Floor Statements

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mr. President, tomorrow we are going to have an opportunity to vote on S. 2124, and I am pleased to learn that it looks as if there is going to be overwhelming support in the Senate for the passage of S. 2124. This is the legislation that helps Ukraine in dealing with the invasion by Russia.

Russia's illegal actions of using its military to overtake Crimea, a part of Ukraine, violate numerous international obligations that Russia has committed to.

I have the honor of chairing the U.S. Helsinki Commission. The Helsinki Accords were entered into in 1975. Russia was one of the leading forces for forming the OSCE.

Russia's taking over of Crimea violates its commitments it made under the Helsinki Final Act. It violates the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, which was signed by the United States, the United Kingdom, Ukraine, and Russia, that guaranteed basically Ukraine's integrity of its land. It violates the 1997 Ukraine-Russia bilateral treaty. It violates the U.N. Charter. The list goes on and on and on.

So I believe it is absolutely essential that we have a strong voice in standing with the people of Ukraine. There was absolutely no justification whatsoever for Russia's action. There was no threat to any of the ethnic communities in Ukraine. All the rights of the people were being protected. The country was in transition from a corrupt government to a government that respected the rights of its citizens. If there was any provocation whatsoever of any unrest, it was caused by Russia's presence in Ukraine.

We got reports from the chief rabbi in Kiev that Russia was staging anti-Semitic provocations in Crimea, and the list goes on and on as to what Russia was doing in order to try to give some justification for its actions.

Russia's thinly veiled landgrab, cloaked in the cloth of self- determination, must not go unchallenged. Here is what I think is critically important: This is a dangerous precedent. We saw Russia use a similar action in Georgia, and now in Crimea in Ukraine. There are other territorial issues involved

around the world. If this goes unchecked, if we do not speak with a unified voice, it just encourages more irresponsible action by Russia in other countries.

We know that we have concerns about the South China Sea. We know we have concerns about Moldova. There are many other areas where Russia could be involved in its border areas.

So all of these issues are matters for us to speak with a strong unified voice. S. 2124 does that. It does it in two principal ways.

First, it imposes the sanctions against those responsible for Russia's invasion into Crimea, Ukraine. It provides sanctions so that these individuals are not permitted to come to the United States. There are economic sanctions in regard to the use of our banking system. These are similar sanctions to what are now being imposed by our European allies.

We need to isolate Russia. As we all know, the G8, which included Russia, is now a G7 without Russia. Russia needs to know that there will be sanctions imposed, and they will be stronger sanctions unless they stop this aggressive action.

In addition, the legislation provides economic assistance to the new Government of Ukraine. Just 2 weeks ago the Prime Minister of Ukraine was here and met with Members of the Senate. I tell you, it was inspirational to listen to his vision for Ukraine as a democratic, independent state, with full integration into Europe. That is important. He is preparing for a May 25 election for the Presidency of Ukraine.

These are all very, very positive steps. But if Ukraine does not have the economic foothold to be able to develop the type of economy and strength in their country, it will be difficult for Ukraine to be maintained as a viable independent state.

Here is where the United States and our European allies, and I hope the global community, come together, as we have in this legislation, to provide economic help on a restructured economic plan for Ukraine that will help them move forward in a very constructive way.

Mr. President, I must tell you I am disappointed, though, that the reforms of the IMF will be eliminated from this legislation. I think that is regrettable. We are entering into a plan for Ukraine that very much depends upon the IMF's--the International Monetary Fund's--plan to make sure that the moneys we are spending, Europe is spending, and other countries are loaning and providing to Ukraine are based upon a sound economic plan that will work. That is why the IMF is there. And they will be there. But the United States needs to be a full participant in the IMF. We are out of compliance, and here is another opportunity lost for us to be in full compliance with the IMF. I am disappointed about that.

But as I said as I took the floor, we must speak with one voice--the Obama administration; the House, the Senate; the Congress--as we stand with the people of Ukraine for their integrity, for their independence, and for the adherence to international principles, which Russia has clearly violated.

With that, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I wish to honor Baltimore physician Murray W. West, a valued member of Maryland's medical community. At the end of this month, Dr. West, a family physician, will retire from clinical practice after more than 30 years.

Born in Washington, DC, on September 11, 1954, Murray West moved to Philadelphia at age 10. From 1975 to 1976, he attended Queen Mary College in London, and he was awarded a bachelor of science degree from Antioch College in 1977.

