, as appropriate. Before
establishing a BEST unit, the Secretary shall consider--
``(A) whether the area in which the BEST unit would be
established is significantly impacted by cross-border
threats;
``(B) the availability of Federal, State, local, tribal,
and foreign law enforcement resources to participate in the
BEST unit;
``(C) the extent to which border security threats are
having a significant harmful impact in the jurisdiction in
which the BEST unit is to be established, and other
jurisdictions in the country; and
``(D) whether or not an Integrated Border Enforcement Team
already exists in the area in which the BEST unit would be
established.
``(3) Duplication of efforts.--In determining whether to
establish a new BEST unit or to expand an existing BEST unit
in a given jurisdiction, the Secretary shall ensure that the
BEST unit under consideration does not duplicate the efforts
of other existing interagency task forces or centers within
that jurisdiction.
``(d) Operation.--After determining the jurisdictions in
which to establish BEST units under subsection (c)(2), and in
order to provide Federal assistance to such jurisdictions,
the Secretary may--
``(1) direct the assignment of Federal personnel to BEST,
subject to the approval of the head of the department or
agency that employs such personnel; and
``(2) take other actions to assist Federal, State, local,
and tribal entities to participate in BEST, including
providing financial assistance, as appropriate, for
operational, administrative, and technological costs
associated with the participation of Federal, State, local,
and tribal law enforcement agencies in BEST.
``(e) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date on
which BEST is established under this section, and annually
thereafter for the following 5 years, the Secretary shall
submit a report to Congress that describes the effectiveness
of BEST in enhancing border security and reducing the drug
trafficking, arms smuggling, illegal alien trafficking and
smuggling, violence, and kidnapping along and across the
international borders of the United States, as measured by
crime statistics, including violent deaths, incidents of
violence, and drug-related arrests.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents under
section 1(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C.
101(b)) is amended by inserting after the item relating to
section 431 the following:
``Sec. 432. Border Enforcement Security Task Force.''.
Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent the committee-reported substitute
amendment be agreed to and the bill as amended be read a third time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute was ordered to
be engrossed and the bill read a third time.
Mr. PRYOR. I know of no further debate on the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is
on passage of the measure.
The bill (H.R. 915), as amended, was read the third time and passed.
Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent the motion to reconsider be laid
upon the table with no intervening action or debate and any related
statements be printed in the Record as if read.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
AMENDING THE TRADEMARK ACT OF 1946
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Judiciary
Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 6215, and
the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk
will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 6215) to amend the Trademark Act of 1946 to
correct an error in the provisions relating to remedies for
dilution.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. I know of no further debate on this measure.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is
on passage of the bill.
The bill (H.R. 6215) was ordered to a third reading, was read the
third time and passed.
Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent the motion to reconsider be laid
upon the table with no intervening action or debate and any statements
related to the bill be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
BILLFISH CONSERVATION ACT OF 2011
Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the
immediate consideration of H.R. 2706, which was received from the
House.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 2706) to prohibit the sale of billfish.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. I know of no further debate on this measure and urge its
passage.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is
on agreeing to the measure.
The bill (H.R. 2706) was ordered to a third reading, was read the
third time, and passed.
[[Page 14845]]
____________________
CALLING FOR THE RELEASE FROM PRISON OF FORMER PRIME MINISTER OF UKRAINE
YULIA TYMOSHENKO
Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the
immediate consideration of Calendar No. 526, S. Res. 466.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 466) calling for the release from
prison of former Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the
resolution which had been reported from the Committee on Foreign
Relations with an amendment and an amendment to the preamble, as
follows:
[Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the part
printed in italic.]
[Strike the preamble and insert the part printed in
italic.]
S. Res. 466
Whereas Ukraine has experienced encouraging growth and
reforms since it declared its independence from the former
Soviet Union in 1991 and adopted its first constitution in
1996;
Whereas the 1996 constitution provided basic freedoms like
the freedom of speech, assembly, religion, and press, but was
ultimately too weak to contain the existing corruption-laced
political culture inherited from its communist past;
Whereas, as a result of the electoral fraud by which Prime
Minister Viktor Yanukovych was declared the winner of the
2004 presidential election, the citizens of the Ukraine
organized a series of protests, strikes, and sit-ins, which
came to be known as ``The Orange Revolution'';
Whereas the Orange Revolution, in concert with
international pressure, forced an unprecedented second run-
off election, which resulted in opposition leader Viktor
Yushchenko defeating Mr. Yanukovych by a margin of 52 percent
to 44 percent;
Whereas, in the 2010 presidential election, incumbent
Yushchenko won only 5.5 percent in the first round of voting,
which left former Prime Minister Yanukovych and then Prime
Minister Yulia Tymoshenko to face one another in the run-off
election;
Whereas, Mr. Yanukovych defeated Ms. Tymoshenko by a margin
of 49 percent to 44 percent;
Whereas, shortly after the 2010 inauguration of Mr.
Yanukovych, the Ukrainian Constitutional Court found most of
the 2004 Orange Revolution inspired constitutional reforms
unconstitutional;
Whereas, in 2010, President Yanukovych appointed Viktor
Pshonka Prosecutor General;
Whereas, since Mr. Pshonka's appointment, more than a dozen
political leaders associated with the 2004 Orange Revolution
have faced criminal charges under the Abuse of Office and
Exceeding Official Powers articles of the Ukrainian Criminal
Code;
Whereas, in 2011, Prosecutor General Pshonka brought
charges under these Abuse of Office articles against former
Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko over her decision while in
office to conclude a natural gas contract between Ukraine and
Russia;
Whereas, on October 11, 2011, Ms. Tymoshenko was found
guilty and sentenced to seven years in prison, fined
$189,000,000, and banned from holding public office for three
years following the completion of her sentence;
Whereas, recognizing the judicial abuses present in
Ukraine, the Parliamentary Assembly Council of Europe (PACE)
passed Resolution 1862 on January 26, 2012;
Whereas Resolution 1862 declared that the Abuse of Office
and Exceeding Official Powers articles under which Ms.
Tymoshenko was convicted are ``overly broad in application
and effectively allow for ex post facto criminalization of
normal political decision making'';
Whereas, since Ms. Tymoshenko's imprisonment, the
Prosecutor General's Office has reopened additional cases
against her that were previously closed and thought to be
sealed under a 10-year statute of limitations;
Whereas, beginning on October 28, 2011, and multiple times
since, Ukrainian Deputy Prosecutor General Renat Kuzmin has
alleged in television interviews that Tymoshenko was involved
in contract killings, but has filed no formal charges;
Whereas, for much of Ms. Tymoshenko's detention, she had
limited outside contact and access to needed medical
treatment;
Whereas international calls for Ms. Tymoshenko's release,
access to outside visitors, and adequate medical treatment
were initially ignored even as her health continued to
deteriorate;
Whereas, on April 28, 2012, major international news
organizations, including the British Broadcast Corporation
and Reuters, reported on and produced photos of bruises
allegedly received by Ms. Tymoshenko from prison guards on
April 20, 2012;
Whereas, in response to her inhumane treatment, Ms.
Tymoshenko began a hunger strike on April 20, 2012;
Whereas, amid international outrage, the European Union has
delayed indefinitely the signing of a free trade agreement
with Ukraine;
Whereas, under international pressure, Ms. Tymoshenko was
moved to a hospital in Kharkiv on May 9, 2012, prompting her
to end her hunger strike, yet leaving her in poor health; and
Whereas on May 30, 2012, the European Parliament passed a
resolution (C153/21) deploring the sentencing of Ms.
Tymoshenko: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) condemns the selective and politically motivated
prosecution and imprisonment of former Prime Minister Yulia
Tymoshenko;
(2) expresses its deep concern that the politicized
prosecutions and continued detention of Ms. Tymoshenko and
other members of her party took place in a country that is
scheduled to assume chairmanship of the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in 2013;
(3) expresses its deep concern that the continued detention
of Ms. Tymoshenko threatens to jeopardize ties between the
United States and Ukraine;
(4) calls for the Government of Ukraine to release Ms.
Tymoshenko, to provide her with timely access to medical
care, and to conduct the October parliamentary elections in a
fair and transparent manner consistent with OSCE standards;
and
(5) calls on the Department of State to institute a visa
ban against those responsible for the imprisonment and
mistreatment of Ms. Tymoshenko and the more than dozen
political leaders associated with the 2004 Orange Revolution.
Mr. PRYOR. I further ask that the Durbin amendment which is at the
desk be agreed to, the committee-reported substitute amendment, as
amended, be agreed to, and the Senate immediately proceed to a voice
vote on adoption of the resolution, as amended.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 2863) was agreed to, as follows:
On page 9, strike lines 1 through 14 and insert the
following:
(2) expresses its deep concern that the politicized nature
of prosecutions and detention of Ms. Tymoshenko and other
members of her party took place in a country that is
scheduled to assume chairmanship of the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in 2013;
(3) expresses its deep concern that the politicized
detention of Ms. Tymoshenko threatens to jeopardize ties
between the United States and Ukraine;
(4) calls for the Government of Ukraine to release Ms.
Tymoshenko from her current incarceration based on
politicized charges, to provide Ms. Tymoshenko with timely
access to medical care, and to conduct the October
parliamentary elections in a fair and transparent manner
consistent with OSCE standards; and
The question is on agreeing to the committee-reported substitute
amendment, as amended.
The committee-reported substitute amendment, as amended, was agreed
to.
Mr. PRYOR. I further ask the committee-reported amendment to the
preamble be agreed to; the preamble, as amended, be agreed to; the
motions to reconsider be laid upon the table with no intervening action
or debate, and any statements be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The committee-reported amendment to the preamble was agreed to.
The preamble, as amended, was agreed to.
(The resolution will be printed in a future edition of the Record.)
____________________
ROBERT H. JACKSON UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE
Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the
immediate consideration of H.R. 3556, which is at the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 3556) to designate the new United States
courthouse in Buffalo, New York, as the ``Robert H. Jackson
United States Courthouse.''
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. I further ask the bill be read a third time and passed,
the motion to reconsider be made and laid upon the table, with no
intervening action or debate, and any statements be printed in the
Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 3556) was ordered to a third reading, was read the
third time, and passed.
____________________
ALTO LEE ADAMS, SR., UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed
[[Page 14846]]
to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 445, H.R. 1791.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 1791) to designate the United States
courthouse under construction at 101 South United States
Route 1 in Fort Pierce, Florida, as the ``Alto Lee Adams,
Sr., United States Courthouse.''
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. I further ask the bill be read a third time and passed,
the motion to reconsider be made and laid upon the table, with no
intervening action or debate, and any statements be printed in the
Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 1791) was ordered to a third reading, was read the
third time, and passed.
____________________
ROBERT BOOCHEVER COURTHOUSE
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 4347, which is at the
desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 4347) to designate the United States
courthouse located at 709 West 9th Street in Juneau, Alaska,
as the ``Robert Boochever United States Courthouse.''
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I further ask that the bill be read three
times and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, with
no intervening action or debate, and any statements related to the
measure be printed in the Record at the appropriate place.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 4347) was ordered to a third reading, was read the
third time, and passed.
____________________
JAMES F. BATTIN COURTHOUSE
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 444, S. 3311.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 3311) to designate the United States courthouse
located at 2601 2nd Avenue North, Billings, Montana, as the
``James F. Battin United States Courthouse.''
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that the
bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be
considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or
debate, and that any statements related to the measure be printed in
the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (S. 3311) was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading,
was read the third time, and passed, as follows:
S. 3311
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. JAMES F. BATTIN UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE.
(a) In General.--
(1) Designation.--The United States courthouse located at
2601 2nd Avenue North, Billings, Montana, shall be known and
designated as the ``James F. Battin United States
Courthouse''.
(2) Technical amendment.--The ``James F. Battin United
States Courthouse'' located at 315 North 26th Street,
Billings, Montana, shall no longer be known and designated as
the ``James F. Battin United States Courthouse''.
(b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation,
document, paper, or other record of the United States to the
United States courthouse referred to in subsection (a)(1)
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``James F. Battin
United States Courthouse''.
____________________
MULTISTAKEHOLDER GOVERNANCE MODEL
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 529, S. Con.
Res. 50.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the concurrent
resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 50) expressing the
sense of Congress regarding actions to preserve and advance
the multistakeholder governance model under which the
Internet has thrived.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the
concurrent resolution.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent
resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to
reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or
debate, and that any statements be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 50) was agreed to.
The preamble was agreed to.
The concurrent resolution, with its preamble, reads as follows:
S. Con. Res. 50
Whereas given the importance of the Internet to the global
economy, it is essential that the Internet remain stable,
secure, and free from government control;
Whereas the world deserves the access to knowledge,
services, commerce, and communication, the accompanying
benefits to economic development, education, and health care,
and the informed discussion that is the bedrock of democratic
self-government that the Internet provides;
Whereas the structure of Internet governance has profound
implications for competition and trade, democratization, free
expression, and access to information;
Whereas countries have obligations to protect human rights,
which are advanced by online activity as well as offline
activity;
Whereas the ability to innovate, develop technical
capacity, grasp economic opportunities, and promote freedom
of expression online is best realized in cooperation with all
stakeholders;
Whereas proposals have been put forward for consideration
at the 2012 World Conference on International
Telecommunications that would fundamentally alter the
governance and operation of the Internet;
Whereas the proposals, in international bodies such as the
United Nations General Assembly, the United Nations
Commission on Science and Technology for Development, and the
International Telecommunication Union, would attempt to
justify increased government control over the Internet and
would undermine the current multistakeholder model that has
enabled the Internet to flourish and under which the private
sector, civil society, academia, and individual users play an
important role in charting its direction;
Whereas the proposals would diminish the freedom of
expression on the Internet in favor of government control
over content;
Whereas the position of the United States Government has
been and is to advocate for the flow of information free from
government control; and
Whereas this and past Administrations have made a strong
commitment to the multistakeholder model of Internet
governance and the promotion of the global benefits of the
Internet: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives
concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that the
Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of
Commerce, should continue working to implement the position
of the United States on Internet governance that clearly
articulates the consistent and unequivocal policy of the
United States to promote a global Internet free from
government control and preserve and advance the successful
multistakeholder model that governs the Internet today.
____________________
PATENT LAW TREATIES IMPLEMENTATION ACT OF 2012
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 532, S. 3486.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 3486) to implement the provisions of the Hague
Agreement and the Patent Law Treaty.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill
which had been reported from the Committee on the Judiciary, with an
amendment to strike all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu
thereof the following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Patent Law Treaties
Implementation Act of 2012''.
[[Page 14847]]
TITLE I--HAGUE AGREEMENT CONCERNING INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION OF
INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS
SEC. 101. THE HAGUE AGREEMENT CONCERNING INTERNATIONAL
REGISTRATION OF INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS.
(a) In General.--Title 35, United States Code, is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``PART V--THE HAGUE AGREEMENT CONCERNING INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION OF
INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS
``CHAPTER Sec.
``38. International design applications........................381.....
``CHAPTER 38--INTERNATIONAL DESIGN APPLICATIONS
``Sec.
``381. Definitions.
``382. Filing international design applications.
``383. International design application.
``384. Filing date.
``385. Effect of international design application.
``386. Right of priority.
``387. Relief from prescribed time limits.
``388. Withdrawn or abandoned international design application.
``389. Examination of international design application.
``390. Publication of international design application.
``Sec. 381. Definitions
``(a) In General.--When used in this part, unless the
context otherwise indicates--
``(1) the term `treaty' means the Geneva Act of the Hague
Agreement Concerning the International Registration of
Industrial Designs adopted at Geneva on July 2, 1999;
``(2) the term `regulations'--
``(A) when capitalized, means the Common Regulations under
the treaty; and
``(B) when not capitalized, means the regulations
established by the Director under this title;
``(3) the terms `designation', `designating', and
`designate' refer to a request that an international
registration have effect in a Contracting Party to the
treaty;
``(4) the term `International Bureau' means the
international intergovernmental organization that is
recognized as the coordinating body under the treaty and the
Regulations;
``(5) the term `effective registration date' means the date
of international registration determined by the International
Bureau under the treaty;
``(6) the term `international design application' means an
application for international registration; and
``(7) the term `international registration' means the
international registration of an industrial design filed
under the treaty.
``(b) Rule of Construction.--Terms and expressions not
defined in this part are to be taken in the sense indicated
by the treaty and the Regulations.
``Sec. 382. Filing international design applications
``(a) In General.--Any person who is a national of the
United States, or has a domicile, a habitual residence, or a
real and effective industrial or commercial establishment in
the United States, may file an international design
application by submitting to the Patent and Trademark Office
an application in such form, together with such fees, as may
be prescribed by the Director.
``(b) Required Action.--The Patent and Trademark Office
shall perform all acts connected with the discharge of its
duties under the treaty, including the collection of
international fees and transmittal thereof to the
International Bureau. Subject to chapter 17, international
design applications shall be forwarded by the Patent and
Trademark Office to the International Bureau, upon payment of
a transmittal fee.
``(c) Applicability of Chapter 16.--Except as otherwise
provided in this chapter, the provisions of chapter 16 shall
apply.
``(d) Application Filed in Another Country.--An
international design application on an industrial design made
in this country shall be considered to constitute the filing
of an application in a foreign country within the meaning of
chapter 17 if the international design application is filed--
``(1) in a country other than the United States;
``(2) at the International Bureau; or
``(3) with an intergovernmental organization.
``Sec. 383. International design application
``In addition to any requirements pursuant to chapter 16,
the international design application shall contain--
``(1) a request for international registration under the
treaty;
``(2) an indication of the designated Contracting Parties;
``(3) data concerning the applicant as prescribed in the
treaty and the Regulations;
``(4) copies of a reproduction or, at the choice of the
applicant, of several different reproductions of the
industrial design that is the subject of the international
design application, presented in the number and manner
prescribed in the treaty and the Regulations;
``(5) an indication of the product or products that
constitute the industrial design or in relation to which the
industrial design is to be used, as prescribed in the treaty
and the Regulations;
``(6) the fees prescribed in the treaty and the
Regulations; and
``(7) any other particulars prescribed in the Regulations.
``Sec. 384. Filing date
``(a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b), the filing
date of an international design application in the United
States shall be the effective registration date.
Notwithstanding the provisions of this part, any
international design application designating the United
States that otherwise meets the requirements of chapter 16
may be treated as a design application under chapter 16.
``(b) Review.--An applicant may request review by the
Director of the filing date of the international design
application in the United States. The Director may determine
that the filing date of the international design application
in the United States is a date other than the effective
registration date. The Director may establish procedures,
including the payment of a surcharge, to review the filing
date under this section. Such review may result in a
determination that the application has a filing date in the
United States other than the effective registration date.
``Sec. 385. Effect of international design application
``An international design application designating the
United States shall have the effect, for all purposes, from
its filing date determined in accordance with section 384, of
an application for patent filed in the Patent and Trademark
Office pursuant to chapter 16.
``Sec. 386. Right of priority
``(a) National Application.--In accordance with the
conditions and requirements of subsections (a) through (d) of
section 119 and section 172, a national application shall be
entitled to the right of priority based on a prior
international design application that designated at least 1
country other than the United States.
``(b) Prior Foreign Application.--In accordance with the
conditions and requirements of subsections (a) through (d) of
section 119 and section 172 and the treaty and the
Regulations, an international design application designating
the United States shall be entitled to the right of priority
based on a prior foreign application, a prior international
application as defined in section 351(c) designating at least
1 country other than the United States, or a prior
international design application designating at least 1
country other than the United States.
``(c) Prior National Application.--In accordance with the
conditions and requirements of section 120, an international
design application designating the United States shall be
entitled to the benefit of the filing date of a prior
national application, a prior international application as
defined in section 351(c) designating the United States, or a
prior international design application designating the United
States, and a national application shall be entitled to the
benefit of the filing date of a prior international design
application designating the United States. If any claim for
the benefit of an earlier filing date is based on a prior
international application as defined in section 351(c) which
designated but did not originate in the United States or a
prior international design application which designated but
did not originate in the United States, the Director may
require the filing in the Patent and Trademark Office of a
certified copy of such application together with a
translation thereof into the English language, if it was
filed in another language.
``Sec. 387. Relief from prescribed time limits
``An applicant's failure to act within prescribed time
limits in connection with requirements pertaining to an
international design application may be excused as to the
United States upon a showing satisfactory to the Director of
unintentional delay and under such conditions, including a
requirement for payment of the fee specified in section
41(a)(7), as may be prescribed by the Director.
``Sec. 388. Withdrawn or abandoned international design
application
``Subject to sections 384 and 387, if an international
design application designating the United States is
withdrawn, renounced or canceled or considered withdrawn or
abandoned, either generally or as to the United States, under
the conditions of the treaty and the Regulations, the
designation of the United States shall have no effect after
the date of withdrawal, renunciation, cancellation, or
abandonment and shall be considered as not having been made,
unless a claim for benefit of a prior filing date under
section 386(c) was made in a national application, or an
international design application designating the United
States, or a claim for benefit under section 365(c) was made
in an international application designating the United
States, filed before the date of such withdrawal,
renunciation, cancellation, or abandonment. However, such
withdrawn, renounced, canceled, or abandoned international
design application may serve as the basis for a claim of
priority under subsections (a) and (b) of section 386, or
under subsection (a) or (b) of section 365, if it designated
a country other than the United States.
``Sec. 389. Examination of international design application
``(a) In General.--The Director shall cause an examination
to be made pursuant to this title of an international design
application designating the United States.
``(b) Applicability of Chapter 16.--All questions of
substance and, unless otherwise required by the treaty and
Regulations, procedures regarding an international design
application designating the United States shall be determined
as in the case of applications filed under chapter 16.
``(c) Fees.--The Director may prescribe fees for filing
international design applications, for designating the United
States, and for any other
[[Page 14848]]
processing, services, or materials relating to international
design applications, and may provide for later payment of
such fees, including surcharges for later submission of fees.
``(d) Issuance of Patent.--The Director may issue a patent
based on an international design application designating the
United States, in accordance with the provisions of this
title. Such patent shall have the force and effect of a
patent issued on an application filed under chapter 16.
``Sec. 390. Publication of international design application
``The publication under the treaty of an international
design application designating the United States shall be
deemed a publication under section 122(b).''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of parts at the
beginning of title 35, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``V. The Hague Agreement concerning international registration of
industrial designs.......................................401''.....
SEC. 102. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.
Title 35, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in section 100(i)(1)(B) (as amended by the Leahy-Smith
America Invents Act (Public Law 112-29; 125 Stat. 284)), by
striking ``right of priority under section 119, 365(a), or
365(b) or to the benefit of an earlier filing date under
section 120, 121, or 365(c)'' and inserting ``right of
priority under section 119, 365(a), 365(b), 386(a), or 386(b)
or to the benefit of an earlier filing date under section
120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c)'';
(2) in section 102(d)(2) (as amended by the Leahy-Smith
America Invents Act (Public Law 112-29; 125 Stat. 284)), by
striking ``to claim a right of priority under section 119,
365(a), or 365(b), or to claim the benefit of an earlier
filing date under section 120, 121, or 365(c)'' and inserting
``to claim a right of priority under section 119, 365(a),
365(b), 386(a), or 386(b), or to claim the benefit of an
earlier filing date under section 120, 121, 365(c), or
386(c)'';
(3) in section 111(b)(7)--
(A) by striking ``section 119 or 365(a)'' and inserting
``section 119, 365(a), or 386(a)''; and
(B) by striking ``section 120, 121, or 365(c)'' and
inserting ``section 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c)'';
(4) in section 115(g)(1) (as amended by the Leahy-Smith
America Invents Act (Public Law 112-29; 125 Stat. 284)), by
striking ``section 120, 121, or 365(c)'' and inserting
``section 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c)'';
(5) in section 120, in the first sentence, by striking
``section 363'' and inserting ``section 363 or 385'';
(6) in section 154--
(A) in subsection (a)--
(i) in paragraph (2), by striking ``section 120, 121, or
365(c)'' and inserting ``section 120, 121, 365(c), or
386(c)''; and
(ii) in paragraph (3), by striking ``section 119, 365(a),
or 365(b)'' and inserting ``section 119, 365(a), 365(b),
386(a), or 386(b)''; and
(B) in subsection (d)(1), by inserting ``or an
international design application filed under the treaty
defined in section 381(a)(1) designating the United States
under Article 5 of such treaty'' after ``Article 21(2)(a) of
such treaty'';
(7) in section 173, by striking ``fourteen years'' and
inserting ``15 years'';
(8) in section 365(c)--
(A) in the first sentence, by striking ``or a prior
international application designating the United States'' and
inserting ``, a prior international application designating
the United States, or a prior international design
application as defined in section 381(a)(6) designating the
United States''; and
(B) in the second sentence, by inserting ``or a prior
international design application as defined in section
381(a)(6) which designated but did not originate in the
United States'' after ``did not originate in the United
States''; and
(9) in section 366--
(A) in the first sentence, by striking ``unless a claim''
and all that follows through ``withdrawal.'' and inserting
``unless a claim for benefit of a prior filing date under
section 365(c) of this section was made in a national
application, or an international application designating the
United States, or a claim for benefit under section 386(c)
was made in an international design application designating
the United States, filed before the date of such
withdrawal.''; and
(B) by striking the second sentence and inserting the
following: ``However, such withdrawn international
application may serve as the basis for a claim of priority
under section 365 (a) and (b), or under section 386 (a) or
(b), if it designated a country other than the United
States.''.
SEC. 103. EFFECTIVE DATE.
(a) In General.--The amendments made by this title shall
take effect on the later of--
(1) the date that is 1 year after the date of the enactment
of this Act; or
(2) the date of entry into force of the treaty with respect
to the United States.
(b) Applicability of Amendments.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the amendments
made by this title shall apply only to international design
applications, international applications, and national
applications filed on and after the effective date set forth
in subsection (a), and patents issuing thereon.
(2) Exception.--Sections 100(i) and 102(d) of title 35,
United States Code, as amended by this title, shall not apply
to an application, or any patent issuing thereon, unless it
is described in section 3(n)(1) of the Leahy-Smith America
Invents Act (35 U.S.C. 100 note).
(c) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
(1) the terms ``treaty'' and ``international design
application'' have the meanings given those terms in section
381 of title 35, United States Code, as added by this title;
(2) the term ``international application'' has the meaning
given that term in section 351(c) of title 35, United States
Code; and
(3) the term ``national application'' means ``national
application'' within the meaning of chapter 38 of title 35,
United States Code, as added by this title.
TITLE II--PATENT LAW TREATY IMPLEMENTATION
SEC. 201. PROVISIONS TO IMPLEMENT THE PATENT LAW TREATY.
(a) Application Filing Date.--Section 111 of title 35,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking paragraphs (3) and (4)
and inserting the following:
``(3) Fee, oath or declaration, and claims.--The
application shall be accompanied by the fee required by law.
The fee, oath or declaration, and 1 or more claims may be
submitted after the filing date of the application, within
such period and under such conditions, including the payment
of a surcharge, as may be prescribed by the Director. Upon
failure to submit the fee, oath or declaration, and 1 or more
claims within such prescribed period, the application shall
be regarded as abandoned.
``(4) Filing date.--The filing date of an application shall
be the date on which a specification, with or without claims,
is received in the United States Patent and Trademark
Office.'';
(2) in subsection (b), by striking paragraphs (3) and (4)
and inserting the following:
``(3) Fee.--The application shall be accompanied by the fee
required by law. The fee may be submitted after the filing
date of the application, within such period and under such
conditions, including the payment of a surcharge, as may be
prescribed by the Director. Upon failure to submit the fee
within such prescribed period, the application shall be
regarded as abandoned.
``(4) Filing date.--The filing date of a provisional
application shall be the date on which a specification, with
or without claims, is received in the United States Patent
and Trademark Office.''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Prior Filed Application.--Notwithstanding the
provisions of subsection (a), the Director may prescribe the
conditions, including the payment of a surcharge, under which
a reference made upon the filing of an application under
subsection (a) to a previously filed application, specifying
the previously filed application by application number and
the intellectual property authority or country in which the
application was filed, shall constitute the specification and
any drawings of the subsequent application for purposes of a
filing date. A copy of the specification and any drawings of
the previously filed application shall be submitted within
such period and under such conditions as may be prescribed by
the Director. A failure to submit the copy of the
specification and any drawings of the previously filed
application within the prescribed period shall result in the
application being regarded as abandoned. Such application
shall be treated as having never been filed, unless--
``(1) the application is revived under section 27; and
``(2) a copy of the specification and any drawings of the
previously filed application are submitted to the
Director.''.
(b) Relief in Respect of Time Limits and Reinstatement of
Rights.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 2 of title 35, United States Code,
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 27. Revival of applications; reinstatement of
reexamination proceedings
``The Director may establish procedures, including the
requirement for payment of the fee specified in section
41(a)(7), to revive an unintentionally abandoned application
for patent, accept an unintentionally delayed payment of the
fee for issuing each patent, or accept an unintentionally
delayed response by the patent owner in a reexamination
proceeding, upon petition by the applicant for patent or
patent owner.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--The table of sections for
chapter 2 of title 35, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``27. Revival of applications; reinstatement of reexamination
proceedings.''.
(c) Restoration of Priority Right.--Title 35, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) in section 119--
(A) in subsection (a)--
(i) by striking ``twelve'' and inserting ``12''; and
(ii) by adding at the end the following: ``The Director may
prescribe regulations, including the requirement for payment
of the fee specified in section 41(a)(7), pursuant to which
the 12-month period set forth in this subsection may be
extended by an additional 2 months if the delay in filing the
application in this country within the 12-month period was
unintentional.''; and
(B) in subsection (e)--
(i) in paragraph (1)--
(I) by inserting after the first sentence the following:
``The Director may prescribe regulations, including the
requirement for payment of the fee specified in section
41(a)(7), pursuant to which the 12-month period set forth in
this subsection may be extended by an additional 2 months if
the delay in filing the application under section 111(a) or
section 363 within the 12-month period was unintentional.'';
and
[[Page 14849]]
(II) in the last sentence--
(aa) by striking ``including the payment of a surcharge''
and inserting ``including the payment of the fee specified in
section 41(a)(7)''; and
(bb) by striking ``during the pendency of the
application''; and
(ii) in paragraph (3), by adding at the end the following:
``For an application for patent filed under section 363 in a
Receiving Office other than the Patent and Trademark Office,
the 12-month and additional 2-month period set forth in this
subsection shall be extended as provided under the treaty and
Regulations as defined in section 351.''; and
(2) in section 365(b), by adding at the end the following:
``The Director may establish procedures, including the
requirement for payment of the fee specified in section
41(a)(7), to accept an unintentionally delayed claim for
priority under the treaty and the Regulations, and to accept
a priority claim that pertains to an application that was not
filed within the priority period specified in the treaty and
Regulations, but was filed within the additional 2-month
period specified under section 119(a) or the treaty and
Regulations.''.
(d) Recordation of Ownership Interests.--Section 261 of
title 35, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in the first undesignated paragraph by adding at the
end the following: ``The Patent and Trademark Office shall
maintain a register of interests in patents and applications
for patents and shall record any document related thereto
upon request, and may require a fee therefor.''; and
(2) in the fourth undesignated paragraph by striking ``An
assignment'' and inserting ``An interest that constitutes an
assignment''.
SEC. 202. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.
(a) In General.--Section 171 of title 35, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``Whoever'' and inserting ``(a) In
General.--Whoever'';
(2) by striking ``The provisions'' and inserting ``(b)
Applicability of This Title.--The provisions''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Filing Date.--The filing date of an application for
patent for design shall be the date on which the
specification as prescribed by section 112 and any required
drawings are filed.''.
(b) Relief in Respect of Time Limits and Reinstatement of
Right.--Title 35, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in section 41--
(A) in subsection (a), by striking paragraph (7) and
inserting the following:
``(7) Revival fees.--On filing each petition for the
revival of an abandoned application for a patent, for the
delayed payment of the fee for issuing each patent, for the
delayed response by the patent owner in any reexamination
proceeding, for the delayed payment of the fee for
maintaining a patent in force, for the delayed submission of
a priority or benefit claim, or for the extension of the 12-
month period for filing a subsequent application, $1,700.00.
The Director may refund any part of the fee specified in this
paragraph, in exceptional circumstances as determined by the
Director''; and
(B) in subsection (c), by striking paragraph (1) and
inserting the following:
``(1) Acceptance.--The Director may accept the payment of
any maintenance fee required by subsection (b) after the 6-
month grace period if the delay is shown to the satisfaction
of the Director to have been unintentional. The Director may
require the payment of the fee specified in subsection (a)(7)
as a condition of accepting payment of any maintenance fee
after the 6-month grace period. If the Director accepts
payment of a maintenance fee after the 6-month grace period,
the patent shall be considered as not having expired at the
end of the grace period.'';
(2) in section 119(b)(2), in the second sentence, by
striking ``including the payment of a surcharge'' and
inserting ``including the requirement for payment of the fee
specified in section 41(a)(7)'';
(3) in section 120, in the fourth sentence, by striking
``including the payment of a surcharge'' and inserting
``including the requirement for payment of the fee specified
in section 41(a)(7)'';
(4) in section 122(b)(2)(B)(iii), in the second sentence,
by striking ``, unless it is shown'' and all that follows
through ``unintentional'';
(5) in section 133, by striking ``, unless it be shown''
and all that follows through ``unavoidable'';
(6) by striking section 151 and inserting the following:
``Sec. 151. Issue of patent
``(a) In General.--If it appears that an applicant is
entitled to a patent under the law, a written notice of
allowance of the application shall be given or mailed to the
applicant. The notice shall specify a sum, constituting the
issue fee and any required publication fee, which shall be
paid within 3 months thereafter.
``(b) Effect of Payment.--Upon payment of this sum the
patent may issue, but if payment is not timely made, the
application shall be regarded as abandoned.'';
(7) in section 361, by striking subsection (c) and
inserting the following:
``(c) International applications filed in the Patent and
Trademark Office shall be filed in the English language, or
an English translation shall be filed within such later time
as may be fixed by the Director.'';
(8) in section 364, by striking subsection (b) and
inserting the following:
``(b) An applicant's failure to act within prescribed time
limits in connection with requirements pertaining to an
international application may be excused as provided in the
treaty and the Regulations.''; and
(9) in section 371(d), in the third sentence, by striking
``, unless it be shown to the satisfaction of the Director
that such failure to comply was unavoidable''.
SEC. 203. EFFECTIVE DATE.
(a) In General.--The amendments made by this title--
(1) shall take effect on the date that is 1 year after the
date of the enactment of this Act; and
(2) shall apply to--
(A) any patent issued before, on, or after the effective
date set forth in paragraph (1); and
(B) any application for patent that is pending on or filed
after the effective date set forth in paragraph (1).
(b) Exceptions.--
(1) Section 201(a).--The amendments made by section 201(a)
shall apply only to applications that are filed on or after
the effective date set forth in subsection (a)(1).
(2) Patents in litigation.--The amendments made by this
title shall have no effect with respect to any patent that is
the subject of litigation in an action commenced before the
effective date set forth in subsection (a)(1).
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-
reported amendment be agreed to, the bill, as amended, be read a third
time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with
no intervening action or debate, and any statements related to the bill
be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The committee-reported amendment in the nature of a substitute was
agreed to.
The bill (S. 3486), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a
third reading, was read the third time, and passed.
____________________
MAKING TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF CERTAIN LAND
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 498, S. 3193.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 3193) to make technical corrections to the legal
description of certain land, to be held in trust for the
Barona Band of Mission Indians, and for other purposes.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Akaka
amendment, which is at the desk, be agreed to, the bill, as amended, be
read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the
table, with no intervening action or debate, and that any related
statements be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 2864) was agreed to, as follows:
(Purpose: In the nature of a substitute)
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Barona Band of Mission
Indians Land Transfer Clarification Act of 2012''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS; PURPOSES.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) the legal description of land previously taken into
trust by the United States for the benefit of the Barona Band
of Mission Indians may be interpreted to refer to private,
nontribal land;
(2) there is a continued, unresolved disagreement between
the Barona Band of Mission Indians and certain off-
reservation property owners relating to the causes of
diminishing native groundwater;
(3) Congress expresses no opinion, nor should an opinion of
Congress be inferred, relating to the disagreement described
in paragraph (2); and
(4) it is the intent of Congress that, if the land
described in section 121(b) of the Native American Technical
Corrections Act of 2004 (118 Stat. 544) (as amended by
section 3) is used to bring water to the Barona Indian
Reservation, the effort is authorized only if the effort also
addresses water availability for neighboring off-reservation
land located along Old Barona Road that is occupied as of the
date of enactment of this Act by providing guaranteed access
to that water supply at a mutually agreeable site on the
southwest boundary of the Barona Indian Reservation.
(b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are--
(1) to clarify the legal description of the land placed
into trust for the Barona Band of Mission Indians in 2004;
and
[[Page 14850]]
(2) to remove all doubt relating to the specific parcels of
land that Congress has placed into trust for the Barona Band
of Mission Indians.
SEC. 3. LAND TRANSFER.
