Floor Statements

Mr. President, the Gulf of the Farallones and Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuaries Boundary Modification and Protection Act will protect one of the world's most biologically-diverse and productive marine regions. I am proud to be joined in this effort by Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey and Senator Dianne Feinstein.

Established in 1981 and 1989 respectively, the Gulf of the Farallones and Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuaries have helped protect the special marine waters and coastline that are quintessentially Californian. My bill will protect an even greater part of my State's coast by expanding the sanctuaries' boundaries to include more of northern California's great coastal upwelling area, one of only four on the planet.

Upwelling areas are places where deeper water comes up to the surface, bringing the nutrients needed by marine algae to grow and support all higher forms of marine life. Though coastal upwelling areas comprise only 1 percent of the world's ocean they produce 20 percent of its fish. The area from Point Arena to Bodega Bay, currently outside the sanctuaries' boundaries, is particularly important since it consistently has the most intense upwelling in all of North America and an enormous capacity to support marine life. I am proud that my bill will expand the sanctuaries' boundaries to protect this upwelling area.

The unique productivity of this region is illustrated by the abundance and diversity of marine life it supports: 36 species of marine mammals, including the endangered blue and humpback whales; numerous coastal and migratory seabirds, including the black-footed albatross; endangered leatherback turtles; and Coho salmon. Expanding the existing sanctuaries to include this area is necessary to protect this remarkable ecosystem from pollution and habitat degradation.

My bill has broad, local support, including from the California Coastal Commission, the California State Lands Commission, the Counties of Sonoma, Marin, and Mendocino, and the cities in the expansion region. It is also supported by fishermen, including the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, by far the largest and most active association of commercial fishermen on the West Coast. Fishermen recognize the urgency of passing this legislation to preserve the water quality and habitat essential for good fishing.

My bill will help preserve an incomparable gem of an ecosystem. I look forward to working with my colleagues to move this important legislation.

Mr. President, today I am pleased to re-introduce the Airline Passenger Bill of Rights Act, a critical piece of airline passenger safety legislation.

Anyone who has traveled recently recognizes that the delays travelers are encountering at airports are a national problem that needs our immediate attention.

Americans are all too familiar with the numerous horror stories of passengers trapped in airplanes sitting on runways for sometimes as much as 11 hours without adequate food or water, overflowing restrooms, and no opportunity to deplane.

The delays continue. On the Sunday before Christmas 2008, more than 250 passengers on a Continental Airlines flight from Houston to Boston were diverted to Bangor, ME, where they spent about 6 hours idling on the tarmac before they were told that they were going to deplane for the night and would have to find shelter and transportation on their own.

When these passengers returned the next day for their trip home, not only was their flight delayed 5 hours but they also spent another 2 hours idling on the tarmac before finally flying to Boston.

In 1999, the airlines had an opportunity to address the stranding of airline passengers on tarmacs across the country, but despite those efforts little has changed.

Last March a Federal appeals court ruling struck down New York State's Passenger Bill of Rights law, stating that it is up to the Congress to set a national Federal standard.

To meet this immediate need for Federal legislation, I am re- introducing the Airline Passenger Bill of Rights Act, along with Senator Snowe, to give airline passengers basic protections when they are facing these delays and disruptions in their travel.

This legislation requires airlines to give passengers adequate food, water, facilities, and medical attention when planes are delayed on the tarmac.

In addition, the bill requires each air carrier to develop an emergency contingency plan, to be reviewed and approved by the Department of Transportation (DOT) that identifies a clear timeframe to allow passengers to deplane if they choose and if the pilot deems it safe.

Airlines will need to give passengers the option of deplaning every 3 hours, with exceptions to maintain passenger safety and airport efficiency.

Our legislation also includes a few additional provisions from the FAA Reauthorization bill passed by the House in the last Congress. Our bill requires airports to develop plans to handle stranded passenger aircraft and creates a DOT hotline for consumer complaints. It would also permit the DOT to levy fines against air carriers or airports that do not submit or adhere to the contingency plans.

The European Union enacted a Passenger Bill of Rights in 2005 and Canada passed similar legislation last year. It is time for the United States to step up and make a serious commitment to the millions of Americans that rely on safe and effective air travel.

As the number of airline passengers is expected to increase to 1.3 billion by 2025, we can't afford a ``business as usual'' attitude when it comes to passenger safety and efficiency at our nation's busiest airports.

Consumers deserve access to food, water, and medical attention when stranded on an aircraft tarmac due to delays. Congress has the ability to ensure airline passengers' fundamental rights are protected by enacting our Passenger Bill of Rights legislation.

I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this legislation in this Congress.

Mr. President, I would like to thank Senators Bingaman, Domenici, and Murkowski for their excellent leadership in putting together this package, and Senator Reid for his commitment to seeking its passage on the floor. I would just like to say a few words about my three wilderness bills in the package: the California Desert and Mountain Heritage Act, the Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Park Wilderness Act, and the Eastern Sierra and Northern San Gabriel Wild Heritage Act.

But first, since the economy is on all our minds right now, I just want to talk a little about the economic importance of these wilderness areas.

The Outdoor Industry Foundation estimates that outdoor recreation contributes $730 billion per year to the United States' economy and supports nearly 6.5 million jobs. Recreation specifically in wilderness areas produces at least $630 million annually, according to a report by Colorado State University resource economists.

The economic benefit of wilderness areas extends far beyond these types of direct uses. People are drawn to living in areas with scenic beauty, opportunities for recreation, and a high quality of life bringing new jobs and consumer spending to rural counties.

Articles in the journals ``Population and Environment'' and the ``International Journal of Wilderness'' have documented that population growth, increases in employment, and wage increases in rural counties of the western United States are all significantly correlated with the percent of wilderness land in these counties. And property values are almost 13 percent higher in locations adjacent to wilderness.

When you include indirect economic benefits and ecosystem services such as protecting watersheds or filtering waste, wilderness areas produce a staggering $3 to $4.5 billion per year. Colleagues, let me be clear--protecting wilderness does not hurt our economy--it is an investment into our future.

Now I want to tell you a little about each of my three wilderness bills and why it is so important that we pass them as part of this package. These are bipartisan, bicameral bills that will preserve some of California's and the nation's most magnificent places for generations to come. I have worked with Senator Feinstein and our colleagues in the House on each of these bills for over 2 years, finding the right balance for the conservation, development, and recreational needs in these areas.

The California Desert and Mountain Heritage Act, written with Representative Mary Bono Mack, protects some of the last wild places in Riverside County--one of the fastest-growing counties in California.

My bill creates four new wilderness areas and expands six existing wilderness areas, including the Joshua Tree National Park Wilderness with its unique Mohave Desert ecosystem.

