Federal Judicial Fairness Act of 2009

Mr. President, Lake Tahoe is a national treasure. Her alpine beauty has drawn and inspired people for centuries: artists and poets, John Muir and Mark Twain, and countless millions the world over.

But the ``Jewel of the Sierra'' is in big trouble. If we don't act now, we could lose Lake Tahoe--lose it with stunning speed--to several devastating threats.

Invasive species, such as the quagga mussel, could decimate the lake, much as it has Lake Mead. Just one quagga mussel attached to a boat could lay 1 million eggs. An infestation would devastate the lake. It would ruin its biology, foul its beaches, deliver a body

blow to the regional economy. It would turn this ``noble sheet of clear water,'' as Twain put it, into just another dull, gray, polluted body of water. We must get a stranglehold on invasive species before they get a stranglehold on the lake.

Catastrophic wildfires could spiral out of control and consume the basin. The Angora Fire of 2007 destroyed 242 homes and scorched 3,100 acres. It was just a wakeup call. Today, 25 percent of the basin's forests are marred by dead, downed or dying trees. These fuels-- combined with hot, tinder-dry conditions--threaten explosive wildfires that could incinerate the basin. We must make their removal a top priority.

Pollution and sedimentation threaten Lake Tahoe's fabled water clarity. In 1968, the first year UC Davis scientists made measurements using a device called a Secchi disk, clarity was measured at an average depth of 102.4 feet. Clarity declined over the next three decades, hitting a low of 64 feet in 1997. We have seen improvements in this decade. This year scientists recorded average clarity at 69.6 feet-- roughly within the range of the past 8 years. Scientists say the rate of decline in Lake Tahoe's clarity has slowed. I believe we can build on this. But the gains could easily be reversed if we are not diligent.

Climate change is real and adding to all these problems. It leaves the basin hot and tinder-dry, and vulnerable to wildfires. The lake's surface water temperature has risen 1.5 degrees in 38 years. That means the cyclical deep-water mixing of the lake's waters will occur less frequently, and this could significantly disrupt Lake Tahoe's ecosystem.

We must face facts--we could lose Lake Tahoe.

So it is with a real sense of urgency that today I join with Majority Leader Reid as he introduces sweeping legislation to attack these threats. The Lake Tahoe Restoration Act of 2009 is also cosponsored by Senators Ensign and Boxer. Representative Dean Heller of Nevada is introducing a companion in the House of Representatives.

This legislation would authorize $415 million over 8 years to mount a robust attack against these threats.

Against invasive species.

Against catastrophic wildfires.

Against the sedimentation and pollution that could forever ruin Lake Tahoe's crystal waters.

With this legislation we can rise to the challenges presented by all these threats, and build upon the gains set in motion by the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act of 2000.

Bottom line--this bill will help ensure the protection and preservation of Lake Tahoe, now and for future generations.

Now, to see where we are headed, it's important to review where we have been. So I would like to touch on the work that's been done so far at Lake Tahoe, work that sets the foundation for the effort that lies ahead.

The Lake Tahoe Restoration Act of 2000 set in motion a partnership between the Federal Government, the States of California and Nevada, local governments and organizations, and the private sector.

All were brought together with a common purpose--to save Lake Tahoe.

I am proud to have been an original sponsor, along with Senators Reid and Boxer, and then-Senator Dick Bryan.

This legislation set in motion investments that have enabled us to get a foothold. These investments included $424 million by the Federal Government, $612 million by the State of California, $87 million by the State of Nevada, $59 million by local governments and $249 million by the private sector.

It financed more than 300 projects under the Environmental Improvement Program, a combined Federal, State, local, and private- sector partnership to restore Lake Tahoe. One hundred eighty three more projects are in progress.

We have seen improvements across the board:

Water Clarity: Stormwater, erosion-control, and road improvement projects enabled us to begin to tackle the problem of sedimentation and pollution, which enters the lake and degrades its fragile water clarity. This includes improvements to 429 miles of roadways and restoring 739 acres of wetlands. As I noted a moment ago, we have seen gains in water clarity in this decade, and this year's average clarity was 69.6 feet. Scientists report that the rate of decline has slowed. But these gains could easily be reversed if we don't continue and broaden our efforts to keep sediments out of the lake.

