Floor Statements

Will the Senator yield for a question?

I want to say that I agree with my friend's comments about

Senator Stabenow and Senator Roberts. I consider both my friends. They are terrific legislators.

The Paycheck Fairness Act

I do want to go back to the vote that just occurred. I would note that we had present in the Chamber some of the House Members, women of the House. I think they are gone now. It was to underscore the importance of this vote and what it means.

My question goes to this: Is my colleague aware that women in their lifetime are so shortchanged that the average woman, in the course of her career, by the end of her career has made $400,000 less than her male counterpart? Is my friend aware of that?

I think it is important for people to understand what just occurred. We had a straight party-line vote on an issue that impacts every single woman in this country. I think when people say there is a difference between the parties--I like working with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. I have good relationships with them. But for goodness' sake, how can you have a party that, to a person here, votes against equal pay for equal work?

I will close with this question to my friend. It is my understanding that 90 percent of the people support the idea of equal pay for equal work. Is my leader aware of this, and when does he think he might bring this back before the body?

I thank the Senator.

Mr. President, today I wish to pay tribute to my friend Ernie Yates, the dynamic California labor leader who is retiring next month after 49 years as a member, business agent, and officer of Teamsters Local 665 in San Francisco.

Ernie was born in San Francisco in 1946 and attended Mission High School. At age 17, he got a job at Allright Parking and joined Local 665.

In 1977, Ernie was appointed as the business agent for Local 665 and his assignments included policing labor agreements and processing grievances in a variety of crafts, including the rent-a-car, parking garage, shuttle bus, and taxicab industries. Three years later, he was elevated to the executive board of Local 665 and became its president. Throughout the next decade, Ernie negotiated Teamster regional, master, and white paper contracts in all of the core automotive industries under the local's jurisdiction.

In 1992, with the active support of hundreds of Local 665 members, Ernie was elected secretary-treasurer, the principal officer of the union, a position he has held until his announced retirement in 2012.

During his 35 years as an officer and business agent of Local 665, Ernie honed his skills as an expert labor negotiator. In both good and bad economic times, Ernie has used these skills to bring fair and just contract settlements to thousands of workers at Teamster worksites throughout the San Francisco Bay Area.

Ernie has been married to his beloved wife Janet for 47 years. Together they have two sons, Michael and Mark; a daughter, Kimberly; 12 grandchildren and 4 great-grandchildren.

On June 12, 2012, Teamsters Local 665 will celebrate Ernie's decades of service to the union's membership and the working families of California. I am honored to join them in saluting a great Californian and a great American, Ernie Yates.

Mr. President, today I am proud to join my colleague Senator Snowe in once am introducing legislation to improve aviation safety.

The Safe Skies Act we are introducing today will close a loophole in the Department of Transportation's recent rule on pilot fatigue, and ensure that pilots of cargo planes are just as well rested and prepared for their important work as the pilots of passenger planes who they share airports and airways with.

Following the tragic crash of Flight 3407 in 2009, Senator Snowe and I introduced legislation to address several important aviation safety issues, including the need to update pilot fatigue regulations to reflect new, scientific research.

Under the new rule issued by the Department of Transportation, pilots of passenger planes will be limited to flying eight or nine hours, depending on the start time. Minimum rest periods will be 10 hours, with the opportunity for eight hours of uninterrupted sleep.

Unfortunately, cargo pilots were left out of the rule--which undermines the one level of safety we are trying to achieve in our airline industry.

Current rules regarding cargo flight operations permit cargo pilots to be on duty as many as 16 hours during a 24-hour period, regardless of when they begin their shift. Compared to passenger pilots, cargo pilots are permitted to fly 60 percent more hours--as much as 48 hours in a 6-day period.

Keeping cargo pilots out of the improved flight and duty time regulations does not make sense; they too need rest in order to safely perform their jobs. And the safety of our skies depends on all pilots performing well.

This legislation directs the Secretary of Transportation to apply the same flight and duty time regulations for pilots of passenger planes to cargo pilots as well. This bill is supported by the Airline Pilots Association, the Independent Pilots Association and the Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations, and has been championed in the House by Representatives Chip Cravaack and Timothy H. Bishop.

I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this legislation as part of our ongoing efforts to improve the safety of our Nation's aviation system.

Mr. President, today I am proud to join my colleague Senator Snowe in once am introducing legislation to improve aviation safety.

The Safe Skies Act we are introducing today will close a loophole in the Department of Transportation's recent rule on pilot fatigue, and ensure that pilots of cargo planes are just as well rested and prepared for their important work as the pilots of passenger planes who they share airports and airways with.

