[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Pages 16305-16315]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  DISAPPROVAL OF THE PRESIDENT'S EXERCISE OF AUTHORITY TO SUSPEND THE 
                     DEBT LIMIT--MOTION TO PROCEED

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I move to proceed to S.J. Res. 26.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report the motion to 
proceed.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 223, S.J. Res. 26, a 
     joint resolution relating to the disapproval of the 
     President's exercise of authority to suspend the debt limit, 
     as submitted under section 1002(b) of the Continuing 
     Appropriations Act, 2014 on October 17, 2013.

  I yield the floor.


                       Reservation of Leader Time

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
leadership time is reserved. Under the previous order, the time until 
12:30 p.m. will be equally divided and controlled between the two 
leaders or their designees.
  The Senator from Utah.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, before I make my remarks, I understand the 
distinguished Senator from Tennessee has been waiting to make some 
remarks himself. I ask unanimous consent that he go first, and then if 
Senator Baucus is here, he goes second, and I go third, but if Senator 
Baucus is not here, I will go second.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  The Senator from Tennessee is recognized.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Utah. If that 
suits his convenience, I appreciate that courtesy very much. I will not 
take more than 8 or 10 minutes.
  The President should ask the Secretary of Health and Human Services, 
Kathleen Sebelius, to resign her position because of the disastrous 
rollout of ObamaCare.
  Taxpayers have spent $400 million to create exchanges that--after 
3\1/2\ years--still don't work. As a result, the White House had to 
announce last night that the key enforcement mechanism to their 
individual mandate--a

[[Page 16306]]

$95 fine that increases every year--will be waived until the end of 
March of next year. That may be fine for those currently without 
insurance, but for the millions being forced into the exchanges and 
losing their current insurance, there is no relief, just higher prices, 
a likely lapse in insurance coverage, a broken Web site, and broken 
promises.
  We already know of 1.5 million Americans who are losing their 
policies because starting January 1, many insurance policies they now 
have will not be legal under ObamaCare, and because the exchange will 
not be working, they will not be able to choose another policy. This 
chart gives an example of what is going on. Just in three States--
California, Florida, and New Jersey--there are 1.4 million insurance 
policies that will not be valid after January 1 because they are not 
legal under ObamaCare.
  Compare that number, 1.4 million, to the number of Americans in those 
three States who have reportedly applied or enrolled on the Web site 
for insurance, 7 or 8 percent of all the people who will lose their 
current policy have applied for a different policy through the 
exchange. That is what is going on with families across this country as 
people worry about health care.
  These are policies in the individual market. There are 19 million 
Americans in the individual market. We also heard on NBC News over the 
last couple of days that the Obama administration knew that 47 to 60 
percent of the policies in the individual market would not be legally 
offered under ObamaCare. Yet they still said to people: ``If you like 
your insurance, you can keep it.''
  At some point there has to be accountability. Expecting this 
Secretary to be able to fix what she has not been able to fix during 
the last 3\1/2\ years is unrealistic. It is throwing good money after 
bad. It is time for her to resign and for someone else to take charge. 
No private sector chief executive would escape accountability after 
such a poor performance. The principle of accountability is not and 
should not be foreign to the public sector.
  Admiral Hyman Rickover, father of the nuclear navy, told his 
submarine captains they were not only accountable for their ships, they 
were also accountable for the nuclear reactors on their ships. If 
anything went wrong with the reactor, their career in the Navy was 
over, the Admiral said. As a result of that dose of accountability, 
since the 1950s, there has never been a death as a result of a problem 
with a nuclear naval submarine reactor.
  Americans deserve that kind of accountability in the implementation 
of the new health care law. Instead, the Secretary appears not even to 
have told the President about known problems with the ObamaCare Web 
site in the months and days leading up to the launch. Despite repeated 
requests, she has refused to tell Congress or the public the reasons 
the ObamaCare Web site continues to fail, while insisting on more time 
and an undisclosed amount of money to fix it.
  Before the Internet, RCA knew how many records Elvis was selling 
every day, Ford knew how many cars they were selling every day, and 
McDonald's could tell us how many hamburgers they were selling each 
day. Yet, here we are in the advanced stages of the Internet age and, 
under Secretary Sebelius's leadership, the Obama administration will 
not tell us how many Americans have tried to sign up for ObamaCare, or 
how many have actually signed up, or what level of insurance they have 
purchased, or in what ZIP Code they live. Not only will they not tell 
us, they have done their best to keep us from finding out.
  With WikiLeaks and Edward Snowden spilling our beans every day, what 
is happening on the ObamaCare exchanges is the best kept secret left in 
Washington, DC. The National Security Agency could learn some lessons 
from Secretary Sebelius.
  Later today I will ask unanimous consent to approve a six-page bill I 
introduced yesterday to require the administration to answer these 
questions every week. Secretary Sebelius is not responsible for 
enacting ObamaCare, but she has been responsible for 3\1/2\ years for 
implementing it. Now many Americans have only a few weeks to purchase 
new insurance or be without health insurance. To expect the Secretary 
to correct in a few weeks what she has not been able to do in 3\1/2\ 
years is unrealistic.
  It is time for the President to ask the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services to resign.
  I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Utah.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, during the debt limit impasse in 2006, 
then-Senator Obama stated:

       The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's 
     debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. Leadership means 
     the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the 
     burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children 
     and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure 
     of leadership, and Americans deserve better.

  That was former Senator Barack Obama.
  At that time our gross debt was $8.3 trillion. It is now well above 
twice that, currently standing at $17.1 trillion, which is over 100 
percent of the size of our economy.
  During that same 2006 debt limit debate, then-Senator Biden said:

       My vote against the debt limit increase cannot change the 
     fact that we have incurred this debt already and will no 
     doubt incur more. It is a statement that I refuse to be 
     associated with the policies that brought us to this point.

  That was then-Senator Biden. Things have certainly changed since 
2006.
  Now President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden preside over an 
administration which tells us that raising the debt limit is merely a 
matter of paying our bills and is a reflection of decisions made in 
Congress. Yet while it is ostensibly true that the Congress has the 
power to raise the debt limit, it is not true that Congress makes 
spending decisions unilaterally, with no role being played by the 
executive branch. No amount of spending can be enacted without the 
President signing it into law.
  In addition, the President submits a budget every year. The White 
House also issues policy statements and veto threats on spending bills 
on a more or less frequent basis. And, of course, every administration 
works with Congress to enact its domestic agenda which inherently 
includes setting priorities on Federal spending. So, in short, the 
commonly repeated notion that questions surrounding spending and the 
debt limit are Congress's and Congress's alone to answer is simply an 
attempt by this administration to avoid accountability on these issues.
  Ultimately, regardless of what President Obama and those in his 
administration are saying now, both Congress and the executive branch 
are to blame for our current predicament.
  The President has exercised his authority to suspend the debt limit 
under the Continuing Appropriations Act of 2014, which he signed into 
law on October 17. On October 16, public debt subject to the limit was 
around $16.7 trillion. On October 17--the very next day--public debt 
subject to the limit was over $17 trillion. In one day, Treasury 
increased the debt subject to the limit by over $328 billion. Let me 
repeat that. The debt increased by over $328 billion in a single day. 
That brings the increase in total public debt under this administration 
to more than $6.4 trillion, an amount that is, by all accounts, 
unprecedented.
  Echoing earlier sentiments of then-Senator Biden, I refuse to be 
associated with the policies that brought us to this point.
  The debt limit debate provides us with an opportunity to reexamine 
our Nation's fiscal course and take steps to correct it. Sadly, we have 
a President who appears unwilling to have that conversation. Instead, 
he apparently wants to press forward, full steam ahead, on our already 
unsustainable course, saddling future generations with unheard-of debts 
and broken entitlement promises in the process. Unfortunately, as the 
Congressional Budget Office has made clear, over the course of 
President Obama's administration, the Federal Government has recorded 
the largest budget deficits relative to the size of the economy since 
1946, causing our debt to soar, as we all