Catastrophic Wildfires: One-fourth of the forests of the Tahoe Basin are comprised of dead, downed, and dying trees. Combined with hot, tinder-dry conditions, they can feed massive wildfires that could destroy the basin. Removal of these hazardous fuels has been a priority. The Fire Safe Councils and the local Fire Departments have done good work. They deserve our continued support, and with this legislation, they will get it. As with efforts on water clarity, efforts to clear the forests of hazardous fuels, and to institute sensible fire-safe practices must be continued. So far, hazardous fuels reduction treatment has occurred on 33,549 acres, including 12,256 acres treated since 2006. In the next 8 years, we plan on treating 68,000 additional acres.

Stream Restoration and Wildlife Habitat Improvement: So far more than 13,927 acres of wildlife habitat have been improved and 800 acres of Stream Environment Zones restored. This includes restoration of the Upper Truckee Watershed to reduce the flow of sedimentation into the lake, and reintroduction of the Tahoe Yellow Cress, a plant that grows no place else on Earth.

Much work has been done. Much work lies ahead. It must be done, because the old threats are still there. And new ones--such as the quagga mussel--have arisen.

The bill introduced today by Senator Reid is essential to continuing the good work done to date, and to meeting the threats facing the lake today.

It would authorize $415 million over 8 years to improve water clarity, reduce risk of catastrophic wildfire, and restore the environment. Specifically, it would do the following:

The bill provides $248 million over 8 years for the highest priority restoration projects, according to scientific data. The legislation authorizes at least $72 million for stormwater management and watershed restoration projects scientifically determined to be the most effective ways to improve water clarity. This bill also requires prioritized ranking of environmental restoration projects and authorizes $136 million for state and local agencies to implement these projects. Now-- and this is an important point--this legislation would direct investments to where it is needed most. For example, today we know the major sources of stormwater runoff that send sedimentation into the lake, degrading water clarity. So the monies would go to specific projects addressing California State roads, source of 23 percent of urban particle loads; the city of Lake Tahoe, CA, 22 percent; Washoe County, Nevada, 17 percent; and so forth. In this bill, these stormwater projects are targeted to the areas of greatest concern. Priority projects will improve water quality, forest health, air quality and fish and wildlife habitat around Lake Tahoe. In addition, projects that benefit low-income neighborhoods are encouraged.

The bill authorizes $136 million over 8 years to reduce the threat of wildfire in Lake Tahoe. This would finance hazardous fuels reduction projects, at $17 million per year, including grants to local fire agencies. It provides the Forest Service up to $10 million for fuels projects that have multiple environmental benefits, with an emphasis in restoring Stream Environment Zones. This is critical because, again, these streams feed into the lake, and form a critical link in the ecosystem. We need to pay attention to these stream zones if we hope to restore water clarity. The bill also creates incentives for local communities to have dedicated funding for defensible space inspections and enforcement.

This bill protects Lake Tahoe from the threat of quagga mussels and other invasive aquatic species. Quagga mussels pose a very serious threat to Lake Tahoe, a threat made more intractable because these mussels have been shown to survive in cold waters. And this summer UC scientists reported that they found up to 3,000 Asian clams per square meter at spots between Zephyr Point and Elk Point in Lake Tahoe. The spreading Asian clam population could put sharp shells and rotting algae on the lake's beaches and help spread other invasive species such as quagga mussels.

The bill would authorize $20 million for watercraft inspections and removal of existing invasive species. It would also prohibit watercraft that have had contact with quagga or zebra mussel-infested waters from entering waters in the Tahoe Basin. As I noted earlier, one quagga or zebra mussel can lay 1 million eggs in a year. This means that a single boat carrying quagga could devastate the lake's biology, local infrastructure, and the local economy. The damage that could be inflicted at Lake Tahoe by a quagga infestation has been estimated in the tens of millions of dollars annually.

The threat to Lake Tahoe cannot be overstated. There were no quagga mussels in Lake Mead 3 years ago. Today there are more than 3 trillion. The infestation is probably irreversible. Quagga mussels attach themselves to underwater structures and clog water intake pipes, canals, aqueducts and dams. They degrade water quality and can alter the taste and smell of drinking water. They can devastate aquatic ecosystems by consuming large amounts of microscopic plants, leaving little or nothing for native fish and other aquatic species. They are a very real threat.