A 1981 graduate of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Dr. West completed his residency in family practice at the Georgetown University Department of Family Medicine here in Washington, DC. After 3 years with the Indian Health Service in Yuma, AZ, Dr. West moved to Maryland, where he earned a master of public health degree from the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health in 1993. Since 1986, he has treated patients exclusively at nonprofit health centers in our State-- Arundel Village, Washington Village, Peoples Community, and the Belair- Edison Family Health Center, where he served as medical director from 2001 until 2007.

On Thursday, March 28, family members, colleagues, and friends will gather to celebrate this committed practitioner whose career epitomizes dedication to public health and quality care. I ask my Senate colleagues to join me in wishing Dr. West all the best in his retirement.

Mr. President, on this day I hope Marylanders across our State can ``Hear the Maryland Crunch!'' of students eating a healthy school breakfast. Thanks to the leadership of Maryland Hunger Solutions, the ``Hear the Maryland Crunch!'' campaign offers all Marylanders the opportunity to become more aware of the daily struggle of our food insecure children and stand together in support of school breakfast. I wish to continue to highlight this critical issue facing our children.

Maryland has the highest median income in the nation. Yet even in Maryland one in five children is food insecure. These children lack consistent access to adequate food resources. Yet I am happy to announce we are making strides to ensure our children are fed and ready to learn. Approximately 262,000 students in Maryland participate in the 100 percent federally funded National School Lunch Program and receive either free or reduced price lunches. These students know that when they come to school, they are able to receive a nutritious school lunch.

Only 149,000 children or 59 percent of students receiving a school lunch start

their day ready to learn with a school breakfast. At this time, Maryland ranks 14th in the nation in school breakfast participation rate after making tremendous progress over the past 5 years to ensure all children have access to nutritious meals. Over the course of 5 years Maryland's school breakfast program participation rate has increased by 37 percent, and our school lunch participation rate has more than doubled with a 56 percent increase.

I am encouraged by these developments and efforts to continue to expand school breakfast access for all children. Marylanders are united in the vision that the ability of children to learn and succeed in our classrooms should not be impaired because they come to school hungry. Thanks to the partnership between Governor Martin O'Malley, the Maryland General Assembly, national organizations such as the Share Our Strength's No Kid Hungry campaign, the Family League of Baltimore, and Maryland Hunger Solutions, our State has continued to make efforts to expand access to school breakfast with the Maryland Meals for Achievement Program.

Maryland Meals for Achievement allows schools where 40 percent of students or more qualify for free or reduced price school lunch to provide school breakfast meals for all students at no cost to the child. This program combines the expansion of the school breakfast program with innovative efforts to encourage increased participation, including a change in the traditional breakfast delivery model of serving school breakfast meals in the cafeteria to an in-classroom setting. Schools have shown a positive increase in school breakfast participation rates from the new ``Grab and Go'' breakfasts or ``Breakfast After the Bell'' programs, allowing more students to be better prepared to succeed in the classroom. I commend Governor O'Malley for requesting additional funding this fiscal year for the Maryland Meals for Achievement Program that will allow an additional 40,000 students to receive a healthy breakfast.

According to a study sponsored by the Share Our Strength's No Kid Hungry campaign, research has shown students who receive a school breakfast are better prepared to learn and perform in their classwork, are less likely to be overweight, have more strength and endurance throughout the day, are less likely to cause classroom disruptions, and are less likely to be absent from school than if they were not receiving a school breakfast.

In closing, I am honored to join with Maryland Hunger Solutions and Marylanders across our State who are committed to do better for our children. On this Maryland day, we reflect on our rich past and look forward to a bright future in which the only hunger our schoolchildren have is a hunger to learn. I am proud that Maryland is leading the fight against childhood hunger. Together, let's all ``Hear the Maryland Crunch!''

Mr. President, I wish to celebrate Maryland Day and the proud history of my home State. Marylanders across the State are taking a moment to reflect on our proud history and contributions to the Nation. I wish to spend a few minutes to highlight the importance of this State holiday and the activities that are underway.

On this day 380 years ago, two ships commissioned by Lord Baltimore, The Ark and The Dove, carried the first English settlers to land at St. Clement's Island in what is now recognized as St. Mary's County. Leonard Calvert, a son of Lord Baltimore who eventually served as the first Governor of Maryland, led the 150 settlers who came ashore to St. Clement's Island after spending more than four months at sea. This landing represented the first time European settlers came to Maryland and those settlers eventually formed just the third English colony to be settled in British North America.