Section 121 of the Native American Technical Corrections
Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-204; 118 Stat. 544) is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:
``(b) Description of Land.--The land referred to in
subsection (a) is land comprising approximately 86.87 acres
in T. 14 S., R. 1 E., San Bernardino Meridian, San Diego
County, California, and described more particularly as
follows:
``(1) The approximately 69.85 acres located in Section 21
and described as--
``(A) SW\1/4\ SW\1/4\, excepting the north 475 feet;
``(B) W\1/2\ SE\1/4\ SW\1/4\, excepting the north 475 feet;
``(C) E\1/2\ SE\1/4\ SW\1/4\, excepting the north 350 feet;
and
``(D) the portion of W\1/2\ SE\1/4\ that lies southwesterly
of the following line: Beginning at the intersection of the
southerly line of said SE\1/4\ of Section 21 with the
westerly boundary of Rancho Canada De San Vicente Y Mesa Del
Padre Barona as shown on United States Government Resurvey
approved January 21, 1939, and thence northwesterly along
said boundary to an intersection with the westerly line of
said SE\1/4\.
``(2) The approximately 17.02 acres located in Section 28
and described as NW\1/4\ NW\1/4\, excepting the east 750
feet.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(d) Clarifications.--
``(1) Effect on section.--The provisions of subsection (c)
shall apply to the land described in subsection (b), as in
effect on the day after the date of enactment of the Barona
Band of Mission Indians Land Transfer Clarification Act of
2012.
``(2) Effect on private land.--The parcel of private, non-
Indian land referenced in subsection (a) and described in
subsection (b), as in effect on the day before the date of
enactment of the Barona Band of Mission Indians Land Transfer
Clarification Act of 2012, but excluded from the revised
description of the land in subsection (b) was not intended to
be--
``(A) held in trust by the United States for the benefit of
the Band; or
``(B) considered to be a part of the reservation of the
Band.''.
The bill (S. 3193), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a
third reading, was read the third time, and passed.
____________________
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR BURMA
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 6431, which is at the
desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 6431) to provide flexibility with respect to
United States support for assistance provided by
international financial institutions for Burma, and for other
purposes.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be
read three times and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the
table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related
to the measure be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 6431) was ordered to a third reading, was read the
third time, and passed.
____________________
MARK TWAIN COMMEMORATIVE COIN ACT
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Banking
Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 2453 and the
Senate proceed to its consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 2453) to require the Secretary of the Treasury
to mint coins in commemoration of Mark Twain.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent that the Blumenthal amendment
which is at the desk be agreed to; the bill, as amended, be read a
third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table,
with no intervening action or debate, and any related statements be
printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 2865) was agreed to, as follows:
On page 7, strike lines 5 through 7 and insert the
following:
(2) One-quarter of the surcharges, to the University of
California, Berkeley, California, for the benefit of the Mark
Twain Project at the Bancroft Library to support programs to
study and promote the legacy of Mark Twain.
At the end, add the following:
SEC. 8. NO NET COST.
The Secretary shall take such actions as may be necessary
to ensure that--
(1) minting and issuing coins under this Act will not
result in any net cost to the United States Government; and
(2) no funds, including applicable surcharges, are
disbursed to any recipient designated in section 7 until the
total cost of designing and issuing all of the coins
authorized by this Act (including labor, materials, dies, use
of machinery, overhead expenses, marketing, and shipping) is
recovered by the United States Treasury, consistent with
sections 5112(m) and 5134(f) of title 31, United States Code.
The amendment was ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read a
third time.
The bill (H.R. 2453), as amended, was read the third time, and
passed, as follows:
H.R. 2453
Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representatives
(H.R. 2453) entitled ``An Act to require the Secretary of the
Treasury to mint coins in commemoration of Mark Twain.'', do
pass with the following amendments:
On page 7, strike lines 5 through 7 and insert the
following:
(2) One-quarter of the surcharges, to the University of
California, Berkeley, California, for the benefit of the Mark
Twain Project at the Bancroft Library to support programs to
study and promote the legacy of Mark Twain.
At the end, add the following:
SEC. 8. NO NET COST.
The Secretary shall take such actions as may be necessary
to ensure that--
(1) minting and issuing coins under this Act will not
result in any net cost to the United States Government; and
(2) no funds, including applicable surcharges, are
disbursed to any recipient designated in section 7 until the
total cost of designing and issuing all of the coins
authorized by this Act (including labor, materials, dies, use
of machinery, overhead expenses, marketing, and shipping) is
recovered by the United States Treasury, consistent with
sections 5112(m) and 5134(f) of title 31, United States Code.
____________________
MAKING CORRECTIONS WITH RESPECT TO FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION USER
FEES
Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the
immediate consideration of H.R. 6433 which was received from the House.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 6433) to make corrections with respect to Food
and Drug Administration user fees.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be
read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be considered
made and laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the
bill be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 6433) was ordered to a third reading, was read the
third time, and passed.
____________________
TO CONFIRM FULL OWNERSHIP RIGHTS FOR CERTAIN UNITED STATES ASTRONAUTS
TO ARTIFACTS FROM THE ASTRONAUTS' SPACE MISSIONS
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 4158 which was received
from the House.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 4158) to confirm full ownership rights for
certain United States astronauts to artifacts from the
astronauts' space missions.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be
[[Page 14851]]
read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be considered
made and laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the
bill be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 4158) was ordered to a third reading, was read the
third time, and passed.
____________________
SAFE DOSES ACT
Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary Committee be
discharged from further consideration of H.R. 4223 and the Senate
proceed to its consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 4223) to amend title 18, United States Code,
to prohibit theft of medical products, and for other
purposes.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time
and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no
intervening action or debate, and any statements relating to the bill
be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 4223) was ordered to a third reading, was read the
third time, and passed.
____________________
VA MAJOR CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION AND EXPIRING AUTHORITIES EXTENSION
ACT OF 2012
Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the
consideration of H.R. 6375 which was received from the House and is at
the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 6375) to authorize certain Department of
Veterans Affairs major medical facility projects, to amend
title 38, United States Code, to extend certain authorities
of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read three times
and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table with no
intervening action or debate, and any related statements be printed in
the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 6375) was ordered to a third reading, was read the
third time, and passed.
____________________
GAO MANDATES REVISION ACT OF 2012
Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the
consideration of Calendar No. 523, S. 3315.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 3315) to repeal or modify certain mandates of
the Government Accountability Office.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill,
which had been reported from the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs, with an amendment, as follows:
(Omit the part shown in boldface brackets and insert the part printed
in italic.)
S. 3315
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``GAO Mandates Revision Act of
2012''.
SEC. 2. REPEALS AND MODIFICATIONS.
(a) Capitol Preservation Fund Financial Statements.--
Section 804 of the Arizona-Idaho Conservation Act of 1988 (2
U.S.C. 2084) is amended by striking ``annual audits of the
transactions of the Commission'' and inserting ``periodic
audits of the transactions of the Commission, which shall be
conducted at least once every 3 years, unless the Chairman or
the Ranking Member of the Committee on Rules and
Administration of the Senate or the Committee on House
Administration of the House of Representatives requests that
an audit be conducted at an earlier date,''.
(b) Judicial Survivors' Annuities Fund Audit by GAO.--
(1) In general.--Section 376 of title 28, United States
Code, is amended--
(A) by striking subsection (w); and
(B) by redesignating subsections (x) and (y) as subsections
(w) and (x), respectively.
(2) Technical and conforming amendment.--Section 376(h)(2)
of title 28, United States Code, is amended by striking
``subsection (x)'' and inserting ``subsection (w)''.
[(c) ONDCP Annual Report Requirement.--Section 203 of the
Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of
2006 (21 U.S.C. 1708a) is amended--
(1) by striking ``(a) In General.--''; and
(2) by striking subsection (b).]
(c) ONDCP Annual Report Requirement.--Section 203 of the
Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of
2006 (21 U.S.C. 1708a) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``of each year'' and
inserting ``, 2013, and every 3 years thereafter,''; and
(2) in subsection (b), in the matter preceding paragraph
(1), by striking ``at a frequency of not less than once per
year--'' and inserting ``not later than December 31, 2013,
and every 3 years thereafter--''.
(d) USERRA GAO Report.--Section 105(g)(1) of the Veterans'
Benefits Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-275; 38 U.S.C. 4301
note) is amended by striking ``, and annually thereafter
during the period when the demonstration project is
conducted,''.
(e) Semipostal Program Reports by the General Accounting
Office.--Section 2 of the Semipostal Authorization Act
(Public Law 106-253; 114 Stat. 636; 39 U.S.C. 416 note) is
amended--
(1) by striking subsection (c); and
(2) by redesignating subsections (d) and (e) as subsections
(c) and (d), respectively.
(f) Earned Import Allowance Program Review by GAO.--Section
231A(b)(4) of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (19
U.S.C. 2703a(b)(4)) is amended--
(1) by striking subparagraph (C); and
(2) by redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (C).
(g) American Battle Monuments Commission's Financial
Statements and Audits.--Section 2103(h) of title 36, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``of paragraph (2) of
this subsection'' and inserting ``of section 3515 of title
31'';
(2) in paragraph (1), by striking ``(1)''; and
(3) by striking paragraph (2).
(h) Senate Preservation Fund Audits.--Section 3(c)(6) of
the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2004 (2 U.S.C.
2108(c)(6)) is amended by striking ``annual audits of the
Senate Preservation Fund'' and inserting ``periodic audits of
the Senate Preservation Fund, which shall be conducted at
least once every 3 years, unless the Chairman or the Ranking
Member of the Committee on Rules and Administration of the
Senate requests that an audit be conducted at an earlier
date,''.
Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported
amendment be agreed to, the Lieberman amendment, which is at the desk,
be agreed to, the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed,
the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening
action or debate, and any related statements be printed in the Record.
The committee-reported amendment was agreed to.
The amendment (No. 2866) was agreed to, as follows:
On page 2, line 11, insert ``, the Secretary of the Senate,
or the Clerk of the House of Representatives'' after ``House
of Representatives''.
On page 5, line 1, insert ``or the Secretary of the
Senate'' after ``the Senate''.
The bill (S. 3315), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a
third reading, was read the third time and passed, as follows:
S. 3315
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``GAO Mandates Revision Act of
2012''.
SEC. 2. REPEALS AND MODIFICATIONS.
(a) Capitol Preservation Fund Financial Statements.--
Section 804 of the Arizona-Idaho Conservation Act of 1988 (2
U.S.C. 2084) is amended by striking ``annual audits of the
transactions of the Commission'' and inserting ``periodic
audits of the transactions of the Commission, which shall be
conducted at least once every 3 years, unless the Chairman or
the Ranking Member of the Committee on Rules and
Administration of the Senate or the Committee on House
Administration of the House of Representatives, the Secretary
of the Senate, or the Clerk of the House of Representatives
requests that an audit be conducted at an earlier date,''.
[[Page 14852]]
(b) Judicial Survivors' Annuities Fund Audit by GAO.--
(1) In general.--Section 376 of title 28, United States
Code, is amended--
(A) by striking subsection (w); and
(B) by redesignating subsections (x) and (y) as subsections
(w) and (x), respectively.
(2) Technical and conforming amendment.--Section 376(h)(2)
of title 28, United States Code, is amended by striking
``subsection (x)'' and inserting ``subsection (w)''.
(c) ONDCP Annual Report Requirement.--Section 203 of the
Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of
2006 (21 U.S.C. 1708a) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``of each year'' and
inserting ``, 2013, and every 3 years thereafter,''; and
(2) in subsection (b), in the matter preceding paragraph
(1), by striking ``at a frequency of not less than once per
year--'' and inserting ``not later than December 31, 2013,
and every 3 years thereafter--''.
(d) USERRA GAO Report.--Section 105(g)(1) of the Veterans'
Benefits Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-275; 38 U.S.C. 4301
note) is amended by striking ``, and annually thereafter
during the period when the demonstration project is
conducted,''.
(e) Semipostal Program Reports by the General Accounting
Office.--Section 2 of the Semipostal Authorization Act
(Public Law 106-253; 114 Stat. 636; 39 U.S.C. 416 note) is
amended--
(1) by striking subsection (c); and
(2) by redesignating subsections (d) and (e) as subsections
(c) and (d), respectively.
(f) Earned Import Allowance Program Review by GAO.--Section
231A(b)(4) of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (19
U.S.C. 2703a(b)(4)) is amended--
(1) by striking subparagraph (C); and
(2) by redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (C).
(g) American Battle Monuments Commission's Financial
Statements and Audits.--Section 2103(h) of title 36, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``of paragraph (2) of
this subsection'' and inserting ``of section 3515 of title
31'';
(2) in paragraph (1), by striking ``(1)''; and
(3) by striking paragraph (2).
(h) Senate Preservation Fund Audits.--Section 3(c)(6) of
the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2004 (2 U.S.C.
2108(c)(6)) is amended by striking ``annual audits of the
Senate Preservation Fund'' and inserting ``periodic audits of
the Senate Preservation Fund, which shall be conducted at
least once every 3 years, unless the Chairman or the Ranking
Member of the Committee on Rules and Administration of the
Senate or the Secretary of the Senate requests that an audit
be conducted at an earlier date,''.
____________________
GOVERNMENT CHARGE CARD ABUSE PREVENTION ACT OF 2012
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Chair lay
before the Senate a message from the House on S. 300.
The PRESIDING OFFICER laid before the Senate the following message
from the House of Representatives:
Resolved, That the bill from the Senate (S. 300) entitled
``An Act to prevent abuse of Government charge cards,'' do
pass with an amendment.
Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate concur in the
House amendment, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table with
no intervening action or debate, and any statements relating to the
matter be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
HAZARDOUS WASTE ELECTRONIC MANIFEST ESTABLISHMENT ACT
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask the Chair to lay before the Senate a
message from the House on S. 710.
The PRESIDING OFFICER laid before the Senate the following message
from the House of Representatives:
Resolved, That the bill from the Senate (S. 710) entitled
``An Act to amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act to direct the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to
establish a hazardous waste electronic manifest system,'' do
pass with an amendment.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
concur in the House amendment, the motion to reconsider be considered
made and laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the
bill be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION ACT
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Commerce
Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 2838 and the
Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 2838) to authorize appropriations for the
Coast Guard for fiscal years 2012 through 2015, and for other
purposes.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that the
Rockefeller substitute amendment, which is at the desk, be agreed to,
the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed, the title
amendment, which is at the desk, be agreed to, the motions to
reconsider be made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action
or debate, and that any statements relating to the measure be printed
in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 2867) in the nature of a substitute was agreed to.
(The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of
Amendments.'')
The amendment was ordered to be engrossed, and the bill to be read a
third time.
The bill was read the third time.
The bill (H.R. 2838), as amended, was passed.
The amendment (No. 2868) was agreed to, as follows:
(Purpose: To amend the title)
Amend the title so as to read: ``An Act to authorize
appropriations for the Coast Guard for fiscal years 2013
through 2014, and for other purposes.''.
____________________
QUADRENNIAL DIPLOMACY AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ACT OF 2012
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 525, S. 3341.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 3341) to require a quadrennial diplomacy and
development review, and for other purposes.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that the
bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be
considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or
debate, and that any statements related to the measure be printed in
the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (S. 3341) was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading,
was read the third time, and passed, as follows:
S. 3341
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Quadrennial Diplomacy and
Development Review Act of 2012''.
SEC. 2. QUADRENNIAL DIPLOMACY AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW.
(a) Requirement.--
(1) Quadrennial reviews required.--Under the direction of
the President, the Secretary of State shall every four years,
during a year following a year evenly divisible by four,
conduct a review of United States diplomacy and development
(to be known as a ``quadrennial diplomacy and development
review'').
(2) Scope of reviews.--Each quadrennial diplomacy and
development review shall be a comprehensive examination of
the national diplomacy and development policy and strategic
framework of the United States for the next four year period
until a subsequent review is due under paragraph (1). The
review shall include--
(A) recommendations regarding the long-term diplomacy and
development policy and strategic framework of the United
States;
(B) priorities of the United States for diplomacy and
development; and
(C) guidance on the related programs, assets, capabilities,
budget, policies, and authorities of the Department of State
and United States Agency for International Development.
(3) Consultation.--In conducting each quadrennial diplomacy
and development review, after consultation with Department of
State and United States Agency for International Development
officials, the Secretary of State should consult with--
[[Page 14853]]
(A) the heads of other relevant Federal agencies, including
the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Treasury, the
Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, the
Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Secretary of
Agriculture, the Secretary of Commerce, the Chief Executive
Officer of the Millennium Challenge Corporation, and the
Director of National Intelligence;
(B) any other Federal agency that provides foreign
assistance, including at a minimum the Export-Import Bank of
the United States and the Overseas Private Investment
Corporation;
(C) the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on
Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign
Affairs and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and, as appropriate, other members of
Congress; and
(D) other relevant governmental and nongovernmental
entities, including private sector representatives,
academics, and other policy experts.
(b) Contents of Review.--Each quadrennial diplomacy and
development review shall--
(1) delineate, as appropriate, the national diplomacy and
development policy and strategic framework of the United
States, consistent with appropriate national, Department of
State, and United States Agency for International Development
strategies, strategic plans, and relevant presidential
directives, including the national security strategy
prescribed pursuant to section 108 of the National Security
Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 404a);
(2) outline and prioritize the full range of critical
national diplomacy and development areas, capabilities, and
resources, including those implemented across agencies, and
address the full range of challenges confronting the United
States in this regard;
(3) describe the interagency cooperation, and preparedness
of relevant Federal assets, and the infrastructure, budget
plan, and other elements of the diplomacy and development
policies and programs of the United States required to
execute successfully the full range of mission priorities
outlined under paragraph (2);
(4) describe the roles of international organizations and
multilateral institutions in advancing United States
diplomatic and development objectives, including the
mechanisms for coordinating and harmonizing development
policies and programs with partner countries and among
donors;
(5) identify the budget plan required to provide sufficient
resources to successfully execute the full range of mission
priorities outlined under paragraph (2);
(6) include an assessment of the organizational alignment
of the Department of State and the United States Agency for
International Development with the national diplomacy and
development policy and strategic framework referred to in
paragraph (1) and the diplomacy and development mission
priorities outlined under paragraph (2);
(7) review and assess the effectiveness of the management
mechanisms of the Department of State and the United States
Agency for International Development for executing the
strategic priorities outlined in the quadrennial diplomacy
and development review, including the extent to which such
effectiveness has been enhanced since the previous report;
and
(8) the relationship between the requirements of the
quadrennial diplomacy and development review and the
acquisition strategy and expenditure plan within the
Department of State and the United States Agency for
International Development.
(c) Reporting.--
(1) In general.--Not later than the year following the year
in which a quadrennial diplomacy and development review is
conducted, but not later than the date on which the President
submits the budget for the next fiscal year to Congress under
section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, the
Secretary of State shall submit to Congress a report
regarding that quadrennial diplomacy and development review.
(2) Contents of report.--Each report submitted under
paragraph (1) shall include--
(A) the results of the quadrennial diplomacy and
development review conducted in accordance with, and based on
a detailed assessment of, the provisions of and
considerations set out in subsections (a)(2) and (b),
addressing each of the key elements identified in such
subsections;
(B) a description of the threats to the assumed or defined
national security interests of the United States that were
examined for the purposes of that review;
(C) an explanation of any underlying assumptions used in
conducting the review; and
(D) any other matters the Secretary of State considers
appropriate.
(3) Public availability.--The Secretary of State shall,
consistent with the protection of national security and other
sensitive matters, make each report submitted under paragraph
(1) publicly available on the Internet Web site of the
Department of State.
(d) Establishment.--The Secretary of State may establish
within the Department of State an Office of Quadrennial
Diplomacy and Development Review, which the Secretary of
State may, using only existing resources, staff in a manner
to assist in discharging the functions under this section.
(e) Foreign Affairs Policy Board Review.--The Secretary of
State should apprise the Foreign Affairs Policy Board on an
ongoing basis of the work undertaken in the conduct of the
quadrennial diplomacy and development review and, upon
completion of the review, the Chairman of the Foreign Affairs
Policy Board should, on behalf of the Board, prepare and
submit to the Secretary an assessment of the review for
inclusion in the report submitted under subsection (c).
____________________
DIVISIONAL REALIGNMENT ACT OF 2012
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary
Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 5512 and the
Senate proceed to its consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 5512) to amend title 28, United States Code,
to realign divisions within two judicial districts.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be
read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the
table with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related
to the bill be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 5512) was ordered to a third reading, was read the
third time, and passed.
____________________
REPORTING EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENT ACT
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary
Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 6189 and the
Senate proceed to its consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 6189) to eliminate unnecessary reporting
requirements for unfunded programs under the Office of
Justice Programs.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be
read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the
table with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related
to the bill be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 6189) was ordered to a third reading, was read the
third time, and passed.
____________________
MINNESOTA CHIPPEWA TRIBE JUDGMENT FUND DISTRIBUTION ACT OF 2012
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 482, H.R. 1272.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 1272) to provide for the use and distribution
of the funds awarded to the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, et al.,
by the United States Court of Federal Claims in Docket
Numbers 19 and 188, and for other purposes.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that the
bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be made
and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate, and any
statements related to the measure be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 1272) was ordered to a third reading, was read the
third time, and passed.
____________________
LOWELL NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK LAND EXCHANGE ACT OF 2012
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 392, H.R. 2240.
[[Page 14854]]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 2240) to authorize the exchange of land or
interest in land between Lowell National Historical Park and
the city of Lowell in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and
for other purposes.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be
read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the
table with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related
to the bill be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 2240) was ordered to a third reading, was read the
third time, and passed.
____________________
NEW YORK CITY NATURAL GAS SUPPLY ENHANCEMENT ACT
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Energy
Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 2606 and the
Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 2606) to authorize the Secretary of the
Interior to allow the construction and operation of natural
gas pipeline facilities in the Gateway National Recreation
Area, and for other purposes.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a Bingaman
substitute amendment which is at the desk be agreed to, the bill, as
amended, be read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider
be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate and any
statements related to the bill be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 2869) was agreed to, as follows:
(Purpose: In the nature of a substitute)
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``New York City Natural Gas
Supply Enhancement Act''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Permittee.--The term ``permittee'' means the
Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Company, LLC, (Transco), its
successors or assigns.
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR PERMIT.
(a) In General.--The Secretary may issue permits for
rights-of-way or other necessary authorizations to allow the
permittee to construct, operate, and maintain a natural gas
pipeline and related facilities within the Gateway National
Recreation Area in New York, as described in Federal
Regulatory Commission Docket No. PF09-8.
(b) Terms and Conditions.--A permit issued under this
section shall be--
(1) consistent with the laws and regulations generally
applicable to utility rights-of-way within units of the
National Park System; and
(2) subject to such terms and conditions as the Secretary
deems appropriate.
(c) Fees.--The Secretary shall charge a fee for any permit
issued under this section. The fee shall be based on fair
market value and shall also provide for recovery of costs
incurred by the National Park Service associated with the
processing, issuance, and monitoring of the permit. The
Secretary shall retain any fees associated with the recovery
of costs.
(d) Term.--Any permit issued under this section shall be
for a term of 10 years. The permit may be renewed at the
discretion of the Secretary in accordance with this section.
SEC. 4. LEASE OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS AT FLOYD BENNETT FIELD.
(a) In General.--The Secretary may enter into a non-
competitive lease with the permittee to allow the occupancy
and use of buildings and associated property at Floyd Bennett
Field within the Gateway National Recreation Area to house
meter and regulating equipment and other equipment necessary
to the operation of the natural gas pipeline described in
section 3(a).
(b) Terms and Conditions.--A lease entered into under this
section shall--
(1) be in accordance with section 3(k) of the National Park
System General Authorities Act (16 U.S.C. 1a-2(k)), except
that the proceeds from rental payments may be used for
infrastructure needs, resource protection and restoration,
and visitor services at Gateway National Recreation Area; and
(2) provide for the restoration and maintenance of the
buildings and associated property in accordance with section
106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C.
470f) and applicable regulations and programmatic agreements.
SEC. 5. ENFORCEMENT.
The Secretary may impose citations or fines, or suspend or
revoke any authority under a permit or lease issued in
accordance with this Act for failure to comply with, or a
violation of any term or condition of such permit or lease.
The amendment was ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read a
third time.
The bill (H.R. 2606) was read the third time and passed.
____________________
LIONS CLUBS INTERNATIONAL CENTURY OF SERVICE COMMEMORATIVE COIN ACT
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 2139 which was received
from the House.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 2139) to require the Secretary of the Treasury
to mint coins in commemoration of the centennial of the
establishment of Lions Clubs International.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be
read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the
table, and that any statements related to the bill be printed in the
Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 2139) was ordered to a third reading, was read the
third time, and passed.
____________________
MILITARY COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE ACT OF 2012
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 3624 introduced earlier
today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 3624) to amend section 31311 of title 49, United
States Code, to permit States to issue commercial driver's
licenses to members of the Armed Forces whose duty station is
located in the State.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be
read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the
table, with no intervening action or debate, and that any statements
related to the bill be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (S. 3624) was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading,
was read the third time, and passed, as follows:
S. 3624
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Military Commercial Driver's
License Act of 2012''.
SEC. 2. DOMICILE REQUIREMENT FOR COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE.
Section 31311(a)(12) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended to read as follows:
``(12)(A) Except as provided in subparagraphs (B) and (C),
the State may issue a commercial driver's license only to an
individual who operates or will operate a commercial motor
vehicle and is domiciled in the State.
``(B) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, the
State may issue a commercial driver's license to an
individual who--
``(i) operates or will operate a commercial motor vehicle;
and
``(ii) is not domiciled in a State that issues commercial
driver's licenses.
``(C) The State may issue a commercial driver's license to
an individual who--
``(i) operates or will operate a commercial motor vehicle;
``(ii) is a member of the active duty military, military
reserves, National Guard, active duty United States Coast
Guard, or Coast Guard Auxiliary; and
``(iii) is not domiciled in the State, but whose temporary
or permanent duty station is located in the State.''.
[[Page 14855]]
____________________
CHANGING THE EFFECTIVE DATE FOR THE INTERNET PUBLICATION OF CERTAIN
INFORMATION
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed
to the immediate consideration of S. 3625 introduced earlier today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 3625) to change the effective date for the
Internet publication of certain information to prevent harm
to the national security or endangering the military officers
and civilian employees to whom the publication requirement
applies, and for other purposes.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the bill be read
three times and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table
with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related to the
bill be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (S. 3625) was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading,
was read the third time, and passed, as follows:
S. 3625
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. CHANGED EFFECTIVE DATE FOR FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
FORMS OF CERTAIN OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES.
(a) In General.--Except with respect to financial
disclosure forms filed by officers and employees referred to
in subsection (b), section 8(a)(1) and section 11(a)(1) of
the STOCK Act (5 U.S.C. App. 105 note) shall take effect on
December 8, 2012.
(b) Financial Disclosure Forms Not Subject to New Effective
Date.--Financial disclosure forms filed by the following
individuals shall not be subject to the effective date under
this section:
(1) The President.
(2) The Vice President.
(3) Any Member of Congress.
(4) Any candidate for Congress.
(5) Any officer occupying a position listed in section 5312
or section 5313 of title 5, United States Code, having been
nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to
that position.
SEC. 2. STUDY AND REPORT.
(a) In General.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office of
Personnel Management shall contract with the National Academy
of Public Administration (referred to in this section as the
``National Academy'') to--
(1) conduct a study of issues raised by website publication
of financial disclosure forms as is required under the STOCK
Act (Public Law 112-105; 126 Stat. 291); and
(2) issue a report containing findings and recommendations.
(b) Scope of Study.--The study conducted under subsection
(a)(1) shall--
(1) examine the nature, scope, and degree of risk,
including risk of harm to national security, law enforcement,
or other Federal missions and risk of endangerment, including
to personal safety and security, financial security (such as
through identity theft), and privacy, of officers and
employees and their family members, that may be posed by
website and other publication of financial disclosure forms
and associated personal information;
(2) examine any harm that may have arisen from the current
online availability of financial disclosure forms and
associated personal information of employees of the
legislative branch, including any harm to national security,
law enforcement, or other Federal missions and any
endangerment that may have occurred, including to personal
safety and security, financial security (such as through
identity theft), and privacy, of such legislative branch
officers and employees or their family members; and
(3) include any other analysis that the National Academy
believes is necessary or desirable on the topic of the study.
(c) Report.--Not later than 6 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the National Academy shall submit to
Congress and the President a report that contains--
(1) the findings of the study conducted under subsection
(a)(1);
(2) recommendations for ways to avoid or mitigate the risks
identified in the study conducted under subsection (a)(1),
consistent with the goal of providing appropriate public
disclosure of potential conflicts of interest or instances of
insider trading by Federal officers or employees; and
(3) any other recommendations that the National Academy
believes are necessary or desirable.
SEC. 3. PERIODIC TRANSACTION REPORTS FOR TRANSACTIONS OF
SPOUSES AND CHILDREN.
(a) In General.--
(1) Date reporting requirement commences in house of
representatives and executive branch.--Section 2 of the Act
entitled ``An Act to prevent harm to the national security or
endangering the military officers and civilian employees to
whom internet publication of certain information applies, and
for other purposes'', approved August 16, 2012 (5 U.S.C. App.
103 note), is amended by striking ``September 30, 2012'' and
inserting ``January 1, 2013''.
(2) Extension to executive branch.--Section 2 of the Act
entitled ``An Act to prevent harm to the national security or
endangering the military officers and civilian employees to
whom internet publication of certain information applies, and
for other purposes'', approved August 16, 2012 (5 U.S.C. App.
103 note), is amended by striking ``for reporting
individuals'' and all that follows through ``House of
Representatives''.
(3) Technical and conforming amendment.--Section 2 of the
Act entitled ``An Act to prevent harm to the national
security or endangering the military officers and civilian
employees to whom internet publication of certain information
applies, and for other purposes'', approved August 16, 2012
(5 U.S.C. App. 103 note), is amended by striking ``such
section 101'' and inserting ``section 101 of such Act (5
U.S.C. App. 101)''.
(b) Effective Date; Rule of Construction.--
(1) Effective date.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on January 1, 2013.
(2) Rule of construction.--Before January 1, 2013, the
amendments made by subsection (a) shall not affect the
applicability of section 2 of the Act entitled ``An Act to
prevent harm to the national security or endangering the
military officers and civilian employees to whom internet
publication of certain information applies, and for other
purposes'', approved August 16, 2012 (5 U.S.C. App. 103
note), as in effect on the day before the effective date
under paragraph (1).
(c) Savings Clause.--Nothing in the amendments made by
subsection (a) shall be construed as affecting any
requirement with respect to the House of Representatives or
the executive branch in effect before January 1, 2013, with
respect to the inclusion of transaction information for a
report under section 103(l) of the Ethics in Government Act
of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App. 103(l)).
(d) No Change to Existing Senate Requirements.--Nothing in
this section or the amendments made this section shall be
construed as affecting the requirement that took effect with
respect to the Senate on July 3, 2012, which mandates the
inclusion of transaction information for spouses and
dependent children for a report under section 103(l) of the
Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App. 103(l)).
____________________
RECOGNIZING THE 100TH ANNIVERSARY OF HADASSAH
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Judiciary
Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 448 and
the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 448) recognizing the 100th
anniversary of Hadassah, the Women's Zionist Organization of
America, Inc.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the
resolution.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the resolution be
agreed to, the preamble agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid
upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any related
statements be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The resolution (S. Res. 448) was agreed to.
The preamble was agreed to.
The resolution, with its preamble, reads as follows:
S. Res. 448
Whereas Hadassah, the Women's Zionist Organization of
America, Inc. (referred to in this preamble as ``Hadassah'')
was established by Henrietta Szold on February 24, 1912;
Whereas Hadassah is now the largest Zionist organization
for Jewish women, with more than 300,000 active members;
Whereas Hadassah celebrated the 100th anniversary of its
founding on February 24, 2012;
Whereas, since its founding, Hadassah has consistently
promoted the unity of the Jewish people and worked for the
betterment of communities in the United States and what is
now present-day Israel;
Whereas Hadassah was nominated for the 2005 Nobel Peace
Prize for its ongoing initiatives to use medicine as a bridge
to peace;
Whereas Hadassah conducts a wide variety of training
programs for medical personnel and students throughout the
world;
[[Page 14856]]
Whereas, in Israel, Hadassah initiates and supports pace-
setting health care, education, and youth institutions;
Whereas the world-class Hadassah Medical Organization in
Israel is renowned for cutting-edge medical research;
Whereas the Hadassah Medical Organization is constructing
the Sarah Wetsman Davidson Hospital Tower at Hadassah Medical
Center as a gift to Israel, to be officially dedicated at the
Hadassah Centennial Convention in October 2012;
Whereas, in the United States, Hadassah--
(1) enhances the quality of American and Jewish life
through education and Zionist youth programs;
(2) promotes health awareness; and
(3) provides personal enrichment and growth for members;
and
Whereas Hadassah helps support young people by providing
scholarships for students and educating disadvantaged
children: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) congratulates Hadassah, the Women's Zionist
Organization of America, Inc. on its 100th anniversary; and
(2) recognizes the important contributions that Hadassah,
the Women's Zionist Organization of America, Inc. has made to
medical research and care, the health of communities, the
relationship between the United States and Israel, and the
continuity of Jewish heritage.
____________________
OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM VETERANS DAY
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary
Committee be discharged from further consideration of and the Senate
now proceed to S. Res. 472.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 472) designating October 7, 2012, as
``Operation Enduring Freedom Veterans Day.''
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the
resolution.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Enzi
amendment at the desk be agreed to, that the resolution be agreed to,
the preamble, as amended, be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be
laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 2870) was agreed to, as follows:
(Purpose: To update the number of patriots in the United States Armed
Forces who have made the ultimate sacrifice while serving in
Afghanistan)
In the fifth whereas clause, strike ``nearly 1,800'' and
insert ``some 2,000''.
The resolution (S. Res. 472) was agreed to.
The preamble, as amended, was agreed to.
The resolution, with its preamble, as amended, reads as follows:
S. Res. 472
Whereas the initial volley of Operation Enduring Freedom
took place in Afghanistan on October 7, 2001, and October 7,
2012, marks the eleventh anniversary of the war;
Whereas Operation Enduring Freedom, launched in response to
the terrorist attacks committed against the United States on
September 11, 2001, targeted al-Qaida and the Taliban
protectors of al-Qaida in Afghanistan;
Whereas Operation Enduring Freedom is the longest ongoing
war in which the United States is involved;
Whereas the wounded warriors who have served in Operation
Enduring Freedom carry the scars of war, both seen and
unseen;
Whereas some 2,000 patriots in the United States Armed
Forces have made the ultimate sacrifice while serving in
Afghanistan;
Whereas the war in Afghanistan should not fade from the
hearts and minds of the people of the United States; and
Whereas the ongoing sacrifices made by the men and women of
the Armed Forces should be recognized and honored: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates October 7, 2012, as ``Operation Enduring
Freedom Veterans Day'';
(2) honors the brave men and women who gave their lives
while serving the United States in Operation Enduring
Freedom; and
(3) encourages the people of the United States to salute
the more than half a million men and women who have served
bravely in Afghanistan to preserve our shared security and
freedom.
____________________
CONGRATULATING THE ATHLETES FROM THE STATE OF NEVADA AND THROUGHOUT THE
UNITED STATES
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Commerce
Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 558 and
the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 558) congratulating the athletes from
the State of Nevada and throughout the United States who
participated in the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games as
members of the United States Olympic and Paralympic Teams.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the
resolution.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, a moving 11-day journey recently came to an
end. Nearly 4,300 athletes from 166 countries traveled to London,
England, to fulfill their dream of representing their country at the
2012 Paralympic games. I congratulate each of these athletes on a job
well done and for their hard work, determination and triumph. Their
accomplishments inspired us all and help to broaden our sense of what
is possible for individuals living with a disability.
Shortly after the 2012 Olympic games concluded, Olympic officials
worked feverishly to transform the Olympic venues for the upcoming
Paralympic games. Their task was formidable, and their work was
impressive. And once again, London proved to be an exceedingly
welcoming host. In fact, more than 2.7 million spectators attended the
games, shattering the previous mark and making these games the best
attended in history. Many venues were filled to capacity. The energy
and excitement of the fans was impressive and a wonderful inspiration
for these athletes to showcase their talents. While the world watched
with joy and amazement, the athletes competed fiercely, setting an
astonishing 251 world records in the process.
Those in attendance and audiences around the world were treated to
many dazzling performances and were introduced to some truly inspiring
personal stories. One such story is that of LT. Brad Synder. Almost 1
year ago to the day, Lieutenant Synder was bravely serving his country
in Afghanistan when a bomb exploded, rendering him blind. One year
later, he stood in London, again representing his country, with two
gold medals and a silver in swimming around his neck and a world record
in his grasp. In the face of such a tragic and life-altering injury,
this brave soldier refused to let this injury define him and forged
ahead, setting his sights on a new goal. There is also LCDR Steven
Peace who began cycling during rehabilitation from a stroke he suffered
during Active Duty and competed for Team USA in that event. And there
is Scot Severn, another former soldier, who won bronze in shot put at
these games after recovering from injuries sustained from a lighting
strike while on duty. These are but a few of the seemingly endless
stories of perseverance and strength that define the lives of these
athletes and enrich the lives of all of us.
It was in 1948 that the seed of what would grow to become the second
largest sporting event in the world was planted in London. Sir Ludwig
Guttmann sought to inspire recently wounded World War II veterans by
organizing a sporting event to raise their spirits and aid their
rehabilitation. After years of increasing participation and awareness,
this sporting event, which was conceived to parallel the Olympic games,
would formally become known as the Paralympic games in 1960. In 2012,
227 athletes represented the United States in London.
