Floor Statements

Mr. President, today I rise in memory of my dear friend Ruth Singer Meyers, who died in Los Angeles last month after a brief but valiant fight with cancer.

Ruth was a philanthropist, a community leader, and a champion of Israel and a strong U.S.-Israel relationship. She was also a kind, warm, and caring human being who had countless good friends and deeply loved her husband, children, and grandchildren.

Born Ruth Lazarus in Wilmington, DE, Ruth moved to California as a girl with her family. After graduating from Beverly Hills High School and UCLA, she married and had two sons, Rick and Anthony. When her boys grew up and went off to college, Ruth dedicated herself to charitable work, the Jewish community, and Israel.

Ruth's energy, dedication, and fundraising abilities were legendary in charitable circles. She served on the Board of Governors of Cedars- Sinai Hospital, the Board of Directors of the Venice Family Clinic, the International Board of Governors of Tel Aviv University, and the National Board of the United Jewish Appeal. As missions chairman for the Jewish Federation of Los Angeles, she led dozens of community trips to Israel. She also served as the Los Angeles chairman of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and became a national officer in the organization.

On behalf of the people of California, who have benefited so much from Ruth's life and work, I send my deepest gratitude and condolences to her husband, Mickey Meyers, as well as her sons and grandchildren. I know they and many others will miss this wonderful woman, as will I.

Mr. President, I appreciate Senator Tester's leadership in putting together legislation, S. 3525, to address the priorities of sportsmen across the country.

This bill has many important provisions that I support, including reauthorization of highly successful conservation programs in the Environment and Public Works Committee's jurisdiction, which I chair. These programs restore critical wetlands, support partnerships to conserve wildlife habitat, and promote outdoor recreation.

While I appreciate Senator Tester's efforts to move this legislation forward, I remain deeply concerned about two provisions included in this package, which I will discuss today. S. 3525 broadens an exemption that prohibits the use of the Federal Toxic Substances Control Act to address public health and environmental threats from dangerous chemicals, including lead, in ammunition and fishing tackle.

Some ammunition and fishing tackle contain lead that can be harmful to people who consume meat contaminated with lead shot. In 2008, Minnesota examined packages of venison and found that 22 percent contained lead fragments. North Dakota has also found lead fragments in venison being distributed for food.

The latest science shows that there is no known safe level of lead in children's blood. Because lead can damage the nervous system, including the brain, children and pregnant women are especially at risk.

Animals can also be poisoned or die after eating ammunition that is shot into lakes, rivers and upland areas, or when they consume the carcass of another animal that contains spent ammunition. In 2008, an expert at the U.S. Geological Survey stated:

Science is replete with evidence that ingestion of spent

ammunition and fishing tackle can kill birds. The magnitude

of poisoning in some species such as waterfowl, eagles,

California condors, swans and loons, is daunting.

There are safe and effective alternatives, such as steel, to the use of lead in shot and fishing tackle. According to the State of Wisconsin:

Steel shot actually arrives on target in a tighter pattern

. . . (and) penetrates game better than lead . . . Extensive

research, testing steel and other non-toxic shot, shows it to

be both safe and effective.

The Federal Government must be able to use all of the tools at its disposal to protect American families from consuming contaminated food. Therefore, we should not create unneeded exemptions that apply to lead and an unknown number of other contaminants.

I also oppose the provision in S. 3525 that would allow sport-hunted polar bear trophies to be imported from Canada. This misguided provision could jeopardize recovery efforts for a species that is listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, ESA, and protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, MMPA.

Before polar bears received their protected status under the ESA and MMPA, there were extensive warnings for over a year that this protection was imminent. Nevertheless, a small group of trophy hunters ignored these warnings and went forward scheduling new

hunts, and they are now seeking an exception to allow their polar bear trophies to be imported into the United States.

The International Union for Conservation of Nature estimates that approximately 20,000 to 25,000 polar bears remain in the wild. Their survival is severely jeopardized by many factors, and we should not provide a loophole that encourages hunting of this vulnerable species. Maintaining full, consistent protections for polar bears is critical to the health of the Arctic ecosystem, the Native communities who legally harvest these bears for subsistence purposes, and for the public at large that is working to save this iconic animal.

I believe this bill has many good provisions that will help preserve America's treasured natural resources, protect fish and wildlife, and provide recreational opportunities for our families. Unfortunately, the bill also includes two provisions that threaten public health and could set back wildlife conservation efforts. I filed amendments to S. 3525 that would address these concerns, but if the amendments are not adopted and the bill remains unchanged, I will oppose S. 3525 in its current form.

Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating the 2012 World Series champion San Francisco Giants. This season the Giants earned their second World Series title in 3 years by sweeping the Detroit Tigers in 4 games.

All season, the Giants truly exemplified what it means to be a team. Even though this season saw historic accomplishments from individuals, including Matt Cain's perfect game and Pablo Sandoval's three home runs in game one of the World Series, no one player carried the Giants. Contributions from all players on an outstanding roster of perennial all-stars, reliable veterans and promising young players led the Giants to win the National League Western Division.

On their road to the World Series, the Giants showed true grit and determination. They won a record-tying six consecutive games when facing elimination, fighting their way to a historic championship. In the division series, the team made history by battling back from a two games to nothing deficit to beat the Cincinnati Reds--the first come- from-behind win of its kind in National League history.

When the Giants made it to the National League Championship Series against the defending World Series Champion St. Louis Cardinals, they once again found themselves on the brink of elimination. The team banded together and roared back, winning three hard-fought games in a row to capture their second National League pennant in 3 years. With a powerful combination of great pitching, excellent defense, and clutch hitting, this Giant team always found a way to win.

All 25 players on the playoff roster should be congratulated for their contributions to this true team effort: Jeremy Affeldt, Joaquin Arias, Brandon Belt, Gregor Blanco, Madison Bumgarner, Matt Cain, Santiago Casilla, Brandon Crawford, Aubrey Huff, George Kontos, Tim Lincecum, Javier Lopez, Jose Mijares, Guillermo Mota, Xavier Nady, Angel Pagan, Hunter Pence, Buster Posey, Sergio Romo, Hector Sanchez, Pablo Sandoval, Marco Scutaro, Ryan Theriot, Ryan Vogelsong, and Barry Zito.

In addition to the players, I also congratulate Chief Executive Officer Larry Baer, General Manager Brian Sabean, and Manager Bruce Bochy for the tremendous job they did in assembling and guiding this team to the 2012 World Series.

As Giants fans in the Bay Area and around the world celebrate, I congratulate their team on a remarkable season, a seventh World Series title, and a place in the history books.

Mr. President, I was unable to attend the roll call votes that occurred at midnight, September 22. Had I been present, I would have voted against S. 3576, related to foreign aid and voted in favor of S.J. Res. 41, the Iran Resolution. I would have also voted to support passage of H.J. Res. 117, the Continuing Appropriations resolution and would have voted against the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to S. 3525, the Sportsmen's Act.

Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the life of Kenyon Marc Youngstrom, a dedicated husband, proud father, loving son, devoted friend, and respected law enforcement official. Officer Youngstrom lost his life serving the California Highway Patrol on September 5, 2012. He was 37 years old.

Kenyon Youngstrom was born in Pasadena, CA and raised in Riverside. He served as a U.S. Army Reservist from 1994 to 2000, attaining the rank of Specialist. He graduated from the California Highway Patrol Academy in February 2006 and served at both CHP Headquarters and CHP's Contra Costa Area Office.

Officer Youngstrom served his community with a heroism that extended beyond his own life. As the Vallejo Times Herald wrote, Officer Youngstrom ``wanted his organs donated so that if something did ever happen to him in the line of duty, others might live even if he would not.''

Officer Kenyon Youngstrom, like all those who serve in law enforcement across California, put his life on the line to protect his community. He is survived by his loving wife Karen and four children: Alexander, Madison, Andrew, and Kennedy. My heart goes out to his family and loved ones, and my thoughts and prayers are with them. We are forever indebted to him for his courage, service, and sacrifice.

Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the California Coastal National Monument Expansion Act. Congressman Mike Thompson recently introduced companion legislation to this bill in the House of Representatives, and I thank him for all of the work he has done on advancing this initiative. I would also like to thank Senator Dianne Feinstein for joining me as an original co-sponsor of this legislation.

The California Coastal National Monument, created by President Clinton in 2000, stretches over 1,100 miles off California's coast and protects more than 20,000 small islands, rocks, exposed reefs, and islands between Mexico and Oregon. My bill would incorporate 1,225 acres of the Stornetta Public Lands and other public lands near the city of Point Arena in Mendocino County into the existing National Monument, creating the Monument's first onshore additions. By expanding the National Monument to include the ``Point Arena-Stornetta Public Lands,'' my bill not only preserves the area for future generations, but also helps create a more cohesive bridge between the offshore resources and onshore public lands. Visitors will have contiguous public access to the current National Monument, the proposed expansion

area, the adjacent Manchester Beach State Park, and the historic Point Arena Lighthouse.

