Floor Statements

Madam President, I rise to express my deep disappointment that we were unable to proceed to the Defense authorization bill.

I have been here a while, maybe I am wrong--I am searching my memory--I don't remember any time that we voted against proceeding to the Defense bill. I am going to go back. Certainly, in the time I have been here, I don't remember that.

It is a filibuster just to go to the Defense bill. It is perplexing to me because of some of what is in this bill--including funding for the defense health program to care for our military personnel and their families, including our wounded warriors. We know these wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have taken quite a toll on our military men and women, both in seen injuries and unseen injuries--injuries to the brain.

We know some incredible work is going on. I visited some of the research universities that are finding better ways to treat our wounded warriors. They are finding better ways to treat terrible wounds that result from horrible burns to our brave men and women. Now is the time to put those new and better treatments into place and there is a filibuster and we cannot get to the bill.

We know there is a military pay raise in this bill for our servicemembers. Those voting no to proceed to this are stopping that.

This bill authorizes TRICARE coverage for eligible dependents up to age 26. In other words, just as we did in the Health Care Reform Act, in this bill we are saying if you are in the military and you have a child, you can keep them on your coverage until they are 26.

It provides $3.4 billion for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles or MRAPs, which have proven highly successful in protecting our troops from improvised explosive devices, and it requires companies to certify for all DOD contracts valued over $1 million that they are not engaged in any sanctionable activity under the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996. So we would make sure that the DOD, Department of Defense, is not involved in giving contracts to companies that are trading with Iran. This is so important, as we seek to sanction Iran for its reckless activity in moving toward a nuclear weapon.

In the bill the Republicans blocked is also a repeal of the military's don't ask, don't tell policy. The bill includes a provision stating that there will be no repeal of this policy until there is a certification from the Department of Defense that it will not have adverse consequences on our troops.

Some said: Oh, this is just ignoring the Department of Defense, ignoring the Secretary of Defense. Not at all. The way Chairman Levin put it together definitely has a check on it. So I do not understand a lot of my colleagues' claims that it is just a quick repeal with no checks and balances from the Secretary of Defense.

I will say it again, it is clear in there, and I will read the exact words, that there must be, as we repeal don't ask, don't tell, a certification from the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that there will be no significant impact on ``military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion and recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces.''

I think it is important to note what countries allow gays and lesbians to serve. How about 22 of our allies who have fought with our service men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan: Australia, Britain, Denmark, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Switzerland, Austria, Canada, Estonia, Germany, Lithuania, New Zealand, Spain, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Finland, Ireland, Luxemburg and Norway and Sweden. In addition, Israel and South

Africa also don't discriminate against gays and lesbians. I don't know who we end up with, but some of the countries I can find that still discriminate against gays and lesbians in the service are Iran, Pakistan, Cuba, North Korea, and Turkey.

For us to stand with Iran, for us to stand with Cuba, for us to stand with North Korea, Pakistan, and Turkey over Australia, Britain, Denmark, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Austria, Canada, Germany, et cetera--it just doesn't make sense.

The point is, because we are part of this coalition of 22 other nations, our service men and women are already fighting alongside gays and lesbians.

A majority of Americans think it is the right thing to do, to allow our qualified young men and women to serve regardless of their sexual orientation. According to a CNN poll conducted in May, 78 percent of Americans said they support allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military--78 percent of Americans. We would be standing with them and we would be standing with our allies.

Don't ask, don't tell is hurting our military. It is costing our Nation--more than 14,000 service men and women have been discharged from the military under don't ask, don't tell. It has cost taxpayers between $290 million and maybe up to more than a $\1/2\ billion to replace servicemembers who were discharged under this policy.

I know many Americans have seen in their living rooms, on the TV, men and women who are our neighbors' kids, and our neighbors, who have been kicked out of the military even though they were stellar service men and women. It is most unfortunate that our friends on the other side are mischaracterizing what is in the bill.

We allowed them an amendment to strip that language, and they said, oh, well, if we pass this, then the military would be caught off guard. Not at all. The way it is written specifies that there must be a certification that a repeal would not be harmful to our military.

I am also terribly disappointed we will not have a chance to vote on the DREAM Act. The DREAM Act allows those students who have been here most of their lives an opportunity to earn legalized status if they met certain criteria. Those are kids who were brought over as kids, maybe a month or 2, or a year or 2, or 5 or 6 years old. They must have lived in the United States for 5 years. They must earn a high school diploma. After high school, they must complete 2 years of college or serve in the Armed Forces for 2 years. They must demonstrate strong moral character, and only those who pass these tests would be eligible to get on the pathway to legality. Sixty-five thousand young people a year graduate from high school, but they cannot join the military, or they cannot go to college, because of their immigrant status. It was not their fault they were brought into the country by their parents. I want to tell you that our military has said--and I will quote retired Army LTC Margaret Stock. She said: ``Potential DREAM Act beneficiaries are likely to be a military recruiter's dream candidates for enlistment.''

Let me repeat that. The military itself has said, The DREAM Act will result in a military recruiter's dream, because some of these recruits are very good with foreign language skills, foreign cultural awareness, they are in short supply, and they would be excellent recruits.

Businesses support the DREAM Act. Our economic future is something we talk about every day around here. I read a U.S.C. study that said, if we finally begin a process where people who are here, who are hard working and caring, can stay here and come out of the shadows, it will create 25,000 jobs and increase the gross domestic product of my State and of the Nation.

That is why I have the San Jose Mercury News, home paper of the Silicon Valley, writing an editorial last week in favor of the DREAM Act, saying it will boost America's economic competitiveness. So here we have the time where we have something on the floor that is directly related to the military bill, because the military is saying it is a recruiter's dream, this DREAM Act, because they are going to have so many people lining up to join. We have Silicon Valley strongly supporting this, and I will tell you, the San Jose Mercury News said: ``The high school dropout rate in this country terrifies business leaders, who fear that in the coming decades we will not produce enough college graduates with math and science ability.''