There were many Paralympic athletes with ties to Michigan on Team
USA. They represented their Nation and Michigan admirably. They include
Steve Peace in cycling, Asya Miller in goalball, Robin Theryoung in
goalball, Tucker Dupree in swimming, Scott Severn in track and field,
Bryan Barten in wheelchair tennis, and Mackenzie Soldan in wheelchair
tennis. Along with these impressive athletes, I also congratulate the
legions of coaches, trainers, officials, support staff, family and
friends who played indispensable roles for these athletes and
[[Page 14857]]
helped to make their performances possible.
There are more than 24 million Americans living with a disability and
many more who face some sort of physical, visual or mental challenge.
The athletes who competed in London sent a strong, compelling signal
that, while their circumstance may seem daunting, there are many
mountains to climb and races to win if they are determined and willing
to pursue excellence in whatever field they choose, whether it be the
track, a classroom or any other worthy pursuit. These games also bring
greater awareness and more resources to efforts to increase the
availability of physical activity for disabled Americans across the
Nation, the benefits of which have been well-documented in recent
years.
The 2012 Paralympic games dazzled us with impressive athletic feats,
inspired us with stories of courage and perseverance, and reminded us
that we can all overcome adversity and pursue excellence both in
competition and in life. The 2012 summer Paralympic games, like the
Olympic games that preceded it, was a stage on which athletes from
across the globe came together in friendly competition. Barb and I
salute every athlete who represented Team USA in London. As one
organizer eloquently stated, ``The Paralympians have lifted the cloud
of limitation.'' For that, we owe them a deep debt of gratitude.
Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, today I rise to recognize three of our
Nation's inspiring Paralympians, with Connecticut roots, who competed,
along with 227 American teammates and more than 4,000 athletes from
over 160 countries, in this year's Paralympic games in London. During
these games, which took place from August 29 to September 9, the United
States brought home 98 medals, including 31 gold medals. The
exceptional drive, discipline, and dreams of these athletes are as
extraordinary as the medals. Their personal stories of sacrifice and
hard work, effort and energy, and aspirations turned into realities,
despite setbacks and adversity, are truly remarkable.
In 1948 at Aylesbury, England's Stoke Mandeville Hospital, the idea
of the Paralympics was formed, and so it is historically significant
that England hosted this year's Paralympic games. Sir Ludwig Guttmann
envisioned including disabled veterans in international sports
competition, and in 1948 his dream was realized in the International
Wheelchair Games. In 1960, Rome hosted the first official Paralympic
games as we know them today. As we look back at this year's games--one
of the largest Paralympics in history--we celebrate this legacy. We are
reminded of how important these games were for the rehabilitation of
our disabled World War II veterans.
For Tara Profitt of Newington, CT, and member of the 2012 U.S.
Paralympic Table Tennis Team, England as host country is personally
significant. Ms. Profitt competed in the women's singles competition at
the 1984 Paralympics hosted in Stoke Mandeville, England, but always
hoped to have the opportunity to play alongside her college friend and
fellow table tennis champion, Pamela Fontaine, in the women's team
class. This year, in addition to participating individually in the
women's single class events, Ms. Profitt and Ms. Fontaine were selected
to represent the United States together in the women's team event,
reuniting again on familiar territory. Ms. Profitt has credited Ms.
Fontaine with inspiring her to become the athlete she is today,
encouraging her to engage in sports again after the diving injury that
she suffered as a teenager. They have worked hard to qualify over the
past few years, traveling around the world to compete, and this year
achieved the goal that they have held dearly for decades: to play
together, celebrating their country and friendship on an international
stage.
Representing the United States in track and field, three-time gold
medalist Paul Nitz traveled from Bloomfield, CT, to participate in his
third Paralympic games. This year, he was given the tremendous honor of
serving as track captain for the U.S. Paralympic Track and Field team,
inspiring both first-time and veteran athletes. Mr. Nitz has an
accomplished athletic record: He won the Gold in the 100m event in
1992, 1996, and 2000 and broke the 100m world record during the 2012
Swiss Series. This year, I am proud to announce that he brought home
the bronze in the 100m. Equally commendable, Mr. Nitz works in his
community--as an employee of the Hartford Insurance Group--to
positively change public perception regarding disability. In addition
to his impressive athletic achievements, through his efforts at the
Hartford, he has led great strides across the Nation in dispelling
prejudice, misconception, and judgment.
I also applaud the Hartford Insurance Group for their commitment to
the Paralympic games: Since 2003, it has been a founding partner of the
U.S. Paralympics, an official division of the U.S. Olympic Committee.
Five-time Paralympian Scott Danberg calls Stamford his hometown, and
Connecticut has been proud to follow him throughout his impressive
athletic career. Recently, as a well-known and regarded member of the
U.S. Paralympic track and field team, he competed in the men's discus
event, throwing his personal best for this season in London. And this
year he was nominated by his fellow track and field members and then
chosen by a vote by the U.S. paralympic team as our Nation's flag
bearer during opening ceremonies. He adds this tremendous honor to his
past accomplishments, including the bronze at the 2011 IPC World
Championships, the gold at the 2010 U.S. Paralympics Track & Field
National Championships in both discus and shot put, and the silver in
javelin at the 1998 Paralympic games.
I hope that Connecticut's Paralympians can continue to promote
international and national awareness and engagement and we can continue
to come together as a nation, recognizing what unites us. Thank you for
joining me in applauding our amazing American athletes and those around
the world who have shown the athleticism, stamina, and national
identity that transcend differences.
Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the gifted
athletes from my home State of Mississippi who represented the United
States in the 2012 London Olympic games and Paralympic games. They join
an extraordinary legacy built by generations of great American
Olympians and Paralympians, and their historic successes on the world
stage are a proud moment for Mississippi.
In the London Olympic games, Gulfport native Brittney Reese became
the first American woman to win a gold medal in long jump since Jackie
Joyner-Kersee, who won it more than two decades ago in the Seoul games.
The Olympic title tops an impressive career for the former University
of Mississippi standout and four-time world champion, who has become an
unmatched competitor over the past several years.
Particularly heartfelt and inspiring was Reese's dedication of her
gold-medal success to the people of Mississippi and those still
recovering from Hurricane Katrina, which damaged her family's home 7
years ago. As she told reporters, ``This is a great way for me to bring
something home and show them we can all do this together.''
Bianca Knight of Ridgeland helped lead the women's 4x100-meter relay
team to a gold-medal win in an incredible 40.82 seconds--besting the
world record set by East Germany in 1985. The performance earned the
United States its first Olympic gold medal in the women's relay event
since 1996 in Atlanta.
In the men's 4x100-meter relay, Coldwater sprinter Trell Kimmons and
his teammates blazed through to a silver-medal finish--setting a new
American record. Former Jackson State University track star Michael
Tinsley also won silver in the 400-meter hurdles. Isiah Young, a
talented athlete at the University of Mississippi, made his Olympic
debut in the exciting 200-meter dash, advancing to the semifinals with
an impressive run against decorated Jamaican sprinter Usain Bolt.
One Mississippian continued her Olympic success this time as a coach
[[Page 14858]]
for the U.S. women's basketball team. Assistant coach Jennifer Gillom,
an Ole Miss graduate from Abbeville, helped lead the team to a gold-
medal victory in London. She won gold as a player during the Seoul
Games and is the first person in Ole Miss women's basketball history to
be part of multiple medal wins.
Like the Olympics, the London Paralympic games were also a
spectacular display of athleticism and perseverance. The international
sports event for athletes with disabilities began shortly after World
War II as a way for those with war injuries to enhance their quality of
life. More than 4,000 athletes competed in this year's Paralympic
games--including four Mississippians who captivated the world with
outstanding performances.
Shaquille Vance of Houston set a new American record in the men's
200-meter-T42 event--earning the silver medal. Richard Browne of
Jackson sprinted to a silver-medal finish in the highly anticipated
100-meter-T44 race. Top-ranked competitors Ryan Estep and Joseph
Brinson of Florence showcased their expertise as part of the U.S.
wheelchair fencing team, with Estep competing in the epee-style event
and Brinson in the saber-style competition.
I thank the family and friends who have supported and encouraged
these athletes throughout this incredible journey. The Olympics and
Paralympics are a dream for athletes around the world and a life-
changing experience for those who participate. I congratulate these
inspiring Mississippians on their remarkable accomplishments. They have
worked hard and made us proud.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I further ask that the resolution be agreed
to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be considered
made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and
any statements related to the measure be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The resolution (S. Res. 558) was agreed to.
The preamble was agreed to.
The resolution, with its preamble, reads as follows:
S. Res. 558
Whereas the 2012 Olympic Games were held in London, England
from July 27, 2012, to August 12, 2012, and the 2012
Paralympic Games were held in London, England from August 29,
2012, to September 9, 2012;
Whereas 532 Olympians and 227 Paralympians competed on
behalf of Team USA in London, England;
Whereas the great State of Nevada contributed 4 athletes to
the United States Olympic Team and 1 athlete to the United
States Paralympic Team;
Whereas the Olympians and Paralympian from the State of
Nevada proudly represented the United States in competition
and displayed an admirable dedication to the spirit of the
Olympic Games;
Whereas Amanda Bingson of Las Vegas, Nevada, competed in
the Olympic Women's Hammer Throw event;
Whereas Jacob Dalton of Reno, Nevada, competed in the
Olympic Men's Gymnastics Floor Exercise and Men's Team
events;
Whereas Connor Fields of Las Vegas, Nevada, competed in the
Olympic Men's BMX event;
Whereas Michael Hunter II of Las Vegas, Nevada, competed in
the Olympic Men's Heavyweight Boxing event;
Whereas Cortney Jordan of Henderson, Nevada, competed in
the Paralympic Women's 400m Freestyle, 100m Breaststroke,
100m Backstroke, 200m Individual Medley, 50m Freestyle, and
100m Freestyle events;
Whereas Ms. Jordan won silver medals in the 400m Freestyle,
50m Freestyle, and 100m Freestyle, and a bronze medal in the
100m Backstroke;
Whereas the citizens of the State of Nevada and the people
of the United States stand united in respect and admiration
for the Nevadan Olympians and Paralympian, and the athletic
accomplishments, sportsmanship, and dedication of those
athletes to excellence in the 2012 Olympics and Paralympics;
Whereas the many accomplishments of the Nevadan Olympians
and Paralympian would not have been possible without the hard
work and dedication of many others, including the United
States Olympic Committee, the relevant United States National
Governing Bodies, and the many administrators, coaches, and
family members who provided critical support for the
athletes: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate extends sincere congratulations
for the accomplishments and gratitude for the sacrifices of
the athletes from the State of Nevada and throughout the
United States on the United States Olympic and Paralympic
Teams and to everyone who supported the efforts of those
athletes at the 2012 Olympics and Paralympics.
____________________
NATIONAL SAVE FOR RETIREMENT WEEK
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the HELP
Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 555 and
the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk
will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 555) supporting the goals and ideals
of ``National Save for Retirement Week,'' including raising
public awareness of the various tax-preferred retirement
vehicles and increasing personal financial literacy.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the
resolution.
Mr. PRYOR. I further ask that the resolution be agreed to, the
preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be made and laid upon
the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements
relating to the resolution be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The resolution (S. Res. 555) was agreed to.
The preamble was agreed to.
The resolution, with its preamble, reads as follows:
S. Res. 555
Whereas people in the United States are living longer, and
the cost of retirement is increasing significantly;
Whereas Social Security remains the bedrock of retirement
income for the great majority of the people of the United
States but was never intended by Congress to be the sole
source of retirement income for families;
Whereas recent data from the Employee Benefit Research
Institute indicates that, in the United States, less than \3/
5\ of workers or their spouses are currently saving for
retirement, and the actual amount of retirement savings of
workers is much less than the amount needed to adequately
fund their retirement years;
Whereas the financial literacy of workers in the United
States is important to their understanding of the need to
save for retirement;
Whereas saving for retirement is a key component to overall
financial health and security during retirement years, and
the importance of financial literacy in planning for
retirement must be advocated;
Whereas many workers may not be aware of their options in
saving for retirement or may not have focused on the
importance of, and need for, saving for retirement;
Whereas many employees have available to them, through
their employers, access to defined benefit and defined
contribution plans to assist them in preparing for
retirement, yet many of those employees may not be taking
advantage of those plans at all or to the full extent allowed
by Federal law;
Whereas the need to save for retirement is important even
during economic downturns or market declines, which make
continued contributions all the more important;
Whereas all workers, including public and private sector
employees, employees of tax-exempt organizations, and self-
employed individuals, can benefit from developing personal
budgets and financial plans that include retirement savings
strategies and taking advantage of tax-preferred retirement
savings vehicles; and
Whereas October 21 through October 27, 2012, has been
designated as ``National Save for Retirement Week'': Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) supports the goals and ideals of ``National Save for
Retirement Week'', including raising public awareness of the
importance of saving adequately for retirement;
(2) supports the need to raise public awareness of the
availability of a variety of ways to save for retirement
which are favored under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and
are utilized by many people in the United States, but which
should be utilized by more; and
(3) calls on the States, localities, schools, universities,
nonprofit organizations, businesses, other entities, and the
people of the United States to observe National Save for
Retirement Week with appropriate programs and activities,
with the goal of increasing the retirement savings and
personal financial literacy of all people in the United
States.
[[Page 14859]]
____________________
NATIONAL NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE MONTH
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee
on Indian Affairs be discharged from further consideration of S. Res.
561 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk
will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A resolution (S. Res. 561) recognizing National Native
American Heritage Month and celebrating the heritages and
cultures of Native Americans and the contributions of Native
Americans to the United States.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the
resolution.
Mr. PRYOR. I further ask that the resolution be agreed to, the
preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the
table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related
to the resolution be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The resolution (S. Res. 561) was agreed to.
The preamble was agreed to.
The resolution, with its preamble, reads as follows:
S. Res. 561
Whereas from November 1, 2012, through November 30, 2012,
the United States celebrates National Native American
Heritage Month;
Whereas Native Americans are descendants of the original,
indigenous inhabitants of what is now the United States;
Whereas the United States Bureau of the Census estimated in
2009 that there were almost 5,000,000 individuals in the
United States of Native American descent;
Whereas Native Americans maintain vibrant cultures and
traditions and hold a deeply rooted sense of community;
Whereas Native Americans have moving stories of tragedy,
triumph, and perseverance that need to be shared with future
generations;
Whereas Native Americans speak and preserve indigenous
languages, which have contributed to the English language by
being used as names of individuals and locations throughout
the United States;
Whereas Congress has recently reaffirmed its support of
tribal self-governance and its commitment to improving the
lives of all Native Americans by enhancing health care
services, increasing law enforcement resources, and approving
settlements of litigation involving Indian tribes and the
United States;
Whereas Congress is committed to improving the housing
conditions and socioeconomic status of Native Americans;
Whereas the United States is committed to strengthening the
government-to-government relationship that it has maintained
with the various Indian tribes;
Whereas Congress has recognized the contributions of the
Iroquois Confederacy, and its influence on the Founding
Fathers in the drafting of the Constitution of the United
States with the concepts of freedom of speech, the separation
of governmental powers, and the system of checks and balances
between the branches of government;
Whereas with the enactment of the Native American Heritage
Day Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-33; 123 Stat. 1922),
Congress--
(1) reaffirmed the government-to-government relationship
between the United States and Native American governments;
and
(2) recognized the important contributions of Native
Americans to the culture of the United States;
Whereas Native Americans have made distinct and important
contributions to the United States and the rest of the world
in many fields, including the fields of agriculture,
medicine, music, language, and art, and Native Americans have
distinguished themselves as inventors, entrepreneurs,
spiritual leaders, and scholars;
Whereas Native Americans have served with honor and
distinction in the Armed Forces of the United States, and
continue to serve in the Armed Forces in greater numbers per
capita than any other group in the United States;
Whereas the United States has recognized the contribution
of the Native American code talkers in World War I and World
War II, who used indigenous languages as an unbreakable
military code, saving countless Americans; and
Whereas the people of the United States have reason to
honor the great achievements and contributions of Native
Americans and their ancestors: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) recognizes the month of November 2012 as National
Native American Heritage Month;
(2) recognizes the Friday after Thanksgiving as ``Native
American Heritage Day'' in accordance with the Native
American Heritage Day Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-33; 123
Stat. 1922); and
(3) urges the people of the United States to observe
National Native American Heritage Month and Native American
Heritage Day with appropriate programs and activities.
____________________
RESOLUTIONS SUBMITTED TODAY
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the immediate consideration en bloc of the following
resolutions which were submitted earlier today: S. Res. 576, S. Res.
577, S. Res. 578, S. Res. 579, S. Res. 580, S. Res. 581, S. Res. 582,
S. Res. 583, S. Res. 584, S. Res. 585, S. Res. 586, S. Res. 587, S.
Res. 588, and S. Res. 589.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the
resolutions en bloc.
Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to,
the preambles be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the
table en bloc, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements
related to the resolutions be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The resolutions were agreed to.
The preambles were agreed to.
The resolutions, with their preambles, read as follows:
S. Res. 576
Whereas October 10, 2012, marks the 50th anniversary of the
signing of Public Law 87-788 (commonly known as the
``McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act'') (16 U.S.C.
582a et seq.), which authorized the Secretary of Agriculture
to encourage and assist States in conducting a program of
forestry research;
Whereas the McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act was
named for the 2 primary, bipartisan sponsors of the Act,
Representative Clifford G. McIntire of Maine and Senator John
C. Stennis of Mississippi, who recognized that research in
forestry is the ``driving force behind progress in developing
and utilizing the Nation's forests'';
Whereas the McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act
recognized that forestry research would be more effective
nationwide if efforts among State-supported institutions of
higher education were partnered and more closely coordinated
with forestry research activities in the Federal Government;
Whereas Congressman McIntire and Senator Stennis stated a
clear intent to address the important need of the United
States for increased numbers of highly trained forestry
scientists and other research professionals;
Whereas the McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act has
provided 5 decades of base funding to establish and
strengthen research and training capacity in forestry at
State-supported institutions of higher education;
Whereas funds provided by the Act to State-supported
institutions of higher education are highly leveraged with
non-Federal funds;
Whereas university-based forestry research has provided an
accumulated wealth of science-based knowledge, skills, and
technologies that have been critical for sustaining United
States forests for economic, ecological, and social benefits;
Whereas funds provided by the McIntire-Stennis Cooperative
Forestry Act for forestry research at State-supported
institutions of higher education have provided significant
graduate student support over the last 50 years, resulting in
8,500 master's degrees and 2,600 doctoral degrees;
Whereas the State-supported institutions of higher
education that receive funds under the McIntire-Stennis
Cooperative Forestry Act conduct forestry research in all 50
States and 4 territories of the United States, and
disseminate the results of those efforts locally, regionally,
nationally, and globally for the betterment of the
communities of the institutions, the United States, and the
world; and
Whereas many State-supported institutions of higher
education are celebrating and commemorating the 50th
anniversary of the signing of the McIntire-Stennis
Cooperative Forestry Act: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) celebrates the 50th anniversary of the signing of
Public Law 87-788 (commonly known as the ``McIntire-Stennis
Cooperative Forestry Act'') (16 U.S.C. 582a et seq.) by
President John F. Kennedy;
(2) encourages the people of the United States to observe
and celebrate the 50th anniversary of the signing of the
McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act with appropriate
ceremonies and activities;
(3) affirms the continuing importance and vitality of the
State-supported institutions of higher education conducting
forestry research and training supported by the McIntire-
Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act; and
(4) respectfully requests that the Secretary of the Senate
transmit to the National Association of University Forest
Resources Programs an enrolled copy of this resolution for
appropriate display.
[[Page 14860]]
S. Res. 577
Whereas the First Special Service Force (referred to in
this preamble as the ``Force''), a military unit composed of
volunteers from the United States and Canada, was activated
in July 1942 at Fort Harrison near Helena, Montana;
Whereas the Force was initially intended to target military
and industrial installations that were supporting the German
war effort, including important hydroelectric plants, which
would severely limit the production of strategic materials
used by the Axis powers;
Whereas, from July 1942 through June 1943, volunteers of
the Force trained in hazardous, arctic conditions in the
mountains of western Montana, and in the waterways of Camp
Bradford, Virginia;
Whereas the combat echelon of the Force totaled 1,800
soldiers, half from the United States and half from Canada;
Whereas the Force also contained a service battalion,
composed of 800 members from the United States, that provided
important support for the combat troops;
Whereas a special bond developed between the Canadian and
United States soldiers, who were not segregated by country,
although the commander of the Force was a United States
colonel;
Whereas the Force was the only unit formed during World War
II that consisted of troops from Canada and the United
States;
Whereas, in October 1943, the Force went to Italy, where it
fought in battles south of Cassino, including Monte La
Difensa and Monte Majo, two mountain peaks that were a
critical anchor of the German defense line;
Whereas, during the night of December 3, 1943, the Force
ascended to the top of the precipitous face of Monte La
Difensa, where the Force suffered heavy casualties and
overcame fierce resistance to overtake the German line;
Whereas, after the battle for La Difensa, the Force
continued to fight tough battles at high altitudes, in rugged
terrain, and in severe weather;
Whereas, after battles on the strongly defended Italian
peaks of Sammucro, Vischiataro, and Remetanea, the size of
the Force had been reduced from 1,800 soldiers to fewer than
500;
Whereas, for 4 months in 1944, the Force engaged in raids
and aggressive patrols at the Anzio Beachhead;
Whereas, on June 4, 1944, members of the Force were among
the first Allied troops to liberate Rome;
Whereas, after liberating Rome, the Force moved to southern
Italy and prepared to assist in the liberation of France;
Whereas, during the early morning of August 15, 1944,
members of the Force made silent landings on Les Iles
D'Hyeres, small islands in the Mediterranean Sea along the
southern coast of France;
Whereas the Force faced a sustained and withering assault
from the German garrisons as the Force progressed from the
islands to the Franco-Italian border;
Whereas, after the Allied forces secured the Franco-Italian
border, the United States Army ordered the disbandment of the
Force on December 5, 1944, in Nice, France;
Whereas, during 251 days of combat, the Force suffered
2,314 casualties, or 134 percent of its authorized strength,
captured thousands of prisoners, won 5 United States campaign
stars and 8 Canadian battle honors, and never failed a
mission;
Whereas the United States is forever indebted to the acts
of bravery and selflessness of the troops of the Force, who
risked their lives for the cause of freedom;
Whereas the efforts of the Force along the seas and skies
of Europe were critical in repelling the advance of Nazi
Germany and liberating numerous communities in France and
Italy;
Whereas the bond between the members of the Force from the
United States and those from Canada has endured over the
decades, as the members meet every year for a reunion,
alternating between the United States and Canada; and
Whereas the traditions and honors exhibited by the Force
are carried on by 2 outstanding active units of 2 great
democracies, the Special Forces of the United States and the
Canadian Special Operations Regiment: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate recognizes and honors the
superior service of the First Special Service Force during
World War II.
S. Res. 578
Whereas the Red Ribbon Campaign was established to
commemorate the service of Enrique ``Kiki'' Camarena, a
special agent of the Drug Enforcement Administration for 11
years who was murdered in the line of duty in 1985 while
engaged in the battle against illicit drugs;
Whereas the Red Ribbon Campaign was established by the
National Family Partnership to preserve the memory of Special
Agent Camarena and further the cause for which he gave his
life;
Whereas the Red Ribbon Campaign has been nationally
recognized since 1988 and is now the oldest and largest drug
prevention program in the United States, reaching millions of
young people each year during Red Ribbon Week;
Whereas the Drug Enforcement Administration, established in
1973, aggressively targets organizations involved in the
growing, manufacturing, and distribution of controlled
substances and has been a steadfast partner in commemorating
Red Ribbon Week;
Whereas the Governors and attorneys general of the States,
the National Family Partnership, Parent Teacher Associations,
Boys and Girls Clubs of America, PRIDE Youth Programs, Young
Marines, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and hundreds of
other organizations throughout the United States annually
celebrate Red Ribbon Week during the period of October 23
through October 31;
Whereas the objective of Red Ribbon Week is to promote the
creation of drug-free communities through drug prevention
efforts, education, parental involvement, and community-wide
support;
Whereas drug abuse is one of the major challenges that the
United States faces in securing a safe and healthy future for
families in the United States;
Whereas drug abuse and alcohol abuse contribute to domestic
violence and sexual assault and place the lives of children
at risk;
Whereas emerging drug threats and growing epidemics demand
attention, with a particular focus on prescription
medications, the second most abused drug by young people in
the United States, and synthetic drugs;
Whereas, since the majority of teenagers abusing
prescription medications get the medications from family,
friends, and home medicine cabinets, the Drug Enforcement
Administration will host a National Take Back Day on
September 29, 2012, for the public to safely dispose of
unused or expired prescription medications that can lead to
accidental poisoning, overdose, and abuse;
Whereas synthetic marijuana, also known as ``K2'' or
``Spice'', has become especially popular, particularly among
teenagers and young adults, and in 2011 poison centers across
the United States responded to about 6,960 calls related to
synthetic marijuana, up from approximately 2,900 calls in
2010;
Whereas Congress recently enacted the Food and Drug
Administration Safety and Innovation Act (Public Law 112-144;
126 Stat. 993), which adds 26 synthetic drugs to the
Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), including
the drugs commonly found in products marketed as K2, Spice,
and bath salts; and
Whereas parents, young people, schools, businesses, law
enforcement agencies, religious institutions, service
organizations, senior citizens, medical and military
personnel, sports teams, and individuals throughout the
United States will demonstrate their commitment to healthy,
productive, and drug-free lifestyles by wearing and
displaying red ribbons during the week-long celebration of
Red Ribbon Week: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) supports the goals and ideals of Red Ribbon Week, 2012;
(2) encourages children and teenagers to choose to live
drug-free lives; and
(3) encourages the people of the United States--
(A) to promote the creation of drug-free communities; and
(B) to participate in drug prevention activities to show
support for healthy, productive, and drug-free lifestyles.
S. Res. 579
Whereas there are 105 historically Black colleges and
universities in the United States;
Whereas historically Black colleges and universities
provide the quality education essential to full participation
in a complex, highly technological society;
Whereas historically Black colleges and universities have a
rich heritage and have played a prominent role in the history
of the United States;
Whereas historically Black colleges and universities allow
talented and diverse students, many of whom represent
underserved populations, to attain their full potential
through higher education; and
Whereas the achievements and goals of historically Black
colleges and universities are deserving of national
recognition: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates the week of September 24 through September
28, 2012, as ``National Historically Black Colleges and
Universities Week''; and
(2) calls on the people of the United States and interested
groups to observe the week with appropriate ceremonies,
activities, and programs to demonstrate support for
historically Black colleges and universities in the United
States.
S. Res. 580
Whereas, in 1903, President Theodore Roosevelt established
the first national wildlife refuge on Florida's Pelican
Island;
Whereas, in 2012, the National Wildlife Refuge System,
administered by the Fish and Wildlife Service, is the premier
system of lands and waters to conserve wildlife in the world,
and has grown to more than 150,000,000 acres, 558 national
wildlife refuges, and 38 wetland management districts in
every State and territory of the United States;
[[Page 14861]]
Whereas national wildlife refuges are important
recreational and tourism destinations in communities across
the United States, and these protected lands offer a variety
of recreational opportunities, including 6 wildlife-dependent
uses that the National Wildlife Refuge System manages:
hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, photography,
environmental education, and interpretation;
Whereas more than 360 units of the National Wildlife Refuge
System have hunting programs and more than 300 units of the
National Wildlife Refuge System have fishing programs,
averaging more than 2,500,000 hunting visits and more than
7,000,000 fishing visits each year;
Whereas the National Wildlife Refuge System experienced
more than 30,000,000 wildlife observation visits during
fiscal year 2012;
Whereas national wildlife refuges are important to local
businesses and gateway communities;
Whereas, for every $1 appropriated, national wildlife
refuges generate $4 in economic activity;
Whereas the National Wildlife Refuge System experiences
approximately 47,000,000 visits each year, which generated
nearly $2,100,000,000 and more than 35,000 jobs in local
economies during fiscal year 2012;
Whereas the National Wildlife Refuge System encompasses
every kind of ecosystem in the United States, including
temperate, tropical, and boreal forests, wetlands, deserts,
grasslands, arctic tundras, and remote islands, and spans 12
time zones from the Virgin Islands to Guam;
Whereas national wildlife refuges are home to more than 700
species of birds, 220 species of mammals, 250 species of
reptiles and amphibians, and more than 1,000 species of fish;
Whereas national wildlife refuges are the primary Federal
lands that foster production, migration, and wintering
habitat for waterfowl;
Whereas, since 1934, the sale of the Federal Duck Stamp to
outdoor enthusiasts has generated more than $850,000,000 in
funds, which has enabled the purchase or lease of more than
5,500,000 acres of waterfowl habitat in the National Wildlife
Refuge System;
Whereas 59 refuges were established specifically to protect
imperiled species, and of the more than 1,300 federally
listed threatened and endangered species in the United
States, 280 species are found on units of the National
Wildlife Refuge System;
Whereas national wildlife refuges are cores of conservation
for larger landscapes and resources for other agencies of the
Federal Government and State governments, private landowners,
and organizations in their efforts to secure the wildlife
heritage of the United States;
Whereas more than 42,000 volunteers and approximately 220
national wildlife refuge ``Friends'' organizations contribute
nearly 1,600,000 hours annually, the equivalent of 766 full-
time employees, and provide an important link to local
communities;
Whereas national wildlife refuges provide an important
opportunity for children to discover and gain a greater
appreciation for the natural world;
Whereas, because there are national wildlife refuges
located in several urban and suburban areas and 1 refuge
located within an hour's drive of every metropolitan area in
the United States, national wildlife refuges employ, educate,
and engage young people from all backgrounds in exploring,
connecting with, and preserving the natural heritage of the
United States;
Whereas, since 1995, refuges across the United States have
held festivals, educational programs, guided tours, and other
events to celebrate National Wildlife Refuge Week during the
second full week of October;
Whereas the Fish and Wildlife Service will continue to seek
stakeholder input on the implementation of ``Conserving the
Future: Wildlife Refuges and the Next Generation'', an update
to the strategic plan of the Fish and Wildlife Service for
the future of the National Wildlife Refuge System;
Whereas the week beginning on October 14, 2012, has been
designated as ``National Wildlife Refuge Week'' by the Fish
and Wildlife Service; and
Whereas the designation of National Wildlife Refuge Week by
the Senate would recognize more than a century of
conservation in the United States, raise awareness about the
importance of wildlife and the National Wildlife Refuge
System, and celebrate the myriad recreational opportunities
available to enjoy this network of protected lands: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates the week beginning on October 14, 2012, as
``National Wildlife Refuge Week'';
(2) encourages the observance of National Wildlife Refuge
Week with appropriate events and activities;
(3) acknowledges the importance of national wildlife
refuges for their recreational opportunities and contribution
to local economies across the United States;
(4) pronounces that national wildlife refuges play a vital
role in securing the hunting and fishing heritage of the
United States for future generations;
(5) identifies the significance of national wildlife
refuges in advancing the traditions of wildlife observation,
photography, environmental education, and interpretation;
(6) recognizes the importance of national wildlife refuges
to wildlife conservation and the protection of imperiled
species and ecosystems, as well as compatible uses;
(7) acknowledges the role of national wildlife refuges in
conserving waterfowl and waterfowl habitat pursuant to the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (40 Stat. 755, chapter 128);
(8) reaffirms the support of the Senate for wildlife
conservation and the National Wildlife Refuge System; and
(9) expresses the intent of the Senate--
(A) to continue working to conserve wildlife; and
(B) to manage the National Wildlife Refuge System for
current and future generations.
S. Res. 581
Whereas more than 2,500,000 people serve as members of the
United States Armed Forces;
Whereas several hundred thousand members of the Armed
Forces rotate each year through deployments to 150 countries
in every region of the world;
Whereas more than 2,300,000 members of the Armed Forces
have deployed to the area of operations of the United States
Central Command since the September 11, 2001, terrorist
attacks;
Whereas the United States is kept strong and free by the
loyal military personnel who protect our precious heritage
through their positive declaration and actions;
Whereas members of the Armed Forces serving at home and
abroad have courageously answered the call to duty to defend
the ideals of the United States and to preserve peace and
freedom around the world;
Whereas members of the Armed Forces personify the virtues
of patriotism, service, duty, courage, and sacrifice;
Whereas the families of members of the Armed Forces make
important and significant sacrifices for the United States;
Whereas in 2010, 40 States designated October 26 as ``Day
of the Deployed'' following the first recognition of a ``Day
of the Deployed'' by North Dakota on October 26, 2006; and
Whereas the Senate designated October 26, 2011, as ``Day of
the Deployed'': Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) honors the members of the United States Armed Forces
who are deployed;
(2) calls on the people of the United States to reflect on
the service of those members of the United States Armed
Forces, wherever they serve, past, present, and future;
(3) designates October 26, 2012, as ``Day of the
Deployed''; and
(4) encourages the people of the United States to observe
``Day of the Deployed'' with appropriate ceremonies and
activities.
S. Res. 582
Whereas beginning on September 15, 2012, through October
15, 2012, the United States celebrates Hispanic Heritage
Month;
Whereas the Census Bureau estimates the Hispanic population
in the United States at over 52,000,000 people, making
Hispanic Americans the largest racial or ethnic minority
group within the United States overall and in 25 individual
States;
Whereas Latinos accounted for over \1/2\ of all population
growth from July 1, 2010, to July 1, 2011;
Whereas the Hispanic population in the United States is
projected to grow to 132,800,000 by July 1, 2050, at which
point the Hispanic population will comprise 30 percent of the
total population in the United States;
Whereas nearly 1 in 4 United States public school students
is Hispanic, and the total number of Hispanic students
enrolled in public schools in the United States is expected
to reach 28,000,000 by 2050;
Whereas 16.5 percent of all college students between the
age of 18 and 24 years old are Hispanics, making Hispanics
the largest racial or ethnic minority group on college
campuses in the United States, including both 2-year
community colleges and 4-year colleges and universities;
Whereas the purchasing power of Hispanic Americans was
$1,000,000,000,000 in 2010 and is expected to grow 50 percent
to $1,500,000,000 by 2015;
Whereas there are approximately 2,300,000 Hispanic-owned
firms in the United States, supporting millions of employees
nationwide and greatly contributing to the economic sector,
especially retail trade, wholesale trade, food services, and
construction;
Whereas as of June 2012, nearly 25,000,0000 Hispanic
workers represented 16 percent of the total labor force in
the United States, with the share of Latino labor force
participation expected to grow to 18 percent by 2018;
Whereas Hispanic Americans serve in all branches of the
Armed Forces and have bravely fought in every war in the
history of the United States;
Whereasas of July 2012, 143,054 Hispanic active duty
service members served with distinction in the United States
Armed Forces in fiscal year 2012;
Whereas as of June 30, 2012, there were 19,752 Hispanics
serving in Afghanistan;
Whereas as of May 7, 2012, 645 United States military
fatalities in Iraq and Afghanistan have been Hispanic;
Whereas more than 80,000 Hispanics served in the Vietnam
War, representing 5.5 percent
[[Page 14862]]
of individuals who made the ultimate sacrifice for their
country in that conflict even though Hispanics comprised only
4.5 percent of the United States population at the time;
Whereas 140,000 Hispanic soldiers served in the Korean War;
Whereas as of September 2012, there are approximately
1,300,000 living Hispanic veterans of the United States Armed
Forces;
Whereas 44 Hispanic Americans have received the
Congressional Medal of Honor, the highest award for valor in
action against an enemy force that can be bestowed on an
individual serving in the United States Armed Forces;
Whereas Hispanic Americans are dedicated public servants,
holding posts at the highest levels of government, including
1 seat on the Supreme Court, 2 seats in the Senate, 29 seats
in the House of Representatives, and 2 seats in the Cabinet;
and
Whereas Hispanic Americans harbor a deep commitment to
family and community, an enduring work ethic, and a
perseverance to succeed and contribute to society: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) recognizes the celebration of Hispanic Heritage Month
from September 15, 2012, through October 15, 2012;
(2) esteems the integral role of Latinos and the manifold
heritage of Latinos in the economy, culture, and identity of
the United States; and
(3) urges the people of the United States to observe
Hispanic Heritage Month with appropriate programs and
activities that appreciate the cultural contributions of
Latinos to American life.
S. Res. 583
Whereas a terrorist attack, natural disaster, or other
emergency could strike any part of the United States at any
time;
Whereas natural and manmade emergencies disrupt hundreds of
thousands of lives each year, costing lives and causing
serious injuries and billions of dollars in property damage;
Whereas Federal, State, and local officials, as well as
private and nonprofit organizations, are working to mitigate
against, prevent, and respond to all types of emergencies;
Whereas the people of the United States can help promote
the overall emergency preparedness of the United States by
being prepared for all types of emergencies;
Whereas National Preparedness Month provides an opportunity
to highlight the importance of public emergency preparedness
and to encourage the people of the United States to take
steps to be better prepared for emergencies at home, work,
and school;
Whereas the people of the United States can prepare for
emergencies by taking steps, such as assembling emergency
supply kits, creating family emergency plans, staying
informed about possible emergencies, and obtaining reasonable
levels of insurance; and
Whereas additional information about public emergency
preparedness may be obtained through the Ready Campaign of
the Department of Homeland Security at www.ready.gov or the
American Red Cross at www.redcross.org/prepare: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates September 2012 as ``National Preparedness
Month''; and
(2) encourages the Federal Government, States, localities,
schools, nonprofit organizations, businesses, and other
applicable entities, along with the people of the United
States, to observe National Preparedness Month with
appropriate events and activities to promote emergency
preparedness.