It is crucial that steps be taken to ensure the permanent preservation of this naturally diverse segment of the California Coast, which encompasses over two miles of coastline with natural bridges, tide pools, waterfalls, sinkholes and blowholes, and portions of the Garcia River and surrounding estuary. The area is not only recognized for its breathtaking coastal formations, but also for outstanding natural resources that include extensive wetlands, rumpled sand dunes, and rolling meadows. Adding these lands to the National Monument will provide additional resources for more effective management and conservation program opportunities.

The ``Point Arena-Stornetta Public Lands'' is also home to a diverse ecosystem. The Garcia River is crucial habitat for Coho and Chinook salmon habitat, as well as a prime birding location for multiple bird species including the Laysan Albatross, Peregrine Falcon, Great Blue Heron, and many others. These lands are also the targets of restoration efforts that would help protect local endangered wildlife such as the Point Arena Mountain Beaver, Behren's Silverspot Butterfly, and other species of concern, like the Black Oyster Catcher.

In Mendocino County, tourism is responsible for supporting almost 5,000 jobs, with visitors bringing in $19 million annually in state and local taxes. Visitors come from all over the world to experience the beauty and natural wonders of California's northern coast, and local businesses and nearby towns will benefit from the increased profile of a National Monument designation. A National Monument designation will bring increased awareness to the recreational opportunities available in the area, including hiking, fishing, bird watching, nature photography and wildlife watching. This designation could also attract increased resources to support the needs of the area.

It is no wonder that the ``Point Arena-Stornetta Public Lands'' are often referred to as the most significant parts of the Mendocino coastline. These magnificent lands have tremendous natural and recreational value, and it is imperative for them to be included as part of the California Coastal National Monument. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this important legislation. The ``Point Arena-Stornetta Public Lands'' deserves National Monument recognition, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this effort.

Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the California Coastal National Monument Expansion Act. Congressman Mike Thompson recently introduced companion legislation to this bill in the House of Representatives, and I thank him for all of the work he has done on advancing this initiative. I would also like to thank Senator Dianne Feinstein for joining me as an original co-sponsor of this legislation.

The California Coastal National Monument, created by President Clinton in 2000, stretches over 1,100 miles off California's coast and protects more than 20,000 small islands, rocks, exposed reefs, and islands between Mexico and Oregon. My bill would incorporate 1,225 acres of the Stornetta Public Lands and other public lands near the city of Point Arena in Mendocino County into the existing National Monument, creating the Monument's first onshore additions. By expanding the National Monument to include the ``Point Arena-Stornetta Public Lands,'' my bill not only preserves the area for future generations, but also helps create a more cohesive bridge between the offshore resources and onshore public lands. Visitors will have contiguous public access to the current National Monument, the proposed expansion

area, the adjacent Manchester Beach State Park, and the historic Point Arena Lighthouse.

It is crucial that steps be taken to ensure the permanent preservation of this naturally diverse segment of the California Coast, which encompasses over two miles of coastline with natural bridges, tide pools, waterfalls, sinkholes and blowholes, and portions of the Garcia River and surrounding estuary. The area is not only recognized for its breathtaking coastal formations, but also for outstanding natural resources that include extensive wetlands, rumpled sand dunes, and rolling meadows. Adding these lands to the National Monument will provide additional resources for more effective management and conservation program opportunities.

The ``Point Arena-Stornetta Public Lands'' is also home to a diverse ecosystem. The Garcia River is crucial habitat for Coho and Chinook salmon habitat, as well as a prime birding location for multiple bird species including the Laysan Albatross, Peregrine Falcon, Great Blue Heron, and many others. These lands are also the targets of restoration efforts that would help protect local endangered wildlife such as the Point Arena Mountain Beaver, Behren's Silverspot Butterfly, and other species of concern, like the Black Oyster Catcher.

In Mendocino County, tourism is responsible for supporting almost 5,000 jobs, with visitors bringing in $19 million annually in state and local taxes. Visitors come from all over the world to experience the beauty and natural wonders of California's northern coast, and local businesses and nearby towns will benefit from the increased profile of a National Monument designation. A National Monument designation will bring increased awareness to the recreational opportunities available in the area, including hiking, fishing, bird watching, nature photography and wildlife watching. This designation could also attract increased resources to support the needs of the area.

It is no wonder that the ``Point Arena-Stornetta Public Lands'' are often referred to as the most significant parts of the Mendocino coastline. These magnificent lands have tremendous natural and recreational value, and it is imperative for them to be included as part of the California Coastal National Monument. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this important legislation. The ``Point Arena-Stornetta Public Lands'' deserves National Monument recognition, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this effort.