That is why the Silicon Valley Leadership Group supports the DREAM Act. That is a group made up of Republicans, Independents, and Democrats. They wrote: DREAM Act students ``deserve a chance, and the U.S. economy needs their knowledge and ability.''

Companies such as Microsoft also support the DREAM Act. They wrote: ``The DREAM Act rewards those who place high value on education, and on service to country.''

Last week the president of the University of California, the chancellor of the California State university system, and the presidents of State universities in Arizona, Washington, Minnesota, Utah, and Washington wrote in support of the DREAM Act. They write in a letter: ``In the current international economic competition, the U.S. needs all the talent it can acquire and these students represent an extraordinary resource for the country. The DREAM Act . . . is an economic imperative.''

In closing, I want to talk about a couple of stories. I think this is very important. David graduated from high school with a 3.9 grade point average. He is studying international economics and Korean at UCLA. He has served as the leader of the UCLA marching band, and he spends his free time tutoring high school students. After graduation, he hopes to enter the Air Force and some day politics. In many ways, he is a model college student and a leader in his community. But he was born in Korea. He came here when he was 9. His family spent 8 years trying to navigate their way to legalized status, only to find out that their sponsor had erred in filling out the paperwork.

So here sits David. He had nothing to do with all of this. Here is what he says:

I will not be able to put my name down on a job application

because of my status. This country is throwing away talent

every second . . . but the DREAM Act can bring thousands of

students out of the shadows and allow them the opportunity to

work for the country they truly love right now.

I would say these students such as David did not choose to come to this country. They were brought here by their parents. The reality is, they have grown up here. This is the only country they know. I am very disappointed that we are not voting on this important bill today. I hope we can take up the DREAM Act later this year. I believe it will truly strengthen our economy, our military, and our Nation.

The very last point I want to make as we wind up this Congress is, I am so pleased that we passed the Small Business Jobs Act last week. I traveled across California. I have met with so many small businesses, and I did a conference call with about 10 of those businesses, including the Los Angeles Baking Company, the Blue Bottle Coffee Company in Oakland, biofuels manufacturer Solazyme, Capstone Turbine in Chatsworth, U.S. Hybrid in Torrance, the Back on the Beach Cafe in Santa Monica, and the Santa Barbara Adventure Company. These are small businesses in my State that are very strong. They could not get access to credit to expand and hire. As a result of the work we did, they will be able to get that credit. I want to thank the two Republicans who crossed over to vote with us. It shows us that we can make progress when we work together, because this has to come ahead of politics.

I went to a company called Renova. Renova is helping to make California the hub of the clean energy economy. Vincent Battaglia, the owner there, told me he has been getting no help accessing the credit he needs. He called our legislation ``the missing piece,'' the piece he has been waiting for.

Small businesses create 64 percent of our new jobs. That is what happened over the last 15 years. I believe this bill will help get them back on track. As they get back on track, our recovery will begin to have a little more energy behind it. Because it is very slow; it is agonizingly slow.

I wanted to state on the Record how much I appreciate the two Republicans--

I thank you and I yield the floor.

Mr. President, 114 years old, your constituent? I guess Senator Baucus treats his constituents well.

Madam President, I wish to recognize the great work and remarkable accomplishments of Arlington High School's Envirothon team for winning the North American Canon Envirothon Competition, which tests high school students' knowledge about natural resource management.

Competing in the Envirothon was a challenging task for the students of Arlington High School, located in Riverside, CA. Students spent many hours studying, practicing, and competing, often away from their families and friends. However, I know that families across Riverside are now celebrating the accomplishments of their home team.

Members of Arlington High's winning Envirothon team include Kristen Treat, Cory Davis, Alexis Wood, Elijah Kenan, Elizabeth Murry, Ashley Pham, and faculty advisers Sheri Harris, and Dianne Stephens. They solved environmental problems in aquatics, forestry, soils, wildlife, and the 2010 special topic ``Protection of Groundwater through Urban, Agricultural and Environmental Planning.''

I invite all my colleagues to join me in congratulating California's Arlington High School Envirothon team for becoming the North American Canon Envirothon Competition winners.

Mr. President, today I wish to offer a few words in memory of Janet Fairbanks, a California regional planner who passed away last month in her beloved hometown of San Diego.

Janet Fairbanks was a visionary planner who brought people and communities together to plan for sensible, sustainable growth while protecting the natural environment.

From 1980 until her retirement in 2006, Ms. Fairbanks helped guide the development of growth management and habitat conservation plans, first at the city of San Diego and later at the San Diego Association of Governments, SANDAG. Along with her technical skills and expertise, Janet was known for her outstanding ability to educate public officials and a wide array of stakeholders about the virtues of smart growth, conservation, and biodiversity--and then to bring these often divergent individuals and groups together to create plans that enabled communities to grow and thrive while preserving San Diego County's unique natural areas and resources.

As a longtime member of the California Planning Roundtable, Ms. Fairbanks brought city and regional planners together with conservationists to protect some of California's most precious and endangered natural areas. And as an active member of the California Biodiversity Council, she brought a planner's comprehensive perspective to the Council's mission of protecting California's fragile biodiversity.

Janet Fairbanks helped to make San Diego County a nationally recognized leader in regional planning and conservation. She will be sorely missed, but her work and legacy will live on in the beautiful communities she helped to create and the natural landscapes she helped to preserve.

Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to 38 servicemembers from California or based in California who have died while serving our country in Operation Enduring Freedom since March 24, 2010. This brings to 185 the number of servicemembers either from California or based in California that have been killed while serving our country in Afghanistan. This represents 15 percent of all U.S. deaths in Afghanistan.

LCpl Rick J. Centanni, 19, of Yorba Linda, CA, died March 24 while supporting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Lance Corporal Centanni was assigned to 4th Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 4th Marine Division, Marine Forces Reserve, based out of Camp Pendleton, CA.

SgtMaj Robert J. Cottle, 45, of Whittier, CA, died March 24 while supporting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Sergeant Major Cottle was assigned to 4th Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 4th Marine Division, Marine Forces Reserve, based out of Camp Pendleton, CA.