[[Page 16307]]

know. Federal debt as a percent of the economy's annual output is 
higher than at any point in U.S. history, except for a brief period 
around World War II.
  CBO makes three other points equally clear. No. 1, our debt path is 
unsustainable, threatening our economy and putting us at risk of a 
fiscal crisis. No. 2, the root of our fiscal problem is Federal 
spending, not a lack of revenue. No. 3, the main source of our spending 
problem is our unsustainable entitlement programs. That being the case, 
any serious talk about raising the debt limit must include a real, 
concrete discussion about entitlement reform.
  As every credible analyst tells us, we need to face the fiscal facts 
and enact serious structural reforms to our entitlement programs. So 
far, President Obama has been unwilling to even engage in this 
discussion. These days, every fiscal discussion with the White House 
begins and ends with demands for additional tax hikes to fuel even more 
spending. I guarantee it will be spending, not paying down the national 
debt or paying down what we owe; it will be to spend more.
  Of course, the President will occasionally resurrect offers he has 
made in past failed fiscal negotiations to include small entitlement 
changes, including, for example, movement to a different price index 
for certain cost-of-living adjustments, but at the same time the 
President and his administration have made clear that even those small 
entitlement changes will only be on the table if tax hikes are 
delivered first. That is the President's precondition for even 
entertaining tax reform or entitlement reform, even on the heels of a 
more than $630 billion tax hike at the beginning of this year and 
another $1 trillion in revenue delivered courtesy of ObamaCare.
  Entitlement reform is not an option, it is a necessity.
  Structural reforms to our health care entitlements should not hinge 
on another tax-and-spend operation. And structural reforms to Social 
Security should not be held hostage to another tax hike.
  Earlier this year I personally presented to the President, in detail 
and in writing--again, I emphasize I personally gave him this--five 
reform proposals relating to Medicare and Medicaid that have received 
bipartisan support--Democratic and Republican support--in the past. I 
asked him to consider the proposals and have since asked members of his 
administration to likewise give the proposals consideration.
  By the way, when we had our supper at the White House in the family 
dining room, I brought it up again. By the way, I brought it up with 
the Secretary of the Treasury over and over. I did not wait until an 
impending debt limit debate. Rather, I put my proposals forward in a 
good-faith effort to begin timely discussions. Unfortunately, thus far, 
I have not received even the slightest response, while the clock on 
Medicare and Medicaid keeps ticking, and both of them are running more 
and more deficits as we speak. By the way, the five points were 
bipartisan. They were bipartisan measures that both Democrats and 
Republicans supported.
  The situation with Social Security isn't much better. The trustees of 
the trust funds embedded in the Social Security system, including top 
administration officials such as the Treasury Secretary, have, in no 
uncertain terms, urged Congress to act quickly on reforming the 
retirement and the disability insurance programs to move them toward 
sustainability. Quite simply, it would be folly to approve of yet 
another debt limit increase without also working to address these 
programs, which are the main drivers of our debts and deficits.
  Therefore, I disapprove of the President's exercise of an authority 
to suspend the debt limit, and I urge all of my colleagues to similarly 
disapprove.
  The recent debt limit impasse and the impasse of 2011 also provided a 
good deal of information about lack of accountability of the Treasury 
Department and of our regulatory agencies.
  I currently serve as the ranking member on the Senate Finance 
Committee which has oversight responsibility toward the Treasury 
Department. To fulfill those responsibilities, I have been asking 
questions of Treasury about debt and cash management procedures, and I 
have repeatedly been stonewalled by the Treasury Department. I don't 
know that I have ever seen this happen before in either Republican or 
Democratic administrations.
  For example, when we have approached the debt limit, I have asked 
questions about how much cash our Nation has in the till, only to find 
that Treasury won't tell me and that they prefer the Congress rely on 
estimates from think tanks and Wall Street firms.
  Furthermore, during the most recent debt limit impasses, 
administration officials were busy frightening seniors, our troops, and 
financial market participants about whether they would be paid in the 
event the Treasury were to run out of cash. Officials also identified 
threats of massive financial instability stemming from a breach of the 
debt limit and of potential disruption from a downgrade of the rating 
on U.S. Government securities.
  So, naturally, I asked Treasury and, in fact, every voting member of 
the Financial Stability Oversight Council, or FSOC, to provide Congress 
and the American people information regarding the plans they had in 
place to respond to such catastrophes. Out of close to 20 letters I 
sent to FSOC members, I received only 3 responses. Apparently, the 
FSOC, which was empowered by the so-called Dodd-Frank Act to monitor 
and respond to merging threats to financial stability, does not 
identify or share response plans with respect to any threat that could 
emerge as a result of government policies.
  That being the case, I believe we should strip FSOC of any notional 
oversight of financial stability and call it what it really is: another 
unrestrained regulatory agency created only to enact additional 
regulations.
  After the fact, we have found that Treasury and some financial 
regulators had plans for how to respond to a debt limit breach or a 
ratings downgrade. Yet none of these plans were shared with Congress.
  Put simply, if we are going to empower a Federal regulatory body such 
as the FSOC to develop contingency plans to respond to threats to 
financial stability, then that body should be required to share those 
plans with the American people. Sadly, thus far that has not been the 
case.
  Another thing I have learned from our recent debt limit impasses is 
that we need to take a closer look at the Treasury Department's use of 
so-called extraordinary measures, which have become all too ordinary. 
These ``extraordinary measures'' are merely ways for the Treasury 
Department to temporarily delay facing a debt limit increase by issuing 
shadow debt. For example, Treasury can simply declare a debt issuance 
suspension period and stop issuing debt that it normally would issue 
while instead effectively telling the lender: Don't worry, I will pay 
you back later with interest. I believe the authority to use these 
types of extraordinary measures needs to be reexamined.
  As you can see, Mr. President, there are a number of problems that 
need to be confronted with regard to our Nation's ever-growing debt. As 
I said, we need to work together to address our Nation's unsustainable 
entitlement programs; otherwise, any effort to rein in our debts and 
deficits will amount to little more than tinkering around the edges.
  In addition, we need to improve information sharing between Congress 
and the executive branch on issues relating to our debt. The Treasury 
Department and our financial regulators have a lot to do with 
maintaining the depth, liquidity, and efficiency of the market for 
Treasury securities, and Congress has a duty to exercise oversight over 
these functions. Unfortunately, the administration, far more often than 
not, opts to keep Congress in the dark on these issues. And, the 
Treasury and financial regulators choose to keep their plans secret. 
This has to stop.
  By using his authority to suspend the debt limit through February 7, 
2014,

[[Page 16308]]