S. Res. 584
Whereas Jumpstart, a national early education organization,
is working to ensure that every child in the United States
enters school prepared to succeed;
Whereas Jumpstart delivers a year-round research-based and
cost-effective program by training college students and
community volunteers to serve preschool age children in low-
income neighborhoods, helping them to develop the language
and literacy skills necessary to succeed in school and in
life;
Whereas, since 1993, Jumpstart has trained nearly 25,000
college students and community volunteers to transform the
lives of more than 42,000 preschool children in communities
across the United States;
Whereas Jumpstart's Read for the Record, presented in
partnership with the Pearson Foundation, is a national
campaign that culminates in one day of the year when millions
of people in the United States come together to celebrate
literacy and support Jumpstart in its efforts to promote
early childhood education;
Whereas the goals of the campaign are to raise awareness in
the United States of the importance of early childhood
education, support Jumpstart's early education programs in
preschools in low-income neighborhoods through donations and
sponsorship, and celebrate the commencement of Jumpstart's
program year;
Whereas October 4, 2012, is an appropriate date to
designate as ``Jumpstart's Read for the Record Day'' because
it is the date Jumpstart aims to set the world record for the
largest shared reading experience; and
Whereas Jumpstart hopes to engage more than 2,200,000
children in reading ``Ladybug Girl and the Bug Squad'' by
David Soman and Jacky Davis during this record-breaking
celebration of reading and service, all in support of
preschool children in the United States: Now, therefore, be
it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates October 4, 2012, as ``Jumpstart's Read for
the Record Day'';
(2) commends Jumpstart's Read for the Record on its seventh
year;
(3) encourages adults, including grandparents, parents,
teachers, and college students--
(A) to join children in creating the world's largest shared
reading experience; and
(B) to show their support for literacy and Jumpstart's
early education programming for young children in low-income
communities; and
(4) requests the Secretary of the Senate to transmit a copy
of this resolution to Jumpstart, one of the leading nonprofit
organizations in the United States in the field of early
childhood education.
S. Res. 585
Whereas New Mexico has a rich heritage and history, dating
as far back as 11,000 B.C. when the Clovis people left the
earliest evidence of human existence in what is now New
Mexico;
Whereas Santa Fe, the capital of New Mexico, was
established in 1610 and is the oldest capital city in the
United States, as well as the highest in elevation at 7,000
feet above sea level;
Whereas, on September 9, 1850, the portion of the
Compromise of 1850 (9 Stat. 446) that created the New Mexico
Territory was enacted;
Whereas, on January 6, 1912, President William Howard Taft
signed the proclamation making New Mexico the 47th State of
the Union;
Whereas the nickname of New Mexico is the ``Land of
Enchantment'' because of its scenic beauty and rich history
and culture;
Whereas the natural wonder of New Mexico is preserved by a
broad range of national parks, forests, wilderness areas, and
wildlife refuge centers;
Whereas the diverse cultural roots of New Mexico come from
the many different groups of people who have inhabited the
State, notably the strong tribal and Hispanic cultural
influences in the State;
Whereas New Mexico has one of the richest indigenous tribal
populations in the United States, including 19 Pueblo
nations, 2 Apache nations, and the Navajo Nation;
Whereas the Hispanic population of New Mexico has rich and
distinct cultural roots in its historic land grants as
recognized by the Treaty of Peace, Friendship, Limits, and
Settlement between the United States and Mexico, signed at
Guadalupe Hidalgo February 2, 1848, and entered into force
May 30, 1848 (9. Stat. 922) (commonly referred to as the
``Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo'');
Whereas New Mexico continues to derive strength from the
new Hispanic communities in the State with roots in Latin
America;
Whereas New Mexico has an extensive variety of prehistoric,
tribal, and Hispanic archaeological ruins;
Whereas New Mexico has a long tradition of artistic
expression inspired by its natural beauty, unique
architecture, and diverse people;
Whereas the people of New Mexico have a proud history of
military service, predating and continuing after statehood,
including the participation of the people of New Mexico in
every major war of the United States since the Civil War,
with notable participation by the people of New Mexico in
Teddy Roosevelt's Rough Riders, the Navajo Code Talkers, the
defense of Bataan and Corregidor, the wars in Korea and
Vietnam, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan;
Whereas New Mexico is a center for scientific innovation
and laboratory research, serving as the home to the Los
Alamos National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories;
Whereas, on July 16, 1945, the United States Army conducted
the Trinity test, the first test of a nuclear weapon, which
was developed at Los Alamos National Laboratory and tested at
the White Sands Proving Ground in New Mexico;
Whereas, in 1980, New Mexico dedicated the Very Large
Array, one of the world's premier astronomical radio
observatories that studies the history of the universe;
Whereas, in October 2011, New Mexico dedicated Spaceport
America, propelling New Mexico into the future with the first
commercial spaceport;
Whereas New Mexico is home to the Albuquerque International
Balloon Fiesta, the largest hot air balloon event in the
world, which is also considered to be the most photographed
event in the world;
Whereas New Mexico has a long history of agricultural
sustainability and productivity, supporting cattle and dairy,
as well as many crops, including chile, corn, wheat, onions,
peanuts, pistachios, pecans, hay, cotton, and beans;
Whereas the Hatch Valley of New Mexico, known as the
``Chile Capital of the World'', is recognized worldwide for
its bountiful chile crop; and
Whereas New Mexico celebrated the centennial anniversary of
its admission to the
[[Page 14863]]
Union as the 47th State of the United States on January 6,
2012: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate recognizes the extraordinary
history and heritage of the State of New Mexico, and honors
and commends the State of New Mexico and its people on its
centennial anniversary.
S. Res. 586
Whereas the term ``infant mortality'' refers to the death
of a baby before the first birthday of the baby;
Whereas the United States ranks 49th among countries in the
rate of infant mortality;
Whereas high rates of infant mortality are especially
prevalent in African American, Native American, Alaskan
Native, Latino, Asian, and Hawaiian and other Pacific
Islander communities, communities with high rates of
unemployment and poverty, and communities with limited access
to safe housing and medical providers;
Whereas premature birth is a leading cause of infant
mortality;
Whereas, according to the Institute of Medicine of the
National Academies, premature birth costs the United States
more than $26,000,000,000 annually;
Whereas infant mortality can be substantially reduced
through community-based services, such as outreach, home
visitation, case management, health education, and
interconceptional care;
Whereas support for community-based programs to reduce
infant mortality may result in lower future spending on
medical interventions, special education, and other social
services that may be needed for infants and children who are
born with a low birth weight;
Whereas the Department of Health and Human Services, acting
through the Office of Minority Health, has implemented the
``A Healthy Baby Begins With You'' campaign;
Whereas the Maternal and Child Health Bureau of the Health
Resources and Services Administration has provided national
leadership on the issue of infant mortality;
Whereas the Advisory Committee on Infant Mortality provides
advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Health and
Human Services on reducing infant mortality and improving the
health status of infants and pregnant women;
Whereas the Advisory Committee on Infant Mortality provides
advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Health and
Human Services with respect to developing a national strategy
for reducing infant mortality;
Whereas public awareness and education campaigns on infant
mortality are held during the month of September each year;
and
Whereas September 2012 has been designated as ``National
Infant Mortality Awareness Month'': Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) supports--
(A) the goals and ideals of National Infant Mortality
Awareness Month, 2012;
(B) efforts to educate people in the United States about
infant mortality and the factors that contribute to infant
mortality; and
(C) efforts to reduce infant deaths, low birth weight, pre-
term births, and disparities in perinatal outcomes;
(2) recognizes the critical importance of including efforts
to reduce infant mortality and the factors that contribute to
infant mortality as part of prevention and wellness
strategies; and
(3) calls on the people of the United States to observe
National Infant Mortality Awareness Month with appropriate
programs and activities.
S. Res. 587
Whereas high-quality afterschool programs provide safe,
challenging, engaging, and fun learning experiences that help
children and youth develop social, emotional, physical,
cultural, and academic skills;
Whereas high-quality afterschool programs support working
families by ensuring that the children in those families are
safe and productive after the regular school day ends;
Whereas high-quality afterschool programs build stronger
communities by involving students, parents, business leaders,
and adult volunteers in the lives of children in the United
States, thereby promoting positive relationships among
children, youth, families, and adults;
Whereas high-quality afterschool programs engage families,
schools, and diverse community partners in advancing the
well-being of children in the United States;
Whereas ``Lights On Afterschool'', a national celebration
of afterschool programs held on October 18, 2012, highlights
the critical importance of high-quality afterschool programs
in the lives of children, their families, and their
communities;
Whereas more than 28,000,000 children in the United States
have parents who work outside the home and approximately
15,100,000 children in the United States have no place to go
after school; and
Whereas nearly 2 in 5 afterschool programs report that
their budgets are in worse condition today than at the height
of the recession in 2008, and more than 3 in 5 afterschool
programs report that their level of funding is lower than it
was 3 years ago, making it difficult for afterschool programs
across the United States to keep their doors open and their
lights on: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate supports ``Lights On
Afterschool'', a national celebration of afterschool programs
held on October 18, 2012.
S. Res. 588
Whereas on September 11, 2012, 4 American public servants,
United States Ambassador to Libya John Christopher Stevens,
Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods, and Glen Doherty, were killed in a
reprehensible and vicious attack on the United States
consulate in Benghazi, Libya;
Whereas Ambassador Stevens--
(1) was a courageous and exemplary representative of the
United States;
(2) had spent 21 years in the Foreign Service;
(3) was deeply passionate about representing the United
States through his diplomatic service; and
(4) was an ardent friend of the Libyan people;
Whereas Ambassador Stevens served as Special Envoy to the
Libyan Transitional National Council in Benghazi during the
2011 Libyan revolution;
Whereas Ambassador Stevens was a dear friend of the Senate,
having served on the staff of the Committee on Foreign
Relations of the Senate in 2006 and 2007 as a distinguished
Pearson Fellow;
Whereas Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean
Smith--
(1) was a husband and a father of 2 children;
(2) joined the Department of State 10 years ago after
serving in the United States Air Force; and
(3) had served in the Foreign Service, before arriving in
Benghazi, in Baghdad, Pretoria, Montreal, and The Hague;
Whereas Tyrone Woods was a husband and a father of three
children, who, after two decades of service as a Navy SEAL
that included tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, began working
with the Department of State to protect United States
diplomatic personnel;
Whereas Glen Doherty, after 12 years of service as a Navy
SEAL that included tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, began
working with the Department of State to protect United States
diplomatic personnel;
Whereas the 4 Americans who perished in the Benghazi attack
made great sacrifices and showed bravery in taking on a
difficult post in Libya;
Whereas the violence in Benghazi coincided with an attack
on the United States Embassy in Cairo, Egypt, which was also
swarmed by an angry mob of protesters on September 11, 2012;
Whereas on a daily basis, United States diplomats, military
personnel, and other public servants risk their lives to
serve the American people; and
Whereas throughout this Nation's history, thousands of
Americans have sacrificed their lives for the ideals of
freedom, democracy, and partnership with nations and people
around the globe.
Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) recognizes the dedicated service and deep commitment of
Ambassador John Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone
Woods, and Glen Doherty in assisting the Libyan people as
they navigate the complex currents of democratic transition
marked in this case by profound instability;
(2) praises Ambassador Stevens, who represented the highest
tradition of American public service, for his extraordinary
record of dedication to the United States' interests in some
of the most difficult and dangerous posts around the globe;
(3) sends its deepest condolences to the families of those
American public servants killed in Benghazi;
(4) commends the bravery of Foreign Service Officers,
United States Armed Forces, and public servants serving in
harm's way around the globe and recognizes the deep
sacrifices made by their families; and
(5) condemns, in the strongest possible terms, the
despicable attacks on American diplomats and public servants
in Benghazi and calls for the perpetrators of such attacks to
be brought to justice.
S. Res. 589
Whereas small businesses represent 99.7 percent of all
businesses having employees (commonly referred to as
``employer firms'') in the United States;
Whereas small businesses employ \1/2\ of the employees in
the private sector in the United States;
Whereas small businesses pay 44 percent of the total
payroll of the employees in the private sector in the United
States;
Whereas small businesses are responsible for more than 50
percent of the private, nonfarm product of the gross domestic
product;
Whereas small businesses generated 65 percent of net new
jobs during the last 17 years;
Whereas small businesses generate 60 to 80 percent of all
new jobs annually;
Whereas small businesses focus on 2 key strategies:
deepening relationships with customers and creating value for
customers;
Whereas, for every $100 spent with locally owned,
independent stores, $68 returns to the community through
local taxes, payroll, and other expenditures;
Whereas 92 percent of consumers in the United States agree
that the success of small
[[Page 14864]]
businesses is critical to the overall economic health of the
United States;
Whereas 93 percent of consumers in the United States agree
that small businesses contribute positively to the local
community by supplying jobs and generating tax revenue;
Whereas 91 percent of consumers in the United States have
small businesses in their community that the consumers would
miss if the small businesses closed;
Whereas 99 percent of consumers in the United States agree
that it is important to support the small businesses in their
community; and
Whereas 90 percent of consumers in the United States are
willing to pledge support for a ``buy local'' movement: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates November 24, 2012, as ``Small Business
Saturday''; and
(2) supports efforts--
(A) to encourage consumers to shop locally; and
(B) to increase awareness of the value of locally owned
small businesses and the impact of locally owned small
businesses on the economy of the United States.
S. Res. 585
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a resolution,
along with my colleague Senator Tom Udall, recognizing the centennial
anniversary of New Mexico's statehood.
For over 100 years, New Mexico, the ``Land of Enchantment,'' has
enriched the Nation with its magnificent landscapes, diverse people,
and unique culture. New Mexico's road to statehood began in 1850 when
the New Mexico Territory was established. Statehood was finally
achieved on January 6, 1912 when President William Howard Taft signed
the proclamation making New Mexico the 47th State of the Union. New
Mexico's history long predates this, though, with the State's earliest
inhabitants dating as far back as 11,000 B.C. The State's capitol,
Santa Fe, is the oldest capital city in the United States, having been
established by the Spanish in 1610.
New Mexico's beautiful deserts and mountains have been a magnet for
visitors. It is no wonder that our State has inspired artists beginning
with our earliest inhabitants. New Mexicans have a proud history of
military service, and the State has served as a center for scientific
innovation for over half a century through the national laboratories
based there. Among New Mexico's agricultural products, its chile crop
makes it the ``Chile Capital of the World.''
Given New Mexico's many contributions and accomplishments in its
first 100 years as a State, and even before then, I am proud to
introduce this resolution recognizing the extraordinary history and
heritage of the State, and commending the State and its people on this
centennial anniversary.
____________________
SIGNING AUTHORITY
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that from Saturday,
September 22, through Tuesday, November 13, the majority leader and
Senator Lieberman be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills or joint
resolutions.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection it is so ordered.
____________________
APPOINTMENTS AUTHORITY
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that
notwithstanding the upcoming recess or adjournment of the Senate, the
President of the Senate, the President pro tempore, and the majority
and minority leaders be authorized to make appointments to commissions,
committees, boards, conferences, or interparliamentary conferences
authorized by law, by concurrent action of the two Houses, or by order
of the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
AUTHORITY FOR COMMITTEES TO REPORT
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that
notwithstanding the Senate's recess, committees be authorized to report
legislation and executive matters on Friday, November 2, from 10 a.m.
to 12 noon.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
ORDERS FOR TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2012, THROUGH TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 13,
2012
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the
Senate completes its business today, it adjourn and convene for pro
forma sessions only, with no business conducted on the following dates
and times, and that following each pro forma session, the Senate
adjourn until the next pro forma session: Tuesday, September 25, at
9:30 a.m.; Friday, September 28, at 10 a.m.; Tuesday, October 2, at 11
a.m.; Friday, October 5, at 1 p.m.; Tuesday, October 9, at 11 a.m.;
Friday, October 12, at 10:30 a.m.; Tuesday, October 16, at 10 a.m.;
Friday, October 19, at 11 a.m.; Tuesday, October 23, at 1 p.m.; Friday,
October 26, at 1 p.m.; Tuesday, October 30, at 10 a.m.; Friday,
November 2, at 11 a.m.; Tuesday, November 6, at 11 a.m.; Friday,
November 9, at 10 a.m.; and that the Senate adjourn on Friday, November
9, until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, November 13; that following the prayer and
pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning
hour be deemed expired and the time for the two leaders be reserved for
their use later in the day; and that at 5:30 p.m. all postcloture time
on the motion to proceed to S. 3525, the Sportsmen's Act, be yielded
back and the Senate proceed to a vote on the motion to proceed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
PROGRAM
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, the next rollcall vote will be at 5:30 p.m.
on Tuesday, November 13, 2012.
____________________
ADJOURNMENT UNTIL TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2012, AT 9:30 A.M.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come
before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it adjourn under the
previous order.
There being no objection, the Senate, at 4:03 a.m., adjourned until
Tuesday, September 25, 2012, at 9:30 a.m.
____________________
NOMINATIONS
Executive nominations received by the Senate:
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
MARILYN A. BROWN, OF GEORGIA, TO BE A MEMBER OF THE BOARD
OF DIRECTORS OF THE TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY FOR A TERM
EXPIRING MAY 18, 2017. (REAPPOINTMENT)
VERA LYNN EVANS, OF TENNESSEE, TO BE A MEMBER OF THE BOARD
OF DIRECTORS OF THE TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY FOR A TERM
EXPIRING MAY 18, 2017, VICE WILLIAM H. GRAVES, TERM EXPIRED.
MICHAEL MCWHERTER, OF TENNESSEE, TO BE A MEMBER OF THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY FOR A
TERM EXPIRING MAY 18, 2016, VICE DENNIS BOTTORFF, TERM
EXPIRED.
JOE H. RITCH, OF ALABAMA, TO BE A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF
DIRECTORS OF THE TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY FOR A TERM
EXPIRING MAY 18, 2016, VICE THOMAS C. GILLILAND, TERM
EXPIRED.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
VINCENT G. LOGAN, OF NEW YORK, TO BE SPECIAL TRUSTEE,
OFFICE OF SPECIAL TRUSTEE FOR AMERICAN INDIANS, DEPARTMENT OF
THE INTERIOR, VICE ROSS OWEN SWIMMER, RESIGNED.
NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES
OLGA VISO, OF MINNESOTA, TO BE A MEMBER OF THE NATIONAL
COUNCIL ON THE ARTS FOR A TERM EXPIRING SEPTEMBER 3, 2018,
VICE WILLIAM FRANCIS PRICE, JR., TERM EXPIRED.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
ALAN F. ESTEVEZ, OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, TO BE A
PRINCIPAL DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, VICE FRANK
KENDALL III.
____________________
DISCHARGED NOMINATIONS
COAST GUARD NOMINATION OF KENNETH T. BOYT, TO BE LIEUTENANT
COMMANDER.
FOREIGN SERVICE NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH MICHAEL LEWIS
AND ENDING WITH CAROLYN SHUCKEROW, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE
RECEIVED BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD ON SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
FOREIGN SERVICE NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH BRIDGET C.
BITTLE AND ENDING WITH DAVID J. ZANNI, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE
RECEIVED BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD ON SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
ROBERT STEPHEN BEECROFT, OF CALIFORNIA, A CAREER MEMBER OF
THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO
BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF IRAQ.
Federal Campaign Contribution Report
Nominee: Robert Stephen Beecroft
Post: Baghdad
(The following is a list of all members of my immediate
family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons
to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To
the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this
report is complete and accurate.)
Contributions, amount, date, and donee:
[[Page 14865]]
1. Self: None.
2. Spouse: Anne Tisdel Beecroft: None.
3. Children and Spouses: Blythe A. Beecroft: None. Robert
Warren Beecroft: None. Sterling S. Beecroft: None. Grace A.
Beecroft: None.
4. Parents: Robert L. Beecroft--deceased; Emma Lou
Beecroft: None.
5. Grandparents: Irl R. Beecroft--deceased; Ruth V.
Beecroft--deceased; John E. Warren--deceased; Emma Warren--
deceased.
6. Brothers and Spouses: Warren E. Beecroft: $100, May
2012, Romney; $100, June 2012, Romney; Frances Beecroft:
None. Edward R. Beecroft: None. JoAn Stopa Beecroft; None.
Collin J. Beecroft: $2,500, December 2011, Romney. Melinda K.
Beecroft: None.
7. Sisters and Spouses: Robyn R. Ryskamp, None. Barry
Ryskamp: None.
____
____________________
CONFIRMATIONS
Executive nominations confirmed by the Senate Friday, September 21,
2012:
AMTRAK BOARD OF DIRECTORS
ALBERT DICLEMENTE, OF DELAWARE, TO BE A DIRECTOR OF THE
AMTRAK BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR A TERM OF FIVE YEARS.
THE JUDICIARY
GONZALO P. CURIEL, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE UNITED STATES
DISTRICT JUDGE FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA.
ROBERT J. SHELBY, OF UTAH, TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
JUDGE FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
HEIDI SHYU, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF
THE ARMY .
IN THE AIR FORCE
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE UNITED
STATES AIR FORCE TO THE GRADE INDICATED WHILE ASSIGNED TO A
POSITION OF IMPORTANCE AND RESPONSIBILITY UNDER TITLE 10,
U.S.C., SECTION 601:
To be lieutenant general
MAJ. GEN. CHRISTOPHER C. BOGDAN
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE RESERVE
OF THE AIR FORCE TO THE GRADE INDICATED UNDER TITLE 10,
U.S.C., SECTION 12203:
To be brigadier general
COL. JON A. WEEKS
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE UNITED
STATES AIR FORCE TO THE GRADE INDICATED UNDER TITLE 10,
U.S.C., SECTION 624:
To be major general
BRIG. GEN. ANDREW M. MUELLER
THE FOLLOWING AIR NATIONAL GUARD OF THE UNITED STATES
OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE RESERVE OF THE AIR FORCE TO
THE GRADE INDICATED UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTIONS 12203
AND 12212:
To be major general
BRIG. GEN. DONALD P. DUNBAR
THE FOLLOWING AIR NATIONAL GUARD OF THE UNITED STATES
OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE RESERVE OF THE AIR FORCE TO
THE GRADE INDICATED UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTIONS 12203
AND 12212:
To be brigadier general
COL. GERARD F. BOLDUC, JR.
THE FOLLOWING AIR NATIONAL GUARD OF THE UNITED STATES
OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE RESERVE OF THE AIR FORCE TO
THE GRADE INDICATED UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTIONS 12203
AND 12212:
To be brigadier general
COL. MATTHEW P. JAMISON
IN THE ARMY
THE FOLLOWING ARMY NATIONAL GUARD OF THE UNITED STATES
OFFICERS FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE RESERVE OF THE ARMY TO THE
GRADES INDICATED UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTIONS 12203 AND
12211:
To be brigadier general
COLONEL DAVID O. SMITH
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE RESERVE
OF THE ARMY TO THE GRADE INDICATED UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C.,
SECTION 12203:
To be brigadier general
MICHAELENE A. KLOSTER
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE RESERVE
OF THE ARMY TO THE GRADE INDICATED UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C.,
SECTION 12203:
To be brigadier general
COL. GARRETT S. YEE
THE FOLLOWING ARMY NATIONAL GUARD OF THE UNITED STATES
OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE RESERVE OF THE ARMY TO THE
GRADE INDICATED UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTIONS 12203 AND
12211:
To be major general
BRIG. GEN. DEBORAH A. ASHENHURST
THE FOLLOWING ARMY NATIONAL GUARD OF THE UNITED STATES
OFFICERS FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE RESERVE OF THE ARMY TO THE
GRADE INDICATED UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTIONS 12203 AND
12211:
To be major general
BRIG. GEN. JUDD H. LYONS
BRIG. GEN. LEE E. TAFANELLI
THE FOLLOWING ARMY NATIONAL GUARD OF THE UNITED STATES
OFFICERS FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE RESERVE OF THE ARMY TO THE
GRADES INDICATED UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTIONS 12203 AND
12211:
To be major general
BRIG. GEN. KENDALL W. PENN
To be brigadier general
COL. KEITH A. KLEMMER
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE RESERVE
OF THE ARMY TO THE GRADE INDICATED UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C.,
SECTION 12203:
To be major general
BRIG. GEN. MICHAEL R. SMITH
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE RESERVE
OF THE ARMY TO THE GRADE INDICATED UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C.,
SECTION 12203:
To be major general
BRIG. GEN. DAVID J. CONBOY
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE UNITED
STATES ARMY TO THE GRADE INDICATED WHILE ASSIGNED TO A
POSITION OF IMPORTANCE AND RESPONSIBILITY UNDER TITLE 10,
U.S.C., SECTION 601:
To be lieutenant general
MAJ. GEN. FREDERICK B. HODGES
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE UNITED
STATES ARMY TO THE GRADE INDICATED WHILE ASSIGNED TO A
POSITION OF IMPORTANCE AND RESPONSIBILITY UNDER TITLE 10,
U.S.C., SECTION 601:
To be lieutenant general
MAJ. GEN. MARK S. BOWMAN
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE RESERVE
OF THE ARMY TO THE GRADE INDICATED UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C.,
SECTION 12203:
To be brigadier general
COL. URAL D. GLANVILLE
IN THE NAVY
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE UNITED
STATES NAVY TO THE GRADE INDICATED WHILE ASSIGNED TO A
POSITION OF IMPORTANCE AND RESPONSIBILITY UNDER TITLE 10,
U.S.C., SECTION 601:
To be vice admiral
REAR ADM. (LH) JAMES D. SYRING
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
SHARON ENGLISH WOODS VILLAROSA, OF TEXAS, A CAREER MEMBER
OF THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR,
TO BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF MAURITIUS, AND TO
SERVE CONCURRENTLY AND WITHOUT ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION AS
AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF SEYCHELLES.
DAWN M. LIBERI, OF FLORIDA, A CAREER MEMBER OF THE SENIOR
FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF CAREER MINISTER, TO BE AMBASSADOR
EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF BURUNDI.
STEPHEN D. MULL, OF VIRGINIA, A CAREER MEMBER OF THE SENIOR
FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF CAREER MINISTER, TO BE AMBASSADOR
EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF POLAND.
WALTER NORTH, OF WASHINGTON, A CAREER MEMBER OF THE SENIOR
FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF CAREER MINISTER, TO BE AMBASSADOR
EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA TO PAPUA NEW GUINEA, AND TO SERVE CONCURRENTLY AND
WITHOUT ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION AS AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY
AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE
SOLOMON ISLANDS AND AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND
PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE
REPUBLIC OF VANUATU.
RICHARD G. OLSON, OF NEW MEXICO, A CAREER MEMBER OF THE
SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO BE
AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA TO THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN.
JOSEPH E. MACMANUS, OF NEW YORK, A CAREER MEMBER OF THE
SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO BE
REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE VIENNA
OFFICE OF THE UNITED NATIONS , WITH THE RANK OF AMBASSADOR.
JOSEPH E. MACMANUS, OF NEW YORK, A CAREER MEMBER OF THE
SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO BE
REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE
INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, WITH THE RANK OF
AMBASSADOR.
UNITED NATIONS
JOHN HARDY ISAKSON, OF GEORGIA, TO BE A REPRESENTATIVE OF
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE SIXTY-SEVENTH SESSION OF
THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE UNITED NATIONS.
PATRICK J. LEAHY, OF VERMONT, TO BE A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE SIXTY-SEVENTH SESSION OF THE
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE UNITED NATIONS.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DEPARTMENT OF STATE NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH WILLIAM R.
BROWNFIELD AND ENDING WITH THOMAS ALFRED SHANNON, JR., WHICH
NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON JUNE 27, 2012.
NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES
EMIL J. KANG, OF NORTH CAROLINA, TO BE A MEMBER OF THE
NATIONAL COUNCIL ON THE ARTS FOR A TERM EXPIRING SEPTEMBER 3,
2018.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
KEVIN K. WASHBURN, OF NEW MEXICO, TO BE AN ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR.
IN THE AIR FORCE
AIR FORCE NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH ADAM D. AASEN AND
ENDING WITH MARK C. ZWYGHUIZEN, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE
RECEIVED BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD ON APRIL 23, 2012.
AIR FORCE NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH LANCE A. AIUMOPAS AND
ENDING WITH ROBERT S. ZAUNER, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED
BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
JUNE 25, 2012.
AIR FORCE NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH JAMES H. ABBOTT AND
ENDING WITH MARIO F. ZUNIGA, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED
BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
JUNE 25, 2012.
AIR FORCE NOMINATION OF MICHAEL F. WENDELKEN, TO BE MAJOR.
AIR FORCE NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH MICHAEL M. HOWARD AND
ENDING WITH PATRICK E. KNOESTER, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE
RECEIVED BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD ON AUGUST 2, 2012.
AIR FORCE NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH KARYN J. AYERS AND
ENDING WITH JOHN M. TUDELA, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED
BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
AUGUST 2, 2012.
AIR FORCE NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH KIMBERLY A. DALE AND
ENDING WITH CHRISTOPHER B. VOGLER, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE
RECEIVED BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD ON AUGUST 2, 2012.
AIR FORCE NOMINATION OF STEPHEN P. ROBERTS, TO BE COLONEL.
AIR FORCE NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH JEFFREY R. ALTHOFF AND
ENDING WITH GREGORY T. MCCAIN, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE
RECEIVED BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD ON SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
IN THE ARMY
ARMY NOMINATION OF GREGORY S. ULMA, TO BE MAJOR.
ARMY NOMINATION OF PATRICK P. METKE, TO BE MAJOR.
ARMY NOMINATION OF DREW D. DUKETT, TO BE COLONEL.
ARMY NOMINATION OF DAVID A. CORTESE, TO BE LIEUTENANT
COLONEL.
ARMY NOMINATION OF JEFFREY T. WHORTON, TO BE MAJOR.
ARMY NOMINATION OF CHARLES J. ROMERO, TO BE MAJOR.
ARMY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH TANASHA N. BENNETT AND
ENDING WITH REIES M. FLORES, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED
BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
AUGUST 2, 2012.
ARMY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH BRAD D. BEKKEDAHL AND
ENDING WITH WILLIAM L. ZANA, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED
BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
AUGUST 2, 2012.
[[Page 14866]]
ARMY NOMINATION OF GEORGE C. STURGES, TO BE MAJOR.
ARMY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH DAVID W. ACKER AND ENDING
WITH D003093, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY THE SENATE
AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON SEPTEMBER 10,
2012.
ARMY NOMINATION OF JOSEPH R. NEWCOMB, TO BE MAJOR.
ARMY NOMINATION OF MOROHUNRANTI O. OGUNTOYE, TO BE MAJOR.
ARMY NOMINATION OF AUGUST SEEBER, TO BE MAJOR.
ARMY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH ERIC J. ALBERTSON AND
ENDING WITH D011234, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY THE
SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON SEPTEMBER
10, 2012.
ARMY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH STUART N. BURRUSS AND
ENDING WITH ROBERT J. QUINKER III, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE
RECEIVED BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD ON SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
ARMY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH ANDRE B. ABADIE AND ENDING
WITH G001060, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY THE SENATE
AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON SEPTEMBER 10,
2012.
ARMY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH JOHN J. ACEVEDO AND ENDING
WITH D010397, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY THE SENATE
AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON SEPTEMBER 10,
2012.
ARMY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH JEFFREY S. BELL AND ENDING
WITH MARK R. THORNTON, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY THE
SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON SEPTEMBER
10, 2012.
ARMY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH STEVEN E. BATTLE AND ENDING
WITH LUZMIRA A. TORRES, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY
THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
ARMY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH ANTHONY H. ADRIAN AND
ENDING WITH JOHN F. WOYTE, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY
THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
ARMY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH FREDRIC N. AMIDON AND
ENDING WITH ANNE E. YOUNG, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY
THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
ARMY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH ELIZABETH A. BAKER AND
ENDING WITH IAN J. TOLMAN, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY
THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
ARMY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH PATRICK M. ARIDA AND ENDING
WITH ALI S. ZAZA, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY THE
SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON SEPTEMBER
10, 2012.
IN THE NAVY
NAVY NOMINATION OF ALAN T. WAKEFIELD, TO BE LIEUTENANT
COMMANDER.
NAVY NOMINATION OF TASSOS J. SFONDOURIS, TO BE LIEUTENANT
COMMANDER.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH GLEN CABARCAS AND ENDING
WITH RICARDO A. FERRA, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY THE
SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON AUGUST 2,
2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH CHUCK J. BROWDER AND ENDING
WITH CHRISTOPHER K. TUGGLE, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED
BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
AUGUST 2, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH DANIEL ARANDA AND ENDING
WITH CHAD J. STUEWE, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY THE
SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON AUGUST 2,
2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH MATTHEW R. ALLEN AND ENDING
WITH BRIAN T. WIERZBICKI, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY
THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON AUGUST
2, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH WILLIAM E. BLANKS AND
ENDING WITH JEREMY J. WAGNER, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED
BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
AUGUST 2, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH BRADLEY H. ABRAMOWITZ AND
ENDING WITH ERIC A. WEISS, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY
THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON AUGUST
2, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH CHARITY A. BREIDENBACH AND
ENDING WITH PHILLIP A. ZAMARRIPA, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE
RECEIVED BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD ON AUGUST 2, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH HENRY L. BUSH AND ENDING
WITH STANLEY C. WARE, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY THE
SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON AUGUST 2,
2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH KYLE R. ALCOCK AND ENDING
WITH SHEREE T. WILLIAMS, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY
THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON AUGUST
2, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH JEREMIAH P. ANDERSON AND
ENDING WITH AARON L. WOOLSEY, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED
BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
AUGUST 2, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH MARK J. AID, JR. AND ENDING
WITH BRIAN L. ZIMMERMAN, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY
THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON AUGUST
2, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH BRYCE D. ABBOTT AND ENDING
WITH MAXWELL V. ZUJEWSKI, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY
THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON AUGUST
2, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH DEMETRIA L. AARON AND
ENDING WITH AMY J. ZWETTLER, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED
BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH TIMOTHY M. FRENCH AND
ENDING WITH BRYAN E. WOOLDRIDGE, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE
RECEIVED BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD ON SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH CEDRIC J. ABRON AND ENDING
WITH CHADWICK Y. YASUDA, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY
THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH AMY H. ADAIR AND ENDING
WITH DONAVON A. YAPSHING, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY
THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH VINCENT M. J. AMBROSINO AND
ENDING WITH MARK VERHOVSHEK, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED
BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH KORY A. ANGLESEY AND ENDING
WITH ADAM G. ZAJAC, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY THE
SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON SEPTEMBER
10, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH EVAN D. ADAMS AND ENDING
WITH HAROLD B. WOODRUFF, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY
THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH WALTER B. BLACKWELL AND
ENDING WITH JAMES P. ZAKAR, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED
BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH ELIZABETH A. ABAN AND
ENDING WITH ELIZABETH M. ZULOAGA, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE
RECEIVED BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD ON SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
NAVY NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH THOMAS M. BROWN AND ENDING
WITH RALPH G. S. YOUNG, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY
THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON
SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
FOREIGN SERVICE
FOREIGN SERVICE NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH JOELLE-ELIZABETH
BEATRICE BASTIEN AND ENDING WITH KENNETH R. PROPP, WHICH
NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON JULY 12, 2012.
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH MELINDA
ASTRAN AND ENDING WITH CHELSEA TRUE, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE
RECEIVED BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD ON JUNE 25, 2012.
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH DONALD S.
AHRENS AND ENDING WITH DIAMOND E. ZUCHLINSKI, WHICH
NOMINATIONS WERE RECEIVED BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON JULY 25, 2012 .
IN THE COAST GUARD
COAST GUARD NOMINATION OF KENNETH T. BOYT, TO BE LIEUTENANT
COMMANDER.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
ROBERT STEPHEN BEECROFT, OF CALIFORNIA, A CAREER MEMBER OF
THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO
BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF IRAQ.
FOREIGN SERVICE
FOREIGN SERVICE NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH MICHAEL LEWIS
AND ENDING WITH CAROLYN SHUCKEROW, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE
RECEIVED BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD ON SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
FOREIGN SERVICE NOMINATIONS BEGINNING WITH BRIDGET C.
BITTLE AND ENDING WITH DAVID J. ZANNI, WHICH NOMINATIONS WERE
RECEIVED BY THE SENATE AND APPEARED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD ON SEPTEMBER 10, 2012.
[[Page 14867]]
EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS
____________________
HONORING THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF ROHNERT PARK
______
HON. LYNN C. WOOLSEY
of california
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr, Speaker, I rise today to honor a city in my District
on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of its establishment.
Incorporated in 1962, Rohnert Park has become an integral part of
Sonoma County's historical and cultural heritage.
The land that would become Rohnert Park was known as Rancho Cotate
when it was granted by General Mariano Vallejo to one of his soldiers
in 1844. During the next century, the land would change ownership many
times and experience much development.
After World War II, when Sonoma County experienced a surge in growth,
the City of Rohnert Park was conceived and developed by two Sonoma
County lawyers, Paul Golis and Maurice Fredericks, who had a vision of
a vibrant planned community in the heart of the valley. Their concept
stressed the importance of ``neighborhood units'', groups of houses
centered around schools and parks, in order to provide ample recreation
to city-dwellers.