Sgt Kenneth B. May, Jr., 26, of Kilgore, TX, died May 11 while supporting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Sergeant May was assigned to 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Cpl Jeffery W. Johnson, 21, of Tomball, TX, died May 11 while supporting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Corporal Johnson was assigned to 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA.

PO Zarian Wood, 29, of Houston, TX, died May 16 in Helmand Province, Afghanistan, of wounds sustained from an improvised explosive device blast while on dismounted patrol. Petty Officer Wood was assigned as a hospital corpsman to 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA.

SSgt Adam L. Perkins, 27, of Antelope, CA, died May 17 while supporting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Staff Sergeant Perkins was assigned to 7th Engineer Support Battalion, 1st Marine Logistics Group, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton,

Mr. President, I am honored to recognize the career accomplishments and service of the late Bishop Dr. Jerry Louder--clergyman, educator, community leader, and author. Dr. Louder was born in Riverside in 1947 and remained dedicated to his community throughout his life. Dr. Louder passed away on July 2, 2010.

As a student at Pacific High School in San Bernardino, Jerry Louder excelled in academics and athletics. He advanced his education at the University of California, Riverside and earned a dual major bachelor's degree, a master's degree, and a doctorate. Dr. Louder later completed a second doctorate at Friends International Christian University and began his ministry in 1970.

Dr. Louder was an acknowledged leader among his ministerial peers. He served as pastor of New Jerusalem Foursquare Church for 22 years and became founding pastor of New Jerusalem Christian Center. He was heavily active in a diversity of clergy groups in San Bernardino and Riverside counties, including the Riverside Clergy Association; the Riverside Area Pastors' Association; the Inland Area Ministers' Alliance; and the Riverside Interfaith Fellowship. He also served as president of the United States Pastors' Association, a communication network of nearly 100,000 pastors representing more than 40 denominations and independent churches.

Riverside mayor, Ron Loveridge, described Dr. Louder as a ``community healer.'' In addition to helping forge stronger relations between the Riverside Police Department and the communities it serves, Dr. Louder also cofounded and served as executive director of the Opportunities Industrialization Center, which led to his founding the Riverside Opportunity Center to address the needs of the poor, homeless, and marginalized in his community. These and other similar efforts earned the recognition of many groups and organizations throughout his life, including being named a 2010 Alumnus of the Year by the Riverside Community College District.

I extend my heartfelt condolences to Dr. Louder's family, friends, colleagues, and all those whose lives were influenced by Dr. Louder's commitment, compassionate leadership, and personal and professional integrity. He will be truly missed.

Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Pinnacles National Park Act.

This legislation would elevate the Pinnacles National Monument to a National Park. The legislation would also rename the current Pinnacles Wilderness as the Hain Wilderness after Schuyler Hain, an early conservationist whose efforts led to the establishment of the Monument in 1908.

The Pinnacles National Monument ascends out of the beautiful Gabilan Mountains, east of central California's Salinas Valley. Established by President Theodore Roosevelt, the monument protects the spectacular remains of the Neenach Volcano. Colossal monoliths, sheer-walled canyons and talus caves exhibit millions of years of volcanic evolution and tectonic plate movement.

Originally 2500 acres, the monument has grown to encompass 26,000 acres of diverse California wildlands. These parklands represent one of only 5 regions, or less than 2 percent of the world's surface area, supporting a Mediterranean habitat. Less than five percent of the world's Mediterranean habitat remains protected, so it is essential that we preserve this special resource.

Mediterranean habitats provide a rare combination of cool wet winters, hot dry summer days, and evening fog--supporting many plants and animals found nowhere else in the world. One of the animals that calls the Pinnacles home is the critically endangered California condor. Recently, a condor hatched in the wild just outside the monument's boundary--the first to do so in this country in at least 70 years.

The Pinnacles area, famously rendered by John Steinbach in ``Of Mice and Men'' and ``East of Eden,'' is also an important part of California's cultural heritage. The area has held significance for several Native American tribes, early Spanish settlers, and Western homesteaders. Today, the Pinnacles are a global destination for naturalists and outdoor enthusiasts of all kinds, who are attracted by the park's scenic trails, natural resources, and some of the most unique rock-climbing in the world. The Pinnacles National Monument is an important driver of the local tourist economy and jobs, and elevating this site to a National Park will draw even more attention to this incredible destination.

I have worked with Congressman Sam Farr to craft legislation that will further protect this recreational treasure. It has strong support from the surrounding communities and the California Wild Heritage Campaign, a coalition of over 500 businesses and organizations.

I hope my colleagues will join me in recognizing this diverse natural and cultural resource by creating Pinnacles National Park.

Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Pinnacles National Park Act.

This legislation would elevate the Pinnacles National Monument to a National Park. The legislation would also rename the current Pinnacles Wilderness as the Hain Wilderness after Schuyler Hain, an early conservationist whose efforts led to the establishment of the Monument in 1908.

The Pinnacles National Monument ascends out of the beautiful Gabilan Mountains, east of central California's Salinas Valley. Established by President Theodore Roosevelt, the monument protects the spectacular remains of the Neenach Volcano. Colossal monoliths, sheer-walled canyons and talus caves exhibit millions of years of volcanic evolution and tectonic plate movement.

Originally 2500 acres, the monument has grown to encompass 26,000 acres of diverse California wildlands. These parklands represent one of only 5 regions, or less than 2 percent of the world's surface area, supporting a Mediterranean habitat. Less than five percent of the world's Mediterranean habitat remains protected, so it is essential that we preserve this special resource.

Mediterranean habitats provide a rare combination of cool wet winters, hot dry summer days, and evening fog--supporting many plants and animals found nowhere else in the world. One of the animals that calls the Pinnacles home is the critically endangered California condor. Recently, a condor hatched in the wild just outside the monument's boundary--the first to do so in this country in at least 70 years.

The Pinnacles area, famously rendered by John Steinbach in ``Of Mice and Men'' and ``East of Eden,'' is also an important part of California's cultural heritage. The area has held significance for several Native American tribes, early Spanish settlers, and Western homesteaders. Today, the Pinnacles are a global destination for naturalists and outdoor enthusiasts of all kinds, who are attracted by the park's scenic trails, natural resources, and some of the most unique rock-climbing in the world. The Pinnacles National Monument is an important driver of the local tourist economy and jobs, and elevating this site to a National Park will draw even more attention to this incredible destination.