Mr. President, I rise today during Suicide Prevention Month to recognize the Army's Suicide Stand Down Day, which will take place later this month on September 27, 2012.

The stand down is an opportunity for the Army to take a hard look at current efforts to address the issue of suicide among soldiers and focus on ways to improve these efforts. It will emphasize eliminating the stigma surrounding mental health injuries, which too often prevents our service men and women from getting the help they need.

This could not come at a more critical time. The incidence of suicide among our troops has skyrocketed to alarming levels due, in part, to over 10 years of repeated and protracted deployments to combat zones around the world. In fact, the Army experienced a record-high 38 Active-Duty suicides in July and is on track to surpass last year's total. This is absolutely tragic and requires urgent and sustained action.

The central theme of the stand down is ``Shoulder to Shoulder: We Stand up for Life.'' This is such a critical message--our servicemembers should never have to suffer alone. Our military men and women make tremendous sacrifices each and every day in service to our Nation, and we have a sacred obligation to take care of them in return. This means ensuring they feel comfortable seeking the care that they need without fear or repercussion or being stigmatized. This also means improving access to mental health care and providing support for our military families.

While there is no single solution to preventing military suicide, efforts like the Army's Suicide Stand Down Day are important steps because they provide an opportunity to have a frank conversation across all levels of leadership about the profound stressors our troops are experiencing.

I strongly encourage all branches of our military to continue to review and improve their suicide prevention programs because it is clear that more must be done and that it must be done now.

Suicide reaches far beyond one individual--it devastates entire families and affects communities. Our military families are resilient and they display incredible courage in the face of so many unique challenges, but no one person or family can be strong all the time.

That is why we must continue to do everything in our power to send the message to our servicemembers, veterans, and their families that it is OK to ask for help and that the care and support they need is waiting for them.

I urge our citizens, our government, and our Nation to continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with our Armed Forces and recommit ourselves to stemming the tide of military suicide once and for all because we can all agree that one suicide is one too many.

Mr. President, I am pleased to congratulate the 2012 Petaluma National Little League All-Star team for capturing third place at the 66th Little League World Series in Williamsport, PA. The determination, sportsmanship and love of the game that these young athletes exhibited captured the imagination and support of people in Petaluma and throughout California.

Since its establishment with three teams in 1939, Little League Baseball has grown to become the world's largest youth sports program, enabling millions of children from 80 countries in 6 continents to enjoy and compete in the American pastime. This year the Little League World Series featured eight regional representatives from the United States and eight international teams.

The Petaluma National All-Star team qualified for the Little League World Series by winning the District 35 Tournament in Petaluma, the Section I Tournament in Fairfield, the NorCal Division II Tournament in Fremont and the Western Regional Tournament in San Bernardino.

At the Little League World Series, the Petaluma All-Stars achieved several impressive and memorable feats. In the U.S. Championship game, the Petaluma All-Stars staged one of the biggest and most thrilling rallies in Little League World Series history when they plated 10 runs in the bottom of the sixth to force their game against the team from Goodlettsville, TN into extra innings. Although their valiant effort would ultimately fall short, the remarkable determination and competitiveness exhibited by these young athletes will forever be a part of the lore of the Little League World Series. The next day, the Petaluma team showed its resilience by defeating the team from Aguadulce, Panama to place third worldwide behind the eventual Little League World Series championship team from Tokyo, Japan and the U.S. Championship team from Goodlettsville, TN.

I ask my colleagues to join me and the Petaluma community in recognizing all the members of the Petaluma National Little League All- Star team on this wonderful achievement: Kempton Brandis, Blake Buhrer, Logan Douglas, Quinton Gago, Daniel Marzo, Dylan Moore, James O'Hanlon, Austin Paretti, Porter Slate, Hance Smith, Bradley Smith, Cole Tomei, Andrew White and a team of dedicated coaches, parents and volunteers.

Mr. President, today I take this opportunity to recognize and celebrate the 125th anniversary of National City, located in San Diego County, CA.

National City was founded in 1868 and incorporated on September 17, 1887, making it the second oldest city in San Diego County. The land on which it stands had earlier been an Indian rancheria, home of Apusquele band of the Hamacha tribe. In 1769 it had become one of the ranches used by the Mission San Diego de Alcala, and the padres called it La Purisima Concepcion.