President Obama has opted not to confront any of these serious issues. 
Instead, he is leading us even further down a path that we already know 
is unsustainable. That being the case, I plan to vote in favor of the 
resolution of disapproval of this debt limit suspension, and I urge my 
colleagues to do the same.
  Having said all this, we are in a really big mess on ObamaCare--or if 
you want to call it the ``Affordable Care Act'' that nobody believes is 
affordable at all. They know it is going to lead us right into even 
more unsustainability than we have right now. I suspect that over time 
our brilliant people in the IT world, the information technology world, 
many of whom I know personally, will find some way to resolve what 
really has been a horrible, horrible situation with the broken 
introduction of the ObamaCare website. We all know it is horrible, and 
I hope they can resolve that. I think it is going to be hard because it 
is such a mess. I hope Mr. Zients is successful in his efforts to try 
to cure the broken system, but that does not cure the faults or 
problems with ObamaCare as a whole.
  What about the 30-hour rule? A lot of people, a lot of businesses, 
especially small businesses today, are making sure their employees do 
not work more than 30 hours because if they do, it triggers their 
having to pay what appear to many to be outrageous health care costs. 
That is just one thing, and that is not going to be easily resolved 
because the bill is such a stupid bill. It was stupid to begin with. We 
knew it would not work to begin with. We made the case that it would 
not work, and frankly we are here in this really ridiculous posture 
where we have been stymied because of an ineptly implemented 
introduction of a flawed law, and there is certainly some incompetency 
here. I hope they can resolve that, but that still does not resolve the 
30-hour rule, which is very important.
  How about the 50-employee rule? A lot of businesses that would have 
expanded, small businesses that would have grown, that would have 
tested the market and really gotten going, do not want to employ more 
than 49 people and trigger a massive sudden cost to their businesses.
  These are problems that basically are unsolvable under the bill, and 
they may be even larger problems than those we have with regard to the 
website problems I have been mentioning.
  ObamaCare is full of cliffs: to implicit tax rates; to hours of work; 
to numbers of employees. And those cliffs have led and will lead to 
more economic damage.
  That is just the beginning. I could speak for hours about what is 
wrong with this lousy Act called ObamaCare. I wish some of my 
colleagues on the other side would start saying what they actually 
know. They know it is a lousy Act. They know it is something that is 
not going to work. And if it does--if they continue to maintain that it 
has to work--it is going to be a massive cost to society, with less 
effective health care than we have ever had before.
  It is not just these technical problems that we have to solve; it is 
the economic problems that arise from ObamaCare. And I know what is 
going to happen. Within the next year or two, our friends on the other 
side--or should I say the White House in particular--President Obama is 
going to throw his hands in the air and say: It is not working. We have 
to go to a single-payer system, meaning socialized medicine. Anybody 
who believes that is the way to go--it sounds easy, but anybody who 
believes that is the way to go has not looked at socialized medicine 
around the world. They can point to some instances where it has worked 
for a short time, but over time it results in less health care, higher 
costs, and stultification of what really could be a great health care 
system.
  I want to solve these problems in health care, but I believe they 
ought to be solved on a bipartisan basis and not just a partisan basis, 
which is where we are with regard to ObamaCare--or should I say the 
``Affordable Care Act.''
  There are a number of people in this body and in the other body who, 
like me, have worked in health care areas and on health care issues 
ever since they have been in the Congress who would be willing to sit 
down and get this resolved. But I have to say there was no real 
consultation, there was no real effort to work in a bipartisan way, as 
far as I could see, even at the lower levels in Congress, in developing 
the partisan product called ObamaCare. It was just they were going to 
pass this and that is the way it will be. Now they are stuck with it--
should I say they are not really the ones who are stuck with it; it is 
the American people and the American taxpayers who are stuck with it. 
We have to, sooner or later, get together to resolve this problem 
without going to socialized medicine.
  I have talked to a number of doctors, health care providers, who are 
going to get out of the profession. They do not want to be governed by 
this type of governance. Frankly, you are going to find that if we go 
to socialized medicine, doctors are not going to work more than 6 or 8 
hours a day, where today they will work as long as it takes to serve 
people who need their help. We are going to find a real dearth of 
doctors. We are going to find a real dearth of the ability to provide 
the health care people need. We are going to start doing what that 
payment advisory board really is set up for, and that is rationing. 
Once that starts, the American people are going to rebel.
  It is going to happen sooner or later if we do not get our friends on 
the other side to at least work with us on finding some resolution. I 
have to say that we are working on our side to come up with a 
resolution, and I hope I can interest our colleagues on the other side. 
I admit that we can do a lot better than we are doing around here. We 
can do it in a much better bipartisan way than we are doing it. I think 
some people get a joy out of creating battles around here when we 
should get a joy out of resolving problems.
  I yield to the distinguished Senator from South Dakota.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Schatz). The Senator from South Dakota.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Utah and 
appreciate his very eloquent remarks. He has been a great leader on 
health care issues for a lot of years around here and was a fierce 
opponent of ObamaCare when it passed and laid out very compelling 
arguments at the time about why we should not adopt this law. 
Unfortunately, for the people of this country, many of the predictions 
he made are coming out to be true. I appreciate the leadership he 
provides for us as a member of the Finance Committee and his continued 
advocacy for policies that are good for consumers in this country when 
it comes to the issue of health care.
  This Friday marks a full month since healthcare.gov went live. This 
is the Web site that, in conjunction with the new health care law, was 
promised as a solution to all of the problems in the delivery and cost 
of health care in this country.
  To be frank, I do not think anybody on either side of the political 
aisle would deny this fact: These past 29 days have been nothing short 
of a disaster. The administration will not disclose how many Americans 
were actually able to enroll in plans. They are not forthcoming when it 
comes to disclosing exactly what the problem is with the Web site, 
other than calling the problems glitches. Well, glitches refer to 
temporary problems that are easily remedied. The problems with the 
health care law cannot merely be called glitches. The problems go 
deeper than technical problems on a Web site which, by the way, cost 
$400 million to develop.
  As the President said last week, ObamaCare `` . . . is not just a 
website. It's much more.'' Well, that is true. It is much more. It is a 
fundamentally flawed piece of legislation that is resulting in real-
life consequences for middle-class Americans.
  My colleagues and I, the Senator from Utah and others, have been 
speaking about the broken promises of this legislation since it came to 
the floor of the Senate almost 4 years ago. We know this law will not 
work as promised. Unfortunately, thousands of Americans are realizing 
it too as they

[[Page 16309]]

face higher costs and canceled insurance plans.
  Many Americans are experiencing sticker shock when it comes to their 
health care costs. Middle-class Americans already struggling to make 
ends meet are now facing steep premium increases in the ObamaCare 
exchanges.
  Last month, Avik Roy of Forbes reported on a recent study that said:

       ObamaCare will increase insurance rates for younger men by 
     an average of 97 to 99% and for younger women by an average 
     of 55 to 62%.

  In my home State of South Dakota, that is more than just a statistic; 
that is a grim reality facing thousands of young men and women.
  By comparing a typical low-cost plan for a healthy 30-year-old person 
in my State of South Dakota this year with a bronze plan that they 
would be able to get in South Dakota's health care exchange next year, 
the premium increases are nothing short of staggering. Younger women 
are going to face a 223-percent premium increase and younger men are 
going to face a 393-percent premium increase when you compare data from 
HHS with data from GAO about premiums in South Dakota in January of 
this year. That is more than a $1,500 annual increase for women and a 
$2,000 increase in health care premiums each year for 30-year-old men 
in my State of South Dakota.
  But it is not just South Dakota. It is not confined to South Dakota 
alone, and people in my State are not alone in their experience of 
sticker shock. Look at what is happening in the State of Nebraska where 
premium increases are 143 percent or in Georgia where premium increases 
are 198 percent. Money that could be used to pay off student loans, 
save for a home, or start a family is now going to be used to pay for 
ObamaCare.
  According to a new analysis by Avalere Health, Americans could face 
steep cost-sharing requirements--such as copayments, co-insurance, and 
deductibles--layered on top of their monthly premiums.
  It is clear that health care costs are going up--they are not going 
down--particularly for younger Americans.
  Additionally, President Obama promised that health care premiums 
would go down by an average of $2,500 per family. Well, if you look at 
what family premiums have done, they have actually jumped by more than 
$2,500 since ObamaCare became law.
  While costs continue to increase despite the President's promises to 
the contrary, household income has fallen by over $3,700 since 
President Obama first took office. No IT specialist can fix the problem 
of increased health care costs due to ObamaCare. The only fix is to 
repeal this law and to start over.
  In addition to higher costs, families are discovering other grim 
news. For example, they cannot keep the plan they like, despite the 
fact that the President promised they would be able to. Over and over 
the President told Americans they would be able to keep the insurance 
they have.
  Well, millions are now facing health insurance cancellation notices 
due to ObamaCare. That number is expected to increase up to nearly 10 
million by the end of this year. In fact, just this morning, CBS News 
published a story. The headline read, ``More than 2 million people 
getting booted from existing health insurance plans.'' These are 
Americans who had coverage they liked and now cannot continue to 
purchase.
  Finally, after dozens of media reports of Americans who are losing 
plans they like, the White House spokesman said, it is true that some 
Americans will not be able to keep the health care plan that they like 
under ObamaCare. Well, you do not have to tell people in this country, 
as Deborah from Westchester, CA, said in an article last week in the 
Los Angeles Times:

       All we've been hearing the last three years is if you like 
     your policy you can keep it . . . I'm infuriated because I 
     was lied to.