I have worked with Congressman Sam Farr to craft legislation that will further protect this recreational treasure. It has strong support from the surrounding communities and the California Wild Heritage Campaign, a coalition of over 500 businesses and organizations.

I hope my colleagues will join me in recognizing this diverse natural and cultural resource by creating Pinnacles National Park.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Madam President, what the American people want from us is for us to work together. They don't want partisan political attacks. Here is what is so strange about this particular partisan attack we have just heard. The Senator from Maine said she wants a chance for her side to have ``just a few amendments.''

I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the offer made by the majority leader to allow that. Any of the amendments they wanted, the other side wanted, matched by amendments we wanted. I ask unanimous consent to have that printed in the Record.

Madam President, I also work across the political aisle. I worked with Senator Snowe on the Passenger Bill of Rights. I worked with the former Senator Smith on guns in the cockpit. I worked with Senator Ensign on afterschool, I worked with Senator Inhofe on highway bills, on WRDA bills. We all work across the aisle and I too compliment the Senator from Maine for standing with us on some very tough votes. But I have to say--she is asking for a bipartisan bill?

Let me read the sections of this bill and I ask unanimous consent to have this printed in the Record. S

The first amendment written by Landrieu-Snowe; the second, Snowe-Landrieu; the third one, Snowe-Merkley; the fourth one, Snowe-Landrieu; the next one, Landrieu-Nelson; the next one, Snowe- Pryor--and on and on.

The next section: Merkley-Alexander. We all know Senator Hatch worked with Senator Bingaman on many of these. Senator Grassley is involved in this, Senator Brownback is involved.

I have to say, of all the bills we have taken up, this is the most bipartisan. I think that to make a process argument now is a shame.

Let me read some of the groups that support this bill, even though the Senator from Maine doesn't like it. Let me tell you where you are. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce: Pass this bill; National Federation of Independent Businesses: Pass this bill; the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce: Pass this bill; the Black Chamber of Commerce: Pass this bill; the National Association for the Self-Employed; the Small Business Majority--and on and on.

I ask unanimous consent to have the entire list printed in the Record.

Madam President, the Senator from Maine is right when she says we have to move to help this economy, and this bill is one of the answers. That is why it has such broad support. Republicans and Democrats across the country support this, Independent voters support this, small businesses support this. The only group that is filibustering this bill happens to be the Republicans in the Senate. I am telling you, if they say no again, they are hurting this economy.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, will the Senator yield for one question?

I am just asking a question through the Chair. This is the time of the Senator from Louisiana.

I have watched the Senator from Louisiana make a case for this bipartisan bill day after day, and I have heard her lay out why we should come together, Republicans and Democrats, to do something right for small businesses that create 62 percent of all jobs. It is astounding to me that we could not get even one Republican to join with us today. But I do have hope. As we speak, we see the majority leader and the minority leader discussing amendments.

I want to ask my friend two questions. The Senator from Maine gave a very impassioned speech saying that the Democrats were the ones who were stopping this legislation. She said all we needed to do was offer ``a few'' amendments to the Republicans.

My first question: Is it not true, I say to my friend who is managing this bill, that, in fact, the majority leader, Harry Reid, did offer the other side a few amendments--clearly did before this cloture vote? And the second question is whether my friend would be willing to share with our colleagues and the people who are engaged in this debate how this bill is perhaps the most bipartisan bill ever to come out of any committee. I know my friend gave me that information--title after title after title containing the names of Republicans and Democratic Senators.

So if she would answer those two questions, No. 1, when the Senator from Maine says that our leader did not offer a few amendments to the other side; isn't she incorrect? And, No. 2, isn't this one of the most bipartisan efforts to come out of any committee?

Would the Senator yield?

Of course. I just have one more question for my friend.

We hear every Senator--Democratic, Republican, Independent--say the biggest issue before us, the biggest one is jobs--jobs, jobs, jobs. When my friend goes home, I know she has to deal with the oil disaster and still rebuilding after Katrina. In California, we have our series of deep problems in tough, tough times. But she knows that whatever we do here we have to push forward with policies that create jobs, and we have to keep our eye on the deficit.

So my friend has brought forth a bill, along with Senator Baucus and many Republicans--because she just went through the many bipartisan provisions--that will leverage $30 billion into $300 billion from the private sector. If we turn that into jobs, we are talking thousands and thousands of jobs created by the innovators, the small businesspeople who have gotten no help. That is why my friend has the sign ``Main Street.'' We have to help Main Street.

So I want to ask in the form of question, and then I will leave the floor at that point: Isn't this a bill that is desperately needed by our small businesses? Aren't our small businesses the creators of jobs? Is this bill not paid for? And won't this bill deliver the kind of policy that will allow for job growth through growth of small businesses that are solid, with community banks that are solid? Isn't this bill just what we need to do before we leave to go home and be with our constituents in August?

Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating the 100th anniversary of Fresno City College, California's first community college and the second oldest in the Nation.

Fresno City College was the brainchild of Charles L. McLane, the superintendent of Fresno Schools in the early 1900s. Mr. McLane was concerned that many students from the San Joaquin Valley could not afford to attend the nearest universities located outside the San Joaquin Valley. He envisioned a junior college in Fresno that would allow young students to receive an affordable and quality education through their first 2 years of college while still being able to reside at home.

Mr. McLane worked diligently to recruit instructors and design the curriculum. He secured commitments from the University of California and Stanford University that students who completed their coursework in Fresno would be accepted to those schools to further their education.

In September 1910, Fresno Junior College officially opened with 20 students and 3 full-time faculty members. Students studied mathematics, English, Latin, history, and economics. In addition, the new campus provided vocational training in areas such as agriculture, commerce and the industries that many 4-year universities did not offer.

In 1958, Fresno Junior College adopted its current name, Fresno City College. A year later, it permanently moved to its home for over the past 51 years on 1101 E. University Avenue in central Fresno.