Following the tragic crash of Flight 3407 in 2009, Senator Snowe and I introduced legislation to address several important aviation safety issues, including the need to update pilot fatigue regulations to reflect new, scientific research.

Under the new rule issued by the Department of Transportation, pilots of passenger planes will be limited to flying eight or nine hours, depending on the start time. Minimum rest periods will be 10 hours, with the opportunity for eight hours of uninterrupted sleep.

Unfortunately, cargo pilots were left out of the rule--which undermines the one level of safety we are trying to achieve in our airline industry.

Current rules regarding cargo flight operations permit cargo pilots to be on duty as many as 16 hours during a 24-hour period, regardless of when they begin their shift. Compared to passenger pilots, cargo pilots are permitted to fly 60 percent more hours--as much as 48 hours in a 6-day period.

Keeping cargo pilots out of the improved flight and duty time regulations does not make sense; they too need rest in order to safely perform their jobs. And the safety of our skies depends on all pilots performing well.

This legislation directs the Secretary of Transportation to apply the same flight and duty time regulations for pilots of passenger planes to cargo pilots as well. This bill is supported by the Airline Pilots Association, the Independent Pilots Association and the Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations, and has been championed in the House by Representatives Chip Cravaack and Timothy H. Bishop.

I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this legislation as part of our ongoing efforts to improve the safety of our Nation's aviation system.

Madam President, today I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the memory of Dr. Frederick Margolin, my former neighbor in Greenbrae, CA. After a 3-year battle with ALS, Fred passed away peacefully on May 10, 2012, surrounded by his beloved family.

Fred Margolin was born in New York in 1936 and raised in Florida. After graduating from the University of Miami Medical School in 1960, he interned at Los Angeles County Hospital and served for 2 years as an Air Force medical officer in Germany, before returning to California, where he lived for the rest of his life.

Following his residency at the University of California, San Francisco, Dr. Margolin practiced radiology at California Pacific Medical Center from 1968 to 2007 and served as chairman of the Department of Radiology from 1978 to 1992. He was the founder of the Breast Health Center and served as its medical director from 1984 to 2007. Widely recognized as a national leader in radiology and breast cancer screening, he was honored as a fellow of the American College of Radiology and the Society of Breast Imagining. In 2001, he was selected as one of America's Best Doctors for Breast Care.

Throughout his distinguished career, Dr. Margolin worked not only to provide the best possible care to his patients but to extend access to care to poor women and underserved populations.

Fred was a devoted family man who adored Myrna, his wife of 54 years. Together they traveled the world, often on cruises with close friends, and each year they took their children and grandchildren to Mexico for a family vacation.

Dr. Fred Margolin will be deeply missed by his patients, colleagues, family, and friends. On behalf of the people of California and the patients and communities he served so well, I send my gratitude and condolences to Fred's wife Myrna; their children, Jody Margolin Hahn, Elizabeth Brett Garon, and Lawrence Harry Margolin; and their seven grandsons.

Later this month, California residents and visitors from around the world will gather to celebrate the 75th anniversary of a beloved California landmark: the Golden Gate Bridge.

The Golden Gate Bridge is without doubt one of the greatest structures of the 20th century. This seamless stretch of cables and steel beams was the vision of renowned bridge architect and engineer Joseph Strauss, whose prior experience prepared him to design the longest suspension bridge of its day, which many said could never be built.

But built it was, even in the middle of the Great Depression. After more than 4 years of construction, the Bridge opened on May 27, 1937. Hailed as an architectural masterpiece for its complex construction and structural elegance, it soon became a cornerstone

of ground transportation in the Bay Area, carrying passengers and commerce between San Francisco and its neighbors to the north.

The Golden Gate Bridge is much more than a transportation corridor or engineering marvel. With its breathtaking setting and dazzling golden- orange color, the Bridge is the iconic symbol of the San Francisco Bay Area, holding a unique place in the hearts and minds of residents and visitors alike. It is the gateway not just to the Bay Area but to the western United States.

During World War II, the Bridge gained fame as the last site our troops saw as they shipped off to fight in the Pacific and the first structure they saw when they arrived back home. In dozens of movies shot in San Francisco, the Bridge appears in the opening scenes to let you know immediately where you are: in one of the most beautiful places on earth.

This year the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District and the Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy--in cooperation with the National Park Service, the Presidio Trust, and the City and County of San Francisco--have launched a 75th anniversary program, with 75 tributes to celebrate the countless ways in which the Bridge connects people and places.