But the fix need not be drastic. Only about 1.5 percent of boats that have been inspected in Lake Tahoe would be prohibited from entering the lake, according to the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency. The bill would also require that all watercraft be inspected and decontaminated to prevent the introduction of invasive aquatic species. Watercraft last launched in Lake Tahoe would be exempted. The Secretary of the Interior can modify these regulations if scientific information leads to new technologies or techniques that would be no less effective than current measures. And there's good news. There's promising news on this front. This week, scientists reported that under proper conditions, plastic ``bottom barriers'' laid on top of clam beds can kill all Asian clams living there within 28 days. We can fight off these invaders. But it will require drive and imagination--and the help authorized within this bill.

The bill supports reintroduction of the Lahontan Cutthroat Trout. The legislation authorizes $20 million over 8 years for the Lahontan Cutthroat Trout Recovery Plan. The Lahontan Cutthroat Trout is an iconic species that has an important historic legacy in Lake Tahoe. When John C. Fremont first explored the Truckee River in January of 1844, he called it the Salmon Trout River because he found the Pyramid Lake Lahontan Cutthroat Trout. The trout relied on the Truckee River and its tributaries for their spawning runs in spring, traveling up the entire river's length as far as Lake Tahoe and Donner Lake, where they used the cool, pristine waters and clean gravel beds to lay their eggs. But dams, pollution and overfishing caused the demise of the Lahontan Cutthroat Trout. Lake Tahoe is one of the historic 11 lakes where Lahontan Cutthroat Trout flourished in the past, and it's a critical part of the strategy to recover the species.

The bill funds scientific research. The legislation authorizes $30 million over 8 years for scientific programs and research which will produce information on long-term trends in the basin and inform the most cost-effective projects.

The bill prohibits mining operations in the Tahoe Basin. The legislation would prevent the start of any mining operations in the basin, ensuring that the fragile watershed, and Lake Tahoe's water clarity, are not threatened by pollution from mining operations.

The bill increases accountability and oversight. Every project funded by this legislation will have monitoring and assessment to determine the most cost-effective projects and best management practices for future projects. The legislation also requires the Chair of the Federal Partnership to work with the Forest Service, Environmental Protection Agency, Fish and Wildlife Service and regional and state agencies, to prepare an annual report to Congress detailing the status of all projects undertaken, including project scope, budget and justification and overall expenditures and accomplishments. This will ensure that Congress can have oversight on the progress of environmental restoration in Lake Tahoe.

The bill provides for public outreach and education. The Forest Service, Environmental Protection Agency, Fish and Wildlife Service, and Tahoe Regional Planning Agency will implement new public outreach and education programs including encouraging basin residents and visitors to implement defensible space, conducting best management practices for water quality and preventing the introduction and proliferation of invasive species. In addition, the legislation requires signage on federally financed projects to improve public awareness of restoration efforts.

The bill allows for increased efficiency in the management of public land. Under this legislation, the Forest Service would have increased flexibility to exchange land with State agencies which will allow for more cost-efficient management of public land. There is currently a checkerboard pattern of ownership in some areas of the basin. Under this new authority, the Forest Service could exchange land with the California Tahoe Conservancy of approximately equal value without going through a lengthy process to assess the land. For example, if there are several plots of Forest Service land that surround or are adjacent to Tahoe Conservancy land, the Tahoe Conservancy could transfer that land to the Forest Service so that it can be managed more efficiently.

Finally, it is important to note that this bill would increase accountability and oversight. All projects funded by this legislation would be monitored and assessed to ensure cost-effectiveness. The bill would also require annual reports to Congress detailing the status of all projects--including expenditures and accomplishments. Scientific data will be used to inform every aspect of this legislation. It will help us refine and adjust our restoration programs and ensure that we fund only the highest priority projects.

Let there be no doubt: Lake Tahoe is in grave danger. Grave danger from catastrophic wildfires. Grave danger from invasive species. Grave danger from sedimentation and pollution that threaten to dull her crystal waters.

Mark Twain called Lake Tahoe ``the fairest picture the whole world affords.'' Mr. President, we must not be the generation that lets this picture fall into ruin. We must rise to the challenge, and do all we can to preserve the ``Jewel of the Sierra.'' This legislation will do exactly that.

Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Federal Judicial Fairness Act of 2009.

I want to thank my cosponsors--Senator Hatch, Senator Leahy, and Senator Graham--for working with me on this important legislation.