The origin of Maryland Day began with the Maryland State Board of Education placing an emphasis on State and local histories in public schools. In 1903, the Maryland State Board of Education officially recognized Maryland Day as a tool for students and teachers to increase instruction of Maryland history in public schools. The Maryland General Assembly, which held its first session in St. Mary's County not long after the landing at St. Clement's Island, enacted Maryland Day as an official State holiday in 1916. Young learners across our State will spend today learning about the significant contributions of Maryland to the Nation and important historical figures in Maryland.

I am proud to say that every region of my home State has played a role in shaping our Nation. From the Eastern Shore of Maryland, for instance, Harriet Ross Tubman was born into slavery in 1820 in Buckstown, MD along the marshes of the Blackwater River in Dorchester County. After learning she would be sold to settle her late master's debts, Tubman escaped from slavery to Philadelphia, PA, marking the first of many expeditions over the course of the next 11 years to and from the Eastern Shore of Maryland to lead nearly 70 slaves out of slavery. In addition to becoming a famous conductor on the Underground Railroad, she held a lifelong commitment to the women's suffrage movement and worked as a nurse, cook, spy, and scout for the Union Army during the Civil War in Port Royal, SC. She became the first woman to lead an armed assault during the Civil War in Combahee Ferry Raid, liberating nearly 750 slaves. In her later years, she worked tirelessly for the women's suffrage movement, speaking before countless women's groups with fellow suffrage movement leaders Susan B. Anthony and Emily Howland. When asked if she believed women deserved the right to vote, she would reply, ``I suffered enough to believe it.''

In Western Maryland, Maryland citizens played a key role in the military and political struggles of the Civil War. The control of Maryland territory was crucial due to the State's proximity to Washington, DC, the State's border with Virginia and with other States that remained in the Union, and Baltimore's position as a key railroad link to the West. In 1862, GEN Robert E. Lee led his Confederate Army of Northern Virginia across the Potomac River around Leesburg, VA into Maryland, marking his first invasion into the North during the Civil War. The Maryland Campaign consisted of a number of battles along Maryland's westernmost counties and often pitted Marylanders on opposite sides of the fighting. In the single bloodiest day battle in American history, the Battle of Antietam in Sharpsburg, MD formed a turning point in the Civil War. With savage close range fighting lasting over a period of 12 hours, the Union and Confederate forces suffered nearly 23,000 total casualties. This battle forced General Lee to withdraw his Confederate Army back across the Potomac River into Virginia, thus ending the invasion of the North and the last major battle that took place on Union soil. The people of Maryland honor those who valiantly fought in the Civil War, endured the hardships brought on by the conflict, and made the ultimate sacrifice in order to form a more perfect Union.

Perhaps the most recognizable contribution Maryland has provided to our Nation is the national anthem. During the War of 1812, British troops enacted heavy damage to Washington, DC, setting both the U.S. Capitol and the White House ablaze. The British forces then marched towards Baltimore. Citizens of Baltimore, including free blacks, quickly mobilized to protect their city. Barricades stretching more than 1 mile long were constructed to protect the harbor, hulls were sunk to impede navigation, and a chain of masts was erected across the harbor entrance. When the British fleet approached Baltimore at North Point, Marylanders fought the British Army and helped repulse the British Navy from Fort McHenry during the Battle of Baltimore. It's important to note that American forces during the Battle of North Point were volunteer militia, heavily outnumbered by the highly trained British infantry, but they managed to delay the British forces long enough for 10,000 American reinforcements to arrive, preventing a land attack against Baltimore. Following 25 hours of intense British naval bombardment at Fort McHenry, the American defenders refused to yield, and the British were forced to depart.

During the bombardment, American lawyer Francis Scott Key, who was

being held on board an American flag-of-truce vessel in Baltimore Harbor, took notice of the American flag still flying atop Fort McHenry. Key realized then that the Americans had survived the battle and stopped the enemy advance. He was so moved by the sight of the American flag flying following the horrific bombardment, he composed a poem called the ``The Defense of Fort McHenry,'' which was published in the Baltimore Patriot and Advertiser newspaper later that year. This poem, and later the song, inspired love of country among the American people and not only helped usher in the Era of Good Feelings immediately after the war, but became a timeless reminder of American resolve. ``The Star Spangled Banner'' officially became our national anthem in 1931. The flag that flew over Fort McHenry and inspired this anthem is now a national treasure on display at the Smithsonian Institution, a very short distance from where we are today.