Through collaboration and hard work, Rohnert Park was established in
1962. Today it is proud to serve its residents with many recreational
amenities and attractions. Rohnert Park is home to two municipal
swimming pools, an 18-hole golf course, and bike, hiking, and
equestrian trails. The city also contains Sonoma State University and
the Green Music Center.
Mr. Speaker, Rohnert Park is an important city in the heart of Sonoma
County. Please join me in honoring Rohnert Park on the occasion of its
50th anniversary.
____________________
PEACE CORPS DIRECTOR AARON WILLIAMS
______
HON. MICHAEL M. HONDA
of california
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. HONDA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and thank Director
Aaron Williams for his invaluable service to the Peace Corps and our
nation. As the Director throughout the past three years, Mr. Williams
undeniably impacted the Peace Corps legacy. It is important that we
recognize the importance of his contributions and the unique role the
Peace Corps has played in our national and global community throughout
his tenure.
Mr. Williams championed the ideals of the Peace Corps by bridging
alliances with Minority Serving Institutions, enhancing the safety and
security for the nine thousand volunteers serving abroad, and as
President Obama noted, was essential in reforming and modernizing the
agency. Sharing core American values with some of the world's most
impoverished populations, his leadership these past three years
reflects his service to the underrepresented and underprivileged.
Despite a complex, changing global climate, Mr. Williams dedicated
tireless efforts to ensure the safety of the Peace Corps volunteers. I
was proud to work closely with the Director to pass the Kate Puzey
Peace Corps Volunteer Protection Act. This act expanded the Peace
Corps' safety precautions by providing further protection for female
volunteers who are particularly vulnerable while living in foreign
countries. It also increased government accountability in responding to
sexual assault through a Sexual Assault Advisory Council and protects
the anonymity of volunteers who report sexual assault.
Mr. Williams understood that a better Peace Corps is a bigger Peace
Corps, and he therefore fought for the necessary increase in
volunteers. He successfully expanded programs throughout Colombia,
Indonesia, and Sierra Leone. And I was proud to work in the
Appropriations Committee to help the agency obtain the largest funding
in its history.
Whether it was collaborative efforts with RCPV/W or promoting
fundamental principles that make the Peace Corps and our country
exceptional, Mr. Williams never wavered from his commitment to
enhancing Peace Corps' outreach and capacity to serve diverse
communities. Having served in the Peace Corps, I know firsthand the
positive impacts that result from our Peace Corps programs and
volunteers. Due to Mr. Williams' vision and leadership, the Peace Corps
continues to lead the cause for peace, prosperity, and progress, and it
has been strengthened for future generations. Again, I thank Mr.
Williams. I am immensely grateful for his service, and most of all, his
friendship.
____________________
RECOGNIZING SAINT MARY'S COLLEGE OF MORAGA, CALIFORNIA
______
HON. GEORGE MILLER
of california
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise with my
colleague Congressman John Garamendi to recognize and congratulate
Saint Mary's College of Moraga, California, upon its 150th year of
academic excellence in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Saint Mary's College was founded in 1863 in San Francisco as a
liberal arts institution reflecting the life and work of the founder of
the Christian Brothers, John Baptist de La Salle. The College was
founded to serve some of California's earliest denizens, many of whom
were immigrants with few resources and the first in their families to
attend college. In 1928, after establishing a brief presence in
Oakland, the college moved to its current location in Moraga,
California.
Saint Mary's is a Lasallian Catholic College with a strong history of
service to our country. In the 1940s, Saint Mary's joined the war
effort in becoming the West Coast naval aviation training center.
Lieutenant Gerald R. Ford of Michigan, who would later become President
of the United States, was stationed at Saint Mary's for three years as
he trained young pilots for duty in the Pacific Theatre. After the
Second World War, Saint Mary's welcomed returning veterans studying on
the G.I. Bill and continues to support our Veterans today through the
Yellow Ribbon program.
St. Mary's rightfully boasts of a faculty composed of scholars at the
top of their field with a devotion to teaching students to be engaged
global citizens. Nearly 45,000 alumni have earned degrees at Saint
Mary's, leading to every imaginable career path. The Graduate Business
programs have produced scores of corporate leaders in businesses around
the world, while the School of Education has produced world-class
teachers who are in turn educating millions of students around the
globe.
Saint Mary's is also proud of its extracurricular programs. The
athletic department has brought national and international attention to
Northern California through athletic excellence in basketball,
baseball, softball, crew, soccer, golf, and rugby. Furthermore, world-
renowned artists, authors, scholars, musicians and political leaders
share their unique talents not only with the student community, but
with all of Northern California.
I invite my colleagues to join me in recognizing Saint Mary's College
of Moraga, the faculty, staff, alumni and students as they celebrate
150 years of extraordinary success as an educational leader in the
State of California.
____________________
SUPPORTING THE EFFORTS OF THE GEORGIA AQUARIUM
______
HON. TOM PRICE
of georgia
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor the
wonderful work being done by the Georgia Aquarium, which is located in
the heart of downtown Atlanta. With more than 10 million gallons of
water, the Georgia Aquarium is the world's largest with more aquatic
life than any other aquarium, and six distinct galleries that portray
diverse aquatic habitats, ranging from arctic to tropical waters. Since
opening its doors in 2005, Georgia Aquarium
[[Page 14868]]
has established itself as a leader in aquatic animal conservation and
research. The results of this research are shared with the global
zoological community for the enhancement of animals everywhere, thus
showcasing Georgia as a global center of animal study.
Currently, Georgia Aquarium is one of only six accredited facilities
in North America that is capable of providing care for beluga whales, a
species which is presently listed by the International Union for the
Conservation of Nature as ``near-threatened'' in its indigenous Arctic
and sub-Arctic environment. In June 2012, the aquarium applied for a
permit to import 18 beluga whales to the United States with the purpose
of conducting research which must be done in human care, for the
continued edification of aquarium guests, and to secure the
sustainability of the population in North American zoological parks and
aquariums. Applying this important research can help the scientific
community better understand the growing problems beluga whales face in
their natural habitats. This application is corroborated by a five-year
research study, authenticated by the International Union for the
Conservation of Nature, validating that the acquisition of beluga
whales will have no damaging impact to the beluga population of origin.
Mr. Speaker, the extraordinary work the Georgia Aquarium has done in
pursuing research and educating citizens is highly commendable. The
aquarium's recent efforts to study beluga whales will undoubtedly
improve our scientific understanding of this threatened species.
Therefore, I enthusiastically support Georgia Aquarium in its endeavor
to increase the North American beluga population to help to maintain a
sustainable population of whales in human care in certified facilities.
____________________
COMMEMORATING NORTHWESTERN COLLEGE'S 110TH ANNIVERSARY
______
HON. JUDY BIGGERT
of illinois
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Northwestern
College, which is celebrating its 110th year of preparing America's
students for success.
Since 1902, Northwestern College has honored the goals of its
founder, J.F. Fish, to create employment opportunities by providing
career-focused education. This distinguished institution is accredited
by the Higher Learning Commission as well as several programmatic
agencies, and it operates three outstanding campuses in the greater
Chicago area, serving more than 2,100 students.
Offering Associate degrees in health sciences, legal studies,
commerce and technology, and nursing--Northwestern College prepares
students for a rewarding career in their chosen fields.
I am pleased to congratulate Northwestern College on its 110th
Anniversary, and for its ongoing commitment to educating students in
Chicago and around the country.
____________________
IN REMEMBRANCE OF VICTOR CASCIO
______
HON. RODNEY ALEXANDER
of louisiana
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Mr.
Victor Cascio, Sr. His warmhearted connection with those who were
fortunate to know him and his steadfast involvement in the Monroe, LA
community will always be remembered.
Throughout his lifetime, Victor was a vibrant presence in the area.
He won the hearts of many as a child star on KNOE-TV's ``Happiness
Exchange,'' and his family has graced Monroe with their superb ability
as restaurateurs since World War II. The family venture began with his
late mother Josephine's ``Spaghetti Garden'' and culminating with The
Chateau, a Louisville Avenue institution, where Victor hosted such
celebrities as Liberace, Elvis, Donna Douglas of Elly May Clampett
fame, Danny Thomas, and every Louisiana Governor from Big John
McKeithen to Bobby Jindal.
Much of Victor's life was spent in the public eye as a phenomenal
host, friend, and role model for all, and when he finally closed the
doors of The Chateau amid an outpouring of support in March of this
year, it was with the goal of savoring a private life with his wife of
50 years, Marie.
Undeniably, the mark he made on our community will never fade. He had
a gift for putting people at ease and creating an atmosphere that is
not easily duplicated. In the letter of Saint Paul the Apostle to
Timothy, (2 Timothy 2:8-13), Paul says ``If we have died with him, we
shall also live with him; if we persevere, we shall also reign with
him.'' As we fondly remember the life and accomplishments of Victor, he
lived in the faith in which he believed.
To say that he left his fingerprint on the world would be an
understatement. Victor Cascio brought joy to so many, and he will live
in our hearts forever.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO BARNEY UHART
______
HON. DON YOUNG
of alaska
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a
great American and a great Alaskan. Barney Uhart, a devoted father and
President Emeritus of Chugach Alaska Corporation, passed away on
Saturday, September 8th after a lengthy battle with cancer.
Barney's career with Chugach Alaska Corporation began in 1993, and in
2000, he became President and CEO. During his tenure, the company grew
phenomenally, rising in revenue from $19 million in 1993 to over $1
billion in 2009. He was not only a charismatic leader and hard worker,
but a close friend to many who worked with him over the years. His hard
work and total commitment helped provide real, tangible, and ongoing
benefits to the Native Shareholders of Chugach as he strove tirelessly
to help fulfill the promises of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement
Act. His contributions to making the SBA 8(a) program a resounding
success, not only for Chugach, but for all Alaska Natives, Native
Hawaiians, and Native American Tribes, are truly outstanding, and we
are all grateful to him for his achievements.
On July 6, 2012, Barney announced his retirement from Chugach to
focus on his health and spend time with his family. The Board of
Directors of Chugach Alaska Corporation appointed Barney ``President
Emeritus'' in honor of his 19 years of service, dedication, and
leadership.
Barney's career with Chugach began when he joined Chugach Development
Corporation (CDC) as Operations Manager. With a background in
Engineering and Business Administration, his project experience in
managing Base Operation Services (BOS) contracts in extremely remote
locations began 33 years ago when he went to work on his first BOS
contract in 1979 on Wake Island.
Barney told of his Wake Island initiation by saying, ``I was living
in Hawaii and one day I was helping a friend deliver office furniture
to a place called Kentron International. I had no idea what they did,
but it sounded like an exotic and exciting place to work where you
would get to travel. The next day I put together a resume and slid it
under the door. Then I had an interview, and after about 45 minutes, I
thought the interview was over and I got up to leave when the manager
said, `When can you leave?' The following Tuesday I was on a plane to
Wake Island in the mid- Pacific and I still didn't know what Kentron
International did.'' Clearly, Barney never shied away from a new
opportunity.
Born in Fresno, California in 1952, Barney moved to Hawaii in 1970
after high school and his father's passing. During this time, the
Vietnam War was still raging. Barney's brother had already done two
tours in Vietnam, and he expected to be drafted at any time.
Regardless, he enrolled in the University of Hawaii and played
baseball. Barney then worked general construction until he decided it
wasn't the area he wanted to pursue, and instead seized opportunity by
the hand when he went to Wake on his first federal contract job.
In 1985 Barney spent a winter in Greenland on the Defense Early
Warning (DEW) Line and was then offered a job as Superintendent of
Administration for the DEW line, but declined because he didn't want to
spend another year in the Arctic. As a result, he left to work for his
first SBA 8(a) company in Hampton, Virginia where he helped grow the
company in revenue from $200,000 to $6 million a year.
In early 1988, Barney was offered a job with an SBA 8(a) company in
Louisville, Kentucky, and was promoted to Vice-President of Operations.
He moved into the Company's new offices in Panama City, Florida. Later,
he received a call from Mike Brown (Chugach's President and CEO from
1992 to 1999) who was working at that time for PMC, a subsidiary of
Arctic Slope Regional Corporation.
Mr. Brown received Barney's name from someone who worked with him at
Wake Island
[[Page 14869]]
years before. Based on that recommendation, Mike wanted Barney to
become the BOS contract Project Manager at Amchitka Island, on the
Aleutian Chain. Not wanting to move to Amchitka Island, Barney declined
the offer and went back to Florida. Five months later, Mr. Brown called
him again and offered him a job as Manager of Special Projects in
Anchorage.
Years later, Barney recalled with a laugh, ``This time the position
was in Anchorage, so I accepted, and one of the first jobs as Manager
of Special Projects in Anchorage was to go out to Amchitka Island and
evaluate the contract. So he kinda suckered me in with that one.''
While at PMC, the team he worked with received a Coast Guard
contract, the Wake Island contract, and the contract to run Midway
Island. By then he was Vice-President of Operations for PMC, when Mr.
Brown, who had gone to work for Chugach, along with Dusty Kaser
(Chugach's President and CEO from mid to late 1999), recruited him
again. His early work with Chugach Development Corporation (CDC) took
him to Valdez for six months, and then to King Salmon for a year, and
then to Adak, Alaska.
Barney recently recalled, ``During that time, the Chugach management
team started marketing the Wake Island contract and we took it away
from PMC in 1996. So you can see that Wake has been in my blood for a
while, then we received a contract for the Army Housing and Maintenance
at Fort Richardson/Fort Wainwright in 1995.''
By 1996, Barney became the Ops Manager for CDC and would often travel
to the contract locations and oversee the start-ups. When he left to
oversee the start-up of Wake for CAC, he returned full circle to the
site from where he started 16 years earlier.
Barney later explained, ``By then I had become the BOS Ops Manager
for CAC working for Dusty Kaser and the team started getting more and
more contracts. Then I was promoted to Vice-President of Ops for CAC,
and when I came back from starting up MacDill in late 1999, I was
offered the job as president of CAC.'' In May 2000, the Board of
Directors of Chugach promoted Barney to the position of President/CEO
and he served as both until 2009 when the position was split to select
a qualified Chugach shareholder to lead as CEO.
Mr. Speaker, Chugach has become a shining example of an Alaskan
Native Corporation that has succeeded and thrived, and one that has
provided tremendous benefits to its Native Shareholders and employees.
Barney deserves his full share of credit for this success.
There can be no clearer expression of the excellence that Barney, and
Chugach, have achieved over the years, than the words of Barney
himself. And so Mr. Speaker, I close with an additional quote from
Barney Uhart, a leader, a friend, and a champion of doing the right
thing, and of doing things right. He will be deeply missed and his
memory will stay with us forever.
``How have we gotten to where we are today? The reason is simple--the
people. All the people associated with Chugach are responsible for this
success. From the wisdom and direction of the Board of Directors; the
patience of the shareholders; the vision and perseverance of
management; and the dedication and drive of all the employees, this is
what has allowed us to succeed.''
Mr. Speaker, May God bless and hold Barney Uhart and may He bless his
family.
____________________
IN HONOR OF DIXON SAULS
______
HON. WALTER B. JONES
of north carolina
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. JONES. Mr. Speaker, in small towns across America, many special
events are happening all the time, including high school football. On
August 25, 2012, a special event happened in my small town of
Farmville, North Carolina. The ``R. Dixon Sauls Athletic Field'' at
Farmville Central High School was dedicated to Coach Dixon Sauls. Coach
Sauls, a Farmville native, coached football at the school from 1984 to
2007. Honor, integrity and class are the three words Athletic Director
Larry Williford used to describe Coach Sauls, and in his usual humble
way he accepted the honor and then began talking about everyone else
who meant something to the Jaguar program.
I have known Dixon Sauls since his youth. I have followed his journey
of life and sports. He graduated Valedictorian from Farmville High
School in 1966 where he was an outstanding Red Devil football player
who played quarterback and safety under Coach Elbert Moye. He graduated
from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 1970. He was
the first of two sons, born in 1948 to Meta King Moore Sauls of
Farmville, and Roland Dixon Sauls, a World War II veteran from Wayne
County. His father died suddenly in 1956 when Dixon was just 8 years
old and his brother, Fred, was just 5 years old. Dixon and Fred have
been my close friends for many years, and I am grateful for their
friendship. Today Coach Sauls is the devoted husband to Kathryn Finklea
Sauls and father to beautiful daughters, Lindsay and Robyn.
In 1984, Coach Sauls came back home to coach. The Jaguars won 11
football conference championships during his tenure, and the 2003 squad
was a state runner-up. He was the track coach for 19 years and the
athletic director for eight years. He touched many lives during that
time with his strong Christian faith, his stellar character and his
faithfulness to his team and school. He instilled courage, compassion,
respect and a hard work ethic in the young men he coached. Coach Sauls
was a major father figure for many of the players. There is no question
he left his mark on his players and his hometown for a lifetime.
It is teachers and coaches across our Nation like Dixon Sauls who are
helping to build a better America because of their hard work and
dedication. I remember one statement I read many years ago--``If you
want to touch the past, touch a rock; if you want to touch the present,
touch a flower; if you want to touch the future, touch a child.'' Dixon
Sauls, because of your commitment to young people, you have earned this
recognition. Your community, your family and friends join in
celebration of a job well done. Congratulations.
____________________
HONORING TAIWAN NATIONAL DAY
______
HON. LYNN A. WESTMORELAND
of georgia
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the people of
the Republic of China on Taiwan as their day of National Celebration,
October 10, 2012, approaches. This special day recognizes the founding
of the country.
I would also like to highlight the economic success of the Republic
of China on Taiwan over the last century. Beginning with very little
economic activity just a few decades ago, the Republic of China on
Taiwan has seen a profound increase and now has a dynamic economy which
is quickly becoming the envy of Asia.
Moreover, Taiwan has been a fair trading partner. Total trade with
the United States reached an all-time high in 2011, and Taiwan is now
our 10th largest goods-trading partner. Our relationship with Taiwan is
a model for fair trade between countries which benefits both sides, a
model we should highlight here today.
I urge my colleagues to join me in congratulating the people of the
Republic of China on Taiwan on their economic success and thanking them
for their continued efforts to work with the United States to foster
economic growth in our country. On the day of National Celebration the
people of both the United States and the Republic of China on Taiwan
have much to celebrate. We look forward to our continued relationship
with Taiwan, and wish them the very best.
____________________
NATIONAL OVARIAN CANCER AWARENESS MONTH
______
HON. JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY
of illinois
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of women's
health and in recognition of September as National Ovarian Cancer
Awareness Month. This year, it is estimated that 22,280 women will be
diagnosed with ovarian cancer and that 15,500 women, including 620 from
Illinois, will die from it. If ovarian cancer is diagnosed and treated
before the cancer spreads outside of the ovary, the five-year survival
rate is 93 percent. Unfortunately, only 15 percent of ovarian cancers
are found at that stage.
Too many women are losing their lives to ovarian cancer, the
deadliest of the gynecologic cancers. Because no screening or early
detection tests exist today, many women are unaware that they are
living with this disease until it is too late. We need to increase
public education about the early warning signs because, as
organizations such as the Ovarian Cancer National Alliance stress,
``until there's a test, awareness is best.'' Treating this disease
before it has spread beyond the ovary significantly increases the
survival rate.
[[Page 14870]]
At the same time, we need more than awareness--we need to continue the
medical research required to develop the screening tests that will save
women's lives.
Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month helps increase awareness of ovarian
cancer and focus attention on the continued need for innovative
research efforts to identify screening and early detection tests for
ovarian cancer.
I commend the Ovarian Cancer National Alliance, including their
Partner Member groups CCare Lynch Syndrome, Bright Pink, and FORCE of
Chicago, for their steadfast commitment to making women aware of the
risk factors, signs, and symptoms of ovarian cancer and for their
advocacy on behalf of women and families touched by this devastating
disease. I urge my colleagues to help make women aware of the potential
warning signs of this disease and to continue to support ovarian cancer
research efforts.
____________________
IN HONOR OF THE HONORABLE JUDGE DONNA CONGENI FITZSIMMONS
______
HON. DENNIS J. KUCINICH
of ohio
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of the Honorable
Judge Donna Congeni Fitzsimmons, who is the recipient of Recovery
Resources' Community Challenge 2012 Exemplar Award.
Recovery Resources is a community-based nonprofit organization with a
mission of helping people triumph over mental illness, alcoholism, drug
and other addictions. The Exemplar Award, established in 2006,
celebrates members of the local community who have demonstrated a long
and distinguished record of exemplary service and support for Recovery
Resources' Community Challenge program.
Judge Fitzsimmons graduated with a bachelor's degree from Boston
College and earned her law degree from George Washington University in
1976. She began her career in public service in 1977 as an Assistant
Cuyahoga County Prosecutor. In 1980, she became the first woman to be
appointed as Special Attorney in the U.S. Department of Justice,
Organized Crime Strike Force in Cleveland. During her tenure as Special
Attorney, Judge Fitzsimmons served as the lead prosecutor in the U.S.
v. Lonardo, Gallo, et al case, in which she successfully convicted the
former Cleveland Mafia boss, Angelo Lonardo in 1983. In 1984, she was
appointed Deputy Counsel to President Reagan's commission on Organized
Crime in Washington, DC and served in this position until 1985 when she
entered private practice at the law firm of Atter & Hadden.
On January 1, 1994, Judge Fitzsimmons assumed the role of Judge of
the Rocky River Municipal Court and has been serving on the bench
since. In 1997, she was appointed Chair of the Cuyahoga County Violence
Against Women Act Committee and as the Municipal Court representative
to the Cuyahoga County Criminal Justice Supervisory Services Board. As
her career continued, Judge Fitzsimmons would be appointed to the Ohio
Supreme Court's Court Security Committee, Criminal Procedure Committee
and Jury Service Committee.
In addition to her career, Judge Fitzsimmons is an active member of
the Northeast Ohio community. She has served on Fairview Hospital's
Community Advisory Board, as a trustee for Community Challenge, charter
member of the Fairview High School Alumni Hall of Fame and an honorary
chair for the Center for Prevention of Domestic Violence's Annual Break
the Silence Luncheon. She also established the Stalking Victim Support
Group and was a member of the Board of Trustees for the Leukemia and
Lymphoma Society.
Throughout her career, Judge Fitzsimmons has been recognized numerous
times. She has been named Cleveland's Italian Heritage Committee Public
Service Honoree 2011, ``Gem of Cleveland'' by the Junior League of
Cleveland, and has received the Columbian Award from the Federation of
Italian-American Societies of Northern Ohio. She has also been
recognized by the Women's Center of Greater Cleveland.
Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in congratulating Recovery
Resources' Community Challenge 2012 Exemplar Award winner, the
Honorable Judge Donna Congeni Fitzsimmons.
____________________
RECOGNIZING MIKE FLYNN, RECIPIENT OF THE WASHINGTONIAN OF THE YEAR
AWARD
______
HON. ADAM SMITH
of washington
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate Mike
Flynn on being honored with the Washingtonian of the Year award from
the Association of Washington Generals. This annual award is given to a
citizen of Washington State for outstanding community service.
Mr. Flynn worked for 24 years as the editor and publisher of the
Puget Sound Business Journal. In that position, he was widely
recognized throughout the region's business community. He led the
newspaper with a vision of not only reporting on the business sector,
but using the print medium to foster valuable relationships throughout
the community.
In 2006, Mr. Flynn retired from the Puget Sound Business Journal and
turned his focus to community and non-profit causes. In that time, he
has served on the boards of various community organizations. He
continues to be dedicated to building relationships, helping start-up
entrepreneurs, and expanding opportunities in rural areas.
Each year, the Association of Washington Generals awards the
Washingtonian of the Year award to someone who has shown special
dedication to serving Washington State. The Association is proud of the
unique characteristics of Washington State--ranging from our State's
outstanding physical beauty to the people who strive to make Washington
a better place to call home. The Washingtonian of the Year embodies the
Association's devotion to improving our State's communities.
Mr. Speaker, it is with great honor that I recognize Mike Flynn. His
dedication to serving our community is an inspiration to others.
____________________
CONGRATULATING ANNETTE STASSI
______
HON. RODNEY ALEXANDER
of louisiana
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride that I rise today
to congratulate Annette Stassi for being selected Queen Evangeline of
the International Acadian Festival in Iberville Parish. Annette is a
17-year-old senior at St. John High School in Plaquemine, LA.
The International Acadian Festival is sponsored by the Knights of
Columbus, Council #970 of Plaquemine, which is the third oldest Council
in Louisiana.
It is always outstanding to see the diligence with which the young
students of Louisiana work to give back and better their communities. I
have the highest confidence that Annette will succeed in whatever
endeavors she pursues.
I ask my colleagues to join me in passing good wishes to Annette
Stassi, her family, and the entire International Acadian Festival.
Annette is truly deserving of this recognition.
____________________
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
______
HON. KEVIN BRADY
of texas
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 585, I was
unavoidably detained and could not be present for last night's rollcall
vote on H.R. 5044, the Andrew P. Carpenter Tax Act. I am a cosponsor
and strong supporter of this legislation, which would provide tax
relief from any amounts of private educational loans forgiven for
service members who lost their lives in the line of duty since the
beginning of Operation Enduring Freedom in October of 2001. Had I been
present, I would have voted ``yes.''
____________________
IN SUPPORT OF WORKERS AND THE SERVICES THEY PROVIDE TO MEDICARE
PATIENTS
______
HON. LAURA RICHARDSON
of california
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commend America's home
healthcare workers who provide services to millions of patients,
including many Medicare beneficiaries, who are homebound and require
skilled care. These skilled and dedicated workers are among the unsung
heroes in the effort to contain the cost of healthcare without
sacrificing the quality of service provided to patients. Today, there
are
[[Page 14871]]
more than 40 million seniors in the United States, 12 percent of the
population. In 20 years, that number will increase to 70 million, or 20
percent of the population. More than 27 million of these individuals
are over age 70, and more than 1 million are over the age of 80.
Further, more than 43 million people in the United States, 19 percent
of the population, provide care for an elderly family member or friend.
Mr. Speaker, many healthcare treatments that were once offered only
in a hospital or a physician's office can now be safely, effectively,
and efficiently provided in patients' homes by skilled clinicians. Home
healthcare is generally less expensive, more convenient, and as
effective as care provided in a hospital or skilled nursing facility.
Home healthcare can serve as an intermediate level of care for patients
who have difficulty accessing outpatient care or who need intensive
assistance with an acute or chronic health problem.
Skilled home healthcare services funded under Medicare Part A and B
are safe, effective, affordable, clinically advanced, and patient
preferred.
A case study conducted by the Veterans' Administration (VA)
illustrates the benefits of home healthcare. The VA has provided
comprehensive primary care services to veterans in their homes since
1972 in an effort to keep patients in their homes and reduce inpatient
hospital days. The program was specifically designed to target patients
with complex chronic diseases through an interdisciplinary team of
health professionals. This program showed a reduction in inpatient
hospital days by 62 percent, and a reduction in nursing home bed days
by 88 percent. This translated into a reduction in the cost of care
from $38,000 to $29,000 per patient per year for patients enrolled in
the program (a 24 percent reduction).
The Medicare program continues to increase in importance in my home
state of California, where our senior population is increasing
dramatically. The percentage of Californians age 60 and older is
expected to grow from 6.4 percent in 2010 to 11.5 percent by 2030,
according to the California Department of Aging. In my district, there
are currently 63,053 Medicare recipients. I am committed to preserving
benefits for current recipients and those nearing retirement, while
guaranteeing the program's solvency for future generations of
Americans.
For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to join me in support of
Medicare's Skilled Home Healthcare Services act.
____________________
A TRIBUTE TO LYNETTE M. BROWN-SOW
______
HON. ROBERT A. BRADY
of pennsylvania
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Lynette
M. Brown-Sow for her dedication in the field of healthcare and service
to the city of Philadelphia. Lynette is a great example how one can use
their expertise to achieve success while also contributing to the
community.
As Vice President for Marketing and Government Relations at Community
College of Philadelphia, a position she has held since 1995, Lynette
has engaged communities, businesses, and governments in constructing
frameworks that promote progress and prosperity. Her outstanding work
was rewarded in 2009 when she was named Communicator of the Year.
Lynette has done significant work in the behavioral healthcare field.
She serves on the board of Directors of the Consortium, which named its
newest service center the Lynette M. Brown center of hope.
In 1991, Philadelphia Mayor Edward G. Rendell appointed Lynette
Deputy Mayor of Administration. In 2007, Lynette co-chaired
Philadelphia Mayor Michael A. Nutter's transition team and was
appointed as vice-chair of the Philadelphia Zoning Board of Adjustment.
Lynette is the founder and chairman of the Hardy Williams Education
Fund, a nonprofit organization that provides support for educational
endeavors and scholarships for people interested in careers in law,
government, or social action; and founder of L.M. Brown Management
Group, a certified minority/female-owned consultant firm.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to join me in honoring Lynette
M. Brown-Sow for her successful endeavors and major contributions to
the city of Philadelphia.
____________________
IN HONOR OF THE 75TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE NEW KENSINGTON AREA ROTARY CLUB
______
HON. MARK S. CRITZ
of pennsylvania
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. CRITZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the New Kensington Area
Rotary Club on the occasion of its 75th anniversary. Since its
inception, this great international service organization has operated
according to its motto of ``service above self,'' providing support to
our troops and to laudable philanthropic causes in southwestern
Pennsylvania and throughout the world.
In addition to providing support to local chapters of Meals on
Wheels, the Salvation Army, Habitat for Humanity and the YMCA, the New
Kensington Area Rotary Club has sponsored efforts to promote literacy
at local elementary schools, held Santa breakfasts for local needy
children, sent clothing, shoes and other needed materials to needy
communities in Appalachia and provided computers to St. Joseph's Indian
School on the Cheyenne Indian Reservation in South Dakota. It has also
worked to improve lives in disadvantaged and medically underserved
communities abroad, performing water projects in Uganda, supporting the
effort to eliminate the global Polio epidemic and participating in
national immunization days in India, Venezuela and elsewhere.
To honor the selfless efforts its members have made to promote peace
and prosperity throughout the world over the last 75 years, the New
Kensington Area Rotary Club will hold an Anniversary Gala on October
23rd at the Oakmont Country Club in Oakmont, Pennsylvania. It is my
most sincere hope that this event brings pride and fulfillment to all
those who have had a hand in making the New Kensington Area Rotary club
one of Southwestern Pennsylvania's most successful community service
organizations.
Mr. Speaker, I am extremely proud to represent the members of the New
Kensington Area Rotary Club in Congress; everyone should attempt to
emulate their abiding generosity and kindness. I have every expectation
that their great organization will continue to accomplish charitable
feats of international significance for years to come.
____________________
IN SUPPORT OF FUNDING FOR THE ORAL HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS IN HEALTH
CARE REFORM
______
HON. MIKE QUIGLEY
of illinois
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today because we can no longer
afford to treat oral health as separate from general health.
The mouth is a part of the body, and dental care must be part of
comprehensive care. Oral diseases and disorders can cause severe pain,
malnutrition, and even death if left untreated.
But because oral care has long been excluded from comprehensive care,
thousands of families and children are left without dental care.
Twenty-two percent of all out-of-pocket spending in the U.S. is spent
on dental care, and dental decay is the most common chronic childhood
disease.
Our workforce loses 164 million work hours each year due to dental
problems, and close to half of military recruits in 2008 were
ineligible for deployment due to dental issues.
This is unacceptable. We can, and must, do better than this.
We must preserve funding for the Maternal and Child Health Block
Grant, and fully fund the many oral health care provisions in Health
Care Reform. The mouth is part of the body, and must be treated as
such.
____________________
RECOGNIZING UNION COUNTY VOCATIONAL-TECHNICAL HIGH SCHOOL OF UNION
COUNTY, NEW JERSEY FOR BEING NAMED A BLUE RIBBON SCHOOL
______
HON. LEONARD LANCE
of new jersey
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. LANCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Union County
Vocational-Technical High School of Union County, New Jersey for being
named a Blue Ribbon School by the United States Department of
Education.
The Department of Education acknowledges schools where students
attain and maintain high academic goals. Union County Vocational-
Technical High School is proud example of academic excellence where
students have high levels of performance, stellar student
[[Page 14872]]
achievement, and where educators facilitate a strong learning
environment.
This is a prestigious award to receive and Union County Vocational-
Technical High School is proud example of academic excellence and
worthy of this national distinction.
____________________
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
______
HON. MIKE THOMPSON
of california
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, on September 19, 2012, I
missed rollcall vote No. 585. Had I been present, I would have voted in
the following manner:
Rollcall No. 585, ``aye.''
____________________
FREE SPEECH, UNJUSTIFIED VIOLENCE AND HYPOCRISY
______
HON. BARNEY FRANK
of massachusetts
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, the recent death of several
American diplomats is an outrageous example of wholly unjustified
violence that must be unconditionally condemned. The fact that some
people were angry because of what other people put into a movie does
not begin to be a justification for violence, even against those who
made the movie, and it is certainly, not remotely in any logical world,
an excuse for the murder of people wholly uninvolved in this.
The question of the judgment of the people who made that terrible
movie must be kept entirely separate from the question of whether or
not there was any justification for any of the violence that it caused.
The answer is, without any doubt, that there was not.
It is bad enough when some leaders of the Muslim world suggest that
there was some justification for killing people because someone felt
that their religion was insulted. This error is compounded by the
extraordinary hypocrisy involved when many of those who declaim what
they found insulting are themselves guilty of equal vituperation of
other religions and ethnic groups.
In an extraordinary, eloquent and thoughtful column in the New York
Times for September 19th, Thomas L. Friedman, a balanced commentator on
the Middle East who has often been very sympathetic to the legitimate
concerns of Muslim people, wrote an excellent column on the
essentiality of free speech, the absolutely unjustified nature of
violence, and the hypocrisy to which I just alluded--and to which, to
be honest, I was not paying enough attention until I read Mr.
Friedman's column.
As Mr. Friedman says, ``an insult--even one as stupid and ugly as the
anti-Islam video on YouTube that started all of this--does not entitle
people to go out and attack embassies and kill innocent diplomats. That
is not how a proper self-governing people behave. There is no excuse
for it. It is shameful.'' Mr. Friedman goes on to note, with regard to
some in the Muslim community who have been demanding that America
apologize for this, said ``they might want to look at the chauvinistic
bile that is pumped out by some of their own media . . . insulting
Shiites, Jews, Christians, Sufis and anyone else who is not a Sunni, or
fundamentalist, Muslim.''
Thomas Friedman's column should be very widely read, both because he
has earned the right to be taken very seriously on the crisis in the
Middle East, and because of its wisdom and eloquence.
[From the New York Times, Sept. 18, 2012]
Look in Your Mirror
(By Thomas Friedman)
On Monday, David D. Kirkpatrick, the Cairo bureau chief for
The Times, quoted one of the Egyptian demonstrators outside
the American Embassy, Khaled Ali, as justifying last week's
violent protests by declaring: ``We never insult any
prophet--not Moses, not Jesus--so why can't we demand that
Muhammad be respected?'' Mr. Ali, a 39-year-old textile
worker, was holding up a handwritten sign in English that
read: ``Shut Up America.'' ``Obama is the president, so he
should have to apologize!''
I read several such comments from the rioters in the press
last week, and I have a big problem with them. I don't like
to see anyone's faith insulted, but we need to make two
things very clear--more clear than President Obama's team has
made them. One is that an insult--even one as stupid and ugly
as the anti-Islam video on YouTube that started all of this--
does not entitle people to go out and attack embassies and
kill innocent diplomats. That is not how a proper self-
governing people behave. There is no excuse for it. It is
shameful. And, second, before demanding an apology from our
president, Mr. Ali and the young Egyptians, Tunisians,
Libyans, Yemenis, Pakistanis, Afghans and Sudanese who have
been taking to the streets might want to look in the mirror--
or just turn on their own televisions. They might want to
look at the chauvinistic bile that is pumped out by some of
their own media on satellite television stations and Web
sites or sold in sidewalk bookstores outside of mosques--
insulting Shiites, Jews, Christians, Sufis and anyone else
who is not a Sunni, or fundamentalist, Muslim. There are
people in their countries for whom hating ``the other'' has
become a source of identity and a collective excuse for
failing to realize their own potential.
The Middle East Media Research Institute, or Memri, was
founded in 1998 in Washington by Yigal Carmon, a former
Israeli government adviser on counterterrorism, ``to bridge
the language gap between the Middle East and the West by
monitoring, translating and studying Arab, Iranian, Urdu and
Pashtu media, schoolbooks, and religious sermons.'' What I
respect about Memri is that it translates not only the ugly
stuff but the courageous liberal, reformist Arab commentators
as well. I asked Memri for a sampler of the hate-filled
videos that appear regularly on Arab/Muslim mass media. Here
are some:
ON CHRISTIANS Hasan Rahimpur Azghadi of the Iranian Supreme
Council for Cultural Revolution: Christianity is ``a reeking
corpse, on which you have to constantly pour eau de cologne
and perfume, and wash it in order to keep it clean.'' http://
www.memritv.org/clip/en/1528.htm_July 20, 2007.
Sheik Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi: It is permissible to spill the
blood of the Iraqi Christians--and a duty to wage jihad
against them. http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/
5200.htm_April 14, 2011.
Abd al-Aziz Fawzan al-Fawzan, a Saudi professor of Islamic
law, calls for ``positive hatred'' of Christians. Al-Majd TV
(Saudi Arabia), http://www.memritv.org/clip/en1992.htm_Dec.
16, 2005.