It designates segments of four rivers as wild and scenic--including the North Fork of the San Jacinto Creek, and adds four parcels to the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument.

These areas exemplify the incredible diversity of desert and mountain habitats in southern California, ranging from the sandy, pristine deserts of the Palen-McCoy region, to the rugged, varied topography of the Orocopia Mountains, to aptly-named Beauty Mountain.

In total, the bill protects more than 220,000 acres of public lands and 31 miles of rivers in some of the most spectacular natural areas of California.

And according to estimates by the Wilderness Society based on data from the United States Forest Service, this legislation could generate an additional 120 to 157 jobs and $3.6 to $5.7 million in annual income in Riverside County.

The Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Park Wilderness Act, written with Representatives Jim Costa and Devin Nunes, would protect spectacular high Sierra lands in the Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks, including the incomparable Mineral King Valley, majestic granite peaks, deep canyons, one of the largest cavern systems in the Western United States, and magnificent forests of ancient Sequoias.

The centerpiece of this bill is the 39,740-acre John Krebs Wilderness Area, which includes the Mineral King Valley. This wilderness area will be named after former Congressman Krebs, a man of extraordinary political courage, who wrote the 1978 law establishing a national park to protect this magnificent area from development as a ski resort.

The bill also designates 45,000 acres of public land within other areas of the Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Park as wilderness.

This area has some of California's most unique geological features, ranging from the largest grove of Sequoias on Redwood Mountain, to Lilburn Cave--part of the most extensive network of caverns in the western United States.

This legislation will ensure that these beautiful areas will be sustained and preserved as part of America's identity and rich natural heritage.

Applying the economic model of Colorado State University economist John Loomis to this bill, this bill could generate at least 50 jobs and $1.3 million per year in Tulare County.

And finally, the Eastern Sierra and Northern San Gabriel Wild Heritage Act, written with Representative Buck McKeon, will preserve the magnificent mountains, rivers, and open spaces of California's Eastern Sierra and Northern San Gabriel Mountains.

The bill establishes approximately 470,000 acres of wilderness in Mono, Inyo, San Bernardino, and Los Angeles Counties through new designations and expansions.

These areas include the high desert mountain and alpine tundra of the majestic White Mountains, the classic

high Sierra landscape of the Hoover Wilderness area, the dramatic eastern escarpment and trout-producing streams of the John Muir Wilderness, and the pristine Owens River Headwaters in the Ansel Adams Wilderness.

The bill also designates approximately 74 miles of wild and scenic rivers, including the Upper Owens River--one of the most important river systems in the Eastern Sierras, which supports one of America's finest and most economically valuable trout fisheries--and the Amargosa River--the only major river flowing into Death Valley National Park.

In addition to the Eastern Sierra, the bill also protects about 40,000 acres in the Magic Mountain and Pleasant View Ridge areas, and seven miles of Piru Creek--one of the few year-round trout fishing streams in southern California. These areas are all located within Los Angeles County, one of the most urban and densely populated areas of our country.

While preserving some open spaces near these urban areas, we have been careful to accommodate their current and future development needs. We have worked closely with the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and other utilities to exclude their facilities from these wilderness areas, ensuring that the water and power needs of California residents will continue to be met now and in the future.

And this bill will provide substantial economic benefits. According to estimates by the Wilderness Society based on data from the United States Forest Service, National Park Service, and Bureau of Land Management, this legislation could generate an additional 2800 jobs and over $700 million per year in Mono and Inyo Counties.

These three bills protect some of the most breathtaking places in California, areas that provide a refuge for birdwatchers, hikers, campers, equestrians, fishermen, and other visitors looking to escape our crowded, fast-paced cities to enjoy the tranquility of nature.

These areas also provide critically important habitat for a multitude of wildlife and plants, many of which are found nowhere else on Earth. Bighorn sheep, mule deer, mountain lions, bald eagles, and desert tortoises are all found in areas protected by these bills.

Moreover, by protecting important source waters for California's drinking water and areas of open space and fresh air, these bills will help protect water and air quality for our ever-expanding urban areas.

And just as importantly, these bills will have economic benefits, not only protecting California's recreation economy but stimulating jobs and increasing property values in the regions surrounding these wilderness areas.

All of these bills have bipartisan, bicameral, and diverse support. They have been developed in close consultation with local communities, elected officials, recreational organizations, businesses, federal and state agencies, and local property owners--and have received numerous endorsements from these groups.

These bills have broad support from local communities and would not impact the use of private lands in these counties. They would simply improve the protection of existing Forest Service, National Park Service, or Bureau of Land Management lands.

The areas in these bills are truly magnificent places representing California's incredible range of landscapes and habitats. I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to enact this package into law and protect these treasures for future generations of Americans.

Mr. President, what is the order?

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 20 minutes.

Mr. President, I have to say we are now here, approaching Christmas, in a deepening recession. On December 1, the National Bureau of Economic Research said that, in fact, the recession had begun in December 2007.

How many jobs have been lost in the last year? Almost 2 million jobs have been lost in the last year. So we are here today on the heels of a loss of 2 million jobs. The unemployment rate stands at 6.7 percent, and it is growing. In my State, it is 8.2 percent. Today, the Labor Department reported that initial applications for jobless benefits rose to 573,000, the highest number in 26 years.

So when I hear someone come to the floor and say: Gee, I didn't get all the language until a couple days ago and this is a problem; you know, sit down and read the language. We cannot afford to say we are not going to do something and act to turn around this recession because somebody didn't have the time to read the bill.

Consumer confidence has plunged to its lowest level since the survey began in 1967. Gross domestic product has dipped, personal spending decreased 3.7 percent in the third quarter, and according to the CBO-- the Congressional Budget Office--American workers lost more than $2 trillion over 15 months as the stock market decline devastated retirement accounts. Let me say that again. American workers lost more than $2 trillion over 15 months as the stock market decline devastated retirement savings accounts. So we are dealing with a crisis.

Compared to a year ago, U.S. foreclosure filings increased 71 percent in the third quarter. The Institute for Supply Management Index, which is a key gauge of U.S. manufacturing activity, fell to a 26-year low in November. Manufacturing activity fell to a 26-year low in November. Home prices, tracked by S&P's 20-city housing index, dropped 17.4 percent in September. That is a record--the fastest decline on record. Do you hear what I am saying? The job losses, the jobless claims, the foreclosures, the stock market, everything is going in the wrong direction. For people who don't know what the fundamentals of the economy mean, that is the fundamentals of the economy. That is the fundamentals--unemployment, housing prices, stock market, retirement incomes.

Construction spending fell by 1.2 percent in October, much more than what was expected--another fundamental of the economy. Construction of single-family homes plunged 4.6 percent from September. Sales at the wholesale level plunged by 4.1 percent in October. That is nationwide.