In the late 19th century, National City pioneered the shipping and transportation systems for San Diego, constructing the area's first wharf and introducing the first transcontinental railroad terminus; the National City Depot, built in 1882, is the last one standing out of the original five transcontinental terminus railroad stations and is designated as a California historical landmark. Another local cultural treasure ``Brick Row,'' built in 1887 is the only Philadelphia-style row housing in the southwestern United States and is listed in the National Register of Historic Places.

Today, National City's 3-mile-long port along San Diego Bay is part of Naval Base San Diego, the largest U.S. Navy base on the west coast. In addition to its leading role as a naval gateway, National City is considered a symbolic link between San Diego and Mexico.

On September 22, residents of National City will gather for a citywide 125th anniversary picnic at Kimball Park. I congratulate the people of National City on this special occasion and salute their rich history and wonderful community spirit.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Madam President, before Senator Leahy leaves the floor, I want to thank him from the bottom of my heart. What he has shown is that he can team up in a bipartisan way to help the women of this country avoid needless, senseless, dangerous violence. I thank the Senator, and I stand here to support his efforts.

The Leahy-Crapo bill is the bill we need to pass. Why? Because it is the bill that includes everyone. We do not want to leave out 30 million people. We do not want to leave 30 million people out of the Violence Against Women Act. That is what the House of Representatives does because they leave out immigrant people, they leave out the gay and lesbian community, they leave out students and Native Americans.

When you look at those women and those groups, you find out, indeed, they have a very high percentage of violence in their communities-- violence against women that leaves women in deep trouble and threatens their lives. So only the Leahy-Crapo bill--only the Senate bill--which passed here with such a great number of votes can include everyone.

So if you take, for example, Cristina, in my home State of California, whose boss threatened her with deportation unless she complied with his demands for sex, she is not covered in the House bill. This is a woman who is essentially being held hostage by her boss. He is using his power over her, and she is not covered by the House bill.

The House bill, again, fails to protect LGBT individuals when they have problems with abusive partners and have been turned away in the past from shelters because the Violence Against Women Act did not cover the LGBT community.

Mika is a student who struggled to get her college to enforce a restraining order against her boyfriend after he had assaulted her and stalked her. She should not have had to struggle. Under the Leahy-Crapo Senate Violence Against Women Act, Mika will be covered.

Then-Senator Joe Biden, now Vice President Biden, wrote the Violence Against Women Act. It was a long time ago. I was in the House, and I was so honored when Joe Biden came and asked me to carry the House version of the bill. I did that, and I remember being so proud because Joe was such a leader on this and he had the faith in me to ask me to help him.

But I can tell you, it was a struggle to get it done. It took several years to get it done. And when I got to the Senate, I watched Joe Biden team up with Senator Hatch, and I helped them on the floor. I was only able to get a portion of the bill passed in the House, so there was a lot more we needed to do, and we did it.

I want to read a statement that Vice President Biden made today--he just sent it out--because it speaks to this issue. He said:

Eighteen years ago today, the landmark Violence Against

Women Act was signed into law. It was founded on the basic

premise that every woman deserves to be safe from violence,

and since its passage, we have made tremendous strides

towards achieving that goal. We gave law enforcement and the

courts more tools to combat domestic violence and hold

offenders accountable. We created a national hotline to

direct victims to life-saving assistance. And since VAWA

passed, annual rates of domestic violence have dropped by

more than 60 percent.

It is important to reflect on what Vice President Biden is saying. Because of the Violence Against Women Act, we have seen a drop in the annual rate of domestic violence by more than 60 percent. And now we are here to say: Let's make it even better by including 30 million people who were left out of the bill.

Quoting the Vice President, he says:

But we still have much work to do. Three women still die

every day as a result of domestic violence. One in five women

have been raped, many as teenagers, and one in six women have

been victims of stalking.

He writes:

While women and girls face these devastating realities

every day, reauthorization of the strengthened VAWA

languishes in Congress. VAWA is just as important today as

when it first became law, and I urge Congress to keep the

promise me made to our daughters and our granddaughters on

that day--that we would work together to keep them safe.

In closing, because I see Senator Coons is here--we are so happy he is here to talk on this issue, I feel it is important to note that over 900 groups nationwide have signed a letter in support of the bill that includes these 30 million people--that includes everyone. We know this law is working. On today, the 18th anniversary of the VAWA being signed into law by Bill Clinton, let's pass this legislation and send it to President Obama, legislation that strengthens the law, is bipartisan like the Leahy-Crapo bill, and includes everyone.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to 30 servicemembers from California or based in California who have died while serving our country in Operation Enduring Freedom since June 6, 2012. This brings to 381 the number of servicemembers either from California or based in California who have been killed while serving our country in Afghanistan. This represents 18 percent of all U.S. deaths in Afghanistan.