The salaries of our Federal judges are eroding in their real buying power over time. This bill would solve that problem.

Over the past 30 years, pay for Federal judges has declined dramatically. Since 1969, the inflation-adjusted salaries of Federal judges have dropped by 24 percent, even as other Federal workers have received an average salary increase of 18 percent.

The way the pay system works now, Federal judges are at a stark disadvantage each year for receiving a cost-of-living adjustment to keep their salaries in pace with inflation. While most Federal civilian employees receive an automatic cost-of-living adjustment, Federal judges do not. Instead, they currently receive an adjustment only if Congress passes a special law and also provides an adjustment for itself.

Judicial salaries should not be ensnared in Congressional-pay politics. Judges should simply be on the same system that other Federal employees are.

That is what this bill would do.

It would repeal ``Section 140,'' which currently requires Congress to pass a special law each year in order for judges to receive a cost-of- living adjustment; and it would provide judges with an automatic, annual cost-of-living adjustment under the same General Schedule used for other Federal civilian employees.

In other words, the bill would simply put Federal judges on an even playing field.

Why is this important?

The drop in real pay for Federal judges has created what Chief Justice John Roberts has called ``a Constitutional crisis.'' More and more judges are being forced to leave the bench for financial reasons during what should be the peak years of their judicial careers.

Recently, the Federal court for the Central District of California lost a U.S. District Judge, Stephen Larson, after only 4 years of service. Larson had been a public servant for over a decade and said that because of his large family, he was finally faced with an impossible choice: He could either continue serving the public as a judge, or he could retire from the bench in order to be able to afford a college education for his children.

Judge Larson's story is not an anomaly. The Federal bench has lost 103 judges since 1990, 80 percent of whom ended up taking other, usually higher-paying, positions in the private sector.

The problem is especially acute in high-cost states like California. In California, State court judges have higher salaries than Federal Article III judges.

The rate at which our Federal courts are losing judges has increased by 24 percent since the 1990s, even as caseloads have gone up and the replacement process has slowed down.

Departures like Judge Larson's are only half the problem. As former Federal judge and former Representative Abner Mikva has pointed out, a primary effect of the erosion of judicial salaries is to discourage our Nation's most talented lawyers from joining the bench in the first place.

In 1969, the salary of a Federal district court judge was about 20 percent higher than the salary of a top law school dean and about 30 percent higher than that of a senior law professor at a top law school. Today, judges make only two-thirds the salary of similarly credentialed law professors, and half the pay of deans.

In many cases, judges make less than first-year associates fresh out of law school.

The bill that I am introducing today does not say that Federal judges should make as much as law firm partners or law school deans. It simply says that Federal judges should not be at a disadvantage vis-a-vis other Federal employees in getting a cost-of-living adjustment each year. It simply ensures that the salary Congress intended judges to receive will keep pace with inflation.

Congress has already delayed action on this issue for too long. Our Nation now risks losing both our most experienced judges and the next generation of talented jurists.

As early as 2003, the nonpartisan National Commission on the Public Service, also known as the Volcker Commission, concluded that ``the lag in judicial salaries has gone on too long, and the potential for the diminished quality in American jurisprudence is now too large.''

I believe that the legislation that I am introducing today with Senators Hatch, Leahy, and Graham is a straightforward solution. It is not a raise. It is simply an assurance that judges will not have to jump through special hoops or rely on the politics of Congressional pay in order to get the cost-of-living adjustment received by other Federal employees.

I do not believe that judges should expect to make the kind of salaries available to partners at private law firms. The rewards of public service are of a different kind. But we must ensure that judicial service remains a viable option for the most talented members of the bar.

Basic fairness requires that judges' salaries not diminish over time. It is time to provide these critical public servants with a fair pay system that will guarantee the future health of the judiciary.

I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today with my good friends, Senator Feinstein, Senator Ensign, and Senator Boxer to introduce the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act of 2009.

Representatives Heller, Titus, Berkley and others will be introducing an identical version of this legislation in the House of Representatives today, and I urge both bodies to act swiftly on this important legislation.

Lake Tahoe is a place of incredible beauty. The clear blue waters of the lake, surrounded by forested slopes and snow-capped peaks is a sight that can stir the soul. When Mark Twain first saw Lake Tahoe in 1861, he described it as ``a noble sheet of blue water lifted six thousand three hundred feet above the level of the sea, and walled in by a rim of snow-clad mountain peaks that towered aloft full three thousand feet higher still!'' He went on to proclaim the view in front of him as surely ``the fairest picture the whole earth affords.'' I could not agree more.