My State of California trails only Michigan in the total number of auto-related jobs. In fact, there are nearly 200,000 Californians employed by auto dealers, manufacturers, and wholesalers whose livelihoods are at stake.

At the Vehicle Accessory Center in Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 50 workers manufacture auto parts for GM cars.

The general manager, Russell Hoyt, writes that without a bridge loan to the Big Three, ``we run the risk of losing all of the gains we've made over the years to make our company more competitive and to build new technologies and cars that will benefit consumers and improve our nation's energy security.''

Gina Underwood, the controller of a Saturn dealership that employs 48 people in Ontario, CA, wrote to me about the impact the credit market is having on her business.

She says ``the potential trickle down into my community borders on catastrophic.'' She adds that ``helping our industry in the short-term will have a much lower cost than addressing the effects of a failed industry in the midst of an economic turnaround.''

The Los Angeles Federation of Labor says the decline in the auto industry is ``responsible for nearly 11 percent of California's job loss in the past year. It has also robbed millions of dollars from state and local treasuries that are responsible for funding some of our most crucial public services.''

The California chapter of the United Auto Workers writes that ``these loans will enable domestic auto companies to continue operations and will avoid putting thousands of people out of work.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the California recession figures.

Suffice it to say that 1.5 million Californians are out of work, and in the third quarter we had 79,000 foreclosures, more than triple last year's numbers. We have a State budget crisis, some of it emanating from this downturn, and we have to step up to the plate and do our part. Whether we live in a city, whether we live in a county, whether we work for the people as a member of a city council, whether we work as a county supervisor, whether we work as a mayor or a House Member or a Senator, all of us who work for the people have to step up to the plate.

I did something interesting, and it might be of interest to you. I worked with my staff. We have 58 counties in California and we got on the phone and we talked to the leaders of each of those counties and the 10 major cities in our State. We do have 38 million people in our State. They told us what is happening on the ground there, and it is not a pretty picture. Now, some of them are doing better than others. A lot of them are facing unemployment rates in their cities of 13 percent, 12 percent, and 9 percent. In the inland empire area, which is just east of Los Angeles, we have the highest unemployment rate in the Nation, about 9.1 percent.

So the point of my setting the stage for my remarks by giving a broad look at what is happening is to make sure people understand we are not taking up this auto rescue plan in normal times. If it was normal times, that would be one thing. I wouldn't be that sympathetic to the big three in normal times. I have had my arguments with them since the 1980s. I think their fighting California and the 19 other States that want better fuel economy is a huge mistake on their part, and I don't want to reward them for that. But I have to tell you, when you look at the times we are in, you recognize we need to bridge these troubled times right now, bridge these troubled times with a loan so we can take a look at this when we have a new President, a new Congress, and, frankly, when we begin to see a light at the end of this tunnel, which I believe is going to come when our new President comes to us in January and we start to put together a plan for economic recovery.

How tragic would it be if we lost this manufacturing base at this point in this recession, just as I do believe we are going to pull ourselves out of this mess we are in. We need a bridge to better times for the auto industry. By the way, other countries around the globe are doing the same for their auto industries. Because there are two things happening here. Detroit got in trouble because, in my view, they built those big cars, they didn't diversify their fleet, and they fought us on fuel economy. Believe me, I was in that fight against them every step of the way. They won that fight. But now they are losing at the end of the day because they made a mistake in fighting us.

But we don't want to lose this manufacturing base at this time. We would be the only industrialized nation in the world not to have a domestic auto industry.

When I hear my colleagues say I don't like this little sentence here or that sentence there, I understand that. Believe me, there are a lot of things in

these bills I do not like at all. But we have to step back and say, in these troubled times, unparalleled since the Great Depression, do we want to leave here and risk the chance that we could wake up without a manufacturing base in our great Nation? I say the answer is no.

I have three reasons for voting for this rescue package: Jobs, jobs and jobs. When we were hit with foreclosures, the first round of them, they had to do with predatory lending. They had to do with some things that were outrageous--people put in these subprime loans who could have been in prime loans. They woke up one day when they were paying $400 a month and suddenly it is $1,000 a month. They couldn't do it. We hope those loans could be restructured. That is one set of difficult circumstances for going into foreclosures. The far worse set of circumstances is when you lose your job and your family cannot make it. That is the thing I wish to avoid.

My focus is on this economy and making sure we are doing everything to save, preserve, and create jobs. With each passing day, we realize what a crisis we are in. Again, today we found out more people filed for unemployment compensation, a bigger number than we have seen in 26 years. When I heard we lost 533,000 jobs last month, it sent shivers up and down my spine. If we don't act, we risk seeing another 2 to 3 million jobs that could be at risk. We know even the collapse of one of the big three could cause that.

In my home State, we have 200,000 auto-related jobs, second only to Michigan.

At the Vehicle Accessory Center at Rancho Cucamonga, our general manager there writes that without a bridge loan to the big three:

We run the risk of losing all the gains we've made over the

years to make our company more competitive and to build new

technologies and cars that will benefit consumers and improve

our nation's energy security.

Gina Underwood, a controller at Saturn of Ontario, employing 48 people in Ontario, CA, wrote to me about the impact of the credit crisis. She says:

The potential trickle down into my community borders on

catastrophic.

She adds:

Helping our industry in the short-term will have a much

lower cost than addressing the effects of a failed industry

in the midst of an economic turnaround.

The Los Angeles County Federation of Labor says the decline in the auto industry:

. . . is responsible for nearly 11 percent of California's

job loss in the past year.

The California chapter of the United Auto Workers writes:

These loans will enable domestic auto companies to continue

operations and will avoid putting thousands of people out of

work.

I ask unanimous consent to have these letters printed in the Record.

Mr. President, the unemployment rate in my State, again, is 8.2 percent in California; 8.2 percent. It is rising. Losing another 200,000 jobs at this time is catastrophic. If we leave and we risk that, then it is our fault. The people who vote this way will have to answer to their own consciences. Failure to act is not an option.

Here's the thing, there is a huge cost of inaction. I understand my colleagues are very concerned about the cost to taxpayers. I share that concern. I never heard them talk about that when their States were giving all kinds of incentives to foreign car companies to come in. I will get to that later. But here is what happens in addition to the massive job losses if the big three fail. The burden on taxpayers to pick up the pieces would be much more costly than these loans. Losing GM, Ford or Chrysler would add billions of dollars in costs to the already depleted Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. Taxpayers would have to provide health care, unemployment benefits, and other related services. Unfunded health care liabilities would be forced into Medicare and Medicaid with costs reaching $50 billion. If the automakers file for bankruptcy, it could lead to a $108 billion loss to the Treasury because of reduced individual income.