CPT Scott P. Pace, 39, of Brawley, CA, died June 6, in Qarah Bagh, Afghanistan, of wounds suffered when his helicopter crashed. Captain Pace was assigned to 1st Squadron, 17th Cavalry Regiment, 82nd Combat Aviation Brigade, 82nd Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC.

Cpl Anthony R. Servin, 22, of Moreno Valley, CA, died June 8, while conducting combat operations in Helmand Province, Afghanistan. Corporal Servin was assigned to 2nd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA.

SPC Nathan T. Davis, 20, Yucaipa, CA, died June 9, in Tore Obeh, Afghanistan, of injuries suffered when his vehicle was attacked with an enemy improvised explosive device. Specialist Davis was assigned to 1st Battalion, Airborne, 501st Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, Airborne, 25th Infantry Division, Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, AK.

Cpl Taylor J. Baune, 21, of Andover, MN, died June 13, while conducting combat operations in Helmand Province, Afghanistan. Corporal Baune was assigned to 1st Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Twentynine Palms, CA.

SSG Nicholas C. Fredsti, 30, of San Diego, CA, died June 15, in Spedar, Afghanistan, when insurgents attacked his unit with small arms fire. Staff Sergeant Fredsti was assigned to 1st Battalion, 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 82nd Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC.

SGT Jose Rodriguez, 22, of Gustine, CA, died June 19, in Kandahar Province, Afghanistan, of wounds suffered from enemy small arms fire. Sergeant Rodriguez was assigned to 4th Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment, 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA.

PFC Steven P. Stevens II, 23, of Tallahassee, FL, died June 22, while conducting combat operations in Helmand Province, Afghanistan. Private First Class Stevens was assigned to 1st Combat Engineer Battalion, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA.

LCpl Niall W. Cotisears, 23, of Arlington, VA, died June 23, while conducting combat operations in Helmand Province, Afghanistan. Lance Corporal Cotisears was assigned to 1st Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Twentynine Palms,

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when I have completed my statement, Senator Harkin be permitted to take the floor at that time.

I wish to thank Senator Harkin because he and I were spending a little time together in the great State of our Presiding Officer, and he and I agreed that one of the issues that ought to be talked about a little bit more involves the stark choice we are facing in November in large part due to the budget of Paul Ryan, who is now the Vice Presidential nominee for the Republicans. And Governor Romney has endorsed and embraced the Ryan budget.

I think it was Senator Harkin's idea that we ought to explain that Ryan budget, so I am going to do my best to talk about it as the chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, which has the jurisdiction of highways, bridges, transportation systems, and the environment, and I will also make a couple of comments about Medicare. I know Senator Harkin is going to go into that in great depth.

I want to make sure everybody understands that what I am talking about comes straight from the budget. So if you look at page 78 of the report accompanying the Ryan budget resolution, Mr. Ryan makes it clear he wants to make devastating cuts to transportation. What do I mean when I say that? I mean devastating. I mean a 50-percent cut, which means about 1 million jobs would be lost if the Ryan budget were to go into effect. We are talking about construction jobs--an area that has been hit so hard. We still haven't come back from this recession. And if there is one thing we learned when we were in the Presiding Officer's great State at that convention, it was the depth of this recession--the worst since the Great Depression. What a time Paul Ryan picks to bring devastating cuts to the construction industry. I am talking about businesses and jobs mostly in the private sector, not the public sector.

We have to think about the fact that 70,000 of our bridges are deficient and 50 percent of our roads are not in good condition. We know bridges fail. We have seen it happen. We are not only talking about devastating cuts to the construction industry and its workers but a devastating situation for people who use our bridges--the 70,000 of which are structurally deficient--and our roads, which need help. So no country can lead the world if we can't move people and goods, and we cannot be a world power when it comes to transportation.

The Ryan budget is a jobs killer. I am talking about 1 million jobs that would be lost--in the private sector mostly--and it would put our families at risk by neglecting our bridges, our highways and our transit systems. Now, President Obama, on the other hand--and, frankly, a lot of us here on both sides of the aisle--reject the notion that we can walk away from rebuilding our infrastructure. So this is a very key issue.

I said I wanted to speak as the chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, and I have talked a little bit about public works, but what does the Ryan budget do to the environment? What he does is he undermines the public health protections provided by the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and other landmark laws.