  CareFirst BlueCross BlueShield is being forced to cancel plans that 
cover 76,000 individuals in Virginia, Maryland, and Washington, DC, due 
to changes made by President Obama's health care law. That represents 
more than 40 percent of the 177,000 individuals covered by CareFirst in 
those States.
  President Obama said on July 21, 2009: If you like your current plan, 
you will be able to keep it. Let me repeat that. He said: If you like 
your plan, you will be able to keep it. That is from 2009.
  But he also went on to say, ``I won't sign a bill that somehow would 
make it tougher for people to keep their health insurance.'' That is 
from another conference he had with bloggers back in 2009. It is 
abundantly clear that this is not a simple misstatement or a glitch in 
the law, it is another broken promise that reveals serious underlying 
problems with the core principles of this law.
  No IT specialist can fix the problem of canceled plans due to 
ObamaCare. The only fix is to repeal this law and to start over. The 
President promised the people could keep a health care plan they liked. 
But an NBC News article published yesterday shows that the 
administration knew as early as 2010 that this was not going to be the 
case.
  NBC is reporting that 50 to 70 percent of the 14 million consumers 
who buy their insurance individually--in the individual marketplace--
can expect to receive a cancellation letter or the equivalent over the 
next year, because their existing policies do not meet the standards 
mandated by the new health care law. One expert predicts that number 
could reach as high as 80 percent. All say that many of those forced to 
buy pricier new policies will experience ``sticker shock.'' You do not 
have to look any further than George Schwab, a 62-year-old man from 
North Carolina who said he was ``perfectly happy'' with the plan from 
Blue Cross Blue Shield, the plan he currently had, which also insured 
his wife for a $228 monthly premium. But this past September he was 
surprised to receive a letter saying his policy was no longer 
available. The comparable plan the insurance company offered him 
carried a $1,208 monthly premium and a $5,500 deductible. The best 
option he has found on the exchange so far offered a 415-percent jump 
in premiums, to $948 a month.

       The deductible is less--

  He said.

       But the plan doesn't meet my needs. Its unaffordable. I am 
     sitting here looking at this, thinking we ought to just pay 
     the fine and just get insurance when we're sick.

  That is what Schwab said.

       Everybody's worried about whether the website works or not, 
     but that's fixable. That's just tip of the iceberg. This 
     stuff isn't fixable.

  That is from Mr. Schwab of North Carolina. That is just one of many 
stories out there about how this law is affecting average Americans, so 
much so that now even Democrats have come out criticizing parts of the 
health care law. Most recently there were 10 Senate Democrats who asked 
the administration to delay the deadline to sign up for ObamaCare 
before the tax on the individual mandate kicks in.
  While I agree that Americans should not be expected to pay a fine for 
not having a product they cannot even access, delaying implementation 
does not solve the underlying problem that this bill is simply bad 
policy. It was a partisan bill. It was rushed through without adequate 
forethought in the implementation problems and the serious adverse 
effect it would have on Americans' daily lives.
  Giving people more time to try to navigate a broken Web site with 
glitches is not going to fix this underlying fundamental flaw in this 
law. A majority of Americans, 56 percent, believe the Web site glitches 
are part of a broader problem with the health care law. ObamaCare is 
more than a Web site. Its real-life consequences squarely hit middle-
class Americans.
  Americans are facing sticker shock discovering they are being dropped 
from an insurance plan they like. As one woman said: I was all for 
ObamaCare until I found out I was paying for it. That too was a story 
that the LA Times ran over the weekend. ObamaCare is not ready for 
prime time. The President has got a new healthcare.gov czar, Jeffery 
Zients, who has been tasked with coming in and trying to fix the Web 
site by the

[[Page 16310]]

end of November. But a fix to the Web site by the end of November does 
not rectify the underlying problems with this law. The problems with 
this law are more than just problems with a Web site. We need to 
continue to work to repeal the onerous parts of this law and replace it 
with solutions that actually lower the cost of health care and give 
Americans continued access to a doctor they choose at a cost they can 
afford.
  Republicans here at the time when this law was being debated and 
passed in the Senate several years ago and subsequent to that time have 
consistently put forward solutions to the health care challenges that 
we face in this country that do not entail having government take over 
literally one-sixth of the American economy. As we can see from the 
rollout, the government does not do complicated things very well.
  This is a disaster at the rollout, but it is a train wreck in terms 
of substance and what it is going to do and the harm it will cost 
middle-class Americans. There are so many better solutions. We should 
allow people to buy insurance across State lines, create interstate 
competition, allow market forces to drive insurance costs down, allow 
people and businesses to join groups so they can get the benefit of 
group purchasing power, do away with the issue of defensive medicine by 
getting rid of a lot of the junk lawsuits that are clogging up our 
legal system in this country, allowing people to have a tax credit 
where they can buy their own insurance and use their judgment and allow 
for transparency when it comes to pricing and outcomes so that the 
market in the competition that exists out there works in a way that 
makes insurance rates come down for everybody and improves the quality 
of health care in this country.
  There are so many good ideas out there that do not involve a 
government takeover of health care and the results we have seen that 
has caused. So I hope that not only will the American people who I 
think are quickly coming to the conclusion that this is a bad law, it 
is a flawed policy to start with, but Members of Congress here in 
Washington, DC, Members of the Senate will also come to that conclusion 
and will decide it is time to not only delay this but to repeal it and 
start over.
  We need a do-over. The American people need a do-over. We need an 
opportunity to put policies in place that actually put downward 
pressure on insurance rates in this country, rather than increasing 
them, which is what we have seen with ObamaCare, dramatic increases for 
many people across this country, loss of coverage that people like. 
They were told by the President repeatedly, over and over the President 
went out there and said: If you like the insurance you have, you can 
keep it. We now know that is not true. We know that the administration 
knew that was not true.
  So it is time we acknowledge we need a do-over. The American people 
need a do-over. We need health care policies in this country that drive 
down costs for people, for families, middle-class Americans, that 
improve the quality of health care delivery in this country, and that 
do not create costly harm to the economy.
  We hear over and over that the mandates and the requirements and the 
costs associated with ObamaCare are making it more difficult and more 
expensive to create jobs in this country. We are seeing an economic 
growth rate that is sluggish, in the 1-percent to 2-percent range. We 
are seeing the lowest labor participation rate literally in the last 35 
years, since Jimmy Carter was the President of the United States, 
chronically high unemployment, lower take-home pay, an economy that is 
suffering from too much cost and too many policies that actually make 
it more difficult and more expensive to create jobs.
  We need to be looking at health care policies that improve coverage, 
lower costs, and make it less difficult and less costly to create jobs 
in this economy so we can get Americans back to work, we get our 
economy growing and expanding at a more robust rate and improve the 
standard of living and the quality of life for people all across this 
country.
  This policy, the ObamaCare health care policy, was ill-fated, was 
misguided from the beginning. Now we are seeing the effects and the 
results of that. Hopefully, politicians in Washington, DC, on both 
sides of the aisle will come to the correct conclusion; that is, it is 
time to start over and do this the right way.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. HATCH. 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. CARPER. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum 
call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                            Superstorm Sandy

  Mr. CARPER. As many of us recall, on October 29, 2012, Superstorm 
Sandy made landfall in my part of the United States. Its impacts up and 
down the east coast were devastating and heartbreaking. New York, New 
Jersey, and parts of New England were hit particularly hard. In 
Delaware we did not experience the level of devastation that was 
inflicted on our neighbors to the north and to the east, but our State 
did receive significant damage. In total there were over 200 deaths 
attributed to Superstorm Sandy. Today we remember the lives lost and 
those forever impacted by this storm.
  As I traveled through Delaware during and after the storm, I saw some 
of the massive impacts of that storm firsthand, but I saw something 
else as well. I saw people from all walks of life pulling together, 
helping one another, and taking care of their neighbors. The impacts of 
that superstorm are still fresh in my mind today as we continue to 
rebuild in Delaware, New Jersey, in New York, and in other places up 
the East Coast.
  But not only are the impacts of the superstorm still fresh in my 
mind, something else is as well, and that is this: the extraordinary 
efforts of ordinary people who left the comfort of their own homes in 
Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut and 
in other States as well to help people they had never met and will 
probably never see again. They did so not because they were paid to do 
it, not because someone told them to do it, but because they wanted to 
do it.
  This morning I met a handful of Delawareans who were called to action 
by the Red Cross to volunteer in the shelters and communities in 
Delaware and New Jersey and New York. Those volunteers included 
Charlotte and Richard Duffy, Joe Miller, and Glenn Sholley, who are 
joining us today in the Senate, and we welcome them. In the days and 
weeks following Sandy, they stopped their lives to help others, and for 
that we are truly grateful. I thank you all for your extraordinary 
service.
  As our rebuilding efforts continue, I am so thankful for the first 
responders, for the volunteers, and for the Good Samaritans who pulled 
together not only in Delaware but in our States to the north to ensure 
the safety and health of our neighbors.
  A few minutes ago I told the folks who gathered in my office for some 
light refreshments before we came over here--the same group that is 
joining us here today--that last night I had heard a speech from Paul 
Begala, who our Presiding Officer will remember was a key member of 
President Clinton's team during his Presidency. He was on television a 
million times and widely known for his wit. We saw another side of Paul 
Begala last night. We saw his wit as well, but we also heard from him a 
recounting or retelling of the story of the Old Testament and of the 
question that was asked in the Bible. He asked the audience: Who asked 
the first question? Nobody knew. He said, actually, the first question 
was asked by Abel, who had slain his brother Cain. The Heavenly Father, 
of course, knew what had happened. He tracked down Abel and said: 
Where's Cain? And Cain said: Am I my brother's keeper? Am I my 
brother's keeper?
  That story is retold in the Bible in a number of places as the Golden 
Rule,