My colleagues say let them go bankrupt, as if it is a magic solution. It is not a magic solution because the polls tell us 80 percent of the people will not buy a car from a bankrupt automaker because of obvious reasons. If you want to keep your car 3, 4, 5 years--I keep mine 9 or 10 years--you want to make sure you have the parts available to fix your car. You want to make sure you have someone who understands the car and can service the car.

This is not similar to a dress company going out of business and declaring bankruptcy. That is sad and it is tough but, you know, you are not going to worry about it. If you have a dress by someone and the company goes out of business, you are not going to be dealing with that manufacturer. You are if you buy a car. By providing $14 billion in loan authority now with requirements that the money be paid back, we are taking steps to protect taxpayers from at least $150 billion in future liabilities, should the auto companies shut down.

Then there are people who say isn't this the first of what could be many interventions? I can't predict that. I am just saying at this time, now, with what we know about the state of this economy, with what we know about the state of the lost equity in the market, with what we know about the state of housing, of construction, of the number of people filing--this the Christmas season. My goodness, let's take a chance on this. Let's take a chance on this.

The administration gave $150 billion to an insurance company. I never heard anybody at that time say: Well, the workers in that insurance company make too much money. That is the problem. You never heard a word about that from my Republican friends. Blaming the workers for this is outrageous. They have given back and they have given back and they have given back.

What would happen to the thousands of other associated businesses that rely on GM, Ford, and Chrysler if they went belly up? The big three share 80 percent of the supplier base in this country. If one of the companies goes bankrupt, these small- and medium-size businesses could lose significant revenue and be forced to make layoffs or close their doors.

I wish to talk about other countries taking significant steps to support their domestic auto manufacturing base. Countries throughout Europe and Asia are providing assistance to their auto manufacturers during this time of crisis. You take all the auto companies now--take Toyota. Their sales are way down. Everybody is hit by this recession. The question is, Do we abandon this manufacturing base? Credit markets are still frozen. For that, I have to say, and let me be clear--I don't understand what Mr. Paulson has done since we gave him that authority for $350 billion. Why are the credit markets still as frozen as they are?

The answer comes back: It could have been worse. I believe that. It could have been worse. But we need to do a better job there. Let me be clear, I am not voting--if I have to vote today, tomorrow, next week-- to release the next $350 billion to this administration. So let me put that on the line.

Other countries are recognizing that, with the credit markets frozen, they need to maintain their strong manufacturing base. We are the greatest country in the world. How could we ever continue our leadership if we lose that manufacturing base? I know Senator Stabenow has been quite eloquent on the point, about how integrated the manufacturing base is with our military and national defense infrastructure. The big three automakers are the biggest customers for many of the major suppliers of parts and technology for the armed services. From onboard computer devices to tires to engine machinery, these suppliers often rely on the big three to sustain their businesses.

I say to my colleagues on the other side who are taking the lead against this: Think about it. We all stand for a strong defense. If you lose this manufacturing base, whom are you going to rely on if we have more national emergencies, international emergencies? We know we cannot afford to lose this base.

I mentioned before that some of my colleagues on the other side--the Senator from Alabama, the Senator from Tennessee--they have been very outspoken against helping the auto companies. Where were they when Alabama provided $258 million in taxpayer-funded incentives to the foreign automaker Mercedes-Benz to build an auto manufacturing plant in the State of Alabama? I never heard them speak up. Do they only speak out against American workers who work for American companies here? They support the foreign companies, not the American companies.

Tennessee offered at least $200 million in incentives to Toyota to build an assembly plant in Chattanooga. Instead, they landed in Mississippi. Mississippi provided Toyota $296 million in taxpayer- funded initiatives. Why don't I hear my colleagues from Tennessee or Mississippi out here saying: Oh, that was a mistake. Taxpayers should not have been on the hook.

Something is wrong. Is this about not helping these workers because they are tough and they joined a union? Is that it? What is this? It doesn't smell right. You can't support giving money to lure foreign manufacturers into your State, foreign auto companies into your State, and then suddenly turn on folks who are trying to save the domestic automobile industry.

It is not that I am against what those States did. I am just talking about being consistent. If you didn't oppose giving money to foreign car companies, why do you oppose giving a bridge loan to our own domestic manufacturing base at a time of great economic peril?

We will live to fight another day on this, that is for sure. As I said, if this were a different time, if this were a different place, if the economy were thriving and one of those companies had problems due to their own ineptitude, I would not be here now. This is a worldwide recession. Other countries are moving forward. I hope the American people understand this.

If we are to add 2 to 3 million more unemployed people onto the list, we are going to be in a downward spiral. It is going to be very hard for us to recover in the near term.

Again, the big three have made a lot of mistakes. I met with them in the 1980s. I will never forget it. I was over in the House and I was on a committee that was dealing with fuel economy. I said: Why don't you make more of these fuel-efficient cars? At that time, I said: My kids are in college. I see their friends are all buying these smaller cars. They want to buy American, but they cannot. They cannot afford the gas. That was after we had this crisis in the 1970s.

They said: You don't know what you are talking about. Those small cars, you don't make enough money on

them, they are no good. People want big cars. That is good. We make more money. They said to me: We are giving up those small cars to other companies, to foreign companies.

I believed that was wrong. I said you need to have diversity.

They decided to go their way.

I don't have a great deal of sympathy for the management over there responsible for this. They didn't take the lead in research and development of advanced technology vehicles. They put too many of their resources into gas guzzlers.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for another 10 minutes.

They ignored signs that their future success would depend on an ability to adapt to a changing business climate with innovation and new technologies. When I learned of the financial problems facing GM, Ford, and Chrysler, I viewed a possible rescue plan as an opportunity to help Detroit embrace new technologies that could lead them toward a strong and prosperous future. I still think, because of the White House's objection, the bill before us is making a big mistake because I wanted to make sure we could say in this bridge loan the funds could not be used to pursue litigation related to the California waiver.

Well, the administration will not go for that. We know where they stand on energy independence, we know where they stand on fighting global warming, on clean cars. They stand nowhere--or I should say they stand somewhere in a bad place. If the big three would embrace the California waiver, understanding that 19 other States are with us, and produce cars to meet the goals, the very clean-air goals we have there, I think we would be a leader in the world. I see that in our future. I really do.

I know in your State, Mr. President, we are seeing a whole new range of manufacturing dealing with solar panels. It is very exciting. This is the future. This is the future. Our big three should be leading the way. I hope they got the message in this last runup of gas prices. I hope they get the message that there is global warming and that we are going to have to deal with it if our planet is to survive.

I am confident that President-elect Obama is going to approve the waiver. I am confident that when he does that, it is going to be a big help to the big three because they will really buckle down.