On May 27th, the anniversary season will culminate in a Golden Gate Festival, with events along the San Francisco waterfront from Fort Point to Pier 39. With the theme of ``Bridging Us All,'' this community celebration will honor a beloved landmark that represents and reflects the ingenuity, inclusiveness, and creativity of the San Francisco Bay Area.

I will wait.

Mr. President, I rise to say that it is stunning to see the Republican Party running away from a bill they supported and a deal they cut. The deficit reduction deal was led by Senator Conrad. The Budget Control Act is the law of the land. Instead they are offering up a series of budgets that I believe will destroy this country.

Why do I say that? Because they destroy the middle class and they give to the millionaires and the billionaires. That is a recipe for a third world nation, the haves and the have-nots. I hope the American people wake up and pay attention because a budget is a statement of who we are as a people.

I was proud to serve on the Budget Committee. I wish I was still on there, but I had other options for my State. I decided to leave the Budget Committee and go on the Commerce Committee. That is one tough committee, and we are going to miss Senator Conrad. His leadership is exemplary, and he has explained why the replacement budgets the Republicans have offered are unworkable. Some of them don't even make any sense.

This is serious business because one of them did pass the House. Not only did it pass the House, but then they passed another law, and we call it reconciliation, which is dangerous in what they did. They stood with all of their heart, with all of their soul, with all of their power and their fervor to fight for the 1 percent. They are fighting for the millionaires, the multimillionaires, the billionaires, and the trillionaires; that is who they are fighting for. They are giving them back an average of $150,000 a year. Over the 10-year period that average millionaire can write a big kiss to the Republicans if this ever becomes law because they would get back $1.5 million over the 10- year period.

How do they pay for this largess? How do they pay for this warm, fuzzy hug to the people who have everything? They cut the heart out of the middle class. I will give some examples. They would allow student loan rates to double so students would have to pay not a 3-percentage point interest rate on their student loans but over 6 percent.

They will cut the heart and soul out of America's infrastructure. Did you ever look at the construction industry lately? Well, there are 1.4 million unemployed construction workers. We need to make sure they are building the roads, highways, and the 70,000 bridges that are deficient. Half of our roads don't meet the standards. We need to rebuild America, as the President said--not Afghanistan, not Pakistan. Thank you very much. Iraq? The blood of our people is on the ground over there. It is time to spend that money here as our President has said.

They continue all that war spending, they add to that war spending, and they expect everybody else to stand back and quietly accept a doubling of their student loan rate and a cut in the transportation program.

They end Medicare, period. They are going to turn it into a voucher system, and our elderly are going to have to negotiate to try and find a way to pay for health insurance, and it will cost them thousands of dollars more.

One of these budgets actually cuts Social Security by 39 percent. Imagine a Social Security recipient living on $18,000 getting a cut of almost 40 percent.

So this is what they are doing, I say to my colleagues. They eliminate the Department of Education. They eliminate the ability for many people to pay for their energy assistance in the winters. They walk away from alternative energy, which is going to free us from foreign oil and make us safer. That is what they do, and they do it all in the name of tax breaks for the people in America who--I am very proud of them. They made it. In my State, a lot of those folks who have made it have written to me and said: Senator, we want everybody to have the chance we had.

The only passion of Republicans is for those who have. They practice Robin Hood in reverse. In one of the budgets, they even--I think it is the Ryan budget--tax the poorest people. They tax the poorest people. They raise taxes on the poorest people, and they cut taxes on the richest people. Robin Hood in reverse. Isn't that sweet? Isn't that kind? Not. So they bring America to its knees. They walk away from the Budget Control Act. Do we know why they don't like it? Because it forces spending cuts across the board. I don't like that, but we are serious about deficit reduction.

In my closing remarks I will say this: In the last 40 years, one party balanced the budget. In the last 40 years, one party created a surplus. That happens to be the Democratic Party and a Democratic President named Bill Clinton. How did we do it? We met each other halfway. We said that when we are faced with a crisis, we have to put everything on the table and everybody makes a little bit of a sacrifice. It is no big deal. We ask the people who have the most to do a little more, and we find ways to cut spending. That is what we did in the Clinton years. Do we know what happened? We created I think 23 million new jobs. We created 23 million new jobs. We balanced the budget, we created a surplus, and now we have to listen to the demagogues over there lecture us about how to balance the budget. Wrong. We know how to do it. They don't know how to do it. All they know how to do is stand up and attack our President when our President inherited this terrible deficit from George W. Bush, who took a surplus--Bush did--and turned it into deficits as far as the eye can see. And we were losing--I ask unanimous consent for 30 additional seconds.