ON SHIITES The Egyptian Cleric Muhammad Hussein Yaaqub:
``Muslim Brotherhood Presidential Candidate Mohamed Morsi
told me that the Shiites are more dangerous to Islam than the
Jews.'' www.memritv.org/clip/en13466.htm_June 13, 2012.
The Egyptian Cleric Mazen al-Sirsawi: ``If Allah had not
created the Shiites as human beings, they would have been
donkeys.'' http://www.memritv.org/clip/en13101.htm_Aug. 7,
2011.
The Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan video series: ``The Shiite is a
Nasl [Race/Offspring] of Jews.'' http://www.memri.org/report/
en/0/0/0/0/0/51/6208.htm_March 21, 2012.
ON JEWS Article on the Muslim Brotherhood's Web site
praises jihad against America and the Jews: ``The Descendants
of Apes and Pigs.'' http://www.memri.org/report/en10/0/0/0/0/
51/6656.htm_Sept. 7, 2012.
The Pakistani cleric Muhammad Raza Saqib Mustafai: ``When
the Jews are wiped out, the world would be purified and the
sun of peace would rise on the entire world.'' http://
www.menuiorg/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/51/6557.htm_Aug. 1, 2012.
Dr. Ismail Ali Muhammad, a senior Al-Azhar scholar: The
Jews, ``a source of evil and harm in all human societies.''
http://www.memri.org/report/en10/0/0/0/0/51/6086.htm_Feb.
14, 2012.
ON SUFIS A shrine venerating a Sufi Muslim saint in Libya
has been partly destroyed, the latest in a series of attacks
blamed on ultraconservative Salafi Islamists. http://
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19380083_Aug. 26, 2012.
As a Jew who has lived and worked in the Muslim world, I
know that these expressions of intolerance are only one side
of the story and that there are deeply tolerant views and
strains of Islam espoused and practiced there as well. Theirs
are complex societies.
That's the point. America is a complex society, too. But
let's cut the nonsense that this is just our problem and the
only issue is how we clean up our act. That Cairo protester
is right: We should respect the faiths and prophets of
others. But that runs both ways. Our president and major
newspapers consistently condemn hate speech against other
religions. How about yours?
____________________
IN REMEMBRANCE OF SAUL MINTZ
______
HON. RODNEY ALEXANDER
of louisiana
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and memory
of Mr. Saul Mintz, whose ardent presence as a family man, business man,
and philanthropist in Monroe, LA, will be sorely missed.
Mr. Mintz was brilliant in business, opening the very successful
Strauss Interests with his wife, Jean, many years ago, but he will be
remembered more for his community philanthropy than his genius for the
market. A family man and mentor by nature, many of his crowning
philanthropic works bettered the lives of children in 12 parishes in
our area.
[[Page 14873]]
The Children's Coalition for Northeast Louisiana received their first
donation 15 years ago from the Mintz family, and Mr. Mintz was with the
Coalition every step of the way thereafter, lending not only financial,
but also social and philosophical support. Similarly, he and his wife
were steadfast supporters of the Strauss Theatre and were integral to
the establishment of a children's theatre, among many other
institutions.
In reflecting on his life, Mr. Mintz said ``I don't think too many
people have been submitted to so many opportunities as I. So, it would
be irresponsible if I didn't take advantage of what God [has] given me
to try to leave a better future for others.'' His grateful spirit and
humble generosity have won him a spot in the hearts of everyone who
knew him, and he serves as a reminder of the responsibility that we all
have to give what we can and take care of one another in our families
and communities.
When we look back on Mr. Mintz's life, we see a life of giving. Not
only did he personally do everything he could to better our community,
he also preached about the joy of giving generously and helping others
to anyone who would listen. For his three children, 10 grandchildren,
one great grandchild, and for all of us, the way in which Mr. Mintz led
his life should be emulated. We are all grateful to have known him and
will never forget what a beautiful and civic-minded person he was.
To say Mr. Mintz left his fingerprint on the world would be an
understatement. Countless lives have been changed for the better by his
efforts, and he will stay in the hearts of Louisianians forever.
____________________
RECOGNIZING TERRE JONES ON THE OCCASION OF HIS RETIREMENT FROM THE WOLF
TRAP FOUNDATION FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS
______
HON. GERALD E. CONNOLLY
of virginia
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise along with my
colleagues, Rep. Frank Wolf and Rep. Jim Moran, to recognize and
commend Terrence D. ``Terre'' Jones on the occasion of his retirement
after 17 years of distinguished service as President and CEO of the
Wolf Trap Foundation for the Performing Arts. Terre's career in the
performing arts spans more than 40 years, and he leaves a rich legacy
both on and off the stage that will benefit the arts community and
Northern Virginia for years to come.
During his tenure, Terre helped fulfill and then expand Wolf Trap's
mission of providing a world-class platform for aspiring and
accomplished artists alike at the majestic Filene Center and the 18th
century Barns at Wolf Trap. Thanks to his innovative spirit, the
Foundation continues to set new attendance and fund-raising records. As
the guiding force behind America's only National Park for the
Performing Arts, Terre has positioned Wolf Trap as a leader not only in
the arts, but also in connecting education, technology and
environmental stewardship through the arts and inspiring passion for
those pursuits in a new generation. And though its artistic scope is on
the national and global stages, Terre has made sure that Wolf Trap also
is a resource for our local communities.
In 2003, Terre helped lead the fund-raising effort to establish a
National Center for Education on the Wolf Trap campus. Wolf Trap's
education programs focus on early childhood arts education and also
serve as a resource for the entire community, particularly local school
children. More recently, Wolf Trap received a competitively awarded
grant from the U.S. Department of Education to demonstrate the
effectiveness of the arts in advancing STEM (Science, Technology,
Engineering and Math) learning for young children.
Terre also has strengthened Wolf Trap's connection to its
environmental roots. In 2007, he launched the Foundation's ``Go Green''
program with the stretch goal of making Wolf Trap carbon neutral. To
date, the program has decreased the park's carbon footprint by 20% and
cut landfill waste in half. Wolf Trap has been designated as a Climate
Friendly Park by the EPA and National Park service. Terre also led the
effort to establish the National Council on the Arts and Environment
and a partnership with the Aspen Institute on a nationwide Summit on
the Arts and the Environment.
Prior to taking the helm at Wolf Trap, Terre served as CEO and
artistic Director of the Krannert Center for the Performing Arts at the
University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana. He previously served as
General Manager of Clowes Memorial Hall in Indianapolis, Assistant Dean
of the College of Fine Arts at Butler University, and he also founded
the Bradford Repertory Theater in Vermont.
Throughout his distinguished career, Terre has received local and
national recognition. He received the Distinguished Alumni Achievement
Award from his alma mater, the University of Kansas, was named
Washingtonian of the Year in 2006 by Washingtonian Magazine, and was
recognized by his peers with the Fan Taylor Distinguished Service Award
from the Association of Performing Arts Presenters. During his tenure
as Foundation president, Wolf Trap also has received numerous awards
and accolades.
Beyond these accomplishments, we want to recognize Terre's exemplary
role not just as an arts advocate and executive, but also as an
individual. When asked in an interview what he loves most about his
job, he said: ``People--I don't think you could do this job if you
didn't enjoy people and didn't like being around people.'' We can all
recognize and appreciate Terre's unequivocal commitment to his craft
and our community.
Mr. Speaker, Terre Jones has left a tangible, lasting imprint on the
rich history of our National Park for the Performing Arts, and his
legacy will continue to inspire a new generation of artists. We wish
Terre, his wife, Polly, and their family the continued success as he
enters this next act of his life, and we ask our colleagues to join us
in expressing our appreciation for his tremendous contributions to the
arts, our nation and the Northern Virginia community.
____________________
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
______
HON. AL GREEN
of texas
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was unavoidably
detained and missed the following votes:
1. H.R. 5044, the Andrew Carpenter Tax Act, as amended. Had I been
present, I would have voted ``yes'' on this bill.
2. H.R. 5912, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to prohibit
the use of public funds for political party conventions, and to provide
for the return of previously distributed funds for deficit reduction,
as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on this bill.
____________________
IN HONOR OF ARMENIAN STATEHOOD DAY
______
HON. DENNIS J. KUCINICH
of ohio
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Armenian
Statehood Day. As the Armenian community in Greater Cleveland gathers
to celebrate, I join them in appreciation of their rich history and
culture.
September 21, 1991, marks the day that Armenia restored its
independence by becoming the first republic proclaiming independence
from the Soviet Union. Armenia was originally established by the
Artashisian Dynasty in 189 BC. Following hundreds of years of
invasions, the last Armenian kingdom fell at the onset of the 14th
century. The first Armenian democratic republic was not established
until 1918, which followed the Armenian Genocide in 1915.
Unfortunately, just two years later, in 1920, the Armenians were
occupied by the Soviet Union until they declared sovereignty in 1991.
Cleveland is home to a strong Armenian community which has succeeded
in preserving their heritage while wholeheartedly supporting American
society, thereby contributing to the unique richness and diversity of
our national culture.
Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor and celebration
of Armenian Statehood Day. May every American of Armenian heritage hold
memories of their past forever in their hearts, remembering the day
that their forbears gained their freedom.
____________________
RECOGNIZING MASTER SERGEANT MICHAEL HUNTER
______
HON. ADAM SMITH
of washington
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor Master Sergeant
Michael S. Hunter of the 1st Special Forces Group from Joint Base
Lewis-McChord, Washington, who has
[[Page 14874]]
received the Silver Star and the Bronze Star with Valor. These medals
were awarded by Major General Jeffrey Buchanan, I Corps Deputy
Commanding General on September 12, 2012.
Master Sergeant Hunter performed many heroic acts during his
deployment to Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. He
helped execute a joint raid with 28 Afghan commandos and three other
American special operators. Master Sergeant Hunter put himself in
danger to protect others and led the way for the U.S. and Afghan
special operators. In June 2010, he delivered medical assistance to two
injured soldiers during a long 16 hour firefight.
His courageous actions earned him the Silver Star and Bronze Star
with Valor. The Silver Star is the Nation's third highest medal for
combat valor and ranked fifth in military awards. Master Sergeant
Hunter's award is also the highest for combat valor that is not unique
to a specific service branch.
Mr. Speaker, it is with great honor that I recognize Master Sergeant
Hunter for receiving the Silver Star and the Bronze Star. I ask my
colleagues to join me in expressing our great appreciation for his
dedication to protect and serve our country.
____________________
IN CELEBRATION OF THE UNVEILING OF A STATUE OF FREDERICK DOUGLASS IN
THE UNITED STATES CAPITOL
______
HON. SANFORD D. BISHOP, JR.
of georgia
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor an
important milestone for our nation's Capitol. The statue of
abolitionist leader, Frederick Douglass, will soon grace the halls of
the United States Capitol. This effigy will serve as a reminder of the
hard work of this great American and civil rights leader who was
committed to the freedom and equal rights of all Americans.
Frederick Douglass is often called the father of the civil rights
movement. Born a slave in Maryland around 1818, he taught himself how
to read and write at a young age despite the ban forbidding slaves to
be literate. It was by reading newspapers and political writings that
Douglass developed his ideology on the opposition of slavery.
Douglass attempted to escape from slavery twice before he succeeded
on his third attempt with the help of his future wife, Anna Murray.
After they married in 1838 and settled in New Bedford, Massachusetts,
Douglass became a regular lecturer in opposition of slavery. He also
spoke out in support of women's rights. With the help of his
bestselling autobiographies, Frederick Douglass quickly became one of
the most famous African Americans in the country.
During the Civil War, Douglass gave council to President Abraham
Lincoln and President Andrew Johnson on the treatment of black soldiers
and the importance of black suffrage. After the war, he was appointed
to several political positions and, as Victoria Woodhull's running mate
on the Equal Rights Party ticket in 1872, became the first African
American nominated for the office of Vice President of the United
States. Douglass continued to fight for the rights of African-
Americans, women, and minority groups until his death in 1895.
To honor the life and accomplishments of this abolitionist, human
rights and women's rights activist, orator, author, journalist,
publisher, and social reformer, the United States Congress has approved
a bill that would allow the District of Columbia to display his statue
in our Capitol. The statue, designed and completed by architect Steven
Weitzman, was commissioned by D.C. to present to the Capitol as a gift.
Frederick Douglass had said, ``If there is no struggle, there is no
progress.'' Despite his many struggles in the bonds of slavery, he rose
to prominence through his determination and fervor. His vision for
America was that all Americans would be equal and free of
discrimination and he worked tirelessly to share this vision with
others and to help it become a reality. The progress we have made as a
nation would not have been possible without the leadership and
influence of great leaders like Frederick Douglass.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the people of the Second Congressional
District of Georgia, I ask my colleagues to join me today in paying
tribute to a strong leader and inspiring visionary, Frederick Douglass.
It is my hope that all the visitors to our Capitol will see his statue
and remember all the valuable contributions made to our nation by this
great human rights advocate.
____________________
CELEBRATING THE NEW JERSEY COUNCIL FOR THE HUMANITIES
______
HON. RUSH D. HOLT
of new jersey
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor the forty
years of service that the New Jersey Council for the Humanities has
provided for my constituents in the twelfth congressional district and
for residents throughout New Jersey. It is only appropriate that I take
time in advance of October, National Arts and Humanities Month, to
honor the important work that the Council does to engage New Jerseyans
in discussions of history, literature, and culture that help residents
reflect on our past and think critically about our future.
When Congress and President Johnson created the National Endowment
for the Humanities (NEH) in 1965, they laid the groundwork for
improving the study of the diverse heritage, traditions, and history of
our nation. Indeed, the NEH has opened many doors for scholars and
cultural institutions such as museums, libraries, and archives to
further their research and share their findings. Since its founding,
the NEH has helped Americans better understand America.
Yet, upon signing the Arts and Humanities Act of 1965, President
Johnson remarked wisely ``. . . these actions, and others soon to
follow, cannot alone achieve our goals. To produce true and lasting
results, our States and municipalities, our schools and our great
private foundations, must join forces with us.'' In 1972, Congress
heeded President Johnson's insight, and amended the Arts and Humanities
Act to establish state Councils that would facilitate public
programming unique to each state.
The New Jersey Council for the Humanities began its efforts in 1972
to provide an endless stream of programming that invites New Jerseyans
to consider the past and think creatively about our future. By
providing financial support for conferences, documentaries,
publications, lectures, and forums, the Council offers the opportunity
to learn more about our shared history and the traditions of others
without cost to New Jersey residents. The New Jersey Council for the
Humanities enables New Jerseyans to become consumers of history,
informed commentators on our present, and architects of our future.
As a former educator, I am grateful for the New Jersey Council for
the Humanities' dedication to enhancing history education in our
schools. In an age of narrowing school curriculum across our country,
arts, foreign language, history and other subjects have been pushed
aside by the intense focus on tests and tested subjects. To help keep
history alive in our classrooms, the Council offers an annual seminar
known as the ``Teacher Institute'' for New Jersey primary and secondary
school teachers to refresh and deepen their knowledge on key moments
and themes of our past. The Teacher Institute has helped over 3,700
educators gain exposure to rich new content and benefit their students
by bringing their knowledge back to the classroom. Thanks to the New
Jersey Council for the Humanities, we are graduating more well-rounded
and historically aware students.
In addition to enhancing the appreciation of humanities in the
classroom, the Council promotes lifelong learning in public and private
life. The New Jersey Council for the Humanities' extensive programming
not only benefits school teachers and their students, but also writers,
publishers, hospitals, libraries, civics groups, and colleges and
universities in every corner of New Jersey.
I have heard from many of my constituents who inform me that the
Council makes our community a better place to live. One resident in
Monroe who works with senior citizens, for example, expressed to me
that the state humanities councils advance ``the mental and
intellectual well-being of our seniors.'' A local middle school teacher
shared with me that despite having served on the faculty of a major
research university, her knowledge to share with students ``was
deepened'' by the Council's Teacher Institute. Others have conveyed the
depth and strength of the Council's Horizon Speaker's Bureau, which
provides educational lectures on topics ranging from the legendary
Jersey Devil to Shakespeare's Hamlet, and to the U.S. Constitution for
thousands of New Jerseyans every year. Simply put by a constituent from
Lawrence, ``the state [C]ouncil is the neighborhood face of the
humanities.''
My own experiences with the New Jersey Council for the Humanities
have paralleled the positive testimonials constituents have shared
[[Page 14875]]
with me. Each year, I eagerly await the Council's announcement of the
Book, Teacher of the Year, and Lifetime Achievement in the Humanities
Awards. By honoring the recipients of these distinctions, the New
Jersey Council recognizes exemplary work in the public humanities that
has made a significant and lasting difference in the lives of New
Jerseyans. Previous award winners include Dr. Kwame Anthony Appiah in
2011 for his book The Honor Code: How Moral Revolutions Happen, Sylvia
Nasar in 1999 for A Beautiful Mind, and Neil Baldwin in 1996 for
Edison: Inventing the Century. I am proud to display in my
Congressional office a collection of many of the past New Jersey
Council for the Humanities Award winners, including works by twelfth
congressional district constituents such as historian James McPherson,
novelist Joyce Carol Oates, and the late poet and translator Robert
Fagles.
The New Jersey Council has been dedicated for forty years to
promoting public knowledge and love of New Jersey's rich history and
culture. I look forward to the years to come when the New Jersey
Council for the Humanities will continue to build upon its activities
of the past forty years and continue to support and foster the exchange
of ideas that creates a thoughtful and engaged society.
____________________
HONORING CITY OF CORAL SPRINGS
______
HON. THEODORE E. DEUTCH
of florida
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. DEUTCH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remember September 11
alongside the city of Coral Springs, Florida as they host a memorial
service to honor the victims of September 11th. Though eleven years
have passed since this horrific attack on our nation, the attack is no
less devastating today.
Each year since the attacks, dedicated members of the Coral Springs
community have worked to plan memorial services to remember those lost
and honor their memory. It is truly an honor to recognize the community
and this important initiative on this day. Seeing communities across
the country come together to remember the victims is one of the few
bright developments to rise out of this great tragedy.
In collaboration with generous donors and volunteers, members of the
Coral Springs community built the September 11th Memorial at the Coral
Springs NW Regional Library in 2001. This memorial was dedicated to
those lost in New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia, and honors the
residents who lost their immediate family members.
I applaud the efforts of the city of Coral Springs in commemorating
the September 11th tragedy, and feel blessed to have been able to
participate in the 5K Inaugural Walk to Remember in the city of Coral
Springs this year. I thank the community for their dedication. My
family and I join with the families in Coral Springs and throughout the
country to remember those we lost on September 11, 2001.
____________________
IN HONOR OF MR. JOSEPH HAMMELL
______
HON. ROBERT E. ANDREWS
of new jersey
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mr. Joseph Hammell, a
retiring veteran who has served in three separate branches of the U.S.
Military.
Mr. Hammell began his career with the United States Marine Corps in
1969 when he was 17 years old. After training, he was stationed at Camp
Pendleton, California before being deployed to Okinawa, Japan, the
Philippines, and Vietnam. After his service with the Marine Corps ended
in 1974, Mr. Hammell joined the U.S. Army. During his time in the Army,
Mr. Hammell was stationed at Fort Dix, New Jersey where he worked as an
instructor at the base's truck driving school. In 1977, he left the
Army, but came back after 14 years to join the New Jersey Air National
Guard. In the Air National Guard he was a member of the 170th Air
Refueling Wing. Within the Wing he served as an equipment operator for
the 170th Civil Engineering Squadron. After the 170th Air Refueling
Wing disbanded, he was absorbed into the 108th Air Refueling Wing where
he continued his service as an equipment operator. He served within the
108th Air Refueling Wing as a member of the 108th Civil Engineering
Squadron until 2007 as a work controller. He then moved to the 108th
Safety Office where he finished out his career as the 108th Ground
Safety Manager.
In addition to his service, Mr. Hammell is an active member of the
American Legion and the Marine Corps League where he is a tireless
advocate for homeless veterans. Specifically, he has worked with and
supported the Stand Down for Homeless Veterans for 16 years, a
nonprofit organization that assists male veterans who are struggling
due to mental and/or physical ailments, addictions, homelessness and/or
other personal issues. It helps veterans regain their lives through a
multi-tiered program, transitional living, and collaborative efforts.
Mr. Speaker, the extraordinary commitment of this New Jersey veteran
should not go unrecognized. I join all of South Jersey in expressing
our profound gratitude and thanks for Mr. Hammell as he retires from
his more than 42 years of remarkable service to our country.
____________________
HONORING THE SERVICE OF ADMIRAL KIRKLAND DONALD
______
HON. JOE COURTNEY
of connecticut
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today, along with my friend and
fellow co-chair of the bipartisan House Shipbuilding Caucus,
Representative Rob Wittman of Virginia, to honor Admiral Kirkland
Donald, U.S. Navy, as he prepares to retire upon completion of more
than 37 years of faithful service to our Nation.
Admiral Donald has held the position of Director, Naval Nuclear
Propulsion Program (Naval Reactors), for the last eight years. During
his illustrious career, he played a pivotal role in ensuring that
nuclear-powered warships continued to meet our global commitments in
defense of our Nation's security.
Throughout his many years of service, Admiral Donald distinguished
himself at the tip of the Navy's spear. He served as the Commanding
Officer of the nuclear-powered attack submarine, USS Key West,
Commander of the elite Submarine Development Squadron Twelve, and
Commander of NATO's Submarine Forces in Europe. Other highlights
include tours at the Bureau of Naval Personnel, the Joint Staff, and as
Commander of all US Submarine Forces.
As his time in Washington has shown, Admiral Donald's accomplishments
do not end with his excellence as an undersea commander. Nuclear-
powered warships have safely steamed over 150 million miles, and
operated for more than 6,400 reactor years without a reactor accident.
The last 20 million miles and 800 reactor-years have been achieved
under Admiral Donald's superb leadership overseeing more than 100
operational nuclear reactors.
Admiral Donald has been particularly passionate about our submarine
force and the investment in our current and future undersea programs.
At a time when submarines are playing an increasingly vital role in our
national security, Admiral Donald has been at the forefront of making
the case for the need for robust construction of new Virginia class
submarines--and has kept a steady hand on this crucial program at a
time when a cooperative effort between the Navy and our shipbuilding
reduced the cost and construction schedule of each new submarine. At a
time when every corner of our government is challenged to find savings
to ensure the most efficient use of taxpayer dollars, Admiral Donald
has helped to guide this shining example of acquisition excellence.
Today, these incredible submarines are deployed worldwide, from the
arctic to the equator, protecting Americans and our values. Their
missions would not be possible without the ships' nuclear propulsion
plants, impeccably designed and built by Admiral Donald and his team. I
can speak from personal experience about the passion that Admiral
Donald brings to this incredible responsibility.
When I first came to Congress in 2007 as a new member of the House
Armed Services Committee, Admiral Donald and his team were among the
first in my office in those early days to help educate me on the
importance of our nuclear powered submarines and the value they bring
to our nation. In particular, he invited me to join an ``Ice
Expedition'' on board the USS Alexandria--a two day voyage under the
Arctic ice which was an opportunity to see firsthand the capability of
the these extraordinary vessels.
Further, Admiral Donald oversaw the final design and construction of
the nuclear propulsion plant for the Nation's next-generation aircraft
carrier class--the first new aircraft carrier design in over 40 years.
Owing much to his leadership, the USS Gerald R. Ford propulsion plant
will triple the electrical power available for transformational
technology, reduce reactor compartment manning by nearly 50 percent,
[[Page 14876]]
and increase ship operational availability by nearly 25 percent.
As Director, Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, Admiral Donald's
commitment to environmental stewardship and public health and safety
helped foster the highest degree of public trust. He worked tirelessly
to develop and implement a robust process of preparing the nation's
spent naval nuclear fuel to be stored safely for centuries. His
foresight and execution give the American people great confidence that
the nuclear Navy will continue to be safe and environmentally
responsible for generations to come.
Mr. Speaker, Admiral Donald has been a thoughtful, forward-looking
and hands-on leader for our nation's Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program,
and his stewardship of this highly effective, responsive and world-
class organization has set an example for all our nation's civilian and
military leaders. Along with Representative Wittman and my colleagues
in the House of Representatives, I wish him ``Fair Winds and Following
Seas'' as he completes his honorable and distinguished service in the
U.S. Navy, and wish he and his wife Diane the best as they embark on
the next chapter of their lives.
____________________
IN RECOGNITION OF THE BLACK SHIELD POLICE ASSOCIATION
______
HON. DENNIS J. KUCINICH
of ohio
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the Black
Shield Police Association, BSPA, an organization of dedicated minority
police officers that are committed to serving our communities
throughout the Greater Cleveland area.
The BSPA was originally founded in 1946 as the Shield Club, which was
designed to assist black officers in maintaining and strengthening
self-esteem within an atmosphere of indifference. The Shield Club was a
social club for black officers who were, at the time, prohibited from
joining organizations that were for white police officers. In 1969, the
Shield Club was officially chartered as a non-profit organization and
was the third oldest black police organization in the U.S. The Shield
Club officially became the Black Shield Police Association in 1978. By
2000, the National Black Police Association expanded to an
international organization with members in the United Kingdom, Canada
and the Bahamas. The BSPA supports the philosophy of community
policing, the calls for a true and cooperative partnership between the
community and the police for safer communities.
The Black Shield Police Association's Annual Dinner and Dance
Scholarship Awards Banquet is being held at Cleveland's Doubletree
Hotel on October 13, 2012. The theme of this year's event is ``Still
moving FORWARD while celebrating 66 years of Unity.'' Special tributes
will be made to retirees Lieutenant John Cole, Sergeant Hughleam
Medlea, Sergeant Andre Douglas, Sergeant Randall Bergeon, Police
Officer Eugene Preston, Police Officer Arthur Fantroy, Police Officer
Sandra Robertson, Police Officer Kevin Martin and Police Officer Paul
Jones.
Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in recognizing the Black
Shield Police Association and its important role in the Greater
Cleveland community.
____________________
RECOGNIZING THE SEATTLE CHAPTER OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ASIAN
AMERICAN PROFESSIONALS
_____
HON. ADAM SMITH
of washington
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the Seattle,
Washington chapter of the National Association of Asian American
Professionals (NAAAP--Seattle) for being named the Chapter of the Year.
The NAAAP--Seattle chapter bested twenty-seven others from across the
United States and Canada to receive the honor.
This is the first time NAAAP--Seattle has been named Chapter of the
Year. The organization stood out among the other chapters and associate
chapters for its exceptional organizational involvement, membership
development, and programs.
The NAAAP was established in 1979 and is now the largest and fastest
growing Asian American professional non-profit organization in North
America. Members are not required to be pan-Asian and come from all
parts of the professional community.
The NAAAP works to empower leaders and connect professionals in the
same region. In addition, members volunteer in the community. NAAAP--
Seattle has hosted many charitable events, including a dragonboat
racing fundraiser to benefit the Northwest Lions Foundation for Sight &
Hearing, an event at Seattle Symphony to raise money for children's
literacy programs, volunteering with Habitat for Humanity, a Walk for
Rice fundraiser for the Asian Counseling & Referral Service, and many
others. NAAAP--Seattle also hosts career fairs and professional
development seminars throughout the Puget Sound.
Mr. Speaker, it is with great honor that I recognize the Seattle
chapter of the National Association of Asian American Professionals.
The organization's work to make meaningful contributions to government,
education, business and society inspires leaders throughout the
business community.
____________________
HONORING CHAIRMAN STANLEY CROOKS, SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
_____
HON. BETTY McCOLLUM
of minnesota
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to
honor the life of Chairman Stanley Crooks of the Shakopee Mdewakanton
Sioux Community. With the passing of Chairman Crooks on Saturday,
August 25, the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, Minnesota and
America lost a transformative and highly respected leader.
Chairman Crooks lived his life serving our nation, the residents of
Minnesota and the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community. A proud veteran
of the United States Navy, Chairman Crooks was first elected chairman
of the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community in 1992. During his decades
of leadership, he earned national renown for his eloquent and effective
defense of tribal sovereignty.
Chairman Crooks never missed an opportunity to reach out to less
fortunate communities or to speak out on their behalf. He touched lives
in a way that provided hope, opportunity, and dignity to Native
American families and communities in need. He was a visionary and a
proud leader, and his mentorship inspired a generation that will
continue his work for Indian country. Those who knew him well share a
tremendous appreciation, respect and fondness for him. I am grateful
that he was always ready to lend a hand and to share with me his
experience and wisdom regarding tribal issues.
Mr. Speaker, the entire Congressional delegation from Minnesota
extends our deepest sympathies to Chairman Crooks' family, including
Cheryl, his wife of 48 years, as well as the entire Shakopee
Mdewakanton Sioux Community, and all who encountered his generosity and
profound spirit. Please join us in honoring the life of this great
leader.
____________________
HONORING CITY MANAGER MARIA DADIAN
_____
HON. LINDA T. SANCHEZ
of california
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
recognize Maria Dadian and her 18 years of public service to the people
of Southern California.
Maria's devotion to public service is long-standing. In 1975, Maria
began her career in municipal government working for the City of South
El Monte. She later accepted the position of Parks and Recreation
Director with the City of Hawaiian Gardens, and after four years was
promoted to Assistant to the City Administrator. Following her 11 years
of continuous service to Hawaiian Gardens, she was named interim
Executive Director of the Coalition for Youth Development, the city's
newly established non-profit organization. During her municipal career
she has been contracted by both public entities and private businesses
to organize and implement public safety and recreation programs.
Since joining the City of Artesia management team in 1994, Maria has
worked tirelessly to ensure Artesia remains safe for its residents and
economically vibrant for its business community. During her time as
Assistant City Manager, Maria oversaw the City's Public Safety
programs, Capital Projects, Community Development projects, and grant
program. On top of that, Maria also steered Artesia's Parks
[[Page 14877]]
and Recreation and Public Works departments. On November 20, 2000, she
was appointed City Manager, and redoubled her efforts to serve the
citizens and businesses of Artesia.
Over the years, Maria never stopped working to improve Artesia
through redevelopment, encouraging private sector investment, and
diversifying and expanding Artesia's economic base. As a result,
Artesia flourished under Maria's tenure. This includes an historic
district renovation and restoration project, as well as numerous
projects devoted to public infrastructure and facilities, downtown
revitalization, and developmental and housing assistance. In short,
Artesia has seen a renaissance with Maria as City Manager.
I commend Maria Dadian for her many years of outstanding public
service and dedication to the City of Artesia and the community. We
need more public servants like Maria Dadian. Artesia would not be the
community it is today without her.
____________________
ON THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CREATION OF THE OFFICE OF THE U.S. TRADE
REPRESENTATIVE
______
HON. DAVE CAMP
of michigan
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, fifty years ago this October, Congress
directed the President to appoint a Special Representative for Trade
Negotiations to lead the Administration's efforts to expand global
trade. As a result, for the past 50 years, the U.S. Trade
Representative has led the Executive Branch in aggressively opening
markets to American-made goods and services and promoting economic
growth and job creation through trade. USTR's leadership has
contributed in significant ways to the tremendous economic growth that
the United States enjoyed over the past 50 years and firmly established
our global economic leadership.
Across Administrations, USTR has maintained an admirable bipartisan
and close working relationship with Congress. I've always said that the
very best people become the U.S. Trade Representative. The 50-year
history of USTR demonstrates that the men and women who have served as
the U.S. Trade Representative are strategic thinkers and tough
negotiators--the kind of intelligent, can-do people who have
demonstrated their ability to advance our trade agenda. And the
dedicated USTR employees who serve with them also exhibit that
intellectual rigor and high caliber. I'm proud of all that they have
accomplished in opening markets and enforcing our rights under our
trade agreements.
USTR is uniquely nimble, lean, and effective. In a world that has
changed dramatically over the past 50 years, USTR's small size,
independence, and direct access to the President have been critical to
its success. With these attributes intact, I am confident that USTR
will continue to fulfill its mission effectively and commendably for
the next 50 years.
Today, I honor USTR on its 50th anniversary, the 16 men and women who
have served as the U.S. Trade Representative, and the thousands who
have proudly served under them. I wish USTR the best for another 50
years.
____________________
CONGRATULATIONS TO JASON C. YUAN
______
HON. RANDY HULTGREN
of illinois
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. HULTGREN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate Taiwan's Ambassador
to the United States, Jason C. Yuan, for his service in the United
States and his recent appointment as Taiwan's National Security
Advisor.
I also would like to wish Taiwan a happy anniversary for her upcoming
anniversary on October 10th. Known as double ten day, this will mark
Taiwan's 101st year.
With so much turmoil in the world today, the region along the Taiwan
Strait is one of the important places where hostilities are decreasing.
Taiwan has forged constructive partnerships with China, and there is a
working peace between the two countries. Much of this can be credited
to President Ma's leadership and the policies he has instilled.
Since President Ma became president, there have been numerous daily
flights between the two countries, large increases in tourism between
China and Taiwan, and a pooling of joint resources to reduce crime
along the Taiwan Strait.
Happy anniversary to Taiwan, and thanks to President Ma for his part
in maintaining peace and stability in Southeast Asia.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO HONOR FLIGHT OREGON
______
HON. GREG WALDEN
of oregon
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the 48 World War II
veterans from Oregon who will be visiting their memorial tomorrow in
Washington, DC through Honor Flight of Oregon. On behalf of a grateful
state and country, we welcome these heroes to the nation's capital.
The veterans on this flight from Oregon are: Harry Barber, U.S. Army;
Clarence Carnahan, U.S. Army; Elmer Hendricks, U.S. Army; Burl Jarrell,
U.S. Army; Melvin McCoy, U.S. Army; Lowell Miller, U.S. Army; Walter
Orum, U.S. Army; Wilburt Rathke, U.S. Army; Fred Riggs, U.S. Army;
Willard Runion, U.S. Army; Dennison Thomas, U.S. Army; Frank Vaughan,
U.S. Army; Harley Hess, U.S. Army Air Forces; Marion Kirkham, U.S. Army
Air Forces; Urban Kluthe, U.S. Army Air Forces; Robert Mitchell, U.S.
Army Air Forces; Roland Stewart, U.S. Army Air Forces; Francis Ellmers,
U.S. Air Force; Jack Keeler, U.S. Air Force; Milton Kelm, U.S. Air
Force; John O'Brien, U.S. Air Force; Robert Stubblefield, U.S. Air
Force; Walter Lowblad, U.S. Coast Guard; Billie Tracy, U.S. Coast
Guard; Harvard Lewis, U.S. Marine Corps; William Sexton, U.S. Marine
Corps, Muriel Yandle, U.S. Marine Corps; Douglas Smith, U.S. Merchant
Marine; Adam Bachmann, U.S. Navy; James Bratton, U.S. Navy; Richard
Davis, U.S. Navy; Joseph Doyon, U.S. Navy; James Dunn, U.S. Navy; Teddy
Freeman, U.S. Navy; Thomas Gibbons, U.S. Navy; William Jordan, U.S.
Navy; James Kohl, U.S. Navy; James Lancaster, Sr., U.S. Navy; William
Matthias, U.S. Navy; Warren McCoy, U.S. Navy; Jerald Muck, U.S. Navy;
Franklin Nolan, U.S. Navy; Leonard Premselaar, U.S. Navy; Vance Strunk,
U.S. Navy; Leonard Swanzy, U.S. Navy; Walter Thompson, U.S. Navy; Frank
Spiegel Jr., U.S. Navy; Richard Watson, U.S. Navy.
These 48 heroes join more than 100,000 veterans from across the
country who, since 2005, have journeyed from their home states to
Washington, DC, to reflect at the memorials built in their honor.
Mr. Speaker, each of us is humbled by the courage of these soldiers,
sailors, airmen, and Marines who put themselves in harm's way for our
country and way of life. As a nation, we can never fully repay the debt
of gratitude owed to them for their honor, commitment, and sacrifice in
defense of the freedoms we have today.
My colleagues, please join me in thanking these veterans and the
volunteers of Honor Flight of Oregon for their exemplary dedication and
service to this great country. I especially want to recognize and thank
Dick and Erik Tobiason and Michael and Cindy Jensen for their tireless
work with Honor Flight of Oregon.
____________________
IN REMEMBRANCE OF MRS. RUTH COYNE
______
HON. DENNIS J. KUCINICH
of ohio
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Mrs. Ruth Coyne,
the former ``first lady'' of Brooklyn, Ohio.
Ruth was the wife of John M. Coyne, the former mayor of Brooklyn. She
attended Rhodes High School and met John at a dance at Our Lady of Good
Council. They were married at Old Pete's Wayside Inn on November 30,
1940. John went on to serve as mayor for an astounding 52 years, from
1947 to 1999. Ruth provided support for her husband throughout the
years and came to be loved by the community. The couple was married for
72 years.
Ruth is remembered fondly by everyone she encountered. Councilwoman
Kathleen Pucci has said that, ``She exemplified grace, dignity and
style. She genuinely cared about our community and its residents.''
In addition to her role as ``first lady'', Ruth was a loving citizen
and mother. She was the mother of four, grandmother of nine, and great-
grandmother of fifteen. She always put her family first.
Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in memory of Mrs. Ruth
Coyne, a woman who spent her long life working for others, and who will
be greatly missed by her family and the City of Brooklyn.
[[Page 14878]]
____________________
RECOGNIZING TALBOT HILL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
______
HON. ADAM SMITH
of washington
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor Talbot Hill
Elementary School, located in Renton, Washington, for being named one
of the ``Coolest Schools in America'' by Parent & Child magazine. The
school was also named a Washington State Designated Innovative School.