But the Lake Tahoe Basin faces some great challenges. The famed clarity of the lake declined by over a third during the last 50 years; it is estimated that 25 percent of the trees in the basin are dead or dying; the Lahontan cutthroat trout that once grew to 40 pounds or more in Lake Tahoe are no longer present; and many of the basin's natural marshes and wetlands have been altered or drained.

It became clear to me in the 1990s that a major commitment was needed to turn things around for the health and future of Lake Tahoe and the Lake Tahoe Basin. In 1996, I called then-President Clinton and Vice President Gore and asked if they would come to Lake Tahoe with me so that they could see both the incredible beauty of the place and many threats facing this rare jewel. When we convened in July 1997, the President and Vice President brought four cabinet secretaries with them and we had a serious multi-day session On the future of Lake Tahoe. President Clinton promised to make Lake Tahoe a priority--for the people of Nevada, for the people of California and for the whole country. An executive order and the subsequent Lake Tahoe Restoration Act of 2000 underscored that commitment.

It would have been difficult to imagine at that first summit how much progress we would be able to make in 12 years. The clarity of the lake now appears to have stabilized, thousands of acres of forest lands have been restored, roads and highways across the basin have been improved to limit runoff, and the natural function of many miles of stream zones and riparian areas has been restored. But there is a great deal yet to be done. We offer this legislation as the next step.

The Lake Tahoe Restoration Act of 2009 focuses Federal attention on the areas where we can be most effective and it builds on the lessons we have learned since 1997. The basic summary of the bill is that it authorizes $415 million over 8 years to improve water clarity, reduce the threat of fire, and restore the environment. But I would like to take a few minutes to explain some of the components in greater depth.

It would be impossible to make real progress in the Lake Tahoe Basin without working hand-in-hand with the Forest Service, which manages 75 percent of the land in the area. With that in mind, we call on the Forest Service to support the thresholds put forth by the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, we provide encouragement and funding to work on the restoration of stream environment zones, and we withdraw all Forest Service in the Basin lands from mineral entry in order to minimize soil disturbance. The Forest Service is also granted increased flexibility to exchange land with the states of Nevada and California which will allow for more cost-efficient management of the over 8,000 publicly owned urban parcels spread throughout the Basin. Currently, the Forest Service owns over 3,280 of these urban parcels and there are questions about whether it is in the public interest for the Forest Service to manage these urban lands or whether it would be better to pass them to other responsible entities that could provide more efficient management. We have asked the Forest Service to report to Congress on their plans for improving this part of their program, including any suggestions for how Congress might be able to help. Along with these new authorities and direction for forest management, the bill authorizes $136 million to reduce the threat of wildfire. This includes work on Forest Service lands as well as work done by local fire agencies. Local communities and fire districts that receive grants from this generous program will provide a 25 percent cash match.

The Environmental Improvement Plan, EIP, another key part of restoration efforts in the basin. The EIP is a list, prepared by Lake Tahoe stakeholders, of projects that are designed to improve water quality, forest health, air quality and fish and wildlife habitat around Lake Tahoe. As part of this bill we authorize $136 million for Federal funding to support EIP projects. We also call on stakeholders in the basin to carefully rank the projects in the EIP, using the best available science, in order to give everyone involved an understanding of the long-term priorities and goals of the program. Through this ranking, when state, local, or private funds become available, the stakeholders and government agencies can move immediately to fund and implement the projects that are most vital and in keeping with the long-range vision for environmental restoration in the basin.

Another important authorization in the bill is $72 million for stormwater management and watershed restoration projects which have been determined to be among the most effective ways to improve water clarity. These are projects designed to reduce the inflow of very fine sediment into the lake through improvement of urban stormwater systems or the restoration of natural watershed functions in the basin's streams and marsh areas.