[[Page 16311]]

to look out and help other people the way we would like to be helped, 
treat other people the way we would want to be treated. Not only does 
that show up in the Old and New Testaments, including in the parable of 
the Good Samaritan, but it shows up in the sacred scriptures whether 
you happen to be Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist or Hindu. It shows 
up in the scriptures of virtually every major religion on Earth--the 
idea that we have an obligation to help our neighbors, whoever they may 
be.
  In the parable in the New Testament, Jesus is asked by some of the 
Pharisees: Who is my neighbor? And that is when he tells the story of 
the Good Samaritan, who ultimately was helped not by someone from his 
community, not by a clergyman who walked by, but he was helped by 
somebody from another part of that country who didn't care at all for 
the fellow who was beaten and left for dead.
  The financial costs of Superstorm Sandy were also severe and 
estimated to be in not just the hundreds of millions of dollars but 
billions of dollars. It will take years to recover from devastation 
such as this. As my colleagues and I know, it is important we get that 
recovery right.
  I want to take a look at a few pictures of Seaside Heights, NJ, 
before Sandy and after. Before I turn to the photographs on my left 
here, I would just say to the Presiding Officer that a lot of people 
who might be watching this across the country on C-SPAN may wonder 
where Seaside Heights, NJ, is. I wondered that myself, and I am from 
Delaware, less than 100 miles away. A lot of people have heard of 
Asbury Park, where Bruce Springsteen is from. Asbury Park is just a 
little bit north of Seaside Heights, NJ. About 50 miles south of 
Seaside Heights is a place called Atlantic City that a lot of us have 
heard of.
  This is a shot taken in May of 2009 in Seaside Heights, NJ. This is a 
before shot. This is a little more than 3 years before the hurricane. 
There are a couple of buildings here where we have these yellow arrows. 
They are there for a purpose--so that when we look at the after shot we 
can figure out what happened to those structures. Here is a red arrow 
on this building.
  This is about 3\1/2\ years later when Sandy came a-calling. Here we 
go. These buildings aren't in the same place. They do not look the 
same. What looked to have been a pier along through here is gone. There 
used to be roads through here and now there are what appear to be sandy 
trails. Virtually every house here is badly damaged, many of them 
absolutely totally destroyed.
  We have another shot here, same town, Seaside Heights. This is 
obviously the beach, the boardwalk, and this is an amusement park. A 
lot of people went there over the years, for decades, and had a great 
time with their families. They had a roller coaster here. There were a 
lot of rides here. I must admit I like rides. My wife says: Are you 
ever going to grow up? I say: I hope not, because this stuff is still 
fun to me. But here is the roller coaster. Again, this is taken in late 
May 2009. There is the roller coaster.
  Let's see what it looks like after Hurricane Sandy. Here is the 
roller coaster. Here is the roller coaster. It is in the ocean. And 
here is what is left of the pier and of the amusement park.
  The power of that storm is demonstrated graphically by these photos, 
which I said earlier destroyed not just this amusement park, the 
beaches and the homes in this community, but wreaked havoc throughout 
the mid-Atlantic and northeastern seaboard and took the lives of over 
200 people.
  In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, we saw many problems during 
the recovery phase that held communities back and created great 
suffering, and not only great suffering, also a lot of anger in terms 
of the inadequate response, the untimely response, the inept response. 
Money was not always well spent, the efforts were not well coordinated, 
and the recovery moved slowly as a result.
  Thanks in part to the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 
2006, which was shepherded through the Homeland Security and 
Governmental Affairs Committee and through Congress by Senators Susan 
Collins and Joe Lieberman, many of the problems we saw during Katrina's 
recovery efforts have been fixed, and we have seen a great deal of 
improvement in the emergency response efforts as a result.
  I have a friend who, when you ask him ``How are you doing?'' he 
always says, ``Compared to what?'' So when speaking of how are we doing 
with respect to the recovery after Superstorm Sandy, I say: Well, 
compared to what? Compared to Katrina, we are doing great. Can we do 
better? You bet we can. We have learned a lot, and 7 years later you 
can tell we have learned not all our lessons but certainly a number of 
them.
  That act that was passed about a half dozen years ago required FEMA 
to bolster their regional offices in order to build strong 
relationships with State, local, and tribal governments. As an old 
recovering Governor--and the Presiding Officer is a recovering 
Lieutenant Governor--we know the Federal Government can't do 
everything, particularly in responding to emergencies. It is the 
relationships with the State and the local folks, in some cases with 
tribal units, with the emergency responders, with the National Guard, 
and all of the above, that is critical. Those strong relationships not 
only improve the ability of the Federal Government to respond to 
disasters, but they also enhance FEMA's capability to support State, 
local, and tribal governments as they rebuild.
  That law also required FEMA to coordinate with other Federal 
departments to write a national disaster recovery strategy. This 
eventually lead to the National Disaster Recovery Framework, which has 
helped to organize and coordinate recovery efforts to Hurricane Sandy.
  A key question we need to ask, however, after a storm such as this, 
is whether it was an aberration or a harbinger of things to come. I 
would like to think it was an aberration. There is a good chance it was 
not. Just a few short years ago, hurricanes hitting the areas along the 
northeastern half of the East Coast were relatively uncommon. Hurricane 
Sandy is actually the third major hurricane to threaten or strike the 
northeastern coast of our country in the last 3 years. Fortunately, we 
are almost through this hurricane season--knock on wood--without a 
major storm hitting our coast. Unfortunately, the Northeast, mid-
Atlantic, and other vulnerable areas are expected to see more frequent 
and larger storms such as Sandy in the future.
  Earlier this year, the Government Accountability Office, 
affectionately known as GAO, added a new area to its recently updated 
High Risk List--the impact of climate change on the Federal Government 
and on our country. GAO explained that, among other things, climate 
change ``could threaten coastal areas with rising sea levels, alter 
agricultural productivity, and increase the intensity and frequency of 
severe weather events.''
  The GAO also argued the Federal Government is not prepared to deal 
with the impacts of climate change. I might add State governments and 
local governments as well are not prepared to deal with the impacts of 
climate change. They recommended we take a strategic look at them and 
start to prepare accordingly.
  The costs associated with responding to and recovering from a 
hurricane such as Sandy, both in human and financial costs, are so 
severe we simply cannot afford to face this devastation over and over 
again.
  It might have been Einstein who defined the definition of sanity as 
doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. We 
can't do the same thing over and over. It is a different world in which 
we live, and we have to respond to those changes.
  Fortunately, we have seen States take promising steps toward 
addressing some of the issues GAO has identified. In particular, the 
States of New York and New Jersey have begun to plan to mitigate 
against future disasters. We know all too well that an ounce of 
prevention is worth a pound of cure.
  In fact, a few years ago the National Institute of Building Sciences 
issued a