On this Maryland Day, Marylanders are in the midst of celebrating Baltimore's role in the bicentennial anniversary of the War of 1812. The Pride of Baltimore II, named in honor of the Baltimore clipper the Chasseur, set sail from the Baltimore Inner Harbor to the State capital while carrying a replica of the Star Spangled Banner ``that was still there'' after the bombardment of Fort McHenry in September 1814. Sewn by volunteers of the Maryland Historical Society, this flag will be presented to Governor Martin O'Malley and members of the Maryland General Assembly at the Annapolis Statehouse.

I am proud of the legacy of my home State and the efforts Marylanders have made and continue to make to remember those who have come before us. I thank all of those who participated in Maryland Day ceremonies and congratulate the students who learned something new about our great State today.

Mr. President, I take this time to talk about the child care and development block grant bill that is before us and will be before us soon. I want to congratulate my colleagues, Senator Mikulski for her leadership on this bill, and Senator Harkin, Senator Alexander, and Senator Burr. This is truly a bipartisan effort, and we very much appreciate the child care and development block grant. It is critically important.

The last time we authorized this program was 1996. I know that very well because I was serving in the House of Representatives at the time and had the opportunity to be the ranking member on the Human Resources Subcommittee in the Ways and Means Committee that was considering welfare reform and childcare, and how we could reward families for work, and how our welfare system could become a transitional program rather than a permanent program that would allow people, particularly moms, to be able to get into the workforce, stay in the workforce and climb up the economic ladder.

As part of welfare reform we recognized we had to do things about the major cost concerns of someone, a mom, giving up her welfare in order to go to work. One of those issues was health care. We passed transitional health care for people coming off of cash assistance. We also had to deal with childcare, because childcare is an extremely costly part of being able to get into the workforce.

In 1996 we consolidated many programs that were out there. We coordinated eligibility. There were different eligibility rules for many of these programs. We simplified the rules so we could get maximum dollars of help for people who entered the workforce. The goal was self-sufficiency through education, training, and being able to get a job.

Today, under the CCDBG, under the Child Care and Development Block Grant Program, there are 1.6 million eligible children. It is not just a safe environment for those children, because 70 percent of their parents are working--not just a safe environment,

it is early childhood education. These children who are in childcare will do better later in life. There have been many studies that verify this.

This is a win-win situation, providing a safe environment for children so their parents can work and educational opportunity for the children at the same time. It pays off big-time for the workforce. A TANF study showed that parents who had their children in childcare for 2 years or more were more likely to remain in the employment field. So it provides stable employment, help for the child, and a win-win situation.

The eligibility for the program is it cannot exceed 85 percent of the State median income, to give you an idea of the type of people we are talking about who benefit from this program.

In Maryland, for a family of two the maximum income is $24,000 and for a family of four the maximum income is $35,000. In my State, Maryland, the average cost for childcare for an infant is about $12,000 a year. For a child over 4 years of age, it is about $9,000 a year.

We heard about the income levels and how a family is eligible for this program. It is clear that low-wage families cannot afford childcare on their own. We need to help, and that is what this program does, so that they can move up the economic ladder and not be a burden on the cash-assistance program.

Today, as we did prior to 1996, we have combined discretionary and mandatory programs for our childcare. Today discretionary spending is at $2.36 billion and $2.9 billion in mandatory spending.

The legislation before us also makes improvements, as it should. It allows the States to develop 13 specific health and safety standards, such as first aid and CPR, and SIDS, sudden infant death syndrome. It is keeping our children safer in childcare by having safety standards that are developed. It requires the States to do inspections of childcare centers, comprehensive background checks for those who are involved in childcare, online information, more transparency in the program, and additional State flexibility on how they can set priorities within the childcare program. That is exactly what federalism should be.

The Federal Government establishes a broad policy that we want to see families self-sufficient, we want to make sure there is a safe environment for children, and we want to make sure we do this in a way that is consistent with our national priorities. We also need to give flexibility to the State and local governments to be able to set their priorities to meet the needs of their citizens, and that is what this bill does.

I will take a moment now to give real-life examples of how this program is critically important to our community. A great example is the Judy Centers of Maryland. We have 25 Judy Centers in Maryland. They are named after Congressman Steny Hoyer's wife Judy, who died of cancer in 1997. Judy was a longtime advocate for quality early childhood education and comprehensive family support services. I knew Judy very well, and she was an incredibly dedicated leader and advocate for our children.