The legislation also takes great strides in protecting Lake Tahoe from dangerous invasive species like quagga and zebra mussels. The damage that would be inflicted at Lake Tahoe by a quagga or zebra mussel infestation has been estimated to be in the tens of millions of dollars annually. These organisms destroy native ecosystems. Their rampant reproduction upsets food chains and drives other species out of existence. Dense accumulation of shells damages infrastructure, clogs water pipes and fouls boats and motors. As has been experienced in other parts of our country, these invasive species can leave boulders and beaches covered in an unsightly, foul-smelling, crust of sharp fingernail-sized shells. In order to protect Lake Tahoe from this horrible fate, our bill would provide $20 million for watercraft inspections and removal of existing invasive species from Lake Tahoe. Further, we prohibit watercraft that have had contact with quagga or zebra mussel-infested waters from entering waterbodies in the Lake Tahoe Basin. All other watercraft must submit to inspection and decontamination prior to launch in order to prevent

the introduction of these harmful species. Watercraft can be exempted from decontamination if they have not launched elsewhere since last being in Lake Tahoe.

Of special importance to me, this legislation authorizes $20 million to help implement the full-scale recovery of the Lahontan cutthroat trout. This iconic fish was highly sought by anglers for generations, and was the top predator in the lake's ecosystem. Populations started to decline when widespread logging and pulp operations came to the Tahoe Basin, damaging crucial spawning areas. This, combined with serious overfishing, led to a sharp decline in population levels. To make matters worse, a number of non-native fish were introduced into Lake Tahoe and began to prey upon the remaining juvenile cutthroats.

We have since made great progress in cleaning up the Basin's streams and restoring lost habitat, but we will need to take additional steps to bring this great fish back to Lake Tahoe. The funding authorized by this legislation will make these steps possible. I would also like to note, that the Fish and Wildlife Service has made great progress in bringing Lahontan cutthroat trout back to Fallen Leaf Lake, in the Tahoe Basin. I have faith that they can work similar wonders in Lake Tahoe.

Another piece of this bill that we have put a lot of time and thought into is the science program. A solid understanding of how our restoration efforts are working, and how natural physical and biological processes affect the lake is critical to ensuring continued progress in restoring the health of the basin. The legislation authorizes $30 million for scientific programs and research that will produce information on long-term trends in the basin and provide the basis for selection of the most effective projects. To help coordinate efforts, all projects funded by this legislation will have monitoring and assessment built into their project design so that we can better understand their contributions to restoration in the basin.

A great deal of work has gone into this bill, and I am grateful for the help and assistance that my colleagues and their staffs have provided. Senator Feinstein and her staff deserve special praise for their diligent efforts. I also sincerely appreciate the time and attention of the many people in Nevada and California who have provided crucial input along the way.

Anyone who has been to Lake Tahoe knows that is it not just uniquely beautiful but that it is also worth fighting to protect. It is my sincere hope that my grandchildren will see the day when the Lake's clarity is restored to 100 feet or more, when Tahoe's giant native trout are once again plentiful, and when nearby forests are diverse and healthy. Mark Twain saw something amazing when he crested into the Lake Tahoe Basin. We owe it to ourselves and to subsequent generations to restore as much of that splendor as we can. This bill is the next step in that journey.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Federal Judicial Fairness Act of 2009.

I want to thank my cosponsors--Senator Hatch, Senator Leahy, and Senator Graham--for working with me on this important legislation.

The salaries of our Federal judges are eroding in their real buying power over time. This bill would solve that problem.

Over the past 30 years, pay for Federal judges has declined dramatically. Since 1969, the inflation-adjusted salaries of Federal judges have dropped by 24 percent, even as other Federal workers have received an average salary increase of 18 percent.

The way the pay system works now, Federal judges are at a stark disadvantage each year for receiving a cost-of-living adjustment to keep their salaries in pace with inflation. While most Federal civilian employees receive an automatic cost-of-living adjustment, Federal judges do not. Instead, they currently receive an adjustment only if Congress passes a special law and also provides an adjustment for itself.

Judicial salaries should not be ensnared in Congressional-pay politics. Judges should simply be on the same system that other Federal employees are.

That is what this bill would do.

It would repeal ``Section 140,'' which currently requires Congress to pass a special law each year in order for judges to receive a cost-of- living adjustment; and it would provide judges with an automatic, annual cost-of-living adjustment under the same General Schedule used for other Federal civilian employees.

In other words, the bill would simply put Federal judges on an even playing field.

Why is this important?

The drop in real pay for Federal judges has created what Chief Justice John Roberts has called ``a Constitutional crisis.'' More and more judges are being forced to leave the bench for financial reasons during what should be the peak years of their judicial careers.