We were losing how many jobs a month? We were losing 800,000 jobs a month when our President took over. The country was falling apart.

He saved the auto industry--it is back on top--when others said: Let them go bankrupt. He started the job creation. It is not good enough, but I will tell my colleagues one thing: If we are going to make it better, we better start working together.

Let's live by the Budget Control Act that is the law of the land, and let's use that time to find a long-term solution, as we did in the Clinton years.

Thank you very much. I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the memory of Judge Robert E. Coyle, a talented jurist, a respected member of the community, and a kind and gentle man. Judge Coyle passed away on May 7 in Fresno at age 82.

A Fresno native, Robert Coyle received his B.A. from Fresno State College in 1953 and his J.D. from the University of California, Hastings College of the Law in 1956. After law school, he began his legal career as a deputy district attorney in Fresno County before working as an associate at Hansen, McCormick, Barstow and Sheppard from 1958 to 1961 and as partner at McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Coyle and Wayte from 1961 to 1982.

Judge Coyle was nominated to the Eastern District bench by President Reagan, confirmed by the Senate on March 31, 1982, and served as chief judge of the district from 1990 to 1996, when he took senior status and continued to take cases until 2006.

Judge Coyle played an instrumental role in the construction of new Federal courthouses in Sacramento and Fresno. For 13 years, he led the effort to build the Fresno courthouse, often seen shuttling from his chambers to the construction site with his hard hat in hand. His passion for this project once prompted him to ride in a suspended platform to some 300 feet above the ground to get a glimpse of the view that is now enjoyed by the building's occupants and visitors. After taking in the views of his beloved hometown and the breathtaking Sierra and beautiful Coastal Range, Judge Coyle compared his experience to ``riding on a cloud.''

I am proud to have introduced legislation that led to the naming of the Federal courthouse in downtown Fresno as the Robert E. Coyle United States Courthouse. The nine-story building stands as a reminder to the community and people of California of the dedicated work of Judge Robert E. Coyle.

Judge Coyle was always admired for his sharp intellect, collegiality, and gentlemanly ways. A giving person, he lent his time and talents to a number of community causes, including service on the board of trustees of the United Way Advocate. In his leisure time, he enjoyed spending time at the family cabin above Bass Lake.

I extend my deepest sympathies to his wife of 59 years, Faye; his son and daughter-in-law, Robert and Kim; and his daughter and son-in-law, Barbara and Michael Vellone; and his grandchildren, Hunter, Sydney, Morgan, and Matthew.

Judge Coyle will be greatly missed.

Mr. President, I salute the life and accomplishments of Burt Bacharach, who received The Library of Congress Gershwin Prize for Popular Song on Tuesday night. This award is given to musicians whose lifetime contributions to the field of popular song demonstrate the standard of excellence associated with George and Ira Gershwin. Mr. Bacharach received this award jointly with cowriter Hal David, which is the first time in the history of this award that it has gone to a songwriting team. This prestigious honor not only celebrates their work, but it places them among the ranks of Paul Simon, Paul McCartney, and Stevie Wonder, all previous recipients.

Born in Missouri and raised in New York, Burt built a name for himself over his six-decade career as one of the country's most respected and honored songwriters. His partnership with Hal David created such beloved songs as ``Raindrops Keep Fallin' on My Head,'' ``What the World Needs Now is Love,'' ``Walk on By,'' and ``Alfie.'' The duo first began collaborating in the 1950s at the Famous Paramount Music Company, and among their first big hits were ``The Story of My Life,'' made famous by Marty Robbins, and ``Magic Moments,'' performed by Perry Como.

Following on their first successes, between 1962 and 1972 their songs were almost continuously on Billboard Magazine's singles chart. During this time they worked with an array of singers, including Dionne Warwick, B.J. Thomas, Dusty Springfield, The Carpenters, Tom Jones, Jackie DeShannon, Gene Pitney, and Herb Alpert. Together, Burt and Hal have written numerous hits that have helped launch the careers of some of America's most celebrated musicians.

Mr. Bacharach, one of the most honored and successful composers of our time, has earned three Academy Awards and eight Grammy Awards. These include the 1997 Grammy Trustees Award, which he shares with David, and the 2008 Lifetime Achievement Award. Even after being inducted into the Songwriters Hall of Fame, he is still touring and performing all over the world.