If we look at pages 13 to page 15 of his budget, we can see he cuts $62 billion for activities such as protecting our drinking water, protecting our air, and preserving our public lands. Let's face it: When kids get asthma, when people are too sick to go to work, when children are too sick to go to school, and when people die prematurely from heart attacks because of the air quality, there are no real savings. He says he is cutting $62 billion from the budget. Let me just say that for every dollar we spend on clean air protections, we know we get $30 worth of benefits. In 2010 alone, the Clean Air Act prevented 160,000 premature deaths. Ask a family who stands to lose the breadwinner in that family: Did we save money? No.

Let me cite some numbers: 1.7 million asthma attacks, 130,000 heart attacks, 86,000 emergency room visits, 13 million lost workdays, and 3.2 million lost schooldays. In 2010 the Clean Air Act prevented all that.

So what is the point, Mr. Ryan? What is the point? It will cost the American public dearly out of their pockets and out of their lives if they suffer more asthma attacks, emergency room visits, lost workdays, lost schooldays, and they have more heart attacks and premature deaths. That is shortsighted. The American Lung Association--and they are not Republican or Democratic--says that 40 percent of our population lives in areas with unhealthy levels of smog or toxic soot.

So let's remember that when we look at a budget, there is a set of values that accompany the numbers. And I don't think it is an American value to say to our people that we don't care if they get sick, they miss work, or they go to the emergency room.

Finally, I want to set the stage for Senator Harkin's very in-depth discussion about health care. I am just going to talk about Medicare and Medicaid as someone who is privileged to represent, along with Senator Feinstein, the largest State in the Union, with the most senior citizens. We have almost 38 million people. So whenever I talk about this Ryan budget and how many people get hurt, believe me, I speak from the heart when I say we can't let it happen.

The American people know Medicare, they like it, and they do not want to change it. Now, the Republicans tell us their plan saves Medicare. But just ask someone. Ask someone who is going to be the victim of the Paul Ryan plan if we don't stop it. That person will find they are getting a voucher; they are not getting Medicare. Medicare will be gone. They will get a voucher, and experts tell us and the studies show that voucher will be almost $6,000 a year short. Imagine an older person who really is struggling for a quality of life having to have the added worry of not knowing whether he or she will be able to find health insurance.

Look, putting Republicans in charge of Medicare is like putting the Cookie Monster in charge of your favorite bakery. And I am not overstating it. No one would put the Cookie Monster in charge of their favorite bakery. Well, we can't put the Republicans in charge of Medicare, and I will prove why. This isn't just rhetoric. Listen. In 1995 Newt Gingrich said he thought Medicare, in his words, should wither on the vine. In his 1996 Presidential campaign, Senate majority leader Bob Dole bragged:

I was there fighting the fight, voting against Medicare,

because we knew it wouldn't work in 1965.

Really? Really. Medicare works. Why would we end it? We are not going to end it. But if Paul Ryan gets into power, he will have a good chance of ending it with his friend and Presidential candidate Mitt Romney who has endorsed the Ryan budget.

Listen to what Michael Steele, the head of the Republican National Committee, said in 2009:

I mean, the reality of it is this single-payer program

known as Medicare is a good example of what we should not

have happen.

The Ryan budget at page 53 shreds Medicare. As if he hasn't slammed Medicare enough, look what he does to Medicaid. He cuts it by more than $800 billion. Where are low-income families going to go?

Senator Harkin is the expert, but I can tell you this. So many of our elderly rely on Medicaid for nursing home costs. It is a disaster. We know that in addition to all these terrible cuts--and by the way, when Paul Ryan attacks President Obama for cutting money from Medicare, what he isn't telling us is the President has found savings from overpayments to providers. Do you know what he does with the money? He puts it right back into Medicare, extends the life of the program for 8 years, closes the doughnut hole to help seniors, and gives senior citizens preventive health care, well checkups, and the like.

To quote President Clinton, that ``takes a lot of brass.'' Because the fact is, President Obama has strengthened Medicare and has extended the life of Medicare. What Paul Ryan does is he takes those cuts and he gives tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires.

I yield to my friend.

Absolutely. Both his budgets take the same amount. But instead of putting it back into Medicare, he robs Medicare, and Medicare will go broke--my understanding--in 2016 under the Ryan plan; whereas, President Obama puts the money back into Medicare, extends the life 8 years, and gives more benefits.

I am going to finish up and just say this. However you look at this, this Ryan budget is a roadmap for disaster for the American people. He cuts the heart out of things the American people like. The American people want clean air, they want safe drinking water, they want Medicare, they want to make sure our seniors can be safe in nursing homes. The American people want transportation--and they don't want to be worried if a car is on a bridge that is going to fall down into the water below. It has happened.