Today, Fresno City College has grown from a small campus of 20 students and 3 faculty members to a dynamic community college whose average enrollment is approximately 25,000 students. It is a highly regarded community college that features award-winning programs in several disciplines, including nursing and vocational training.

For the past century, Fresno City College has been a dependable and accessible institute of higher learning that has empowered generations of San Joaquin Valley residents, many of whom overcame challenging backgrounds, to realize their full potential in many different aspects of life.

It is my pleasure to congratulate the administration, students, faculty, staff and proud alumni of Fresno City College on 100 years of educational leadership and excellence in the San Joaquin Valley. I send my best wishes for many more years of continued success.

Mr. President, I wish to thank the Senator from Louisiana, the chairman of the Small Business Committee, for her impassioned remarks. I have worked with Mary Landrieu on many issues. Sometimes we are on opposite sides. I don't like those times. I like these times. And I thank the Senator from Florida for his strong support.

Here is where we are. We are coming out of the worst recession since the Great Depression, and I don't sugarcoat it when I go home because everybody knows where we are. And I remember back to those days at the end of the Bush administration when we were bleeding hundreds of thousands of jobs every single month, and at that time, as we all looked at the situation, we realized who the job creators had been for the past 15 years. They had really been the small businesses. They created 64 percent of the new jobs. So when we talk about jobs, when we talk about turning this recession around, we have to focus on small businesses because they are the job creators. We have seen big corporations' profits return to prerecession levels, and they are sitting on their cash and they are not hiring.

We know small businesses are asking us to work with them so they can get credit. This is about healthy community banks being able to lend to healthy small businesses. This is not about toxic assets and toxic investments. This is such a strong program, the small business lending program, that the CBO estimates that we will make back $1.1 billion as the banks and small businesses pay back the fund.

Mr. President, I am going to spend the rest of my time reading into the Record the organizations and the businesses that support this bill:

The American Apparel and Footwear Association; the American Bankers Association; the American International Automobile Dealers Association; the Arkansas Community Bankers; the Associated Builders and Contractors; California Independent Bankers; Community Bankers Association of Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Ohio, Iowa, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin; the Conference of State Bank Supervisors; the Fashion Accessory Shippers Association; the Financial Services Roundtable; the Florida Bankers Association; the Governors of Michigan, Ohio, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Washington, and West Virginia; Heating, Airconditioning and Refrigeration Distributors International; the Independent Bankers Association of Texas, of Colorado, and of New Mexico; the Independent Community Bankers of America, of Minnesota, and of South Dakota; the Indiana Bankers Association. It goes on and on. The Maine Association of Community Banks; the Maryland Bankers Association; the Massachusetts Bankers Association; the Michigan Bankers Association; the Missouri Independent Bankers Association. It goes on and on. The National Association for the Self-Employed; the National Association of Manufacturers; the National Bankers Association; the National Council of Textile Organizations; the Marine Manufacturers Association; the National Restaurant Association; the National RV Retailers Association; the National Small Business Association; the Nebraska Independent Community Bankers; the Pennsylvania Association of Community Bankers; the Printing Industries of America; Small Business California; the Small Business Majority; the Tennessee Bankers Association; the Travel Goods Association; the Virginia Association of Community Banks; the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce; and the Women Impacting Public Policy.

This is a list that reflects America. This is a list that reflects economic activity. This is a list of organizations in States that are struggling to get to good times.

This idea, that I have to say originally came from a Merkley-Boxer bill embraced by Senators Landrieu and Cantwell and LeMieux, made better as it went down the legislative road, deserves to get 60 votes. It deserves to get, frankly, 100 votes. Because if we are serious about jobs, then we need to show it with our votes. It is not enough to get on the floor and complain and say, Where are the jobs? This is legislation, an amendment to a very important bill, that will leverage $30 billion into $300 billion. That is what we are talking about, the kind of a jolt to this economy that we need. And it makes money for the taxpayers.

Talk about a win-win, that is what this is. I am going to yield the floor and I am going to say one more time to the Senator from Louisiana, Senator Landrieu, thank you for your leadership. Thank you for your passion. This is about jobs, jobs, jobs, and anyone who votes no on this, in my opinion, don't say that you are for jobs because this is a proven job creator. We know it. Small business creates the jobs, 64 percent of the jobs. They need access to credit. They are not getting it from big banks. This allows us to get it from our community banks and it brings a very good marriage together--helping community banks, helping small businesses, and job creation.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the PACE Assessment Protection Act of 2010. I am pleased to be joined in this effort by my colleagues, Senators Merkley, Gillibrand, and Begich.

Property Assessed Clean Energy or PACE programs allow homeowners and building owners to finance an energy efficiency upgrade to their property through a tax assessment on that property. In this way, property owners are able to spread the cost of the upgrades over several years, lower their energy costs, contribute to a cleaner environment, and create jobs.

In California, nearly half of the State's 58 counties, as well as individual cities, have developed PACE programs or plan to start one, and 23 states as well as the District of Columbia have enacted PACE legislation. The program has the strong support of the White House and the Department of Energy, and many States and cities dedicated Recovery Act funding for their PACE programs.

Despite the promise of this program, the Federal Housing Finance Agency recently ordered Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to take actions that limit the use of PACE programs in conjunction with their home mortgages, effectively killing the program. FHFA objected that PACE assessments carry a priority lien, ahead of the lenders, on participating properties.

The right of States and localities to secure property tax assessments with a senior position is well established, and in the past, Fannie and Freddie have always respected this right--such as with assessments to finance sidewalks, bridges, or parks and other projects that provide a public benefit--without raising any concerns over the impact of such priority liens. In addition, the Department of Energy issued guidance for municipalities intending to use Recovery Act funding for PACE programs that calls for strong underwriting standards. These guidelines require that the savings a property owner would see as a result of any upgrade must be greater than the cost of the assessment, leaving homeowners in a more financially secure position.