[[Page 16312]]

report that concluded that for every $1 we spend on various mitigation 
measures we can save $4 in response and recovery costs. For $1 of 
investment we end up saving $4. Through mitigation, then, we can get 
better results--save money and, most importantly, we can save lives.
  We must ensure that sound and effective mitigation policies are 
thoroughly incorporated into this recovery effort. This is especially 
important as climate change drives the sea level to rise and increases 
the severity and frequency of coastal storms. By working together, we 
can rebuild and become stronger by better protecting ourselves from 
future storms. But in doing so, we can't ignore what I and many experts 
believe may be the underlying cause of storms such as Hurricane Sandy. 
It is not enough to just address the symptom--that is the storm, the 
wind, the sea level rise, the surge--we need to address the underlying 
cause or causes.
  As we recover from Sandy and put in place the protections, we need to 
reduce the impact of the next big one. We would make a mistake if we 
didn't think about what we need to do to address not just the symptoms 
of climate change but the underlying cause itself.
  We have been joined on the floor by my colleague Senator Menendez 
from New Jersey. Through the Presiding Officer, let me just say to my 
colleague, we have some folks here today from Delaware who ended up, as 
I said earlier, in New Jersey, and I think in New York. Our State was 
hit, but nothing like the Senator's State. These folks, serving in the 
spirit of the Good Samaritan, with the encouragement and actually the 
organizational skills of the Red Cross, came to his State, across the 
Delaware River, in order to lend a hand to people they didn't know, had 
never met, and will probably never see again.
  Someday the tables will be turned, someday it will be our State, 
someday it will be Delmarva that is reeling from the impact of such a 
storm. We know when that happens, the Senator will be there for us as 
well.
  I am pleased to yield the floor for my friend from New Jersey.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, let me start by thanking my 
distinguished colleague, the senior Senator from Delaware, for his 
remarks, and the people of Delaware who came to New Jersey to help us. 
That is the essence of why we call this great country the United States 
of America. In moments of challenge and adversity we come together. We 
appreciate the Delawareans who came to help us. We hope we never have 
to repay the kindness, but if perchance it comes, we will.
  I come to the floor on this anniversary of Superstorm Sandy a year 
ago. We all remember what has now become an iconic photo. It is hard to 
believe that it has been 1 year since Sandy, but it has. For a year, 
under difficult and trying circumstances, New Jerseyans have pulled 
together, worked together, and helped each other to recover. I rise 
today in praise of their tenacity, their resilience, their spirit of 
community, and remembering all of the hard work of the many first 
responders, Federal, State, and local officials, community leaders, and 
volunteers who helped in those recovery efforts.
  Just yesterday I was with Secretary Donovan in New Jersey to announce 
another $1.4 billion in community development grant disaster relief 
funding. This is $1.4 billion in flexible-use funding that comes in 
addition to the $1.8 billion we have already received from the hard-
fought $60 billion disaster relief package we secured a year ago. We 
secured that funding after a long debate over whether we as a nation 
and the Congress were prepared to provide disaster relief to the people 
of my State and others who suffered devastating losses. Standing with 
me in that effort were many in this Chamber, and one who is no longer 
with us, our late colleague and friend Senator Frank Lautenberg. He and 
I worked against many who did not want to provide New Jersey the 
disaster relief we needed. We were in the midst of a debt ceiling 
debate, a fiscal cliff at the end after a congressional session, and 
even after Sandy relief had passed the Senate with bipartisan support, 
the House Republican leadership chose not to immediately bring the 
relief package to a vote, unnecessarily delaying our recovery from 
Sandy by 6 weeks.
  There were those in Congress who believe that even in times of 
disaster and crisis we are on our own. I don't believe that. I believe 
we are all in this together and in times of crisis we come together as 
a community.
  That is why when the State of New Jersey submitted its application 
last March to use $1.83 billion in Federal Sandy relief to help 
thousands of homeowners and small businesses rebuild, the Obama 
administration, through HUD Secretary Donovan, approved the application 
in April, the following month.
  We have come a long way since October 29th when Sandy made landfall 
in southern New Jersey. One hundred and fifty-nine people lost their 
lives, 8.5 million customers lost power, more than 650,000 homes were 
damaged and 40,000 in our State were severely damaged or destroyed.
  Here is a perfect example of how far we have come. You can see here 
the damage Sandy brought on this home one year ago today. And, as you 
can see in this second photo, today it is well on its way to being 
fully restored. But we have a long way yet to go in every community to 
fully recover from the extent of the damage and to make families and 
businesses whole again.
  A year ago, this headline ran in the Record: ``Business losses mount; 
Some choosing to close rather than rebuild.'' Hundreds of thousands of 
businesses were forced to close, causing an estimated $65 billion in 
economic loss and resulting in emergency declarations or disasters in 
13 States up and down the East Coast.
  In a matter of minutes, people had lost loved ones, they lost their 
homes, their property, and their livelihoods, but they stood strong and 
began to rebuild. Beyond the headlines of this story, we see the Jersey 
spirit that came through in person after person. Despite the uphill 
climb, New Jersey rebuilt one home at a time, one business at a time, 
one community at a time. That's what makes us Jersey Strong.
  For 10 days, millions along the East Coast lived without power, 
without phones, seniors were stranded on the upper floors of buildings 
where elevators were out, and the loss of power led to fuel shortages 
and long gas lines. You can see in this photograph of the PATH Train 
Terminal in Hoboken, the extent of damage to our transportation 
infrastructure.
  It was a wake-up call to what could happen again in the future and 
the investment we need to make in our infrastructure to avoid future 
damage from future storms.
  The Sandy Recovery package we passed last year included $13 billion 
in critical funding I sought to help restore our transit and highway 
systems from what they looked like then, as you can see in this 
photograph.
  The Port Authority was able to repair the PATH station at Hoboken and 
harden electrical equipment to prevent future damage. NJDOT was able to 
elevate roads that were washed away by Sandy.
  At the end of the day, the legislation included necessary policy 
reforms that helped streamline recovery efforts and improve FEMA's 
Public Assistance Programs, allowing us to rebuild what was in place 
before the storm and build it stronger and better than before.
  Since then, almost $400 million in FEMA grants have been approved to 
help individuals and families recover. That is over $341 million for 
housing assistance and more than $54 million for additional needs.
  Homeowners, renters, and business owners have received over $764 
million in SBA disaster loans and $314 million in FEMA Public 
Assistance grants to help local communities and local non-profits that 
serve the public and provided relief.
  National Flood Insurance Program payments to New Jersey have amounted 
to $3.5 billion to help people rebuild and get their lives back on 
track. In New Jersey alone, more than 261,000 people contacted FEMA for 
help and information and over 126,000 homes have been inspected.

[[Page 16313]]