Here is the deal. If we were to say to Mr. Ryan: Are you cutting all this so you could balance the budget today, he would say: Oh, no; that is 25 years from now.

What is he doing with the ``savings''? He is giving these huge tax breaks. I will close with this. People earning more than $1 million a year are going to receive $400,000 more in tax breaks every year. So he cuts everything to give these tax breaks to the people who already have millions and billions, but it is still not enough. As President Obama has pointed out, he will then have to go after the middle class and take away middle-class tax deductions, such as the home mortgage deduction, because he doesn't even get enough money from these Draconian cuts. He has to go ahead and raise taxes on the middle class.

I watched Presidential nominee Romney be asked this question: What are you going to cut? He said: Well, we will discuss it later. Mr. Ryan, the Republican Vice Presidential nominee, said: We will work with Congress on it. Right.

Listen, they know they have to make Draconian tax increases on the middle class and the working poor. They have to cut the things America wants in order to pay for their tax cuts. No wonder Mr. Romney picked Mr. Ryan. Mr. Romney will be in the 1-percent tax bracket--that is what the experts say--can you imagine?--while his secretaries and everybody else pay through the nose.

These next 60 days or so is an important time for us. I wish to thank my friend from Iowa because I was very interested in laying out some of these issues and he encouraged me to do so. I am very delighted to be here with him.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today I rise to pay tribute to the great talents and accomplishments of Gore Vidal, the extraordinary American writer who died this week at age 86 in California, where he spent the last 9 years of his life.

Gore Vidal was a child of the Senate--or more precisely, a grandchild of the Senate. His maternal grandfather was Senator Thomas Pryor Gore of Oklahoma, and the writer's happiest childhood memories were of the times he lived at Senator Gore's Washington home. According to Vidal's New York Times obituary, ``He loved to read to his grandfather, who was blind, and sometimes accompanied him onto the Senate floor.'' Vidal himself later said, ``At something like 13 or 14, I wanted to be a politician, but knew that I was a writer. . . .''

This change of career path worked out best for everyone. Gore Vidal's prose was elegant and crystal clear, and his range as a writer has seldom been equaled. His essays, perhaps his greatest triumph, utilized and displayed his wide-ranging interests, encyclopedic learning, and dazzling wit. He also wrote more than two dozen novels including a series on American political history that is widely read and admired on both sides of the aisle--as well as plays, screenplays, television dramas, and two volumes of memoirs.

Gore Vidal twice ran for office, losing a 1960 run for Congress in upstate New York and a 1982 Senate primary in California. Despite these political setbacks, he remained convinced that ``There is no human problem which could not be solved if people would simply do as I advise.'' He dispensed his advice with great wit and intelligence for more than 60 years, and America is far the richer for it.

Will my friend yield for a question?

I have a question, and I want to make sure everyone listening to this debate gets what is about to happen.

Is it not true that the Senate passed the bipartisan Leahy-Crapo Violence Against Women Act with well more than 60 votes?

Is it not correct that the House passed its version and left out 30 million Americans?

Yes. And the immigrant women, as the Senator has discussed, which Senator Blumenthal pointed out, are the most vulnerable because they are so afraid of their status, they are very scared to report that someone is raping them, beating them, or harming them every single day; is that correct?

Isn't it fair to say that the 30 million people we cover--which the House leaves out--include college students, enhanced protections for them on campus; the LGBT community; Native American communities; and undocumented immigrants; is that correct?

As my friend pointed out, is it not true that when you look at rates of violence against these particular people in our communities, they are higher than the population at large?

Isn't it fair to say that the House bill--their version of the Violence Against Women Act left out the most vulnerable people who are the most susceptible to violence?

I have two more points, and then I will yield to my friend so she can make the unanimous consent request.

Isn't it also true that the excuse Speaker Boehner is giving as to why he will not take up and pass the bipartisan Leahy-Crapo bill, isn't it true that the excuse is that there is a technical problem, which he calls a blue slip, in the Senate bill? And isn't it true that my friend today is going to ask unanimous consent to correct that problem so that we can send this inclusive bill over to Speaker Boehner?

Finally, I hope, when my friend makes the unanimous consent request, to take the very same text of the Violence Against Women Act, which passed this body with well over 60 votes, and put it into a bill that would overcome the technical problem and enable us to send it back to the House. It is my strong hope that the Republican leadership will not object. If they do, let the whole country understand what they are objecting to: a way to fix this technical problem so that Speaker Boehner and the Republicans can pass the Senate bipartisan Violence Against Women Act and include the 30 million people who have been left out.

I thank my friend for yielding.