To allow PACE programs to continue, as well as protect homeowners and taxpayers, we must take immediate action to address the overreach by the FHFA. My legislation would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to: adopt sound underwriting standards for financing clean-energy upgrades, consistent with Department of Energy guidelines; treat a PACE assessment as any other property tax assessment and respect States' authority to secure such assessments with a first lien; allow homeowners to finance, refinance, or sell their home without having to repay any PACE assessment first; prohibit discrimination against communities implementing or participating in a PACE program.

The legislation also limits the assessment amount subject to foreclosure to only the unpaid delinquent amount, along with applicable penalties, interest and costs, and not the entire amount.

The current uncertainty surrounding PACE programs is jeopardizing $110 million in Federal investments for California communities, and millions more in other States, which is simply unacceptable. We must take action to protect these initiatives because they create jobs, save homeowners money on their energy bills and help our environment. I urge my colleagues to join me and to support this legislation.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the PACE Assessment Protection Act of 2010. I am pleased to be joined in this effort by my colleagues, Senators Merkley, Gillibrand, and Begich.

Property Assessed Clean Energy or PACE programs allow homeowners and building owners to finance an energy efficiency upgrade to their property through a tax assessment on that property. In this way, property owners are able to spread the cost of the upgrades over several years, lower their energy costs, contribute to a cleaner environment, and create jobs.

In California, nearly half of the State's 58 counties, as well as individual cities, have developed PACE programs or plan to start one, and 23 states as well as the District of Columbia have enacted PACE legislation. The program has the strong support of the White House and the Department of Energy, and many States and cities dedicated Recovery Act funding for their PACE programs.

Despite the promise of this program, the Federal Housing Finance Agency recently ordered Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to take actions that limit the use of PACE programs in conjunction with their home mortgages, effectively killing the program. FHFA objected that PACE assessments carry a priority lien, ahead of the lenders, on participating properties.

The right of States and localities to secure property tax assessments with a senior position is well established, and in the past, Fannie and Freddie have always respected this right--such as with assessments to finance sidewalks, bridges, or parks and other projects that provide a public benefit--without raising any concerns over the impact of such priority liens. In addition, the Department of Energy issued guidance for municipalities intending to use Recovery Act funding for PACE programs that calls for strong underwriting standards. These guidelines require that the savings a property owner would see as a result of any upgrade must be greater than the cost of the assessment, leaving homeowners in a more financially secure position.

To allow PACE programs to continue, as well as protect homeowners and taxpayers, we must take immediate action to address the overreach by the FHFA. My legislation would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to: adopt sound underwriting standards for financing clean-energy upgrades, consistent with Department of Energy guidelines; treat a PACE assessment as any other property tax assessment and respect States' authority to secure such assessments with a first lien; allow homeowners to finance, refinance, or sell their home without having to repay any PACE assessment first; prohibit discrimination against communities implementing or participating in a PACE program.

The legislation also limits the assessment amount subject to foreclosure to only the unpaid delinquent amount, along with applicable penalties, interest and costs, and not the entire amount.

The current uncertainty surrounding PACE programs is jeopardizing $110 million in Federal investments for California communities, and millions more in other States, which is simply unacceptable. We must take action to protect these initiatives because they create jobs, save homeowners money on their energy bills and help our environment. I urge my colleagues to join me and to support this legislation.

Mr. President, the Senator from Vermont speaks in very clear words. When he says this debate is about whose side are you on, he could not be more on target. We have a situation where we know that when President Obama took office and the Democrats were increasing their majority, we inherited the worst recession since the Great Depression. Those are not just words; that is a fact.

We inherited the worst deficit ever, because under the Republicans, the hugest tax cuts ever to people earning more than $1 million a year, $1 billion a year, went right on the credit card; two wars went right on the credit card; nothing paid for.

Then at the end of George Bush's term, when we started to see jobs being lost, 700,000 jobs a month, that is when we took over, and we took some tough votes. We said to the American people: We are going to focus like a laser beam on jobs and this economy, and we are going to get back on our feet. Yes, we are going to tackle that deficit.

I happen to have the privilege of having been sent here by my State when Bill Clinton was President of the United States. You know what. He inherited huge deficits, and he inherited a tough economic time, and we proved that we could both balance the budget and create 23 million jobs. When George W. Bush took the keys to that Oval Office, it took him a matter of minutes, figuratively a matter of minutes, to turn surpluses into deficits, and to bring down the jobs market until we got to a point where we were losing and hemorrhaging jobs at 700,000 a month.

This is important for us to remember, because it is this date where we say to our Republican friends, if you care about the people who are trying desperately to get jobs, if you care about people who have been hit by this great recession, then come with us. Work with us. Let's make sure we are there for those who deserve to have this help.

By the way, if I could say, the rules that go along with getting this unemployment extension, people do not talk about that much. You have to prove you are ready and willing to work. You have to prove you are actively seeking a job. You cannot have been fired for cause. And, by the way, you have to have paid into the unemployment insurance fund as well. This is unemployment insurance that the workers have paid into.

These are people who are actively seeking work. Guess what. When they get there, they find out there are five job seekers for every job. So we say to our friends on the other side of the aisle, where is your heart? Where is your heart?

A couple of them proved that. They stepped up and voted with us. That is all. When history is written, I think this time is going to go down as a time when right triumphs over wrong, because we did get these votes.

But guess what. Even though the other side knows we have those votes, they are stalling and stalling and having us vote on amendments that would give the wealthiest Americans their tax cuts, without paying for it. So when a deficit is caused by helping those who earn $1 million a year, $1 billion a year, oh, they are happy with that. But when you are trying to help mainstream America, middle-class America, the hard- working people, oh, my goodness, where are they? They are not here. Only to delay they are here. They are here to delay.

This is an important moment in history, because we always had bipartisan support for extending unemployment compensation. My God, we had it when George W. Bush was President in 2003. The Republicans joined with us and extended unemployment. No problem. So I do not know where this is coming from.