  While these numbers show the progress we have made, the reality is 
that for thousands of people in New Jersey, recovery is a round-the-
clock, 24-7 effort.
  Many New Jersey families have been hit with the ``triple whammy,'' 
having been flooded by Sandy, then facing repair and mitigation costs 
and then facing astronomical increases in flood insurance costs built 
into a flood reform bill that was passed before Sandy hit.
  Even as we slowly recover from the worst natural disaster in our 
State's history, a manmade disaster is looming in the distance, 
jeopardizing our recovery.
  The combination of updated flood maps and the phaseout of premium 
subsidies for the National Flood Insurance Program threatens to force 
victims out of their homes and destroy entire communities.
  Many homeowners will be forced to pay premiums that are several times 
higher than the current rate they pay. Those who cannot afford the 
higher premiums will be forced to either sell or be priced out of their 
home--probably at a fire-sale price. This in turn will drive down 
property values and local revenues at the worst possible time.
  I have heard from countless New Jerseyans, many who have come to me 
in tears, who are facing this predicament. These are hardworking middle 
class families, who played by the rules, purchased flood insurance, and 
are now being priced out of their home.
  In order to stop this manmade disaster from doing even more damage, I 
am leaving the floor in a few minutes and going to introduce bipartisan 
legislation to take a time-out and assess the impact these premium 
hikes will have on homeowners and the flood insurance program as a 
whole.
  The Homeowners Flood Insurance Affordability Act, which we will be 
announcing in a few minutes, would delay flood insurance premium 
increases imposed in the Biggert-Waters legislation for most primary 
residences until FEMA completes an affordability study that I had 
offered, and proposes a regulatory framework to address the issues 
found in the study.
  This will give current homeowners some breathing room before their 
flood insurance premiums go up. For prospective homebuyers, the 
certainty that they will not see their rate dramatically increase 
simply because they purchased a home is critically important to 
maintaining property values.
  At the end of the day, we look back at the year since the storm 
struck and remember those who lost their lives and those who came 
together to help their neighbors rebuild. We remember the efforts of 
first responders and government and community leaders pulling together.
  It is often said that ``the hardest steel must go through the hottest 
fire,'' and Sandy tested what we were made of.
  When we look at this photograph of twisted metal that once was a 
rollercoaster, we associate it with the destruction of Sandy, but we 
also associate it with how far we have come and what we have learned. 
We learned that it is not enough to live in a community, we have to be 
part of it. We have to remember that citizenship comes with 
responsibility not just to ourselves, but to each other.
  In the face of Sandy--in the aftermath, the tragedy, and the loss--we 
pulled together as a community. We worked together, helped each other 
rebuild lives, businesses, homes, our beaches and boardwalks--and, in 
doing so, we strengthened New Jersey's sense of pride and a belief that 
we are, in fact, all in this together. It is that spirit, that unity, 
that has made New Jersey stronger and better than before.
  Let me conclude by saying that recovery from any disaster depends on 
our continuing cooperation within our communities at every level of 
government. The business of government is people--their lives, their 
hopes, their dreams of a better life for themselves and their families.
  In New Jersey, we proved that--at every level of government--with 
various agencies working together--we all came together. There can be 
no tolerance of partisan division when it comes to the future of my 
State or any State's efforts to help families rebuild from a disaster 
like Sandy. The storm was extraordinary, but what makes me 
extraordinarily proud is that New Jerseyans rose to the challenge as 
they always do.
  There is much work left to do. We have learned that recovery from a 
disaster is not a one-size-fits-all endeavor. Full recovery from Sandy 
will take more than a village.
  But at the end of the day the biggest reason New Jersey has made the 
progress that it has, and why our State will come back better and 
stronger than before, is because of the people who live there. It 
hasn't been easy. But I have never been more proud to represent the 
people of New Jersey than I have during this last year since Sandy 
struck.
  I have seen the best of who we are and what we can do when we pull 
together, each of us working for the recovery of all of us. Looking 
back at the last year, I would say we are all New Jersey proud as well 
as New Jersey strong.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.


                         Farewell to the Senate

  Mr. CHIESA. Mr. President, nearly 5 months ago I had the high honor 
to stand in this historic Chamber, surrounded by my family, and be 
sworn in as a Member of the Senate. My service as a Senator will soon 
draw to a close, so I wish to take this opportunity to share with my 
colleagues a few thoughts before I leave.
  I want to begin by thanking Governor Christie for providing me with 
this incredible opportunity. Our professional relationship, and our 
friendship, began more than 20 years ago as young lawyers working 
together in a New Jersey law firm. We had our entire careers ahead of 
us. If someone had suggested that one day Chris Christie would have 
been Governor, I would not have been surprised. I would, however, have 
dismissed out of hand any suggestion that I might someday be the New 
Jersey attorney general, let alone a Member of the Senate.
  To have served here representing the people of New Jersey has to rank 
as the greatest honor of my professional life. I will always be 
grateful to Governor Christie for the confidence he has shown in me by 
appointing me, and I will always be thankful for the wonderful 
opportunities he has given me, time and again, to serve in public life.
  I also thank my colleagues in the Senate from both sides of the aisle 
who have gone out of their way to make me feel welcome, to help me 
navigate the sometimes confusing rules and traditions of the Senate, 
and for assisting me in making the most of my time here.
  One thing I did know for certain when I arrived here in June was that 
I wanted to use my time as effectively as possible. To the extent I 
have, I have so many of my colleagues to thank. The senior Senator from 
New Jersey, who will have to break in another new Senator from our 
State, has been a supportive colleague. I truly appreciate his 
willingness to assist me in my time in the Senate. I thank the Senator.
  The Republican leader has gone above and beyond to give me the 
opportunity to work and make a difference during my tenure here, and I 
thank him very much.
  I also thank the senior Senator from Delaware and the junior Senator 
from Oklahoma for agreeing to my request to hold a hearing on human 
trafficking in the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee. 
Eliminating human trafficking or, more directly, abolishing modern-day 
slavery has been a priority for me throughout my career in public 
service. The chairman and ranking member of the committee could not 
have been more helpful in my efforts to raise awareness of this evil 
crime, a crime that robs people of their innocence and dignity, taking 
a terrible toll on our victims and society as a whole.
  The junior Senators from New Hampshire and North Dakota, both former 
attorneys general themselves, stood alongside me in this effort. When I 
first spoke with them about my desire to hold a hearing, they 
immediately

[[Page 16314]]

agreed to work with me to make it work as productively as possible. I 
am grateful to them for partnering with me and I know they will 
continue to make this issue a top priority.
  I also thank the senior Senator from Arizona for attending and 
contributing to the hearing on a day when no votes were scheduled and 
for his strong commitment for righting this terrible wrong. These are 
important and forceful voices for the victims of human trafficking, and 
I appreciate their support of my efforts.
  I want all of my colleagues to know I will continue to work to 
abolish this scourge on our Nation and on the entire human family. I 
hope they will feel free to call on me if I can ever be helpful to them 
in their efforts, just as I may call on them from time to time.
  So many of my colleagues have made this a wonderful experience, and I 
am proud to call all of them my friends.
  I know I looked pretty lost on more than one occasion here, but I 
always had someone pointing me in the right direction. I am 
particularly grateful to my good friends from Utah, Wyoming, Tennessee, 
Ohio, and Illinois, who have repeatedly helped me over the past 5 
months both by listening and also providing good advice.
  As every Senator knows, the work we do here would not be possible 
without the work of the people who serve on our staffs. I have been 
incredibly fortunate to have an outstanding group of people on my 
Senate staff--a group that jumped right in with me on very short notice 
and a group I am so proud to have worked with. They were fully aware 
that their tenure, like mine, would be short. They interrupted and, in 
many cases, disrupted their lives to serve with me.
  My chief of staff Donna Mullins did an amazing job assembling a 
talented and dedicated group of professionals to serve both here in 
Washington and back in New Jersey. Their willingness to do so reflects 
their commitment to the people of New Jersey, the Senate, and to our 
Nation. Some of them I have worked with for years, others only for a 
few short months. All of them have earned my everlasting respect and 
friendship.
  I want to acknowledge each of them by name: Donna Mullins, John Lutz, 
Tomi-Anne Nolino, Nick DiRocco, Jeannette Larkins, Chip Sinders, Ken 
Lundberg, Bob Bostock, Ryan Berger, Krista Powers, Tyler Yingling, 
Marissa Watkins, Michael Rebuck, Chris Mindnich, Taylor Holgate, Nicole 
Dube, Jamie Rhoades, Michael Pock, and Shante Palmer. They reflect the 
best of public service, and I will always be thankful to them and the 
work we have done together.
  Of course, the greatest thanks goes to my family. My wife Jenny and 
our children Al and Hannah have always given me their unconditional 
love and support. I could not have done this without them. I am lucky 
to have them.
  I was born and raised in New Jersey. It is not just my home State, it 
is my home in every sense of the word. The honor of representing the 
people of my State--my friends, my neighbors--is almost beyond 
description. After all, there could be no greater calling for any 
citizen than to have the opportunity to represent the people of your 
State in the highest councils of government. Although the past 5 months 
have passed very quickly, my deep sense of gratitude for the 
opportunity to serve will stay with me for the rest of my life.
  My experience as a Member of this body has confirmed what I already 
thought was true--every Member of the Senate is a dedicated public 
servant. Every Senator is deeply committed to the work they do. Every 
Senator is here because he or she wants to contribute to the centuries-
old work of forming a more perfect union. We do not always agree on how 
this is best accomplished, but vigorous, respectful debate is critical 
in a government such as ours.
  There is so much talent, so much commitment, and so much love of 
country here. I urge my colleagues to advance their efforts to find 
common ground in pursuit of their common purpose, to continue to 
advance the success of the country we love and secure the blessings of 
liberty for the people we serve.
  Soon there will be a new Senator-elect from New Jersey who will stand 
where I stood just a few months ago to be sworn in. When he takes his 
place in this body, he will be joining a long list of dedicated public 
servants who have served New Jersey--stretching back to the very first 
Congress. I urge him to continue to work as hard for the people of our 
State as he did while serving as the mayor of New Jersey's largest 
city. I know he will always put the people of New Jersey first.
  New Jersey's new Senator will have a very long list of priorities 
waiting for him when he arrives in Washington--all of them important. 
There is one area that will require his immediate and ongoing focus, 
and that is New Jersey's continued effort to recover and rebuild from 
the devastation of Superstorm Sandy, which struck my State a year ago 
today. Working together New Jerseyans have made incredible progress in 
coming back from what the storm delivered, but our work continues.
  For those who have suffered so much loss, a year seems like an 
eternity. They must know that until all the damage done by the storm is 
undone, and until all the work needed to protect our State and its 
people and their property from future storms like this is completed, we 
will not rest.
  As I prepare to make the transition back to private life, I do so 
with a deep sense of gratitude to all of those who made my service in 
the Senate possible, and an even deeper sense of humility for having 
been given this opportunity.
  This has been, for me, a remarkable 5 months. I know I will in the 
years ahead look back on this time with gratitude and appreciation for 
the privilege of having served the people of New Jersey and the Senate 
of the United States of America.
  I thank the Presiding Officer, and I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware.
  Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, while Senator Chiesa is still on the 
floor, I want to take a moment to say to him how much we have enjoyed 
getting to know him, work with him, and come away with a wonderful--not 
just a first impression but a lasting impression. Governor Christie did 
the State of New Jersey well by appointing Senator Chiesa to serve as 
the interim Senator.
  We had a similar experience with losing an elected Senator when Joe 
Biden was elected as Vice President and to the Senate at the same time. 
He had to choose between being the Senator from Delaware or Vice 
President. I don't know if he ever regrets it, but he made the choice 
to be our Vice President, as we know. The Governor of our State 
appointed Ted Kaufman to serve as the interim Senator for 2 years, and 
he was subsequently succeeded by Chris Coons when Chris was elected a 
couple of years ago.
  We have a tradition of folks who are appointed as interim Senators 
who turn out to do an extraordinary job. Sometimes I wonder--with 
tongue in cheek--if maybe that is not a better approach, in some cases, 
for populating this place with men and women from across the country.
  The Senator from New Jersey has been here for 5 tumultuous months, 
and he has seen the good, the bad, and the ugly--in some cases the very 
ugly. If we had more people who would bring Senator Chiesa's values and 
commitment to comity--not comedy with a ``d,'' but comity with a 
``t''--communicating, and his willingness to compromise, not on 
principles but on policy, this would be a better place and a better 
country.
  As the chairman of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs 
Committee, I say on behalf of Tom Coburn, ranking Republican--and on 
behalf of those of us who have the privilege to serve on that 
committee--what a privilege it has been for the Senator from New Jersey 
to be one of our members.
  We are joined on the floor by Senator Barrasso, and it has been my 
privilege to serve on the Environment and Public Works Committee with 
him. As Senator Barrasso knows, Jeff Chiesa