Talbot Hill Elementary School is part of the national MicroSociety
program. In this program, students participate in a fully-functioning
society. Students apply for jobs, earn money, pay taxes, and
participate in government.
Each fall, the Talbot Hill Elementary School community elects a
Legislature, comprised of a president, vice president, at-large members
and senators and representatives from each grade level. Students work
on a newspaper, run a post office, start small businesses, and manage a
recycling center.
This unique school is made possible by parent and community support.
Parents get involved to invest in the school and in their children's
education. This includes spreading the word to the community about the
needs of the school. The community's involvement is essential to the
success of Talbot Hill Elementary and helps to build a generation of
successful and innovative students.
Mr. Speaker, it is with great honor that I recognize the students,
teachers, administrators, parents, and staff of Talbot Hill Elementary
School. The school's groundbreaking educational techniques prepare
students to be life-long learners and engaged members of their
communities.
____________________
NATIONAL DAY FOR THE REPUBLIC OF CHINA ON TAIWAN
______
HON. DAN BURTON
of indiana
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, on October 3, 2012, the Taipei
Economic and Cultural Representative Office, located in Washington, DC,
will be celebrating the 101st National Day of the Republic of China on
Taiwan at the beautiful Twin Oaks Estate. I rise today in advance of
this celebration to offer my continued praise and support of the U.S.-
Taiwanese relationship and to acknowledge the good work of Jason Yuan,
who after serving four years as Taiwan's Washington Representative is
returning to Taiwan to continue his distinguished career by serving as
Secretary General of the National Security Council. Mr. Yuan has worked
tirelessly to further the mutually beneficial relationship between the
United States and Taiwan.
As the people of the Republic of China on Taiwan celebrate the 101st
anniversary of their nation's founding, I congratulate them on their
National Day and would like to commend them for more than 100 years of
progress. As a good friend and ally of the United States, the Republic
of China on Taiwan remains a peaceful and prosperous democracy, and is
a model for nations around the world.
I would like to take a moment and recognize the 23 million citizens
of Taiwan for their commitment to peace. As a symbol of this
commitment, the Republic of China on Taiwan recently melted down
artillery shells and used the metal to construct a ``Peace Bell.''
President Ma Ying-jeou also proposed a peace initiative in the hope of
easing the recent tensions in the East China Sea. The initiative calls
on all parties concerned to show restraint, shelve controversies and
settle disputes in a peaceful manner. It also urges all parties
concerned to strive for a consensus on a code of conduct in the East
China Sea, and to establish a mechanism for cooperation on exploring
and developing resources in the region. We celebrate these efforts to
maintain good relations with other countries, and the United States is
proud to call the Republic of China on Taiwan a partner in peace.
In closing, I hope my colleagues will join me in thanking Ambassador
Yuan for his service along with President Ma, Vice President Wu, and
the people of the Republic of China on Taiwan for their continued
commitment to peace and democracy on this anniversary of their National
Day. Although I am retiring from the United States House of
Representatives, please be assured that my support, commitment and
friendship to Taiwan will remain strong, and will never die.
____________________
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
______
HON. ROSA L. DeLAURO
of connecticut
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and so I missed
rollcall vote No. 585 regarding the ``Andrew P. Carpenter Tax Act''
(H.R. 5044). Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes''.
____________________
HONORING NANCY OSBORNE
______
HON. DEVIN NUNES
of california
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. NUNES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Nancy Osborne, an
important public figure in the Central Valley news industry, on the
occasion of her retirement.
Ms. Osborne graduated from Las Cruces High School in New Mexico and
attended New Mexico State University for 3 years.
Following a five year break from her education, she returned to
college in the valley at Fresno State University. She graduated in 1976
with a BA in Speech Communications and began work on a Master's degree.
After a year of graduate study, she accepted a reporting job at
ABC30. As one of only a handful of women in the local broadcast
industry, Nancy became a role model for many young women.
In the fall of 1977, Nancy joined the anchor team at KFSN-TV. In
1980, she produced and anchored the valley's first locally produced
news magazine show while continuing to co-anchor Action News.
In 1996, Nancy joined the Action News Management Team. While
continuing her coverage of the valley's political scene and issues
involving children and families, she was named Executive Producer--
Special Projects. With this new assignment, she helped shape Action
News around the clock.
In January 2004, after a short hiatus, Nancy returned to reporting
full time, once again adding her experience and expertise to the
expanding daily Action News coverage while continuing to co-anchor
Action News Live at Five. She also wrote a popular blog, ``The Red,
White, and True'', which focused on stories about the Central Valley's
military personnel and families.
In 2005, Nancy was inducted into the prestigious Silver Circle by the
Northern California chapter of the National Academy of Television Arts
and Sciences for her commitment of over 25 years to the Fresno
television market and broadcast news industry.
Nancy has reported on countless stories and events important to the
people of Central California and she has given her time and effort to
numerous non-profits and charities over the decades. Please join me in
congratulating Ms. Osborne on her ``award-winning and trailblazing
television career,'' as she retires from ABC30 Action News.
____________________
IN RECOGNITION OF FORTY YEARS OF LEADERSHIP FROM CLINTON RIVER
WATERSHED COUNCIL
______
HON. GARY C. PETERS
of michigan
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. PETERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Clinton River
Watershed Council (CRWC) as it celebrates 40 years of service to
Southeast Michigan. Situated within Macomb and Oakland Counties and
located in the heart of the Great Lakes region, the Clinton River
watershed covers over 760 square miles that begins at the headwaters of
the Clinton River in Springfield Township and stretches to its outlet
into Lake St. Clair.
Water has long been an important part of our lives in Michigan and
throughout the Great Lakes region--it was the means through which
Michigan became a center of industry and innovation during the
Industrial Revolution and remains a critical part of our economy.
However, as an unintended consequence of our success, the Clinton River
and its watershed became polluted by industrial runoff and untreated
sewage, which threatened this important natural resource in Southeast
Michigan. As a response to growing public concern, in 1972 the CRWC was
founded with a mission to protect, enhance and celebrate the Clinton
River, its watershed and Lake St. Clair.
In execution of its mission, the CRWC has created programs that have
engaged all the sectors of the community in efforts to restore
[[Page 14879]]
the watershed, while providing hands-on education which has instilled
the value of good environmental stewardship. Among its programs is
Adopt-a-Stream, which directly involves area residents in the water
quality monitoring process. It promotes annual events like Clinton
River Day, which brings the community together in dozens of sites
around the watershed to participate in projects that educate, clean and
promote the importance of the Clinton River to our region. Over its 40
years, the CRWC has created a clear track record of leveraging strong
partnerships with area stakeholders to remove the impairments caused by
pollution.
The work of the CRWC has left a tangible impact on the communities of
Southeast Michigan--riparian habitat has been restored, children have
been educated on the healthy and active lifestyle that the watershed
supports and recreational fishermen once again enjoy premier fisheries.
Beyond these benefits to area residents, the CRWC's outreach to its
stakeholders has created important synergies between local governments,
institutes of higher education, area businesses and advocacy groups,
that have strengthened the vitality of the Southeast Michigan region.
The results have been, not just a healthier ecosystem, but also
increased economic activity and increased quality-of-life for our
families.
Mr. Speaker, as a proud supporter of the Great Lakes and the federal
commitment Congress has made through the Great Lakes Restoration
Initiative, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the CRWC for
40 years of leadership in protecting, enhancing and celebrating the
Clinton River, its watershed and Lake St. Clair. While there is still a
lot of work left to be done to fully restore and protect our important
natural resources, we have seen great progress because of the work of
the CRWC and its sister organizations across the Great Lakes region. I
am confident that with the sustained dedication of the CRWC, its
stakeholders and its supporters, that we will continue to see more
progress made to fully restore the Clinton River Area of Concern.
____________________
RECOGNIZING THE 225TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE ADOPTION OF THE NORTHWEST
ORDINANCE BY THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES
______
HON. JEAN SCHMIDT
of ohio
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mrs. SCHMIDT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize that 225 years
ago the Continental Congress of the United States enacted the Northwest
Ordinance, which in 1787 established a system of government that made
the territory north and west of the Ohio River the first commonwealth
in the world whose organic law recognized every man as free and equal.
Encompassing 265,878 square miles, the Northwest Territory included
the future states of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, and
part of Minnesota.
In addition to prohibiting slavery, the Northwest Ordinance
guaranteed religious freedom and civil rights throughout the territory.
This federal mandate preceded by several years the Bill of Rights--the
first 10 Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The Northwest Ordinance
was adopted by the Continental Congress on July 13, 1787.
The Continental Congress appointed Arthur St. Clair the first
governor of the Northwest Territory on October 5, 1787. Governor St.
Clair was based in Losantiville, a town he renamed Cincinnati on
January 4, 1790.
The first delegate of the Northwest Territory to the U.S. House of
Representatives was William Henry Harrison of Hamilton County, who
served from March 4, 1799, to May 14, 1800. He successfully promoted
the Harrison Land Act, which allowed people of modest means to buy land
in the Northwest Territory directly from the federal government. This
contributed to the rapid growth in Ohio's population.
The Northwest Ordinance established a process for new states to join
the Union, and in 1803 Ohio became the first state formed out of the
Northwest Territory.
The Northwest Ordinance also established the township form of
government, which continues to be favored by many local communities in
Ohio.
Mr. Speaker, Ohioans appreciate their state's history and their
heritage of equality under the law.
Today, I want to recognize the 225th anniversary of the adoption of
the Northwest Ordinance, which resulted in the great state of Ohio and
ensured liberty for all its residents.
____________________
IN HONOR OF MR. GREGORY M. SADLEK
______
HON. DENNIS J. KUCINICH
of ohio
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor Mr. Gregory M.
Sadlek who is being honored by the Polonia Foundation on October 7,
2012.
Born and raised in Northeast Ohio, Gregory is a graduate of Padua
Franciscan High School in Parma, Ohio. In 1968, following his high
school graduation, he moved to Quincy, Illinois to attend Quincy
University and later attended the Catholic Theological Union in
Chicago. Gregory holds several degrees including a bachelor's in
philosophy and a master's and doctorate in English. He has pursued a
career in academia, teaching at the University of Nantes, Hamilton
College, Eastern Illinois University, Northern Illinois University and
the University of Nebraska at Omaha in the English Department. Gregory
is married to Francoise Rolland; together they have two sons, Jonathan
and Benjamin.
In 2005, Gregory returned to his native Cleveland, Ohio and became
the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences at
Cleveland State University (CSU). At CSU, he has worked tirelessly to
establish a Polish Studies program and a partnership with the
University of Warsaw.
Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honoring Mr. Gregory M.
Sadlek and congratulating him as he is recognized by the Polonia
Foundation.
____________________
RECOGNITION OF TAIWAN'S NATIONAL DAY
______
HON. ALBIO SIRES
of new jersey
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. SIRES. Mr. Speaker, I would like to send my best wishes to
President Ma Ying-jeou and the people of the Republic of China (Taiwan)
on their National Day this October 10th.
In the last four and a half years President Ma, along with other
national leaders, has helped Taiwan's economy thrive. President Ma took
a number of helpful steps to take Taiwan out of an economic slump,
including guaranteeing bank deposits, lowering interest rates,
distributing shopping vouchers and investing in domestic
infrastructure. As a result, Taiwan's economy has been rapidly
improving, alleviating the problems of unemployment and poverty.
President Ma has also excelled on promoting foreign policy. Apart
from the signing of the mutually beneficial Economic Cooperation
Framework Agreement (ECFA) with mainland China in 2010, President Ma's
government is currently negotiating economic cooperation agreements
with the governments of Singapore and New Zealand and paving the way
for Taiwan to become a member of the multilateral Trans-Pacific
Partnership.
President Ma has also significantly reduced tensions in the Taiwan
Strait by pursuing a policy of diplomatic truce with the mainland and
has ended the dangerous cycle of diplomatic warfare between the two
sides.
Taiwan is currently enjoying a robust relationship with the United
States. U.S.-Taiwan ties have been the most amicable in 30 years.
Communication between our two countries is smooth and friendly. Much of
this is due to the capable stewardship of Taiwan's top diplomat in the
United States: Representative Jason Yuan. Yuan is a seasoned diplomat
and has been working very hard to promote an open discussion between
Taiwan and Congress on Capitol Hill.
Again, congratulations to the Republic of China on its National Day.
____________________
OUR UNCONSCIONABLE NATIONAL DEBT
______
HON. MIKE COFFMAN
of colorado
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, on January 20, 2009, the day
President Obama took office; the national debt was
$10,626,877,048,913.08.
Today, it is $16,012,971,761,294.54. We've added
$5,386,094,712,381.46 to our debt in 3.5 years. This is $5.4 trillion
in debt our nation, our economy, and our children could have avoided
with a balanced budget amendment.
[[Page 14880]]
____________________
ON THE 20TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE ACHIEVABLE DREAM TENNIS BALL
______
HON. ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT
of virginia
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate An
Achievable Dream and the Rotary Club of the Virginia Peninsula, a
longtime sponsor of the event, on the occasion of the 20th Annual
Achievable Dream Tennis Ball. An Achievable Dream, with the generous
help of the Rotary Club of the Virginia Peninsula and other sponsors,
offers an extraordinary education program in my home district which
provides tremendous promise to young at-risk students.
The motto of An Achievable Dream is ``Teaching Kids Winning Ways.''
The Achievable Dream program is structured to give young people the
skills needed to succeed in life. Those skills are taught at An
Achievable Dream on the tennis court, in the classroom, on field trips,
and in sharing experiences with successful and caring adults in the
community.
Often, young people don't think too much about the future, and don't
realize that choices made today may limit those in the future. The
staff, supporters and sponsors at An Achievable Dream have worked to
ensure that their students have every opportunity to be successful in
the future, setting and achieving a goal of graduating 100% of students
on time in the past, and hope to send all graduating seniors off to
college.
As a public-private partnership with Newport News Public Schools, the
city of Newport News, the Newport News Sheriff's Department, the U.S.
Army, the Rotary Club, Riverside Health System, and the College of
William and Mary, An Achievable Dream has received national recognition
as one of the most effective urban school programs in the country and
has provided a model for integrating support from the business
community to support quality educational opportunities for at-risk
students. The Achievable Dream Tennis Ball seeks to highlight the
community's dedication to these students and to An Achievable Dream.
I am pleased that I have been involved with An Achievable Dream as a
supporter since its beginnings. As An Achievable Dream and our
community gathers to celebrate the 20th Anniversary of the An
Achievable Dream Tennis Ball, the community can look forward to the
continued success of An Achievable Dream and the programs that have
been put in place at these schools. I would like to congratulate the
staff, supporters and sponsors at An Achievable Dream on this
monumental occasion, and hope to see continued success from An
Achievable Dream in the future.
____________________
TRIBUTE TO SPECIALIST JOSHUA L. REED
______
HON. JIM JORDAN
of ohio
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Army
Specialist Joshua L. Reed, who died at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, on August
4.
Josh was born in Bellefontaine, Ohio, in 1990 to Lloyd and Tonja
Reed. A 2009 graduate of Benjamin Logan High School, Josh participated
in football and wrestling and also enjoyed skateboarding, snowboarding,
and quad racing.
Enlisting in the Army in February 2010, Josh graduated from the
Multiple Launch Rocket System Crewmember Advanced Individual Training
Course at Fort Sill later that year. He was an ammunition specialist
with Bravo Battery, 1st Battalion, 14th Field Artillery, and was
awarded the Army Certificate of Achievement and the Army Achievement
Medal.
Josh is survived by a loving family, including his wife, Teosha Reed
of Lawton, Oklahoma; his parents; two brothers, Nicholas Thompson and
Tristan Reed; and grandparents Elva Karns and Lewis ``Butch'' and Judy
Lenhart.
Josh courageously volunteered to serve in defense of his family, his
community, his state, and his nation. Every American lives under the
blanket of safety he helped provide. For this, we owe him and his
family a great debt of gratitude.
Josh will be deeply missed. But the strength of his character and the
courage he demonstrated through his service will live on.
____________________
IN HONOR OF LARRY WALTON COLSON
_____
HON. SANFORD D. BISHOP, JR.
of georgia
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, it is with a heavy heart and
solemn remembrance that I rise today to pay tribute to a great man and
close friend, Larry Walton Colson. Mr. Colson passed away on September
18, 2012. Visitation will be held at Carson McLane Funeral Home at 11
a.m. on Thursday, September 20, 2012, and funeral services will be held
on Friday, September 21, 2012.
Mr. Colson graduated from Valdosta High School in 1966. He attended
Valdosta State University and graduated with a degree in Business
Administration. Mr. Colson was an entrepreneur at heart. He was the
owner and founder of Colson Business Systems, Inc. as well as the co-
owner of Splash Zone.
Mr. Colson loved his community and actively served in various
capacities. He served on the Guardian Bank Board of Advisors, the South
Georgia Medical Center Foundation Board and the Valdosta State
University Board of Trustees. He was also a Blazer Booster as well as
an avid Florida Gator Booster.
A favorite pastime of Mr. Colson's was playing golf. He played as an
amateur in the AT&T Pebble Beach National Pro-Am. He was also an active
member of Park Avenue United Methodist Church where he served as an
usher.
George Washington Carver once said, ``How far you go in life depends
on your being tender with the young, compassionate with the aged,
sympathetic with the striving and tolerant of the weak and strong
because someday in your life you will have been all of these.'' Mr.
Colson went far in life because of his kindness and compassion for
others.
Mr. Colson is preceded in death by his father, George Wallace Colson;
his brother, Gordon Wallace Colson; and uncles, Carlton Thomas Adams
and Kenneth Carmen Colson.
He is survived by his wife, Patricia Louise Colson; children, Rachel
(Steve) Blankenship, Allison (David) Gracey, and Hunter Colson; his
mother Myrtice Adams Colson; brother Greg Colson (wife Cheryl); sister-
in-law Valerie Colson; many loving nephews: Todd Hatcher, Brent Colson
(wife Cara), Brad Colson, and Trace Colson; as well as many great
nieces and nephews: Ellen, Cole, Julia and Tate Colson, Caroline and
Davis Hatcher.
Mr. Speaker, my wife Vivian and I would like to extend our deepest
sympathies to Mr. Colson's wife Pat, their children and other family
members during this difficult time. May they be consoled and comforted
by their abiding faith and the Holy Spirit in the days, weeks and
months ahead.
____________________
IN HONOR OF MR. WALTER BORKOWSKI
_____
HON. DENNIS J. KUCINICH
of ohio
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Mr. Walter
Borkowski who is being honored by the Polonia Foundation on October 7,
2012.
Born September 11, 1969, Walter is a first generation American. He
was raised in Parma, Ohio and attended Normandy High School before
earning a degree in business administration from the University of
Toledo. Following graduation, Walter began a career in financial
services as a customer service representative with Transamerica
Financial Services. Within two years, he was the Executive Branch
Manager of the Canton, Ohio office. He briefly left Northeast Ohio for
a job with Long Beach Mortgage Company, but returned when he launched
Consumers Choice Mortgage Inc. Walter retired from Trust In Equity
Mortgage Group, LLC in 2009, but continues to work as a part-time
Mortgage Consultant.
Walter has been involved in the Polish-American community since he
was a young child as a singer in the John Borkowski Orchestra. At the
age of 24, he was elected to his first of two terms as the director of
the Alliance of Poles of American. Currently, he is the Recording
Secretary for the Cleveland Society of Poles and the Alternate National
Director for the Polish American Congress.
Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honoring Mr. Walter
Borkowski and congratulating him as he is recognized by the Polonia
Foundation.
[[Page 14881]]
____________________
RECOGNIZING AND HONORING MS. GENEVIEVE FLOREZ
_____
HON. JEFF DENHAM
of california
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. DENHAM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor Miss
Genevieve Florez, who organized a school-wide donation project to send
care package to our troops.
At age 10, Genevieve is the youngest child of Susan and Steve Florez.
She has attended Joshua Cowell Elementary School since kindergarten,
where her mother is a teacher. The family lives in Twain Harte, and
Genevieve and her mom commute to school daily--an hour and a half trip
each way. While in the car she does her homework, reads, and talks with
her mom about all of the things that fill the life of a 5th grader.
Despite all the time that Genevieve dedicates to her studies and long
commute, she still finds the energy to help with a home garden,
participate in summer drama productions, and take dance classes. She
loves art and keeps a sketchbook of her own fashion designs. Not only
is Genevieve bright, happy, thoughtful, and creative, but she is a
highly motivated self-starter ready to make a difference in the world.
In fact, her goal is to be the future President of the United States.
The care package project was inspired by Genevieve's admiration for
her school principal, Ms. Bennett. Genevieve sent her the following
letter: You inspired me. I want to help and stop world hunger, no more
bullies, say thanks to police, fire-fighters, and ladies and men in the
military. I also want to say thanks to the teachers. I don't know how
to help. That's why I ask you. This is money to help with anything.
Miss Florez had enclosed $20.
After speaking with Principal Bennett about a variety of ways to
reach out to people, Genevieve decided to pursue the idea of sending
packages to soldiers overseas. Bennett put Genevieve in touch with the
family of Corporal Charles O. Palmer--a United States Marine, who lost
his life in Iraq on May 5, 2007. Corporal Palmer's family met with
Genevieve to help her coordinate services as she prepared to send
personal care packages to the troops. After organizing three school
meetings to share her idea about the project, Genevieve had
successfully earned the support of 70 students who wanted to
participate.
On September 11, 2012, a school assembly was held to remember those
who lost their lives during the attacks and to honor the heroes that
emerged who protect us every day. The Palmer family spoke to the
students about the collecting of items to send to the soldiers. They
talked about the personal healing that the project brings to them, and
they thanked the students for their efforts. They finished by letting
the students know that they were all heroes for making a difference at
that moment. After sorting through all of the donations, the Palmer
family, students, staff, and volunteers were able to send out 65 boxes
to our very deserving troops.
Mr. Speaker, please join me in praising Genevieve Florez for the
significant contributions she has made to the people of the local
community and for her honorable and faithful dedication to our
servicemen and women of the United States of America.
____________________
RECOGNIZING THE 90TH ANNIVERSARY OF BISHOP GUILFOYLE CATHOLIC HIGH
SCHOOL IN ALTOONA, PENNSYLVANIA
______
HON. BILL SHUSTER
of pennsylvania
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 90th
anniversary of Bishop Guilfoyle Catholic High School in Altoona,
Pennsylvania.
Bishop Guilfoyle has been dedicated to the education and development
of Altoona's youth for nearly a century, and its commitment to
excellence has helped the school to become a tremendously influential
institution in our community. The school places a great emphasis on
instilling a culture of goodness, discipline, and knowledge in its
students, as evidenced by its valued presence in the Altoona area.
In 1922, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Altoona and Johnstown
established Bishop Guilfoyle Catholic High School, under its original
name of Altoona Catholic High School. After the sudden death of Bishop
Richard T. Guilfoyle in 1957, the school was renamed to honor his
compassion for the Altoona Catholic students, and his enthusiasm for
sports.
Since its establishment, the school has seen nearly 11,000 of its
students receive diplomas, many of them matriculating to higher
education. With this outstanding production, the school has had a
profound importance in its students' lives, and has helped each of them
to thrive in our community and beyond.
Bishop Guilfoyle has achieved numerous accolades, and has developed a
prestigious academic reputation across the 12 Catholic parishes that it
serves. The school has continued to add state-of-the-art facilities,
and has implemented a rigorous academic curriculum, which holds its
students to the highest of standards, both within the classroom and in
the community.
Mr. Speaker, Bishop Guilfoyle's commitment to the education of our
district's youth has not gone unnoticed. Its faculty's passion for
cultivating the necessary values to succeed as productive,
compassionate citizens has earned the school an exemplary reputation in
Pennsylvania's 9th district. The many proud alumni that are spread
throughout the world are a testament to the school's celebrated
achievements and storied tradition as a first-class instructional
institution.
As Congressman of the 9th District, I wish Bishop Guilfoyle Catholic
High School all the best on what is sure to be another productive,
successful 90 years of education and development.
____________________
HONORING WASHINGTON COUNTY, COLORADO ON ITS 125TH ANNIVERSARY
______
HON. CORY GARDNER
of colorado
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. GARDNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Washington County,
Colorado on its 125th Anniversary.
Washington County is distinctly different from the Washington I am
standing in today. However, both did name their areas in honor of the
first President of the United States, George Washington.
This past February marked their 125th anniversary of Washington
County, and they have much to celebrate.
During the early 1880s, the Northeast section of Colorado experienced
a boom in agricultural development and settlers flocked to the area for
available and plentiful land to grow crops. In fact, my family sold
farm equipment in Akron and Otis, something my family remains very
proud of to this day.
The population expansion led the Colorado State Legislature to pass
legislation that officially established Washington County in 1887, and
declared Akron, Colorado as the county seat.
After some territorial disputes with the town of Yuma, the current
boundaries were established in 1903.
Today, over 4,800 Coloradoans call Washington County home, and the
county continues to promote Colorado's rich agricultural legacy.
I had the honor and privilege to represent Washington County when I
served in the Colorado State Legislature, and it is again my honor and
privilege to represent this great county in the United States Congress.
I am proud to recognize Washington County on their 125th Anniversary.
____________________
PROVIDING QUALITY HOME CARE SERVICES
______
HON. JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY
of illinois
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss the need for
strategies to maintain and improve access to home-based medical and
long-term care services.
As the Co-Chair of the Seniors Task Force, I am committed to ensuring
seniors get the care that they need in the setting that they prefer.
Today, three-and-a-half million Medicare beneficiaries get home health
services, allowing them to live independently in their own homes while
getting the medical care they need. Home healthcare provides skilled,
safe and effective medical treatments that once were available only at
a hospital or doctor's office, allowing seniors and people with
disabilities to receive necessary medical care without needing
transportation to a doctor's office or admission to a hospital. Home
health care is good for individuals and their families, and it also is
good for taxpayers. Home
[[Page 14882]]
healthcare services saved Medicare $2.81 billion between 2006 and 2009.
As we head into this fall's debate on sequestration and alternative
budget proposals, I urge my colleagues to remember the importance of
home health care to seniors and people with disabilities on Medicare
and to avoid cuts that will threaten the services upon which they rely.
Twelve million adults--seniors and adults with disabilities--need
long-term care services but Medicaid is currently unable to meet all
their needs. The problem will become even more serious in the future,
since it is estimated that 27 million Americans will need long-term
services by 2050. Yet, our nation still lacks a comprehensive approach
to meet current and future long-term care needs.
I have introduced H. Res. 759 to express support for a comprehensive
approach to provide the home care workforce and long-term care services
we need in order to ensure that seniors and people with disabilities
are able to live at home and enjoy a dignified quality of life. It is
time not just for a national discussion, but for national solutions.
We know that we have to address the cost of health and long-term
care, but there is a right way to deal with those costs and a wrong
way. The wrong answer would be to target vulnerable seniors and people
with disabilities--denying them home healthcare and long-term care
options or shifting the financial burdens to family caregivers. Large
Medicare and Medicaid cuts, vouchers and block grants would do real
harm to real people. Higher cost-sharing requirements will price
essential services out of reach.
Instead, we need to look for ways to lower health care costs across-
the-board by eliminating fraud and abuse, giving Medicare authority to
use its bargaining power to negotiate for lower drug prices as the VA
does, encouraging greater efficiency in the delivery of care, and
encouraging the use of cost-effective health care services, including
home healthcare services.
As we undertake serious budget discussions this fall, we must
carefully consider the real-life impacts of the choices before us. I
will be working to make sure that we protect and improve our ability to
meet the home healthcare and long-term care needs of seniors and people
with disabilities.
____________________
HONORING THE LIFE OF JULIANNE ELIZABETH MARKS ALLEN
______
HON. MAURICE D. HINCHEY
of new york
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a dear
friend of mine, Julianne Elizabeth Marks Allen, who passed away earlier
this month. Julie, as she was called, had a heart of gold and was one
of the most giving and loving people I've ever been fortunate enough to
know. It was an honor and privilege for me to have her serve on my
staff for nearly 19 years as a trusted advisor and liaison to the
people of Sullivan County--the county she loved and called home for
nearly her entire life.
Julie committed her life to her family and community. Through her
volunteer efforts and public service, Julie touched countless lives in
Roscoe and throughout Sullivan County, a beautiful, rural part of New
York, where she was known by seemingly everyone. She was particularly
interested in assisting young people and served as the Town of
Rockland's Youth Committee Chairman for the Roscoe Central School
District for several years. She was also a board member on the Sullivan
County Community College Foundation Scholarship Committee. Julie worked
diligently with me on a wide range of issues and was critical in
helping me establish and steer the Sullivan-Wawarsing Rural Economic
Area Partnership--an innovative regional community development
initiative, for which Julie served on the Board of Directors for many
years. Julie diligently advocated for those who sought assistance
through our office and was widely respected for her tireless efforts to
help others. Julie was also a distinguished and stalwart pillar of the
Democratic Party, serving for the past 40 years as a member of the
Sullivan County Democratic Committee and for the last 25 years as an
elected member of the New York State Democratic Committee.
Julie had a profound impact on virtually everyone she met. To her,
public and community service was a calling. Despite facing health
challenges for the past 23 years, Julie's passion and determination to
help others remained steadfast. In fact, Julie was recently honored
with the Sullivan County Community College ``2012 Women Who Make A
Difference'' award for her lifetime dedication of volunteerism to the
county. She constantly put everyone else's needs before her own, and
her reservoir of compassion and inner strength was an inspiration to me
and others. Every conversation with Julie involved her asking how the
other person was doing, how their family was doing, and asking for
stories and updates to make sure everything was alright. She felt like
a family member because she cared so much about everyone.
While she had many jobs and significant responsibilities, the roles
that Julie cherished more than any others were that of loving wife,
mother, grandmother, sister, and aunt. Julie loved her family with all
of her heart--and it was one of the biggest hearts I've ever known. She
spoke frequently and proudly about her family members' latest
accomplishments. Nothing brought Julie more joy than spending time with
her husband Don--her one and only true love and high school sweetheart
to whom she was married for 47 years--and the rest of their family,
including their children, Laurie and Michael, along with their spouses,
Perry and Kori; and their grandchildren Elizabeth Julianne, Caden and
Taylor. Despite all of the many great accomplishments throughout her
life, there was no greater achievement in Julie's life than building
this beautiful family.
Mr. Speaker, I add my voice to those honoring the life of Julianne
Elizabeth Marks Allen. I offer my heartfelt condolences to her family
and many friends. I am deeply grateful for the opportunity to have
known and worked closely with Julie. The world is an emptier place
without Julianne Elizabeth Marks Allen, but her legacy and impact on
the lives of others will live on forever.
____________________
NATIONAL OVARIAN CANCER AWARENESS MONTH
______
HON. KATHLEEN C. HOCHUL
of new york
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Ms. HOCHUL. Mr. Speaker, in recognition of the month of September
being National Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month, I would like to express
my deep support for the women and families who are affected by ovarian
cancer. In 2012, over 22,000 women will be diagnosed with ovarian
cancer in the United States, and we will lose more than 15,000 mothers,
daughters, wives, sisters, and friends to this disease.
While great strides have been made in cancer research, education, and
awareness, there is still much work to be done, especially on ovarian
cancer. Though many other cancers have seen significant reductions in
mortality rates due to improved prevention methods, screenings, and
treatments, the mortality rate for ovarian cancer has remained nearly
the same for the past 40 years.
I commend the many programs and organizations dedicated to ovarian
cancer research, education, and awareness, including the National
Cancer Institute, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's
Ovarian Cancer Control Initiative, the Department of Defense Ovarian
Cancer Research Program, and the many advocacy, education, and
awareness organizations.
I urge my colleagues to join me in recognizing September as National
Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month, remembering the women who have lost the
battle with this disease, and supporting research, education, and
awareness efforts so that eventually, future generations will no longer
feel the effects of ovarian cancer.
____________________
IN HONOR OF MRS. ALINA CZERNEC
______
HON. DENNIS J. KUCINICH
of ohio
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor Mrs. Alina Czernec
who is being honored by the Polonia Foundation on October 7, 2012.
Alina was born in pre-World War II Poland. During the war she was
forced to spend five years of her life living in Polish refugee camps
in Iran, India and Pakistan. Following the war, her family reunited in
England in 1947 and immigrated to Cleveland, Ohio's Tremont
neighborhood in 1952. After graduating from St. John Cantius High
School, Alina was attending Fenn College and working for the Polish
daily newspaper, Wiadomosci Dodzienne. In 1959, Alina married Steve
Czernec and together they had three children, Lisa, Richard and Chris.
Alina spent much of her time volunteering at local schools and nursing
homes and eventually became the director of admissions at Broadview
Nursing Home. She worked at Heights Drapery Company, which
[[Page 14883]]
she and her daughter own, until her retirement in 2004.
Alina has been involved in the Polish-American community since she
settled in the U.S. She has belonged to a number of organizations
including Gmina 6, PNA and the Alliance of Poles. She is also an active
member of the Polish American Cultural Center and has spent countless
hours volunteering at St. John Cantius Church.
Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honoring Mrs. Alina
Czernec and congratulating her as she is recognized by the Polonia
Foundation.
____________________
A TRIBUTE TO HIS HONOR JUDGE MICHAEL T. McSPADDEN--TEXAS JUDGE
______
HON. TED POE
of texas
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, there are thousands of individuals who
make it their life's work to make communities safer while holding
criminals accountable for their actions. One of the best is Judge
Michael T. McSpadden. I have known Judge McSpadden for what seems like
forever. We served in the district attorney's office as prosecutors
together. Judge McSpadden prosecuted criminals for 8 years in the
Harris County district attorney's office under the leadership of
District Attorney Carol Vance.
In 1982, Judge McSpadden became a Criminal District Court Judge in
Harris County, Texas. He tried felony cases. Judges in Texas are
elected on a partisan ballot and Judge McSpadden has been elected 8
consecutive times to the bench of the 209th Criminal District Court. We
served as judges together and I witnessed his remarkable dedication to
the law and justice. As a community, we are truly privileged to have
such an extraordinary man answer the call to public service and as an
individual, I am grateful to call Judge McSpadden a friend.
Judge McSpadden has served the citizens of Harris County, Texas for
over 35 years. A graduate from the University of Oklahoma (though we
don't hold it against him), he has worked diligently to rise through
the ranks in Texas courts. He started his legal career in the Harris
County District Attorney's office as an Assistant District Attorney,
and then he became the Chief Prosecutor of the 209th District Court.
In 1982, Judge McSpadden was elected as a judge for the same court
and, for the last 30 years, he has continued to preside over the 209th.
His extensive knowledge of the justice system and his incredible work
ethic have gained the respect of many in the law profession. Over his
career, he has earned the respect and admiration among lawyers and
judges within the legal community: he is always among the highest rated
judges by members of the Houston Bar Association and was the highest
rated judge in Harris County in the 2011 Houston Bar Association
Judicial Qualification Poll. Our community has benefited greatly from
the many, many years of service that he has dedicated. In addition,
Judge McSpadden has been recognized by the Houston Police Officer's
Association and Harris County Deputy Sheriffs Association. He has also
been honored and named Champion of Crime Stoppers by the Bay Area Crime
Stoppers. These organizations recognized that he has not only dedicated
his professional time to helping others, but he has dedicated his
personal time to helping the next generation as well. In 1994, Child
Advocates honored him for his efforts to help children. He has been
also honored by the Samaritan Center and the Assistance League of
Houston for his work with inner city youth. Judge McSpadden is a
positive mentor to young males at risk. In 2002, he was the first
recipient of the Chuck Norris Team Spirit Award for his work with Kick
Drugs Out of America. He continues to serve on the advisory boards of
many non-profit organizations. By giving his time and lending his
hands, Judge McSpadden has changed many lives, and I want you to know
that our Nation is a better place because of his commitment to helping
our communities become safer.
Prior to his three decades of public service in the courtroom, Judge
McSpadden also served his country as a United States Marine. While
enlisted, he even found time to win the Marine Corps Tennis Champion
title. He is a 3-time Big 8 Conference Tennis Singles Champion and
still enjoys playing at River Oaks Country Club.
The impact of Judge McSpadden's work is far reaching. He truly is an
unsung hero whose efforts are felt in communities, neighborhoods and
homes across Texas each and every day.
Judge McSpadden's achievements at the 209th and in the community far
surpass these recognitions. His innovation, determination and
compassion for serving others make him one of the best judges in the
Nation. Judge McSpadden is a close personal friend, excellent lawyer,
tremendous judge, and amazing public servant for Texas.
And that's just the way it is.
____________________
HONORING MONTANA'S WORLD WAR II VETERANS
______
HON. DENNY REHBERG
of montana
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. REHBERG. Mr. Speaker, today it is my distinct privilege to
welcome a very special group of men and women to our Nation's capital.
And while it is incumbent upon us to honor them, the truth is, they
honor us with their presence here.
On September 23, 2012, nearly 100 veterans of the Second World War
will arrive in Washington, D.C. through the Honor Flight program. Since
2005, Honor Flight has worked to bring WWII veterans to visit their war
memorial at the foot of the Washington Monument, and a few feet from
the White House. In that first year, 137 veterans participated in the
program. By last year, that total annual participation had swelled to
18,055.
And while each of the veterans who has participated deserves our
thanks and our honor, this particular group is special because it marks
the second time this year that Honor Flight has brought out a group of
veterans from Montana.
You won't find a state that's more proud of our veterans than
Montana. And we have a lot of them. In fact, you won't find many states
that have more as a percentage of our population.