By the way, we are going to reimburse this technology fund, they are going to move ahead and they are going to meet the requirements with the cleanest cars possible, and it will be a new day. Now, if all three of them do it and two of them survive in the future, that may be the way. We do not know. But what we do know is that today, this day, December 11, so close to Christmas, we do know that to walk away without helping this important industry could lead--could lead--to a far deeper recession and even toward a depression.

With this auto retooling program from which these funds are being borrowed, this will be replenished. Speaker Pelosi has indicated to me personally that they will be replenished. I call on my colleagues in the Senate to support quick replenishment of the program, which is essential to the effort of repositioning the U.S. at the forefront of new transportation and advanced battery technologies.

You know, we have startup companies in my State--very exciting. One of them is called Tesla Motors and the other is Fisker Automotive. That is two of them. They are leading the effort to develop advanced technology batteries, zero-emission cars, and high-performance plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. I have driven some of these cars. They are extraordinary. These companies and others, including the big three, are processing section 136 loan applications to retool manufacturing plants and speed up the development of technology that will put the United States right out in front, leading the way to clean cars and clean technology.

I wish to point out that no bill is perfect. I could write a bill that would be far better for me. Every Senator could. But there is significant taxpayer oversight in this bill, as well as benchmarks that the big three must meet in order to continue to receive Government assistance.

By January 1, the car czar will develop benchmarks to determine how to assess each company's progress in turning its plans submitted to Congress into long-term restructuring plans. The benchmarks will focus on how the big three will restructure their businesses for long-term viability, increased fuel efficiency, advanced technology, managing debt, capitalization, and future cost requirements.

So to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who say: Let them go bankrupt, it is better, they will restructure, we are going to make sure they restructure without declaring bankruptcy and without unloading all of the cost of that bankruptcy onto the backs of taxpayers. If any of the big three fail to submit long-term restructuring plans by March 31, 2009, the car czar has the authority to call the loan or cancel the loan commitment within 30 days, requiring the loan to be paid back at an accelerated rate.

Taxpayers will recover the cost of these loans over 7 years at a rate of 5 percent for the first 5 and 9 percent thereafter. The car czar will have access to all financial records of the big three and will have the ability to prohibit asset sales or possible investments over $100 million, which will protect U.S. jobs being outsourced. The Government will have senior debt status for repayment of the loans, meaning we are in the front of the line to recover loan payments regardless of the companies' success. Stock warrants will ensure the taxpayers benefit from any future growth these companies may experience. The bill prohibits golden parachutes, puts limits on executive compensation and bonus compensation to top employees, and it requires the companies to divest from any private jet investments. The payment of dividends to shareholders will be prohibited during the loan period. In other words, there is every incentive for these companies to turn their companies around. They want to pay dividends to shareholders, they want to get bonuses, they want to get back to business as usual. But we say: Before you do, you have to pay us back. They have a lot of reasons to make this turnaround.

The loan program will be subject to strict auditing by the Comptroller General and the GAO. The car czar will be tasked with facilitating agreements between unions, retirees, debtholders, creditors, suppliers, auto dealers, and shareholders to reduce costs and ensure long-term viability.

Again, I say to my colleagues who are saying let them go bankrupt, take a look at this bill. You are saying let them go bankrupt because they will have to restructure. We say restructure without the bankruptcy because if, in fact, there is a bankruptcy declared, 80 percent of the American people say they will not buy a car from a company that has gone bankrupt. I understood that. So this avoids the bankruptcy and allows them to restructure. If we fail to do this, we are playing Russian roulette with this recession. In times of crisis, you have to see opportunities.

I believe, as a major critic of the car companies since the 1980s when I was here in the House of Representatives, they have finally gotten the message. It has taken them too long. They have been too arrogant. They have not seen the world changing. They have not noticed global warming. They have been blinded to so many things that were happening around them. They were hostile to California and the 19 other States that want to clean up our environment and get better fuel mileage, have clean cars. Instead of embracing those States and working with those States--by the way, those 19 States and California represent a majority of the American people. A majority of the American people want clean cars.

Now, it may have taken this horrific turn of events to get the message through, but clearly the message must be getting through. Jeffrey Sachs wrote recently in the Washington Post:

American-made fuel-cell cars may be a large-scale reality

within a decade. Success would dramatically improve energy

and national security and U.S. global competitiveness.

Now, this is the opportunity. But guess what. If we do not act, if we do not act and this recession keeps deepening, we will not have this chance. We will be the only industrialized democracy without a domestic auto company

and without that manufacturing base. So we have to do what is necessary to push Detroit toward a stronger, more efficient future. It may be that at some point in the future, that industry will have a different look to it. Maybe it will have a different look to it. We do not know that. But what we do know now is that what has hit Detroit is far more than making the wrong choices about what cars they produce. I think they made those wrong choices, but it is far bigger than that because every company in America and outside of America that is making cars is suffering today because of the terrible recession we are in, because of a lack of consumer confidence, because of a loss of equity in the stock market, because of home foreclosures, because of all of these things.

So I say you never know what could happen in the future. I am not able to predict it because I cannot. But I know what I have to do now. I have to think about those three things: jobs, jobs, and jobs. When I think about that, and I recognize that just today we had more filings for unemployment insurance than we have had in 26 years, I say for us to walk away from this without this scaled-down bridge loan would be playing Russian roulette with this recession. I love my country too much to do that. With all of the problems I have with Detroit, I will support helping them in this fashion.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the period for morning business be extended until 2 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, change is on the way, but it didn't get here tonight. The American people said they wanted change in the Senate, but it is not here yet. I think it was proven tonight by this vote. The American people will see who stands with the middle class of this country and who doesn't, who cares about working people and who doesn't by this vote tonight. Anyone could have picked a number of reasons for voting no tonight, but as far as I am concerned, with this economy in crisis, we should have voted yes.

All I wish to say is we are going through tough times and tomorrow things are going to be a whole lot tougher for a whole lot of people, unless Henry Paulson does the right thing. I wish to say to my colleagues, Senator Levin and Senator Stabenow--I know they are headed out, which is fine--that I am going to work as hard as I can to convince the Treasury Secretary to take action to save these 3 million jobs that could be on the line.

People played Russian roulette with this recession tonight. We don't know what is going to happen, but we do know that Hank Paulson can save these jobs. If he can save all those jobs in the white-collar industry, certainly he can save some jobs in the blue-collar industries. Everyone knows I have had problems with Detroit. I think the fact that they didn't listen to those of us who felt they ought to produce clean cars and fuel-efficient cars, the fact that they didn't listen to us led to, in many ways, the problems they face. To lose our manufacturing base, without even a helping hand to try and save it tonight, is shocking.