I ask my Senate colleagues join me in honoring and congratulating Mr. Burt Bacharach on this well-deserved honor.

Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the hard work and remarkable accomplishments of Granada Hills Charter High School's Academic Decathlon team for winning the 2012 Academic Decathlon--its second consecutive national championship. I want to congratulate all the members of the team: Christian Koguchi, Stella Lee, Priscilla Liu, Kimberly Ly, Hamidah Mahmud, Lev Tauz, Julia Wall, Sean Wejebe, and Jimmy Wu, as well as its coaches Matthew Arnold, Nick Weber, and Spencer Wolf.

Each year, hundreds of high schools throughout our Nation compete for the honor of becoming Academic Decathlon National Champions. This year, Granada Hills Charter High School not only became one of three schools to ever win consecutive national championships, but also set the highest score ever achieved at the Academic Decathlon National Championships.

Competing in an Academic Decathlon is a daunting task. The Academic Decathlon's intense 2-day national final competitions include multiple- choice testing in seven different events, speeches, essay writing, and interviewing exercises. Students spend many hours studying, practicing, and competing, often away from their family and friends. I invite all of my colleagues to join me and the State of California in congratulating California's Granada Hills Charter High School Academic Decathlon team on becoming 2012 National Academic Decathlon Champions.

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

Mr. President, yesterday I spoke on the floor about the Democratic bill to reduce interest rates on student loans, and I was lamenting the fact that our Republican colleagues would not even permit us to turn to the bill. They were filibustering a motion to proceed to the bill which meant we could no longer work on it. That is why this floor today is so empty. We should have been here working on a student loan bill which is so critical to so many college students and their families across the country. The interest rates on these student loans, which are the Stafford loans, the Federal subsidized loans, is going to go from 3 percent to 6 percent. We want to get it back down. This is important to 7.5 million students and their families.

When I concluded my remarks, Senator Brown from Massachusetts took to the floor. He expressed shock that I was concerned about Republican filibusters and started to talk about how cooperative the Republicans have been, pointing to a few issues where we have worked together. Look, I am here to say that working together in a bipartisan manner on a few issues is fine, but we need to work together in a bipartisan manner on almost all the issues we work on because the American people are counting on us. Because there are a handful of issues on which the Republicans cooperated, let's not come down to the floor and say everything is perfect and Republicans are not blocking us, when, in fact, they are blocking us.

The Democrats essentially retook the Senate in 2007. Since then, these Republican filibusters have been off the charts. Don't take my word for it, listen to congressional scholars Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein. They recently wrote an opinion piece in the Washington Post. It was based on a study. I ask unanimous consent to have that printed in the Record.

Here is the title of their piece, ``Let's Just Say It, The Republicans Are The Problem.''

They explain that in the past they looked at Congress and thought both parties were to blame. But on reflection, as they studied the facts--not the rhetoric but the facts--it was Republicans who are causing all the problems. Here is what they write:

The filibuster, once relegated to a handful of major

national issues in a given Congress, became a routine weapon

of obstruction applied even to widely supported bills or

Presidential nominations.

All we have to do is watch the Senate or certainly when one is in the Senate we realize these scholars, Mann and Ornstein, are absolutely right. In this Congress, the 112th Congress, we have already seen 48 Republican filibusters; 48 times the Republicans stopped us from doing our work. But don't get the impression this was new behavior because it did not just start in the 112th Congress, it started way before. In the 111th Congress, which covered 2009 and 2010, Republicans conducted 91 filibusters. In the 110th Congress, 2007 and 2008, they conducted 112 filibusters. So far this year we have had 48 Republican filibusters. In the Congress before that we had 91, and the one before that we had 112.

What does this mean? It means that in all those times we were unable to do the work of the American people because one party stopped it. There have been more filibusters by the Republicans in the 6 years since Democrats took over the Senate than there were in the prior 10 years. I want to remember one of those times because I was sitting down there in the manager's chair, coming out of my committee, Environment and Public Works, with a near unanimous vote on a little program called the Economic Development Administration. This EDA has been in place for--I want to say 50 years. It has been in place for 50 years--5 0; not 15--50 years through Presidents Republican and Democratic. It is a beautiful program because what it does is it takes some modest Federal funds and leverages States' money, local money and private money and it comes into areas that are having difficulty with job creation and invests that money there. As a magnet it creates all of these contributions, and we have seen hundreds of thousands of jobs created as a result.