[[Page 16315]]

came early and stayed late. He asked great questions and brought forth 
good issues--including the issue of human trafficking, which has 
reminded us in extraordinary ways of the terrible situation that is 
faced by millions of women and children in this country and around the 
world. That is a gift the Senator from New Jersey has brought to this 
body, and I think ultimately to our country.
  Senator Chiesa is going to leave us now and sail off into the 
sunrise, and we look forward to having our paths cross many times in 
the future--maybe even in Delaware on a summer vacation. My friend can 
bring his wife Jenny and his two kids. He is always welcomed in the 
first State.
  Good luck, God bless, and Godspeed. I thank my friend for serving our 
country and his State so well.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.
  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I wish to add in a bipartisan way my 
thanks to Senator Chiesa for his service and add to the kind words the 
Senator from Delaware has spoken of our friend and our colleague.
  In Wyoming we talk about the code of the West, and there are 10 parts 
to that code, but No. 1 is live each day with courage; and No. 2 is 
take pride in your work. Members on both sides of the aisle have seen 
that sort of code lived day by day by the Senator from New Jersey who 
has joined us.
  I join my colleague from Delaware in thanking our friend from New 
Jersey. I say that with great admiration, great appreciation, and deep 
respect for his time in the Senate, and I know we are going to continue 
to hear great things from him in the future.
  I thank the Presiding Officer, and I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for such 
time as I may consume.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, Franklin Delano Roosevelt said:

       Our capacity is limited only by our ability to work 
     together. What is needed is the will.

  I have just returned from a week at home in Montana traveling from 
Fort Benton to Billings to Bozeman. I visited with constituents from 
all across our State. At each one of my meetings, the conversation 
would touch on the first snow of the season or football and the Bobcats 
or the Grizzlies. Those are, in this case, football teams. But 
inevitably every conversation turned to the challenges we face in 
Washington and the standoff we just had over the country's borrowing 
limit and funding the government.
  People have lost faith in our ability to serve them. They are worried 
about what the dysfunction means for the future of our country.
  For more than 2 weeks, Congress was stuck in a stalemate, unable to 
agree on a course for our Nation. The political standoff shook 
America's confidence and threatened the global economy. Thankfully, 
compromise was able to overcome conflict. Cooler heads finally 
prevailed. But our Nation didn't emerge from the fight unscathed.
  The 16-day government shutdown took a $24 billion bite out of the 
U.S. economy, according to Standard & Poor's. The rating agency now 
projects the U.S. economy will only grow at 2.4 percent in the fourth 
quarter as opposed to the already slow 3 percent predicted prior to the 
shutdown. That is a staggering self-inflicted wound, and defaulting 
would have been even worse.
  Thankfully, that didn't happen. Leader Reid and Minority Leader 
McConnell were able to find the will and come together to provide a 
path that averted default. Their bipartisan legislation, passed on 
October 16, pulled us back from the brink. It created a conference 
committee to negotiate a budget compromise and it gave the President 
the power to suspend the debt limit until early February. It also gave 
Senators an opportunity to object and overturn the suspension using 
what is called a resolution of disapproval. That is what we are 
considering today.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to reject this resolution. For the good 
of our economy, it cannot pass. Passing this resolution would plunge 
this Nation back into the same economic crisis we were facing just a 
few weeks ago. With economic confidence still suffering from the 
shutdown, another debt ceiling crisis could drive the Nation--and the 
world--back into recession. We cannot let that happen. It is time to be 
responsible leaders. Congress needs to stop governing from one self-
created crisis to another.
  Tomorrow, the budget conference committee will begin discussions on a 
plan to resolve the fiscal challenges before us. The conference will be 
led by Chairman Murray and Chairman Ryan. They are smart, hardworking 
and solutions oriented and I am confident they can craft a compromise.
  I began my remarks with a quote from President Roosevelt and I will 
close with another. Roosevelt once said:

       The great test for us in our time is whether all the groups 
     of our people are willing to work together for continuing 
     progress.

  Today, we face our test. Can we work together for continuing 
progress?
  I strongly urge Members of the Senate to reject the resolution before 
us. It is a step backward, a return to shutdowns and showdowns. Enough 
is enough. Instead, we must find the will to work together for 
progress, for the good of our economy and the good of our country.
  Thank you. I yield the floor.
 Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, earlier this month, I expressed my 
opposition to S. 1569, which allowed our debt limit to increase through 
February 7, 2014. Today, the Senate considers S.J. Res. 26, which would 
reject the suspension in the debt limit and immediately halt any new 
debt issuances by the United States. I support this resolution.
  My position remains unchanged from earlier this month. Our national 
debt is topping $17 trillion and has nearly doubled since the beginning 
of the Obama administration. If we allow the Nation to continue on its 
current path, it will only lead to economic destruction. Allowing the 
debt to continue increasing without any commonsense solutions to rein 
in the federal government would be irresponsible and reckless.
  The recent increase in the debt limit is President Obama's sixth 
since coming to office. In that time, no significant action has been 
taken to reduce the long term trajectory of the debt. If we continue to 
do nothing to rein in spending, the national debt will skyrocket to $25 
trillion in the next decade. Even the President agrees with these 
numbers. We cannot allow this to happen, which is why I support the 
resolution prohibiting a continued suspension of the debt 
limit.

                          ____________________