You are going to hear: Oh, the deficit. That is hogwash. They admit it. They admit it. They do not care about the deficit. When they are cutting taxes for their friends, they said: It does not matter. I have chapter and verse, quotes from their leadership. So this is about values. It is about whose side are you on? I am on the side of the American people, the working people. Most of us. Bernie Sanders is on that side. The Republicans who are joining us in this vote today are on that side today. This is a history-making day. It is the first time we have ever had a standoff on this issue. It is the first time we have ever seen the Republican Party walk away from working Americans like this. Again, when I was here and we balanced the budget, we created surpluses. The Republicans were not with us on that. I can honestly say, I voted to balance the budget. We did it, and we know how to do it, and we are going to do it. But do not turn your backs on people who paid into the unemployment compensation funds. It is insurance. They paid into it. And they have to be actively seeking work.

I wanted to read to you a couple of stories from my State, of real people. But before I do, I want to talk about Mark Zandi. Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's, was one of the top economic advisers to then-Republican Presidential candidate John McCain. He says that every dollar invested in unemployment benefits, such as we are going to vote on today, produces $1.61 in economic activity. The CBO estimates it is $1.90.

Why is that? It is because the people who are getting those funds to survive are going to spend it in the local economy. They are going to go out to the supermarket; they are going to go to the local gas station. Economists of all stripes agree that there is an actual return on investment here, let alone the morality of standing up for people who, through no fault of their own, cannot find a job.

Let me read what a Sacramento woman said to me.

Days go by when I hardly sleep at all, worrying about our

bills. Since my benefits were cut off on July 1 at the end of

my first extension, we have had to concentrate all of our

income on paying the rent and buying food and gas. I have not

been able to pay any of our other bills. I don't know how

long we can make it like this.

I don't know how long we can make it like this. And our friends are stalling and stalling and stalling. Two months already they have stalled.

A city planner from Los Angeles writes:

The effects of the recession were especially acute for

anyone whose industry was decimated by the financial crisis.

Since municipalities are struggling and real estate

development is frozen, jobs in my industry are few . . . my

unemployment checks stopped abruptly last week before the 4th

of July. I

called my benefits office thinking this must be a mistake,

only to find that the benefits ended because Congress didn't

pass the Federal extension.

Another Californian said:

I am very scared of what might happen if I lose the

unemployment income. We don't want to lose our home. My

children catch me crying at times and ask me why are you

crying, mom? I can't tell them . . . Please pass this bill

until this economy strengthens and more companies start to

hire again.

If people on the other side of the aisle can have a good night's sleep knowing this is what is happening in the greatest country in the world on our watch, then fine for them. But I have to tell you, this is a defining moment of who we are as a Nation. As a Nation.

I actually had the experience of a political analyst, someone who comments on politics, say, well, you could understand why people might need two yachts, one on each coast. You know what. We better get back to the basics here: people who need to feed their families, people who need to pay their rent, people who do not want to lose their home.

We have to do everything we can to revitalize the jobs market. We have taken it from 700,000 jobs lost a month under the Republicans, and we have turned it around, but not fast enough, not far enough.

That is why the bills we passed here are so critical. But we have no cooperation on that. It would be one thing if the other side said, you know, let's not do unemployment, but let's work on jobs bills. Oh, no, they do not want to work on jobs bills. We have got a small business jobs bill. We are praying to God--I am--that we get one or two Republicans. This is a bill that is supported across the board by chambers of commerce, everybody. I know, Mr. President, how hard you have worked to make sure our community banks can start lending again to small businesses.

I have been through nine cities in my State. I have met with small businesses. They want access to credit. This small business bill is a terrific bill, and we can leverage it without it costing the Federal Government a dime, these loans to qualified small businesses through qualified and strong community banks, and leverage all of this to be a huge stimulus, and it actually has. Because of the paybacks to the government, we even make a little bit on it.

But we do not have our friends helping us with that. After they stall this unemployment bill, they will stall into the night. Hey, it is their right. It is their right. But it is my right to talk about how I feel about it.

They will start stalling small business just as they stalled the tax breaks that they claimed they wanted. They stalled the bill that would have given the research and development tax credit to businesses all over this great nation that need that tax break.

They have stalled a lot of other tax breaks to businesses. There are huge tax breaks to small businesses in the small business bill they are stalling. So this is a moment in history. This is a moment when partisanship is way ahead of the needs of the people of this great Nation.

I think it is a sad day when some of my Republican friends come down here and start to demean the people, the people like the one who wrote to me, the woman who said: I am scared of what might happen if I lose this unemployment income. We do not want to lose our home. My children catch my crying and ask me why are you crying, mom? I cannot tell them. Please pass this bill until this economy strengthens.

Well, I make this commitment: if we have to stay here through the night, until 1 or 2 a.m.--I do not know what the other side wants; they have got their plan of delaying this--fine, then we will stay here until we get it done. But we are getting this done, because it is the right thing to do, because it is the right thing to do to people who are actively seeking jobs, who have lost jobs through no fault of their own, who have paid into the unemployment compensation fund.

We are going to keep on working to create those jobs so we do not have to be here again and again doing this. There are things we can do to set the stake for economic recovery. We have done some of them. I have met the workers. I have met the workers in my State who are working on the 405 freeway, the 215 freeway, the 805 freeway, the Sacramento Airport, the Caldecott tunnel extension, the Doyle Drive extension, all up and down my State.

I have met those workers who have those jobs because of the Economic Recovery Act. Our Republican administration in California has stated that at least 150,000 jobs have been saved or created, and other studies show it is more than that. It is not enough. We have to keep working at it. I am sad to say all we can hope for are two or three Republican votes at that. We are grateful to those brave Republican Senators who helped us. We are grateful. I thank God for them that they have the courage to stand and say yes to the American people, yes to America's families, and no to partisan politics. I am so grateful to them.

When I say that, it probably hurts them on the other side. I don't mean to do that. I am just being honest about how I feel about it. If anyone ever tells you one vote doesn't make a difference, one vote makes a difference. We swore in a new Senator from West Virginia to take the place of a leader, Robert C. Byrd, who lived his life for working people, for the workers in the mines. How appropriate it was that his first vote was to help working people, working people who, through no fault of their own, can't find work.