So I come to the floor to get this little bill reauthorized. After coming out of my committee with a strong bipartisan vote, it is filibustered. I stood down there for 5 days, and I could not believe it. They are filibustering a bill that would create and save hundreds of thousands of jobs.

We also saw these Republican filibusters when we tried to say millionaires should pay their fair share, which would have reduced the deficit by billions. Oh, no, they could not stand to have us debate that so they filibustered. They filibustered a bill to eliminate tax subsidies to big oil and gas companies that are making record profits and getting subsidies that they have gotten for 30 to 40 years. No, we were not allowed to go to that.

And then, of course, the most recent filibuster by Senate Republicans is on this critically important legislation to cut interest rates on student loans. They are going to double on July 1. Oh, no. They wouldn't even let us go to the bill. I say that despite the protestations of Senator Brown of Massachusetts, this has got to stop. He cited three or four times that we worked together. I say good for that; I am happy for that. That does not in any way change the fact that we face filibuster after filibuster, 48 times in this Congress so far now.

I hope every college student in this country who has an opportunity is watching this Chamber. This Chamber should have been bustling today with people talking and working together, offering amendments so we could cut these interest rates on student loans. College students and high school students who want to go to college, and their parents, grandparents, aunts, and uncles ought to understand that this floor is not filled today passing this legislation because of a Republican filibuster.

What we do here matters. We could save students thousands of dollars on the life of their loans. These are student loans for the middle class. More than 75 percent of the borrowers in the program come from families with incomes below $60,000 a year. This is not some fun and games, but my Republican friends and their presumptive Presidential nominee want to cut taxes for people who earn millions of dollars. They want to give back an average tax cut of $250,000 a year, and they don't have it in their hearts to lower student loans for families who earn less than $60,000 a year. They call for permanent tax cuts for the people who don't need them and again they block the way for us to help the middle-class students to get a break.

Yes, I hope college students are paying close attention to this debate. I know some of them from the great State of California whom I represent are paying attention. I have heard from some of them, and I will have some of their comments for the Record.

Delmita Turner of Rancho Cordova, CA writes:

I am the single mother of three children ages 7, 14, and

20. My daughter Khendel is in college and we have had to get

student loans to pay for her tuition. I am also in college

and have student loans as well. An increase would put a

tremendous strain on an already stretched budget.

After our family suffered nearly every type of loss one

could, including death, foreclosure, divorce, and

unemployment all within a year, I decided to go back to

school with the hopes of making life better for my family. I

began working a year ago last December after being unemployed

for 2 years.

Now I ask: How American is that? We always strive to be better. Here is a woman who went through death, foreclosure, divorce, and unemployment within 1 year. She decided to make life better for her family. She began working a year ago last December after being unemployed for 2 years.

She continues: ``So please consider how this will impact so many of us.''

I am asking my Republican friends--as we have another vote on this I think tomorrow morning--to think of Delmita Turner of California and what this means to her.

Then there is Joseph Briones of San Fernando, CA. He writes:

I am a senior in high school who will be attending college

this fall. My dad is unemployed and a cancer survivor and my

mom is working part-time. These conditions put a large stress

on my myself as well as on my parents to attend my top choice

of college, Westmount College.

We did not receive financial aid from the state and we have

an immense amount remaining to pay for my upcoming

educational years. We are going to be taking out student

loans to pay for college. Please do not allow the passage of

the bill that will increase the interest on student loans. We

rely on these loans and it is difficult to pay them back for

some students as it is. Please do not make it a larger burden

for students to go to college.

So tomorrow when we take up this bill again, I hope my Republican friends will stand down and think of Joseph Briones of San Fernando, CA, who is making a very pointed plea that he relies on these loans, and it is going to be very difficult if the interest rates are doubled.

Then there is Rachel Zavarella of San Jose, CA. She says:

Increasing Stafford loan interest rates only kicks students

and borrowers when we are down . . . Increasing student loan

interest is another dirty trick to redistribute wealth to the

top, and it's disgusting and unacceptable. I want you to vote

for students and borrowers by voting yes on the bill.

Mr. President, that is just three stories from my State. I know in your beautiful State of Oregon, which has so many wonderful universities, you could have dozens of stories like this. Clearly this is not a time to increase loan rates for students. This should not be a partisan matter. Why would every single Republican vote no? I guess it is their ideology. Tax breaks for the rich, rich, rich, rich, and nothing for the middle class.

If anyone wants to know the difference between the two parties, this is the moment. It used to be a little harder to describe the differences between the parties. When I was young, both parties stood here and fought for the middle class, for students, for the environment, and for women. It isn't that way anymore. It just is not.