So, in closing, I wish to say I have a heavy heart right now. I have 200,000 workers in my State, second only to Detroit, who depend on a thriving auto industry. That is 200,000 families, frightened tonight, but I have a message for them: HELP is on the way. Change is on the way. Change is coming to this Chamber. We are going to have people who are here for the right reason--what I consider the right reason--which is fighting for the middle class, fighting to make sure we have a clean environment, a strong economy, educated kids, peace in the world, all those things. That is what the election was about. This is a lameduck Senate, and they acted like a lameduck Senate. It is too bad. But we did get a majority vote, so the message to Mr. Paulson is: Listen to that. More than 51 people here voted to give a chance with a bridge loan, so I hope, Mr. Paulson, you are watching this, and I hope you will do it. Then, when we have our new President and our new Senate and our new House, we can get back to work.

I see Senator Durbin is on the floor and is about to speak. I wish to thank him, Senator Dodd, and Senator Reid, all those who worked so hard and those on the other side who tried--who actually tried--to do something. So I yield the floor, with a heavy heart, but I know that the future is going to be much brighter, much better.

Mr. President, today I rise to pay tribute to 28 young Americans who have been killed in Iraq since April 16. This brings to 859 the number of service members either from California or based in California that have been killed while serving our country in Iraq. This represents 20 percent of all U.S. deaths in Iraq.

PO1 Cherie L. Morton, 40, died April 20 in Galali, Muharraq, Bahrain. Petty Officer 1st Class Morton was assigned to Naval Security Force, Naval Support Activity Bahrain. She was from Bakersfield, CA.

SGT Guadalupe Cervantes Ramirez, 26, died on April 23, 2008, in Camp Arifjan, Kuwait, of injuries suffered in a vehicle incident. Sergeant Cervantes Ramirez was assigned to the 2nd Transportation Company, National Training Center Support Brigade, Fort Irwin, CA. He was from Fort Irwin, CA.

SPC William T. Dix, 32, died April 27 at Camp Buehring, Kuwait, of injuries suffered in a noncombat related incident. Specialist Dix was assigned to the 14th Engineer Battalion, 555th Engineer Brigade, I Corps, Fort Lewis, WA. He was from Culver City, CA.

SGT Merlin German, 22, died April 11 at Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, TX, from wounds he suffered while conducting combat operations in Al Anbar province, Iraq, on February 22, 2005. Sergeant German was assigned to the 5th Battalion, 11th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA, while deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Sergeant German's parent unit was the 2nd Battalion, 11th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA. He was medically retired September 28, 2007, as a result of his injuries.

SSG Bryan E. Bolander, 26, died April 29 in Baghdad from wounds suffered when his vehicle struck an improvised explosive device. Staff Sergeant Bolander was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 502nd Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division, Air Assault, Fort Campbell, KY. He was from Bakersfield, CA.

SGT Glen E. Martinez, 31, died May 2 in Al Anbar province, Iraq, supporting combat operations. Sergeant Martinez was assigned to the Combat Logistics Battalion 1, Combat Logistics Regiment 1, 1st Marine Logistics Group, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA.

LCpl James F. Kimple, 21, died May 2 in Al Anbar province, Iraq, supporting combat operations. Lance Corporal Kimple was assigned to the Combat Logistics Battalion 1, Combat Logistics Regiment 1, 1st Marine Logistics Group, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA.

CPL Miguel A. Guzman, 21, died May 2 in Al Anbar province, Iraq, supporting combat operations. Corporal Guzman was assigned to the Combat Logistics Battalion 1, Combat Logistics Regiment 1, 1st Marine Logistics Group, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA. He was from Norwalk, CA.

LCpl Casey L. Casanova, 22, died May 2 in Al Anbar province, Iraq, supporting combat operations. Lance Corporal Casanova was assigned to the Combat Logistics Battalion 1, Combat Logistics Regiment 1, 1st Marine Logistics Group, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton,

Mr. President, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize an extraordinary couple in the musical world, Alan and Marilyn Bergman, who were recently honored by the renowned Paley Center for Media. Formerly known as the Museum of Television & Radio, the Paley Center for Media is nationally recognized for its efforts to engage communities in a dialogue around the cultural, creative, and social significance of television, radio, and other emerging media platforms.

This year, Alan and Marilyn Bergman are celebrating 50 years of a musical partnership that has enchanted and engaged people around the world. In honor of their extraordinary careers, the Paley Center for Media hosted two very special events to pay tribute to the Bergmans, the first in New York on May 21, 2008, and the second in Los Angeles on November 3, 2008. The two events were part of the Paley Center for Media's ``Paley After Dark'' series, which features only a select few artists each year.

Though Alan and Marilyn's personal life stories may not be widely known--both were born and raised in the same Brooklyn, NY, neighborhood, but it wasn't until they moved to Los Angeles in the 1950s that they met, fell in love, and married--it is hard to find a person who isn't familiar with one of the Bergmans' many famous songs. Starting with one of their first breakthrough successes, a song entitled ``Sleep Warm,'' which appeared as the title track on an album released by Dean Martin in 1959, the Bergmans kicked off a musical career that has lasted half a century.

In 1968, the Bergmans won their first Oscar for ``The Windmills of Your Mind,'' the theme song from the ``Thomas Crown Affair.'' This was just the beginning for Alan and Marilyn. Later, in 1968, ``The Windmills of Your Mind'' also won a Golden Globe award. In 1973, Alan and Marilyn won two Grammys, an Oscar, and a Golden Globe award for ``The Way We Were,'' starring Barbara Streisand and Robert Redford. In 1984, they won another Oscar for the score for ``Yentl,'' and won Emmys for ``Sybil,'' ``Queen of the Stardust Ballroom,'' ``Ordinary Miracles'' and ``A Ticket to Dream.'' In 1995, Alan and Marilyn wrote the Golden Globe-, Oscar-, and Grammy-nominated song ``Moonlight.'' Just a few years ago, Alan and Marilyn were commissioned by the Kennedy Center to write a jazz song cycle which received widespread acclaim. And just last year, Alan released his first album as a vocalist, ``Lyrically,'' featuring some of his and Marilyn's most well-known songs. The reviews were phenomenal.

During their New York and Los Angeles visits, the Bergmans performed a few of their hit songs and treated the audiences to a special question-and-answer session with Pat Mitchell, the Paley Center for Media's president and CEO. Though the Bergmans have been partners for more than 50 years, it was clearly evident that their rapport with each other shines through as strongly today as it did when they first met.

For half a century, Alan and Marilyn have written the lyrics and music to some of the world's most recognizable and unforgettable songs. Their dedication and passion for life is evident in both their marriage and in the work they do. It is no wonder, then, that the Paley Center for Media has honored the Bergmans as part of its ``Paley After Dark'' series.