I will wrap up at this point. I am ready, so ready for this final vote. If we have to stay here through five motions and debate the fact that the wealthiest American billionaires shouldn't have to help us with this recession, I am happy to do that. I am a believer that we all have to do our share. We all have to work together. Hopefully, tonight, whatever time it is, or in the early hours of the morning, my constituents, 200,000-plus in California, will be able to look at their kids and smile a little and say: Honey, we still have a chance. We are going to get out of these tough times. Honey, we are going to do it.

That is what this place should be about at a time such as this, creating the policies that create the jobs, working together to do so but never forgetting there are people who just need that bridge until, when they go for a job, there are not four other people there for the same job. That day will come, if we can work together. I make that commitment.

I yield the floor.

Thank you so much, Mr. President. As Senator Coburn was talking about the need to balance the budget, I was remembering that I voted to do that. With the leadership of Bill Clinton and the Democrats, we not only balanced the budget but we created surpluses. It was a great feeling. We did it, we know how to do it, and we will do it again.

Let's talk about what is before us right now. It is not about the unemployed versus our children. Our long-term unemployed have children, and these children are seeing their dads and moms with their heads in their hands, they see tears, and they don't know why. I have letters from my constituents. They don't know what to tell their kids. They are working so very hard.

So let's talk about what is before us today. We know how to get to the balanced budget. That is why we have budgeting. That is why we have authorizing. That is why we have appropriations. That is why President Obama has said he will cut the deficit in half at the end of his first term, and I am confident that will be the case, and maybe we can even do more. We know how to do that.

Hearing the Senator from Oklahoma say we are being partisan makes no sense at all. I sang the praises of my Republican friends who have joined with us in making sure we can extend unemployment benefits today. I thank God for them, frankly. So this isn't about partisanship. It is about pulling together as a country and recognizing that we are in the worst recession since the Great Depression. It is no time for partisanship. It is time to pull together and help our kids and help our families and help those who, through no fault of their own, find themselves in this predicament.

Why are we treating this like an emergency? That is what we are doing. It is something that has always been done because it is an emergency. President Ronald Reagan signed three extensions of unemployment compensation without paying for it because he believed it was an emergency and because he understood what we understand. He understood that when we, in fact, make sure unemployed people have this insurance--which they paid into, by the way--they will spend it locally, and every dollar of that unemployment compensation brings to the economy either $1.61 under calculations done by John McCain's economic adviser, Mark Zandi, or CBO, the Congressional Budget Office, which said it yields $1.90.

Some of the proposals we have seen from the other side are to cut other jobs in order to pay for extending unemployment benefits. That is not going to help us at this time.

So, yes, I remember the wonderful feeling I had when we balanced the Federal budget when Bill Clinton was President, when we created surpluses as far as the eye could see. The debt was on the way down. The minute the Republicans took over, they put tax cuts to the wealthiest on their credit card. They put two wars on their credit card. Spend, spend, spend, spend, spend. All that work we did was, unfortunately, reversed.

What is before us today is a very simple proposition. My friend from Oklahoma says he cares deeply about the unemployed. I have no reason to doubt that. He should join us today in voting to extend these benefits. Ronald Reagan saw it clearly. He extended them three times as emergencies because it is an emergency. He knew it was counterproductive to cut other jobs to pay for the extension of unemployment benefits.

We know how to balance this budget. Pay-go is a part of it. Pay-go: Pay for everything you do except emergencies. That is what we should be doing because to do otherwise is counterproductive.

I am so grateful we are nearing the point where we can extend these benefits. Yes, we have been delayed. We have been delayed for 2 months. I read letters into the Record before. Here is one:

I have kept up a relentless job search. I have applied for

at least 600 jobs. This is discouraging, not receiving any

information back. Days go by when I hardly sleep at all

worrying about the bills. We have had to concentrate all of

our income on paying the rent and buying gas. I can't pay for

other bills.

Another Californian:

I am very scared of what might happen if I lose the

unemployment income. We don't want to lose our home. My

children catch me crying at times and ask me: Why are you

crying, Mom? I can't tell them. Please pass this bill until

this economy strengthens.

So, again, this isn't about the way the Senator from Oklahoma phrases it.

He makes it sound as though children aren't involved in this situation. They are. They are the children of the unemployed. So it is clear that, yes, we are going to have to tackle the deficit. Of course, we are going to have to tackle the deficit. We don't need to be lectured about that because we are the party that did it. We are the party that created the balanced budget. We are the party that created the surpluses, plus 23 million jobs, and the other side, unfortunately, didn't take very long to turn that whole thing around. This economy went into a ditch, and we are working hard to get it out of that ditch.

So I wish to close with this: Let's take care of this emergency. It is going to help our families. It is going to help our children. It is going to help our local communities when people can go down and buy the gas at the local gas station, buy the food at the local grocery store, and be able to be stable in the community. Then let's get back immediately to working on bills that are going to create jobs.

The small business bill that the Senator from Oregon has worked so hard on and the Senator from Louisiana has worked so hard on, and many of us have worked with them, that is a good bill and it is 100 percent paid for. It even has a plus to it. It is going to create jobs through small business. Small business creates more than 60 percent of the jobs in this Nation. We have a chance to help those who are struggling.

So we need to get this bill behind us and go to the small business bill. We are going to need 60 votes. They are filibustering that as well. So everything we do takes 60 votes.

If I read the list of supporters for the small business bill, it includes the Chamber of Commerce, the regional Chambers of Commerce, and businesses and community banks. They want to see this bill happen because our small businesses need access to credit. Our very good small businesses are being turned away. I visited so many of them. They are thriving even in this climate, but they need to expand and they can't get access to the capital.

So, please, let's not see a filibuster there as well. Please, let's not see delay there as well. Let's do this unemployment compensation, get the assistance to the people who deserve it, those who are actively seeking work, who can't find it through no fault of their own, and who paid into the unemployment compensation fund. Let's get that behind us. That will help our communities. Then let's get to the small business bill. It is a small business jobs bill. Let's do the right thing. We can get this economy back on its feet, but we need to work together.

Thank you very much, Mr. President. I yield the floor.