If we say we are here for the next generation, which all of us say all the time one way or the other, then you don't allow student loan interest rates to double. You don't allow it. We know how to fix it. We found a very simple way to pay for this that makes sense. Closing a tax loophole doesn't hurt anybody. Look at yesterday's vote. It was not good; it was not pretty.

I am glad Senator Harry Reid is going to give us another chance to change that, and I hope my Republican friends are now hearing from their constituents back home. I hope when they come here tomorrow they will cast a ``yes'' vote and let us proceed to this bill and let us do our work. Let us stand for the people who need us to stand for them, the middle class of this great country. We know why the country is great; it is because of the middle class. We need to make sure they have the opportunity to go to college and not have this burden on them that is so heavy it becomes too heavy for them to bear. Pretty soon they will stop going to college because they don't want to have that burden on their back.

We have a chance to do the right thing. I hope we will. Let the record show these filibusters are outrageous and they are historic in nature. We have never had them before. We have never had such a lack of cooperation from Republicans before, and it has been a sad several years where we have seen filibuster after filibuster, even stopping us from going to a bill. Tomorrow maybe we can come together and get on this bill and do our work.

I yield the floor, and I note the absence of a quorum.

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

I ask unanimous consent that the time from 2:15 until 5:15 be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees and that all quorum calls during that period also be equally divided.

Mr. President, before I speak about the details of the impact of not helping students in this difficult economic climate with student loans that they can afford, I wish to say that I was stunned that my Republican friends refused to give us a vote to proceed to the issue.

I think every student in America should turn their focus on this Chamber because the Republican Party made it impossible for us to lower the student loan rates today. They made it impossible. This is going to mean thousands of dollars over the life of a student's loans. So while the Republicans are calling for major tax cuts for billionaires and millionaires of $100,000, $200,000 a year in cuts, they don't have the heart to help middle-class students get a break on their interest rates for higher education. I find it appalling.

If anyone wants to know the difference between the parties, start with this. Whom do we fight for when we are here? We all say we are for the next generation. We all have the speeches--oh, they are terrific; they are beautiful--each party. But when push comes to shove, who is voting to help our students get an interest rate they can afford so they are not shackled to a high interest rate at a time of historic low interest rates? Democrats are on their side. All we have to do is look at the vote today if nothing else. One does not have to understand any more than the Republicans blocked us from debating the importance of lowering interest on student loans.

So I will be back to put in the record individual stories from my constituents. But let's wake up, America. Parents, wake up. Students, wake up. The Democrats proved today that we are on your side. The Republicans proved they are not. Period. That vote says it all. It is not complicated. They will make it complicated. They will talk about procedure and this and that. The bottom line is the bottom line. The Republicans voted not to allow us to vote on ways and methods to lower interest rates for our students. So don't be fooled. We will hear speeches on why they voted no, and they will come up with things. The bottom line is they wouldn't even let us debate this issue. I am stunned. I assumed we would be on this bill.

So when Americans look at the Senate floor and don't see much activity except for a few of us coming to speak, and they thought today was the day we were going to vote to lower interest rates on student loans, wake up to reality. It is called a filibuster. We were stopped by the Republicans once again, just as they have stopped us time and time again. They come to the floor with every reason one can imagine.

We have news. We have two independent scholars who wrote a very important paper. They are nonpartisan. What they said in this paper is that they used to think it was both sides that were stopping progress. Now we know it is one side. It is the Republican side. Today is yet another example. I hope everyone within the sound of my voice--and we will hear stories about what is happening, and I hope people will write us all and e-mail us with their stories and tell us what it means to them to have to spend thousands more unnecessarily on student loans. Give us the stories. Let us tell the stories.

I hope Americans will send us those stories, and I hope we will send a message to those who voted to filibuster this very important legislation today that they are not on the side of the American people. They are not on the side of working families. They are not on the side of the middle class. They are not on the side of economic progress. They are not on the side of economic growth.

I thank the President for the time, and I yield the time.

Mr. President, I wish to express my strong support for California District Court Judge Jacqueline Nguyen, who has been nominated for a seat on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. When confirmed, Judge Nguyen will make history as the first Asian-American woman to serve on the Federal courts of appeals.

Judge Nguyen has had a distinguished career. She is a former Federal prosecutor who secured the first-ever conviction of a defendant for providing material support to a designated foreign terrorist group. She served as a California Superior Court judge from 2002 until 2009, when she was nominated for a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. She was confirmed by a vote of 97 to 0.