Recently, the Federal court for the Central District of California lost a U.S. District Judge, Stephen Larson, after only 4 years of service. Larson had been a public servant for over a decade and said that because of his large family, he was finally faced with an impossible choice: He could either continue serving the public as a judge, or he could retire from the bench in order to be able to afford a college education for his children.

Judge Larson's story is not an anomaly. The Federal bench has lost 103 judges since 1990, 80 percent of whom ended up taking other, usually higher-paying, positions in the private sector.

The problem is especially acute in high-cost states like California. In California, State court judges have higher salaries than Federal Article III judges.

The rate at which our Federal courts are losing judges has increased by 24 percent since the 1990s, even as caseloads have gone up and the replacement process has slowed down.

Departures like Judge Larson's are only half the problem. As former Federal judge and former Representative Abner Mikva has pointed out, a primary effect of the erosion of judicial salaries is to discourage our Nation's most talented lawyers from joining the bench in the first place.

In 1969, the salary of a Federal district court judge was about 20 percent higher than the salary of a top law school dean and about 30 percent higher than that of a senior law professor at a top law school. Today, judges make only two-thirds the salary of similarly credentialed law professors, and half the pay of deans.

In many cases, judges make less than first-year associates fresh out of law school.

The bill that I am introducing today does not say that Federal judges should make as much as law firm partners or law school deans. It simply says that Federal judges should not be at a disadvantage vis-a-vis other Federal employees in getting a cost-of-living adjustment each year. It simply ensures that the salary Congress intended judges to receive will keep pace with inflation.

Congress has already delayed action on this issue for too long. Our Nation now risks losing both our most experienced judges and the next generation of talented jurists.

As early as 2003, the nonpartisan National Commission on the Public Service, also known as the Volcker Commission, concluded that ``the lag in judicial salaries has gone on too long, and the potential for the diminished quality in American jurisprudence is now too large.''

I believe that the legislation that I am introducing today with Senators Hatch, Leahy, and Graham is a straightforward solution. It is not a raise. It is simply an assurance that judges will not have to jump through special hoops or rely on the politics of Congressional pay in order to get the cost-of-living adjustment received by other Federal employees.

I do not believe that judges should expect to make the kind of salaries available to partners at private law firms. The rewards of public service are of a different kind. But we must ensure that judicial service remains a viable option for the most talented members of the bar.

Basic fairness requires that judges' salaries not diminish over time. It is time to provide these critical public servants with a fair pay system that will guarantee the future health of the judiciary.

I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the importance of preserving the Heart Mountain World War II Internment Camp in Powell, Wyoming. My good friend and colleague Senator John Barrasso and I are introducing a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study to determine the suitability and feasibility of adding the Heart Mountain Relocation Center as a unit of the National Park System.

Heart Mountain, WY, was 1 of 10 relocation centers created during World War II to house Japanese and Japanese-Americans who were forcibly relocated inland from the west coast. The current site contains the most existing structures of any site in the country. To memorialize this history, the Heart Mountain, Wyoming Foundation is working to develop a Learning Center on the site of the Internment Camp. The Foundation is a well-established and creditable organization serving 2,800 on its mailing list, with notable Board and Advisory Board members including former Senator Alan Simpson and former U.S. Department of Commerce and U.S. Department of Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta. Senator Simpson and Secretary Mineta first met as Boy Scouts when Senator Simpson's Cody, WY, Scout Troop visited Secretary Mineta's troop while he was interned as a young man in the Heart Mountain camp. They developed a bond that would last for decades and eventually served in Congress together.

Private and public entities alike strongly believe that Heart Mountain, WY, should be preserved for future generations. I, too, believe preservation of one of our country's landmarks from World War II should be saved so our children and grandchildren have another tool to learn about our country's history.

In 2000, I secured Federal funding from the Economic Development Initiative Grant Program, EDI, under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for the Heart Mountain, Wyoming Foundation. The foundation used this funding to acquire land and conduct environmental assessment of the land in order to build an interactive learning facility at Heart Mountain's World War II Internment Camp in Powell, WY. The facility educates tourists and Wyomingites about the camp's history and effects on the Japanese American population. In the past 9 years, private individuals, non-profit organizations, and the Federal Government have issued additional dollars to the Heart Mountain, Wyoming Foundation in order to achieve its goal of preserving the land, remaining structures, and building the Learning Center.