On December 7, 1941 the United States was pulled into the war and
Montanans answered the call to service. Within the first year, 40,000
men and women from the Treasure State enlisted. By the end of the war,
57,000 had served--nearly 10 percent of the state's entire population
at the time, one of the highest rates in the country.
They served in every branch and in every theater of the conflict. And
too many of them never made it back to Montana, although I think that
heaven must be a little something like a peaceful sunset over the
Yellowstone River.
But Montana's veterans didn't sacrifice in vain. They bled and died
to defeat the greatest threat to freedom the world has ever seen. They
fought across the bloody islands of the Pacific and in the frozen
forests of Europe. They fought in the air, land and sea. Some even
fought below the waves. And they won.
Today, the men and women who fought and won that war are justifiably
part of what is called the Greatest Generation. The sacrifices of men
and women who arrive in Washington, D.C. are the reason for this
honorable title. It is not something we gave to them, it's something
they earned.
As they visit this city and reflect on what it stands for as a beacon
of freedom to the world, I think the rest of us should remember that
the reason liberty still exists is because good men stood up to
tyranny. They are the greatest of the Greatest Generation, and on
behalf of all Montanans, I want to thank them.
57,000 Montanans served during World War II. Just under 100 are here
this week. Please join me in welcoming and honoring:
Lee Alderdice (Polson, MT); Milton Lyman Amsden (Broadus, MT); Harry
A. Arvidson (Lincoln, MT); Peter N. ``Bert'' Bertram (Absarokee, MT);
Leonard E. ``Len'' Bestrom (Laurel, MT); Warren Charles Bodecker
(Plains, MT); Ralph Floyd Brewington (Broadview, MT); James C. ``Jim''
Brook (Lewistown, MT); William Boner ``Bill'' Brown (Billings, MT);
Jackson Lamar ``Jack'' Burger (Lavina, MT); Filmore Burton Canon
(Broadus, MT); John M. Clark (Butte, MT); Harold Lee ``Hal'' Conrad
(Lewistown, MT); Hollis E. Coon (Butte, MT); Gool Counts (Livingston,
MT); Carley Rhein Cromwell (Missoula, MT); Leo Eckhardt (Billings, MT);
James E. ``Jim'' Elander (Missoula, MT); James ``Jim'' Ellison
(Billings, MT); Charles T. ``Bosco'' Eskro (Billings, MT); Frank D.
Evans (Billings, MT); Alvin Oscar Fisher (Billings, MT); Samuel W.
Frank (Laurel, MT); Durl J. Gibbs (Buffalo, MT); Raymond P. ``Ray''
Gregori (Hungry Horse, MT); Robert Glover Hall (Potomac, MT); Charles
E. ``Chuck'' Halstead (Columbus, MT); Thomas A. ``Tom'' Hanel
(Billings, MT); Russell LeRoy Hartse (Missoula, MT); James ``Jim''
Hasterlik (Great Falls, MT); Milam V. Hearron (Billings, MT); McDonald
Watkins ``Don'' Held (Billings, MT); Lewis Wiliam
[[Page 14884]]
``Louie'' Holzheimer (Great Falls, MT); Bernard E. ``Barney'' Ilertson
(Corvallis, MT); Earl T. Jackson (Deer Lodge, MT); Elwin M. Johnson
(Laurel, MT); George L. Kimmet (Billings, MT); Vincent Leo ``Vince''
Koefelda (Laurel, MT); Vernon Lee ``Vern'' Koelzer (Billings, MT);
Frank J. Koncilya (Lewistown, MT); Andre Rioul ``Andy'' Kukay (Great
Falls, MT); Willard E. ``Bud'' LaCounte (Billings, MT); Albert Raymond
``Al'' Lasater (Ryegate, MT); Harold J. Lasater (Forsyth, MT); Gorvan
J. ``Duke'' LeDuc (Laurel, MT); Oscar Lawrence ``Lawrence'' Lee
(Shepherd, MT); Norman D. Leonard (Billings, MT); Joseph Biggs ``Joe''
Litle (Bozeman, MT); Max E. Long (Laurel, MT); Robert W. Lubbers
(Billings, MT); Leonard John ``Pat'' Mager (Harlowton, MT); James J.
Marshall (Missoula, MT); William R. ``Bill'' Matthew (Anaconda, MT);
Paul Messer (Billings, MT); Elizabeth Steele ``Betty'' Meyer (Paradise,
MT); Geraldine E. ``Gerry'' Mihalic (Missoula, MT); Gerald Kenneth
``Jerry'' Nelson (Billings, MT); John H. ``O'bie'' O'Bannon
(Stevensville, MT); Clarence Allan ``Ole'' Olson (Billings, MT); Eddie
C. Olson (Vida, MT); Ray A. ``Ole'' Olson (Billings, MT); Thomas F.
``Pat'' Patterson (Stevensville, MT); Roy Louis ``Pete'' Peters (Roy,
MT); John W. Porter (Deer Lodge, MT); Carl ``Corky'' Redding (Billings,
MT); Michael Gene Rhodes (Billings, MT); Robert V. ``Bob'' Ryan (E.
Helena, MT); Charles Franklin ``Frank'' Sandford (Missoula, MT); Dave
Schledewitz (Townsend, MT); Laurence Norbert Shipp (Miles City, MT);
William James ``Jim'' SiveIle (Poison, MT); Anthony William ``Bill''
Skorupa (Bridger, MT); Charles E. ``Chuck'' Smith (Billings, MT);
Donald E. Smith (Melville, MT); Kenneth C. ``K.C.'' Smith (St. Regis,
MT); Robert M. ``Bob'' Standefer (Billings, MT); John R. ``Jack''
Stevenson (Missoula, MT); Frank Phillip Thatcher (Billings, MT);
Clifford V. ``Cliff'' Thomsen (Billings, MT); Robert E. ``Bob''
Torgrimson (Billings, MT); Ronald Wilmar ``Buck'' Torstenson
(Kalispell, MT); James Arthur ``Jim'' Vick (Billings, MT); Albert
``Al'' Wade (Billings, MT); James Forest ``Jim'' Walker (Billings, MT);
Bernard Edgar Wanderaas (Vida, MT); Joseph A. ``Joe'' Weber (Deer
Lodge, MT); Allen L. ``Buster'' Whittington (Billings, MT); Bryce Wood
Williams (Billings, MT); Andrew R. ``Pete'' Winter (Ronan, MT).
____________________
WISHING THE PEOPLE OF TAIWAN A JOYOUS NATIONAL DAY CELEBRATION
______
HON. BLAKE FARENTHOLD
of texas
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. FARENTHOLD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to extend my
congratulations and best wishes to President Ma Ying-jeou on the
occasion of Republic of China (Taiwan)'s National Day. This national
holiday commemorates the 1911 Wu-ch'ang uprising that ended centuries
of monarchy and led to the birth of the Republic of China.
Taiwan and the United States enjoy a robust relationship that
reflects our two countries' historical, cultural and economic ties over
the last century. Despite lack of formal relations between the two
countries, the United States and Taiwan continue to be strong partners
in trade, cultural and educational exchanges as well as cooperation in
many other areas. Taiwan's cooperation with the United States in
combating global terrorism has earned the trust of the American people
and boosted exchanges and friendship between our two nations. Such
relations also extend to discussions over Taiwan's military needs. A
strong Taipei-Washington relationship is in both governments' best
interests for the stability of East Asia. This year, we celebrated the
33st anniversary of the enactment of the Taiwan Relations Act, the
cornerstone of U.S.-Taiwan relations.
My additional congratulations to the people of Taiwan for their
continued participation in the World Health Assembly meetings this May
in Geneva. I hope Taiwan will also soon join the International Civil
Aviation Organization (ICAO).
I join my fellow colleagues in wishing the people of Taiwan a joyous
National Day celebration and look forward to expanding our strong
relationship.
____________________
RECOGNIZING MR. ROBERT SMALL
______
HON. JEFF DENHAM
of california
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. DENHAM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and thank Mr.
Robert W. Small for the time and energy he has dedicated to the
Military Academy Nomination process by serving the constituents of the
19th Congressional District as a member of our Academy Selection Board.
Robert W. Small was born in Lordsburg, New Mexico on February 11,
1935. Mr. Small served his country in both the United States Marine
Corps and the United States Army. While in the Marine Corps, he was
called to duty on combat missions in both Korea and Vietnam; yet, his
service went beyond combat. Mr. Small completed duty as a Marine Corps
Drill Instructor and Marine Corps Recruiter in addition to assignments
with Inspector Instructor Staff, Hawk Missile System, and Infantry and
Tanks.
Beyond his work with the United States Marine Corps, Mr. Small has a
distinguished career with the United States Army. As an Army Recruiter,
Mr. Small recruited for the Army National Guard. His hard work was
recognized in 1981, when he was awarded as the Top Recruiter for the
entire nation--having enlisted 139 soldiers in one fiscal year. This
award is a testament to Mr. Small's impeccable work ethic.
Mr. Small's enthusiastic service to his country is demonstrated by
his wide range of military work, including the California State
Military Reserve. He served as Battalion Commander and Director of
Recruiting State Wide and was assigned to the Commanding General's
Staff as Staff Duty Officer. Mr. Small retired at the rank of Lt.
Colonel. With forty years of military service, he serves as an example
to all in his community.
Beyond the military, Mr. Small continues to exemplify true
citizenship in his civilian life. He attended California State
University, Fresno and West Coast Bible College. Mr. Small was a
founding Pastor of Wahiiwa Church of God in Oahu, Hawaii and a Pastor
of Pinole Church of God in Pinole, California. He currently serves as
Senior Care Pastor at Northwest Church in Fresno, California. He is a
member of the American Legion, VFW, and current Commandant of the
Marine Corps League.
Robert served as Staff Assistant and Military Liaison to Congressman
George Radanovich, former Representative of the 19th District of
California. In addition, he served on the Academy Selection Board for
both Congressman Radanovich and me.
Mr. Speaker, please join me in honoring Robert W. Small for his
outstanding service to his country and community. His expertise as a
member of the United States Armed Services and life experiences have
made his time on the Academy Selection Board invaluable. He is a true
public servant, and I wish him continued success in his future
endeavors.
____________________
A TRIBUTE TO CHAIRMAN PAUL F. OREFFICE
______
HON. DAVE CAMP
of michigan
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Chairman Paul
F. Oreffice of The Dow Chemical Company for his distinguished life and
career as he nears his 85th birthday. Mr. Oreffice is a true American
success story, having immigrated to the United States from Venice when
he was 12 years old to later becoming the CEO of one of the world's
largest and most recognized corporations.
Paul joined The Dow Chemical Company in 1953, after graduating from
Purdue University and serving two years in the U.S. Army during the
Korean War. He maintained a variety of international assignments early
in his career before being named President and Chief Executive Officer
in 1978. His adept business skills while head of the company helped him
become the first person to receive both the Palladium medal and the
Chemical Industry medal in the late 1980s. He was named Chairman of the
Board in 1986, and served in that position until his retirement in
1992. Throughout his tenure, The Dow Chemical Company remained one of
the largest and most well-respected manufacturing companies in the
world.
It is because of the determination and success of individuals like
Paul that America remains the land of opportunity for folks wishing to
achieve great things through hard work and ingenuity. On behalf of the
Fourth Congressional District, I congratulate Paul for his remarkable
life and career.
[[Page 14885]]
____________________
CRANE HERITAGE DAY HONOREE--EVELYN STRODER
_____
HON. K. MICHAEL CONAWAY
of texas
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate a stalwart of our
community, Evelyn Stroder, who is being recognized as this year's Crane
Heritage Day honoree.
When I think of what it takes to make a strong community, I think of
someone like Evelyn. Communities can be united in many aspects, but one
central component found in strong communities is service. And service
to our community has been at the core of Evelyn's life.
Evelyn's journey began in Corpus Christi where she graduated from
high school and attended Del Mar Junior College before she went on to
earn a B.A. in English and Journalism from Baylor University. Later she
earned an M.A. in American Literature and Mass Communications from
UTPB.
In 1955, Evelyn and her husband, Charles, moved from Corpus Christi
to Crane. Once in Crane, Evelyn would use her education to give back.
She served others as an educator for 28 years and continues to serve on
the Crane School Board. While Evelyn no longer teaches, she still
remains active in the Permian Historical Society and the Crane County
Historical Commission. Her journalistic accomplishments include her
presented papers and published work in a variety of publications
throughout Texas, and currently she serves as the assistant editor of
the Permian Historical Society Annual.
One would think that with such a busy schedule, Evelyn would not have
time for much else in life. However, in between all these
accomplishments, she has managed to raise three children, seven
grandchildren, and six great-grandchildren--a notable accomplishment in
itself!
On behalf of the 11th District, it is an honor to recognize Evelyn
because she is an example of those who have made our nation strong. Our
nation did not become great from the top down, but from the bottom up--
from the people in our neighborhoods willing to serve and make their
community a better place for others and their children. Evelyn is one
of these individuals. Through this award, she is rightly recognized for
the time and sacrifice she has dedicated to others and it is an honor
to represent her in the Halls of Congress.
____________________
CONGRATULATIONS TO COLONEL THEODORE C. ``TC'' WILLIAMS ON HIS
RETIREMENT FROM THE UNITED STATES ARMY
_____
HON. HOWARD P. ``BUCK'' McKEON
of california
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to an
exceptional officer in the United States Army, Colonel Theodore C.
``TC'' Williams. Throughout his 27 years of distinguished service, COL
Williams has personified the Army values of duty, integrity and
selfless service across the many missions that the Army provides in
defense of our Nation. As the Chief of Programs Division in the Office
of the Secretary of the Army, many of us on Capitol Hill have enjoyed
the opportunity to work with COL Williams on a wide variety of Army
issues and programs. It's my privilege to recognize COL Williams and
his many accomplishments.
COL Williams, the son of the late Theodore C. Williams, Jr and
Phyllis Kane Williams of Potomac, Maryland, attended Winston Church
Hill Senior High School in Potomac, Maryland, and was commissioned as a
Second Lieutenant in the Infantry in 1985 after graduating from The
Citadel in South Carolina.
He served from 1986 to 1989 as a rifle platoon leader, company
executive officer, and reconnaissance platoon leader in 1st Battalion,
27th Infantry ``Wolfhounds'' at Schofield Barracks, Hawaii. From 1990
to 1993, he served as the battalion assistant operations officer then
commander of Bravo Company in 3rd Battalion, 7th Infantry Cotton-
Bailers during the Persian Gulf War and at Fort Stewart, Georgia. From
1993 to 1994, COL Williams served as a Senior Infantry Trainer in the
24th Infantry Division Resident Training Detachment assisting the 48th
Brigade, Georgia National Guard. From 1995 to 1998, COL Williams was a
small group instructor for the Infantry Officers Advanced Course and
tactics team chief in the Tactics Department of the Infantry School at
Fort Benning, Georgia. From 1999 to 2001, he served as operations
officer and then executive officer in 1st Battalion, 23rd Infantry
``Tomahawks'' at Fort Lewis, Washington.
From 2001 to 2003, COL Williams was an Army Congressional liaison in
the Office of the Chief of Legislative Liaison where he was principally
responsible for overseeing the efficient operation of the division and
managing the Army's legislative portfolio on the Chem-Bio Defense
program.
In 2003, LTC Williams left OCLL to take command of the 2nd Battalion,
6th Infantry ``Gators'' during Operation Iraqi Freedom and at Smith
Barracks in Germany from June 2003 to June 2005. For twelve months,
Force Gator conducted combat and stability operations in southeast
Baghdad. In April 2004, while conducting transfer of authority to the
follow-on unit, the tactical situation in Iraq deteriorated and the
battalion task force was alerted to conduct combat operations in Najaf
and Al Kut. Following decisive combat operations in south-central Iraq,
the task force was extended in Iraq for three months to conduct combat
and stability operations in the infamous ``Triangle of Death.'' For
operations conducted April to July 2004, the battalion received the
Presidential Unit Citation as part of the 2nd Brigade, 1st Armored
Division. Upon redeploying to Germany after fifteen months in Iraq, the
battalion conducted reset and full-spectrum operations training in
preparation to deploy again in late 2005.
From 2005 to 2007, LTC Williams returned to the Office of the Chief
of Legislative Liaison to serve as the Legislative Assistant to the
Vice Chief of Staff, Army (VCSA). He stood out amongst his peers and
made himself an indispensible part of the VCSA's personal staff.
From 2007 to 2009, he was promoted to Colonel and led the division
within OCLL that develops the congressional engagement strategy for the
Secretary, Chief of Staff, Under Secretary, Vice Chief of Staff, and
Sergeant Major of the Army. He performed exceptionally. He personally
improved the Army's strategic communication with the Congress, and
developed the engagement strategy and legislative objectives for the
Army's Senior Leadership.
From 2009 to 2012, COL Williams performed duties as the Chief of
Programs. He expertly led the planning of the Army's congressional
engagement strategies between senior Army Staff leaders and Members of
Congress, leading directly to a defense authorizations bill that
enhanced the Army's ability to recruit, retain, and reset the world's
premiere fighting force.
Through these varying assignments, COL Williams provided outstanding
leadership, advice, and sound professional judgment on critical issues
of enduring importance to both the Army and Congress. On behalf of
Congress, I thank COL Williams, his wife Helen, and his entire family
for the commitment, sacrifices, and contribution they have made
throughout his honorable military career. Congratulations on completing
an exceptional and successful career.
____________________
IN HONOR OF MS. SYLVIA RUCINSKI
_____
HON. DENNIS J. KUCINICH
of ohio
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Ms. Sylvia
Rucinski who is being honored by the Polonia Foundation on October 7,
2012.
Born and raised in Cleveland, Ohio, Sylvia attended Miles Elementary
School and graduated from Holy Name High School. She later attended
Cuyahoga Community College and John Carroll University. Before
beginning her 22 year career at the Alliance of Poles of America,
Sylvia held a number of different positions. She previously held jobs
with Harris Seybold, Grabler Manufacturing and several school and
public libraries.
Sylvia has been a long-time and active member of the Polish-American
community. She has been the director for the Alliance of Poles Federal
Credit Union and Ohio Division of the Polish American Congress. She
also served as the recording secretary of Circle 9 of the Alliance of
Poles. Because of her unwavering service, Sylvia has been acknowledged
by the Alliance of Poles as the recipient of the 2004 Meritorious
Service Medal and Award and named the 2003 Grand Lady of Pulaski by the
Polonia Foundation.
Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honoring Mrs. Sylvia
Rucinski and congratulating her as she is recognized by the Polonia
Foundation.
[[Page 14886]]
____________________
HONORING MR. OLIVER SIEBERT OF CHESTERFIELD, MISSOURI
______
HON. W. TODD AKIN
of missouri
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. AKIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mr. Oliver Siebert of
Chesterfield, Missouri. The French government recently awarded Mr.
Siebert the Legion of Honor for his part in the liberation of
Strasbourg, France. The medal and the accompanying title of Knight of
the Legion of Honor is the highest military award given by the French
government.
Mr. Siebert, just twenty years old, was an acting second lieutenant
leading the 324th infantry battalion and the 220th field artillery in
November 1944. American forces, operating jointly with elements of the
French Second Armored Division under the command of Captain Jean Penet,
fought across the Vosges Mountains in the French Alps throughout
October and November 1944. On 23 November 1944 elements of the French
Army entered Strasbourg and liberated the city.
Mr. Siebert's service did not end with the liberation of Strasbourg.
While conducting operations in support of the assault of Hangviller on
27 November 1944, Mr. Siebert and a small group of American soldiers
were captured by German SS soldiers disguised as U.S. troops. Three
days later, after overpowering two SS officers and commandeering their
car, he was able to escape and return to his duties as an artillery
forward observer.
On Christmas Day 1944 a German shell landed not far from his forward
observation post and caused severe damage to his right leg. German
strafing of the ambulance that evacuated him that night caused further
damage that would require extensive surgery and lengthy convalescence
to repair. After treatment at several American military hospitals, Mr.
Siebert was honorably discharged on 18 August 1945.
Mr. Siebert returned to St. Louis, earned a degree in mechanical
engineering from Washington University and in 1948 married Virginia
Turner, his wife now for more than 63 years.
I am truly honored to have the opportunity to share this heroic
story. This son of a truck driver for Anheuser-Busch, despite initially
being rejected for military service because he was ``clinically
blind'', did not give up his quest to do his part to defeat Nazi
Germany. And now, almost seventy years later, I join the French
government in honoring his sacrifice and service to the French people
and these United States.
Mr. Siebert, thank you. And may God Bless you and your family.
____________________
CONGRATULATING MR. DEREK CAVILLA FOR COMPLETING THE NATIONAL GALLERY OF
ART'S SUMMER TEACHER INSTITUTE
______
HON. DANIEL WEBSTER
of florida
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to recognize Mr. Derek
Cavilla of Orlando, Florida, a teacher at Workforce Advantage Academy,
upon his completion of the National Gallery of Art's Annual Summer
Teacher Institute. During the National Gallery's six-day seminar, Mr.
Cavilla intensively studied the foundation of twentieth-century art by
examining the pioneering artists of French impressionism and post-
impressionism.
In order for participants to be accepted in to the Gallery's Teacher
Institute seminar, they must first complete a rigorous application
process. Mr. Cavilla was one of only forty-five teachers from across
the nation chosen to participate in this year's National Gallery of
Art's Teacher Institute. From this seminar, teachers are able to return
to their schools and students with new tools and ideas that will
enhance education curriculum of all grade levels and subjects. The
students of Central Florida are blessed to have such a dedicated
educator as Mr. Cavilla.
On behalf of the citizens of Central Florida, I am pleased to
recognize and congratulate Mr. Derek Cavilla on his acceptance to and
successful completion of the National Gallery of Art's Annual Summer
Teacher Institute. May his dedication to our nation's educational
institutions and students inspire others to follow in his footsteps.
____________________
FIRST ANNUAL AMERICA'S FAMILY DAY
______
HON. JOE BARTON
of texas
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on October 6, there will be an
event taking place in Santa Monica, CA that I would like to highlight.
This event will be the First Annual America's Family Day. The purpose
of this event will be to celebrate families and to stress the
importance of protecting and investing in our children.
On March 7, 2012, the Bi-Partisan Privacy Caucus, in which I serve as
the co-Chairman, held a briefing to directly highlight H.R. 1895, the
Do Not Track Kids Act of 2011. On our panel, we were joined by Nick
Cannon, Spokesperson for Safe Communications, who shared the same
passion of ensuring that our children are protected across all
platforms. He graciously publicly endorsed H.R. 1895 and has decided to
champion the cause by holding the very first America's Family Day.
I believe that Republicans and Democrats alike can agree that family
is a sacred institution that deserves our time, energy, and devotion. I
am blessed to have a loving wife, four wonderful children, two
stepchildren, and five grandchildren. I want nothing more than to do my
part to make sure they are secure, safe, and well protected. In this
sentiment, I am happy to offer my support for the First Annual
America's Family Day.
____________________
HONORING STATE REPRESENTATIVE PAUL ROAN
______
HON. DAN BOREN
of oklahoma
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. BOREN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a man of
determination, service, and integrity--State Representative Paul Roan
of Tishomingo, Oklahoma.
Roan, a member of the Oklahoma House of Representatives, has served
his district and state with distinction during the years of 2000 to
2012.
Paul's legislative work has been devoted to helping Oklahoma's brave
veterans and emergency responders, protecting the state's natural
resources and improving education for young people.
His personal career has been built on a foundation of public service.
Roan proudly served our country as a member of the United States Air
Force, he then spent time as an educator, a police officer and was
elected Deputy Sheriff of Pontotoc County, followed by over 20 years of
service as an Oklahoma Highway Patrol State Trooper.
Representative Roan has been a civic leader in the Oklahoma community
for several years, serving as 1st Vice-President of the Oklahoma State
Troopers Association, President of Tishomingo Lions Club, Master of
Tishomingo Masonic Lodge #91, and a member of Johnston County Chamber
of Commerce and American Legion Post 164.
It is with great pleasure that I take this opportunity to acknowledge
not only his successes in the Oklahoma legislature, but also as a
devoted father and family man.
Paul Roan is the husband of Betty Roan and father of Chris, Brad, and
Angela Roan. The 20th House District of Oklahoma is a better place
because of the service of Paul Roan.
____________________
IN HONOR OF SEA OTTER AWARENESS WEEK
______
HON. SAM FARR
of california
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call attention to the 10th
Annual Sea Otter Awareness Week, September 23-29, 2012 sponsored by
Friends of the Sea Otter located in my congressional district. This
week-long event highlights one of the most iconic species in California
and the integral role they play in the near-shore marine ecosystem and
draws public attention to sea otters and the conservation issues they
face.
We all know that sea otter recovery has been met with challenges and
sea otter populations remain threatened. Each day, research is
uncovering additional causes of sea otter population declines. As a
keystone species, sea otters hold the entire kelp forest ecosystem
together, and as a bellwether species, they are an important indicator
of the health of the marine environment. The decline of southern sea
otters off of the California coast not
[[Page 14887]]
only impacts the species itself, but also affects other marine
populations and the surrounding ecosystems. The demise of sea otters
allows their prey, sea urchins, to proliferate unchecked--leading to
the alarming overgrazing of kelp beds, which function as critical
nursery grounds for many marine animals, and also help to sequester
CO2. Recent research has shown that spreading kelp can
absorb as much as 12 times the CO2 from the atmosphere than
would an urchin dominated system.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service should be commended for their
efforts in the recovery of the southern sea otter. Termination of the
translocation program, allowing sea otters expansion into southern
Californian waters, is a critical step along that path to recovery. I
am concerned that language in the House version of the FY13 NDAA
contains language that would impede the termination of this failed
program and those flawed sections of the bill must be removed.
Mr. Speaker, I applaud the many accomplishments of Friends of the Sea
Otter and other non-profit environmental organizations that work on
southern sea otter recovery in the Monterey Bay region. The Monterey
Bay Aquarium, researchers, fishermen, state and federal agencies,
schools, and many other institutions and individuals devote tremendous
time and resources to protect and recover the southern California sea
otter. Sea Otter Awareness Week is just one of their many activities
geared towards honoring and saving this species, and I am proud to be
associated with this vital work.
____________________
IN RECOGNITION OF TAIWAN'S NATIONAL DAY
______
HON. EDOLPHUS TOWNS
of new york
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the people of
the Republic of China (Taiwan) on its upcoming National Day.
During the last four and a half years, the Republic of China's
President Ma has further strengthened the ties between Taiwan and the
United States. One way Taiwan has accomplished this has been by
reducing its trade surplus with the U.S. year after year. Additionally,
Taiwan recently lifted its ban on U.S. beef imports. Taiwan's lifting
will help our beef industry economically and Taiwan's example will
encourage other countries to lift their bans against U.S. beef and beef
products.
Taiwan is also known for being a champion of peace. In addition to
reducing tensions across the Taiwan Strait, Taiwan has continued to
assert itself as a proponent of peaceful solutions. For instance, in
the most recent dispute over the Diaoyutai/Senkaku islands, Taiwan has
urged all parties to exercise patience and to put aside their
differences, instead of resorting to military threats.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me today in congratulating
Taiwan on its 101st National Day. I am confident that the friendship
and close relationship that has been cultivated by the United States
and Taiwan will continue for many years to come.
____________________
HONORING SENIOR MASTER SERGEANT EMILIO HERNANDEZ
______
HON. MARIO DIAZ-BALART
of florida
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I proudly rise today to honor Senior
Master Sergeant Emilio Hernandez, an exceptional individual who has
most recently been awarded the 2012 Outstanding Airman of the Year
award by the United States Air Force. This prestigious award is given
to only 12 members of the Air Force each year for their superior
leadership, job performance, community involvement, and personal
achievements.
SMSgt Hernandez was born in Havana, Cuba but grew up in Miami, FL. He
graduated from Hialeah High School in 1990 and began his military
career in 1992, serving at both Sheppard AFB in Texas and K.I. Sawyer
Air Force Base in Michigan. He was deployed to Incirlik Air Base in
Turkey later that year in support of Operation Provide Comfort where he
garnered two achievement medals, and was selected as a holiday phone
call recipient from then President Bill Clinton. His decorated service
history includes deployments to Kuwait in support of Operation Southern
Watch, and Baghdad in support of both Operations Iraqi Freedom and
Enduring Freedom.
In 2008, SMSgt Hernandez was assigned to his current position in the
100th Civil Engineer Squadron as Superintendent Operations Flight at
RAF Mildenhall in the United Kingdom. In 2009 he deployed to Ali Base
Iraq, where he served as Electrical Superintendent of the 407th
Expeditionary Civil Engineer Squadron and received the Meritorious
Service Medal. Later, he was selected as the 100th Civil Engineer
Squadron's 2009 Senior Noncommissioned Officer of the year. In 2011
SMSgt Hernandez was awarded the Bronze Star Medal for his service at
Kandahar Airfield as the Operations Flight Chief of the 777th
Expeditionary Prime BEEF Squadron.
In his current position, SMSgt Hernandez has led 52 people in 53
civil engineering projects at 163 forward operating bases in support of
85,000 warfighters. He orchestrated $80,000 in repairs to nine Marine
Corps aircraft hangers to safeguard $300 million in assets in support
of a vital ISR platform. He oversaw a project to upgrade an electrical
grid on a dam which preserved water and power flow to 450,000 Afghans,
and managed the construction of two tactical operations centers worth
$500,000, securing Afghanistan's key district of Panjwai.
Mr. Speaker, I am honored to pay tribute to Senior Master Sergeant
Emilio Hernandez for his continued service to our nation, and I ask my
colleagues to join me in recognizing this remarkable individual.
____________________
RECOGNITION OF TAIWAN'S NATIONAL DAY
______
HON. TIM RYAN
of ohio
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, in celebration of Taiwan's National
Day on October 10th, I believe it fitting to call to mind one of the
basic elements of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) that has long guided
America's worldwide relationships.
The TRA states in SEC 2(b)(4)
``. . . to consider any effort to determine the future of
Taiwan by other than peaceful means, including by boycotts or
embargoes, a threat to the peace and security of the Western
Pacific area and of grave concern to the United States;''
The Taiwan Relations Act is monumental in the unique impact it has
had in maintaining the Peace in the Pacific and our relationship with
the nations of the Region.
Congratulations to Taiwan during this exciting time in your country's
history and for helping to maintain peace in Southeast Asia.
____________________
CONGRATULATING HEALTH CENTRAL HOSPITAL ON 60TH ANNIVERSARY
______
HON. DANIEL WEBSTER
of florida
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to recognize the 60th
anniversary of Health Central Hospital of Ocoee, Florida. Since 1952,
the dedicated physicians and staff of Health Central Hospital have
compassionately provided excellent healthcare services to residents
across Central Florida.
West Orange Memorial Hospital, as it was originally named, moved from
Winter Garden, Florida to Ocoee, Florida in 1993. Today, Health Central
Hospital is an 85-acre medical facility, housing a 171-bed acute care
hospital, physician offices, and a newly renovated 34-bed emergency
center. Health Central's dedication to their patients is evident not
only in their healthcare service, but also through their involvement in
the community.
On behalf of the citizens of Central Florida, I am pleased to
congratulate and applaud Health Central Hospital, along with their
physicians and staff, for their efforts to enrich the lives of their
patients and the Central Florida community for the past 60 years. May
their example of compassion and dedication inspire others to follow in
their footsteps.
____________________
HONORING FAIR FAMILY FARMS OF MANN'S CHOICE, PENNSYLVANIA
______
HON. BILL SHUSTER
of pennsylvania
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Fair Family Farms of
Mann's Choice,
[[Page 14888]]
Pennsylvania. On September 5, 2012, the farm marked its 200 years of
continuous ownership and operation by the descendents of Lewis Turner.
In 1812, Lewis Turner of Louden County, Virginia, purchased the 241-
acres that would become the original farm from the Estate of George
Woods and from Dr. John and Mary Anderson of Bedford County. Lewis and
his wife, Anna Maria Beltz, raised their six children on the farm.
Following Lewis' death, his eldest son Fredrick Turner purchased the
farm on April 24, 1838. Frederick and his wife, Susannah Mahala Exline,
raised their seven children on the farm and constructed a gristmill on
the property, remnants of which are still visible today.
Upon Frederick Turner's death, the farm was divided between three of
his sons. One of the three, Andrew Turner, purchased the 95-acre Parent
Parcel, a portion of the original land that has remained in the
family's possession since the original 1812 survey. In 1865, Andrew and
his wife Anna Mariah Hillegass constructed a barn and homestead in
which they raised their eight children. The homestead remains in use to
this day.
Following the death of Anna Maria, the farm passed to her daughter
Mary M. Turner and her husband, John W. Fair, on December 20, 1912. On
April 2, 1923, they transferred the property to one of their six
children, Ralph A. Fair, and his wife, E. Mae Mowry. The farm changed
hands again on February 12, 1959, when Ralph H. and Floyd A. Fair, two
of Ralph and Mae's three sons, took possession of the property. Since
1979, Ralph and his wife, Geraldine V. Coughenour, have worked to
acquire portions of the original land that had been subdivided and sold
over the years, and now hold 226 of the original 241 acres. Throughout
their 55 years of marriage, Ralph and Geraldine have always lived on
the farm where Ralph was born and where they raised their six children,
two of whom still live on the property.
After Floyd's death, full ownership of the farm passed to Ralph and
Geraldine, on June 29, 2006. In 2008, Ralph and Geraldine created Fair
Family Farms LLC to hold and preserve all the farm's land. They, as
well as four of their children, are partners of the LLC, making them
the 6th and 7th generation owners of the ancestral farm.
Since the farm's creation 200 years ago, it has remained an active
dairy. Currently, Fair Family Farms is the only Pennsylvania Certified
Organic dairy in Bedford County, producing milk, hay, corn and oats, as
well as a significant poultry operation that produces million of eggs
each year.
It is quite an accomplishment to keep a farm productive and in the
same family for seven generations. Happy bicentennial, Fair Family
Farms, and best wishes for many more!
____________________
RECOGNIZING AND THANKING CAPTAIN ROD W. STUBBLEFIELD
______
HON. JEFF DENHAM
of california
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Mr. DENHAM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and thank Captain
Rod W. Stubblefield for the time and energy he has dedicated to the
Military Academy Nomination process by serving the constituents of the
19th Congressional District as a member of our Academy Selection Board.
Rod W. Stubblefield was born, raised, and schooled in Fresno,
California. He graduated from California State University, Fresno
(CSFU) with a Bachelor of the Arts and was a four-year letterman with
the Fresno State Football Team. He returned to CSUF as a graduate
student, where he earned his Master's in Business Administration. For
51 years, he has been a Trustee and Board Member of the Bulldog
Foundation at Fresno State University and is a devoted fan and
supporter of Bulldog Football.
He has been married to Carol Stubblefield for 52 years, and their
family has traveled extensively. They have been blessed with two sons,
Tim and Curtis, and two grandchildren, Tori and Nicholas.
Captain Stubblefield entered the United States Navy as a Seaman
Recruit in January, 1951. He was a member of the 12-1 Surface Division
while he completed his undergraduate education. In August of 1954, Mr.
Stubblefield was commissioned as an Ensign in U.S. Navy.
His professional schooling includes Department of Defense Graduate
Studies, Boeing Aircraft Management Studies, National Security
Management School, and studies at the Naval War College. Captain
Stubblefield holds Active Duty Certification specialties in Explosive
Ordinance Disposal, Master Deep Sea Diver, Scuba Diver, and Extensive
Training in Atomic, Biological, and Nuclear Warfare and Terrorist
Insurgency. In addition, he is a surface-qualifed officer. He has
served numerous tours at sea, including U.S.S. Laws DD 558, U.S.S.
Renville APA 227, U.S.S. Estes LCC 12, along with many more.
Captain Stubblefield's major shore duties include Commanding officer:
Naval Ammunition Depot, Hawthorne, Nevada; Officer in Charge: Naval
Riverine Operations and Special Forces, Mare Island, California;
Officer in Charge: Counterinsurgency Training with E0D, Unit 1, Hawaii;
and Officer in Charge: US Navy Elk Hills, California, Petroleum
Facility. Captain Stubblefield retired from the active service with the
U.S. Navy on July 1, 1985.
Capstain Stubblefield continues to serve his country as a
representative of the U.S. Naval Academy. In 1973, the Navy assigned
Capt. Stubblefield as the Central California Blue and Gold Officer. He
currently represents thirty schools in the Central Valley. He as served
on five Congressional All Academy Nominating Committees and is
currently assigned to the 19th Congressional District of California.
Captain Stubblefield greatly helped me during my term in Congress and
has served honorably for Congressmen Sisk, Krebs, Coehlo and
Radanovich.
Beyond his significant military career, Captain Stubblefield has been
employed by New York Life and NYLIFE Securities for 56 years as a
Financial Planner and Agent. The Stubblefield Office specialized in
Business, Personal and Estate Planning. Captain Stubblefield has been a
Club Member for 45 years and also holds the Chartered Life Underwriter
and Charter Financial Consultant designations. The Stubblefield Family
has a combined service to New York Life for over 200 years. Captain
Stubblefield has also been Life Member of the Million Dollar Round
Table for 37 years.
Mr. Speaker, please join me in honoring Captain Rod W. Subblefield
for his outstanding service to his country and community. He has served
the U.S. Navy for a total of 61 years, including 39 years at the Blue
and Gold Officer to the United States Naval Academy. This service,
along with his dedicated work as part of the Academy Selection Board,
makes him an invaluable asset to his commuity. He is a true public
servant, and I wish him continued success in his future endeavors.
____________________