I congratulate Judge Nguyen and her family on this important and historic day and urge my colleagues to vote to confirm this well- qualified nominee to the Ninth Circuit.

I thank the Chair and yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, today I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the memory of Dick Clark, one of our country's most beloved cultural icons who entertained grateful viewers in America and around the world for more than 60 years. He passed away on April 17, 2012, at age 82.

Richard Wagstaff Clark was born on November 30, 1929 in Mount Vernon, NY. As a child, Dick looked up to his older brother, Bradley, who became a pilot in the U.S. Army Air Corps during World War II and was killed in the Battle of the Bulge. Dick became depressed after his brother's death, and the only thing that lifted his spirits was music.

In some ways, Dick Clark was destined to work in the broadcasting industry. As a child, he became interested in radio after his parents took him to a live broadcast of the Jimmy Durante and Garry Moore show. Ever the affable young man, Dick participated in A.B. Davis High School's drama club and was elected class president.

After graduating from Syracuse University with a degree in business administration, Dick began working on ``Bandstand'' at Philadelphia's WFIL Radio. The popularity of this program led WFIL TV to begin broadcasting it as an afternoon television show, which Dick started hosting in 1956. The following year, he pitched the show to the American Broadcasting Company, and it became nationally broadcast as ``American Bandstand.''

``American Bandstand'' became a phenomenon, a trendsetting show that touched people around the world across lines of race, culture, and ethnicity. ``Bandstand 's'' integration of African Americans as musicians and dancers played a role breaking down racial barriers at a time when the civil rights movement was coming to the forefront. Over the next three decades, while the show moved from weekdays to Saturdays and from Philadelphia to Los Angeles, Dick Clark introduced American families to many artists who later became icons, including the Supremes, Michael Jackson, Madonna, and Prince. Aretha Franklin recently noted, ``If you didn't go on `American Bandstand,' you hadn't made it yet.''

Over the course of his career, Dick Clark came to be known as one of the most hard-working people in show business. With Dick Clark Productions, founded in 1956, Clark produced television shows, made- for-TV movies, award shows, and beauty pageants. Unistar, which he cofounded and owned, distributed Clark's radio shows including ``Countdown America'' and ``Dick Clark's Rock, Roll & Remembers.''

In 1972 ``Rockin' Eve'' premiered, and since then generations of Americans have welcomed in the New Year with Dick Clark and watched with him as the ball dropped in New York City--a tradition that continued for 40 years. Throughout his time as host, Dick Clark only missed one New Year's Eve celebration in 2005 due to a stroke. The following year he was once again on the air welcoming the New Year with his beloved wife Kari and showing all of us that with tenacity, anything is possible.

Throughout his career, Clark left an indelible mark on the landscape of American music and television, from his 1974 creation of the American Music Awards to his productions of the Academy of Country Music Awards, Golden Globe Awards, Emmy Awards, Live Aid, and Farm Aid. For his successful career and tireless work ethic, Dick Clark was honored with Daytime and Primetime Emmy Awards, Daytime and Primetime Lifetime Achievement Awards, and inductions into the Radio Hall of Fame, the Rock 'n Roll Hall of Fame, the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences Hall of Fame, and the Philadelphia Walk of Fame.

I extend my heartfelt condolences to Dick's wife Kari, his sons Richard Augustus II and Duane, his daughter Cindy, and his grandchildren. He will be missed by the millions of people worldwide who were touched by his work.

Madam President, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the memory of Deputy Robert ``Bob'' Paris, a dedicated public servant in the Stanislaus County Sheriff's Office and a kind and loyal colleague, friend, and family man. On the morning of April 12, 2012, Deputy Paris was tragically killed in the line of duty while serving an eviction notice in north Modesto.

A graduate of Tracy High School and the Ray Simon Criminal Justice Training Center in Modesto, Bob Paris joined the Stanislaus Sheriff's Department as a reserve deputy in May 1996 and became a full-time employee in 1998. During his tenure with the department, he served the community as a court bailiff, a patrol deputy, and as a member of the sheriff's water enforcement team. He was also the department's first- aid and CPR instructor at the sheriff's academy.

For the past 16 years, Deputy Paris dutifully served the citizens and communities of Stanislaus County with great pride, integrity, and valor. His devotion to helping others, along with his passion for law enforcement, helped him become a respected member of the Stanislaus County Sheriff's Department.

Deputy Paris served Stanislaus County with honor and bravery, and I send my heartfelt sympathies to his family, friends, and colleagues.