The next step in this journey is the bill Senator Barrasso and I are introducing today. The bill would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study to determine the suitability and feasibility of adding the Heart Mountain Relocation Center as a unit of the National Park System. When conducting the study, the Secretary of the Interior will be looking at various factors including, but not limited to, evaluating the national significance of Heart Mountain, WY; identifying the cost estimates for any Federal acquisition, development, operation and maintenance of the area; and identifying any potential impacts of designation of site as a unit of the National Park System on private landowners. Once funds are made available for the study, the Secretary of the Interior has 3 years to study the issue and issue a report about next steps to the appropriate House and Senate committees of jurisdiction.

Simply because we are introducing this legislation does not guarantee that Heart Mountain will become a part of the National Park System. The bill we are introducing will allow the Secretary to study that question and to make a recommendation based on the merits of Heart Mountain and how it would fit within the entire National Park System.

Heart Mountain Camp internees want to leave a legacy of learning through this Center to future generations such that abridgements of freedoms and lack of ethnic understanding not occur again in this great country. Preserving the land and structures and building the Learning Center will do just that. This bill is the next step forward in making their dream a reality.

Mr. President, Today I introduce an important piece of legislation that would provide a real boost to our economy at little, if any, expense to taxpayers. The bill I introduce would offer bonus depreciation on the purchase of noncommercial general aviation aircraft in 2010 or 2011.

America is the world leader in general aviation manufacturing, a sector in which we truly have no peer. General aviation is an essential and critical part of our Nation's transportation infrastructure for many individuals and businesses, for whom time is of the absolute essence. Further, general aviation is a vital component of our economy, supporting over 1.2 million jobs and providing $150 billion in economic activity. It is one of the few remaining American manufacturing industries that still provide a significant trade surplus for the U.S., generating over $5.9 billion in exports of domestically manufactured planes in 2008 alone.

However, this sector is particularly susceptible to economic downturns. Many individuals and companies will delay or even cancel the purchase of an aircraft in a bad economy even though they may have a present need for a new aircraft.

We see this reflected in our general aviation sector where during the first half of 2009, we witnessed declines of 58 percent in piston engine aircraft sales; 37 percent in jet engine aircraft sales; and 13 percent in turboprop aircraft sales. At the same time, use of business jets has declined 12 percent over the past year, and the number of used aircraft on the global market stands at a historic high.

Cumulatively, general aviation companies have had to lay off 19,000 American workers, and this includes 11,500 alone in Wichita, KS. Over the past year, total employment of general aviation companies has declined by almost 14 percent. This is even more alarming when you consider that the U.S. Department of Labor aerospace workforce multiplier is three. For every general aviation worker on an aircraft, there are three jobs outside the immediate company that are created, whether manufacturing, engineering, supply or support. So, for this many general aviation workers to have been laid-off has much further reaching consequences in terms of the number of people and families that are adversely impacted.

The legislation that I propose today is a proven approach to spur general aviation aircraft orders with minimal affect on the Federal budget. My approach to this issue is an approach that has resulted in real jobs. During the 2003-2004 economic downturn, I worked to have general aviation bonus depreciation included in legislation that emerged from the Senate Finance Committee. That provision is credited with spurring over $2 billion in new general aviation aircraft sales, and it is credited with saving or sustaining thousands of jobs. Also, another consideration that makes this approach a real

no-brainer is that, in the past, the Joint Tax Committee reported the provision to have a negligible impact on Federal tax revenues over the 10-year budget window. This is because, while tax revenue is reduced in the near-term, revenues rebound to higher levels in the second half of the 10-year window as no deprecation is being taken in the later years of the period.

Acting on this proposal now is important. The Blue Chip Economic Indicators consensus forecast expect unemployment to rise above 10 percent and to remain above the 3rd quarter 2009 level of 9.6 percent at least though the end of 2010, so we are looking at uncertain economic growth and high unemployment for several more quarters. A proposal like the one that I am putting forward is likely to encourage individuals and businesses to go ahead and act now on placing orders rather than waiting. For the Congress to act on this bonus depreciation legislation now would have a positive effect on getting our economic engines moving again and can play a part in helping facilitate a broader economic recovery, as it would hopefully again help to save and sustain jobs as well as returning jobs to those who have lost them as a result of the recession.