As their U.S. Senator, I join the Paley Center for Media in honoring and giving my most sincere congratulations to Alan and Marilyn, one of the most respected songwriting teams in music today, for enriching the lives of so many. And for the sake of all of us, I trust that their joint efforts will continue for many more years.

Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the life of Sacramento County sheriff's deputy Lawrence ``Larry'' Canfield, who was tragically killed in the line of duty on November 12, 2008, when his patrol motorcycle was hit while pursuing a speeding vehicle.

Deputy Canfield was raised in Galt, CA, where he graduated from Galt High School. After graduation he joined the U.S. Army where he served for 4 years. He later followed his father's footsteps and joined the Sacramento County Sheriff's Department. For 13 years, Deputy Canfield took great pride in his service to the Sacramento County Sheriff's Department. To his colleagues he was known for his dedication to law enforcement and passion for serving with the motorcycle division.

Deputy Canfield is survived by his loving wife of 16 years, Michelle, and children Tyler and Bryce. Deputy Canfield will be remembered as a dedicated husband, proud father, loving son, devoted friend, and respected colleague. Deputy Canfield served Sacramento County with honor and bravery and fulfilled his oath as an officer of the law. His contributions to public safety and dedication to law enforcement are greatly appreciated and will serve as an example of his legacy.

We shall be grateful for Deputy Canfield's heroic service and the sacrifices he made while serving and protecting the community that he loved.

Madam President, I am pleased to recognize the career and contributions of University of California, Davis, Chancellor Larry Vanderhoef for his 25 years of service to the university.

Chancellor Vanderhoef was born in a small Wisconsin town and was the first person in his family to graduate from high school. After high school, he attended the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, where he earned a B.S. and M.S. in biology and later earned a Ph.D. in plant biochemistry at Purdue University. Chancellor Vanderhoef began his career in education at the University of Illinois in 1970 as a faculty member and was appointed provost at the University of Maryland, College Park, in 1980. He spent the next 4 years at the University of Maryland before heading west to California and the University of California, Davis, in 1984.

Chancellor Vanderhoef began his career at U.C. Davis serving as executive vice chancellor and later as provost/executive vice chancellor. In April 1994, Larry Vanderhoef was named the fifth chancellor of the University of California, Davis.

Under Chancellor Vanderhoef's leadership, U.C. Davis experienced a period of dramatic growth, adding 4 million square feet of office, classroom, lab, and clinical space to support its 8,000 additional students and 44 percent more faculty. He revitalized the south end of campus with the additions of the Robert and Margrit Mondavi Performing Arts Center, the Robert Mondavi Institute for Wine and Food Science, and the Graduate School of Management.

During Chancellor Vanderhoef's tenure at Davis, the university was invited to join the Association of American Universities, recognizing Davis's standing as a top research university. The campus has also been recognized by U.S. News and World Report as the 11th best public university and Washington Monthly recognized it as the 8th best university for their contributions to society.

Over his career, Chancellor Vanderhoef has been honored for his dedicated leadership at U.C. Davis and in the community. In 2003, the Arts and Business Council of Sacramento honored him with its Prelude to the Season Outstanding Contribution Award; in 2004, he was honored as Sacramentan of the Year by the Sacramento Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce; and in 2006 he was given the Northern California International Leadership Award from the Northern California World Trade Center and California Business, Transportation and Housing Agency for his efforts to increase the campus's international engagement. He was also named one of the 20 people who have contributed most substantially to California's Capital Region over the past 20 years by The Sacramento Business Journal.

As the University of California and Davis community gather to celebrate the retirement of Chancellor Larry Vanderhoef, I would like to congratulate him and thank him for his service to California.

Madam President, I am honored to remember a great American activist, environmental leader, mentor, and woman of service-- Dorothy Green, who passed away on October 13, 2008, at the age of 79.

Dorothy's career as a leading environmental activist for clean and sound water policy spanned three decades. She was well known for her self-taught expertise on clean oceans and responsible water management. She also founded several well-known organizations that continue to make an impact on California's environment.

Dorothy Green was born in Detroit to Polish immigrants in 1929. She moved to California where she graduated from the University of California, Berkley, with a degree in music. She married her husband Jacob in 1951. For many years, Dorothy stayed home and took care of her children. In 1962, she began dedicating her life to volunteerism with her involvement in the Exceptional Children's Foundation, committed to helping children with developmental disabilities--like her son, Hershel.

Dorothy began advocating for water quality in 1972 when she volunteered in a campaign to establish the California Coastal Commission. From there, Dorothy became president of the Los Angeles League of Conservation Voters, where she focused primarily on sewage treatment. However, Dorothy is best known for forming one of the largest, nonprofit environmental groups in Los Angeles in 1985, Heal the Bay. Heal the Bay has grown to 15,000 members and fights to protect coastal waters, clean up beaches, and reports on the

water quality conditions of over 500 California beaches through its annual Beach Report Card.

Dorothy's work did not stop with Heal the Bay. She went on to found the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers Watershed Council to preserve, restore, and enhance the economic, social, and environmental aspects of the local watersheds. She also went on to help establish the Public Officials for Water and Environmental Reform and the California Water Impact Network--both dedicated to water sustainability.

Even to the very last days of her life, when she was bedridden and under hospice care, Dorothy fought for positive change. She wrote an editorial for the Los Angeles Times, pleading for sensible water policy, and she even provided specific guidance on how to obtain it. Dorothy inspired others to take action on environmental issues through a life of dedicated leadership and service.

Green is survived by three sons, Joshua, Avrom and Herschel; two brothers, Morris and Gerald; and three granddaughters, Jessica, Katherine and Tara. I send my deepest condolences to them.

Our Nation lost an amazing environmental activist with the passing of Dorothy Green, but her legacy to the State of California and promotion of clean ocean water will live on.

Madam President, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the memory of a dedicated law enforcement officer, Officer Bradley Alan Moody of the City of Richmond Police Department. For the past 8 years, Officer Moody worked tirelessly to provide the citizens of Richmond with safety and service. On October 4, 2008, Officer Moody was tragically injured in the line of duty, and passed away 3 days later.

Officer Moody, 29 years old, was deeply committed to the city of Richmond. Shortly before his accident, he had received a commendation for chasing down and arresting two suspects carrying concealed weapons in separate incidents in August 2008.

A K-9 officer and a member of the Richmond Police Department SWAT team, Officer Moody was renowned for his extraordinary work ethic among fellow officers. He was also extremely personable; able to both fight crime and interact with youth in the community. Throughout his career, Officer Moody demonstrated a passion for law enforcement and commitment to helping others, qualities that enabled him to become a respected and model member of the Richmond Police Department. Officer Moody's colleagues will always remember him for his professionalism and devotion to serving the public.

Officer Moody was a loving husband, proud father, and devoted friend. He is survived by his wife, Susan, a former Richmond police dispatcher, and two young children. Officer Moody served the city of Richmond with honor and dignity, and his contributions to his community and the many lives he touched will serve as a shining example of his legacy.

We will always be grateful for Officer Moody's service and the valor that he displayed while serving and protecting the people of Richmond.

Madam President, I am pleased and honored to pay tribute to the legendary Barbra Streisand, one of the most talented and successful female entertainers in modern history. For more than 40 years, Barbra's wildly successful career in music, television, film, and theater has enamored fans across America and abroad. In recognition of her great achievements and contributions to American culture, Barbra has been named a Kennedy Center Honoree for 2008.

Barbra Streisand was born on April 24, 1942 in Brooklyn, NY. The daughter of Diana and Emanual Streisand, Barbra passionately pursued her dream of a career in show business from a young age. After getting her start in New York City night clubs, Barbra signed a contract with Columbia Records in 1962.

In 1963, the 21-year-old singer won two Grammy Awards, including Album of the Year. At that time, Barbra was the youngest artist to have ever received that award. Barbra has now recorded 60 albums, sold over 148 million albums worldwide, and is one of the highest-selling female artists of all time.

In 1965, ``My Name is Barbra,'' her first television special, earned five Emmys and the distinguished Peabody Award. In 1968, she earned the Academy Award for Best Actress for her performance in her very first motion picture, ``Funny Girl.'' In 1976, Barbra became the first female composer to win an Academy Award, for her song ``Evergreen'' from the film ``A Star Is Born.''

Barbra continued smashing glass ceilings when she became the first woman ever to direct, write, and star in a major motion picture. ``Yentl'' received five Academy Award nominations. She also directed, wrote, and starred in ``Prince of Tides,'' which received even more nominations, including one for Best Picture. Barbra is one of a very few individuals who has won an Emmy, a Grammy, an Oscar, and a Tony award.

As her career continues to rise to unfathomable heights, Barbra never shies away from an opportunity to improve the lives of others. She has worked tirelessly on issues of national and international importance. Her commitment to social justice is demonstrated by the work of the Streisand Foundation--which benefits national organizations working on the protection of civil rights, environmental preservation, voter education, nuclear disarmament, and women's health. Barbra received the Humanitarian Award from the Human Rights Campaign in 2004.

Barbra's unparalleled talent, enthusiasm and commitment are reflected by the millions of individuals whose lives she has touched. We are grateful for Barbra's innumerable gifts, and I hope you will all join me in celebrating the remarkable Barbra Streisand.

Mr. President, I am honored to remember a great American icon who was a renowned actor, activist, and philanthropist--Paul Newman, who passed away on September 26, 2008, at the age of 83.

Paul's movie career spanned five decades, acting in over 65 films. He captivated all of America with his natural on-screen talent and his off-screen ability to give to others. He was more than an incredibly gifted, Academy Award-winning actor; his zeal for life was evident through his remarkable charitable work and favorite pastimes.

Paul Leonard Newman was born in Shaker Heights, OH, on January 26, 1925, to Arthur and Theresa Newman. Though he hoped to be a professional athlete, his gift for the performing arts showed early as he acted in grade school and high school plays. After high school he served in the U.S. Navy Air Corps and eventually went on to study theatre at prestigious institutions such as the Yale School of Drama and the famous Actor's Studio in New York.

In the 1950s his acting career began in theatre and television. He moved to films and was eventually nominated for 10 Oscars--winning Best Actor for ``The Color of Money'' and also two honorary Oscars. He played many major roles in classic American films such as ``Exodus,'' ``Hud,'' ``Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid,'' ``The Verdict,'' ``The Sting,'' and ``Absence of Malice.'' His legendary performances will forever entertain and captivate the American imagination.

Paul was not only an iconic actor, but he also fervently cared about our Nation. He opposed the Vietnam war and ardently favored civil rights and equality. In addition he was a world-class race car driver, and a flourishing nonprofit entrepreneur. He founded the popular Newman's Own line of food products 25 years ago, and 100 percent of its profits are donated to charities around the world. Among those charities are the Hole in the Wall Camps that Paul helped to create over 20 years ago. These camps allow for a carefree experience for children with illnesses. Newman's Own has raised $250 million so far.

When his son, Scott, tragically passed away, Paul established the Scott Newman Center in 1980 to prevent drug abuse through educating children. He also helped to cofound the Committee Encouraging Corporate Philanthropy, a consortium of global CEOs in support of corporate giving. Paul Newman lived his life by giving to others and encouraging others to give.

He is survived by his wonderful wife of 50 years, award-winning actress Joanne Woodward; five daughters, Susan, Stephanie, Melissa, Nell, and Clea; two grandchildren; and his brother Arthur. I send my deepest condolences to them.

Our Nation lost an amazing talent and humanitarian with the passing of Paul Newman, but his legacy to the State of California and to all of America will live on.

Mr. President, I am pleased to recognize the 2008 Minor League Triple-A baseball champions, the Sacramento River Cats.

On September 16, 2008, the Sacramento River Cats, of the Pacific Coast League, PCL, defeated the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Yankees, of the International League, 4 to 1 in the Bricktown Showdown to become back- to-back Triple-A champions. Sacramento is the Triple-A affiliate of the Oakland Athletics.

The Sacramento River Cats finished the regular season atop the Pacific Coast League Southern Division with a record of 83 wins and 61 losses. The River Cats were assisted this season by their always faithful fan base, which has led Triple-A in attendance for nine consecutive seasons.

In the opening playoff series between the River Cats and the Salk Lake City Bees, the River Cats excelled by scoring 39 runs en route to a 3-games-to-1 series victory. The series victory demonstrated the River Cats' depth of talent as four starting pitchers, four relief pitchers, two infielders, and one outfielder were called up to the Oakland Athletics before the series began.

In the Pacific Coast League Championship Series, the River Cats defeated the Texas Rangers Triple-A affiliate Oklahoma City Red Hawks, winning the series three games to one to repeat as PCL champions. During this series, the River Cats proved their ability to perform on the road by achieving two of their three victories in Oklahoma. The win also earned the River Cats their fourth Pacific Coast League Championship in the last 6 years.

In the Triple-A championship game, River Cats manager Todd Steverson showcased his talented pitching staff. The River Cats used six pitchers who combined for nine strikeouts while only giving up a single run. The victory gave the Pacific Coast League all three of the Triple-A championships since the Triple-A championship game was reinstated 3 years ago.

As the River Cats' fans, players, and staff gather to celebrate this remarkable accomplishment, I would like to congratulate them on an outstanding season.