I have a couple of specific examples from the Judy Center as to how the Child Care and Development Block Grant Program is critically important to their existence. According to the testimony given before a committee, Judy Center employees discovered a dad who lost his job and a mom who only worked part time. They could not make ends meet or look for jobs or go on interviews because they had no childcare for their 2- and 3-year-old children. The Judy Center enrolled them in KinderCare, a childcare partner, and provided tuition assistance.

Since they lost their health insurance when their dad became unemployed, they were given an application for the Maryland CHIP program, the health insurance program. The 3-year-old had a behavioral issue and was referred to the Judy Center behavioral specialist, who worked with her extensively. She also received tutoring services.

Dad is now employed full time. Thanks to safe childcare, dad is now employed full time. After much encouragement, mom enrolled in adult education classes and received her GED. She has also completed a medical assistance program and is now enrolled in the College of Southern Maryland to pursue an associates degree. The children are now in elementary school and are doing well in school.

I could give many more examples like this family. I could talk about many other success stories that would not have been possible without the Child Care and Development Block Grant Program, and that is why it is critically important that we reauthorize the program.

I see my colleague from Maryland is on the Senate floor. I congratulate her for her leadership in getting this bill to the floor-- not just getting this bill to the floor, which is important, but doing it in a way that we can get it passed in the Senate and accomplish our objectives so we can get women into the workforce and have early childhood education to help children succeed in life. We can help American families and strengthen America.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

I yield the floor.

First let me thank Senator Durbin for his commitment on this issue. We know education is a great equalizer in America. We know there are major concerns on access to higher education because of costs, and that we have to do a better job to make college education affordable. We also have to have accountability in higher education, to make sure those institutions are providing quality products to their students and are doing it in a cost-effective way, particularly when taxpayers are providing a lot of the aid.

I would be glad to.

I am glad I yielded to my colleague. We are very proud of the University of Maryland and the programs for the Department of Defense. We believe it is a cost-effective way and a quality education, exactly what the Senator from Illinois is talking about; and that is we have to get value for our dollars and we have to get accountability. I appreciate the Senator bringing that to our attention.

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

Mr. President, shortly we will be voting on some nominees, and I want to thank all the nominees and their families for their willingness to serve the public. This is a real sacrifice. People are giving up other opportunities in order to serve their country. It is not just the individual who accepts these positions of public service, it is a family matter, and so I applaud them all for their service to our country.

I would like to speak in particular about the last vote we will have in this series, and that is the confirmation of Sarah Bloom Raskin as Deputy Secretary of the Treasury. Sarah is a person who has given much to public service throughout her career. I know her personally. She is a Marylander, and we are very proud of the fact she is a Marylander.

If Sarah is confirmed, she will be the highest ranking woman in the history of the Treasury, and I am very proud of that accomplishment. She has been very active in Maryland and at the national level. For the past several years Sarah has served on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. Her deep financial and regulatory knowledge and sound judgment made her an essential asset during her tenure there. As the Presiding Officer knows, this has been a very turbulent time in regard to the economy of our Nation, and during this great economic unease her dedication to strong consumer protections has been especially valuable.

Even before joining the Board of Governors, Sarah was no stranger to successfully navigating choppy economic waters. In 2007 she was appointed Commissioner of Financial Regulation for the State of Maryland, so I have had the chance to observe her and her dedication and her effectiveness at the State level and also at the national level.

At the State level she has significantly improved consumer protections and supported banks through the many challenges of the financial crisis. That is where I got to see her work firsthand and her thoughtfulness and how dedicated she was, and her ability to bring people of different persuasions together, different stakeholders in our financial community, and to chart a course where we could have a positive result not only for the financial institutions but for consumers and for our economy.

Sarah is also part of a family of government service. Her husband Jamie is a member of the Maryland State Senate and has an excellent record of public service in his own right. So this is a family that has given much to public service. We need people in the administration like Sarah Bloom Raskin. Her background, her education, and her job training all serve to make her particularly well suited to be the deputy secretary.

I, for one, am thankful to Sarah and her family that she is willing to serve in an extremely challenging position. This is not going to be an easy position, obviously, as Deputy Secretary of the Treasury. It gives me great confidence to know Sarah will be handling the many responsibilities demanded of the deputy secretary, and it gives me great pride that a fellow Marylander may continue to be among the financial leaders who guide our economy toward our future growth and stability.

I urge my colleagues to support her confirmation. We are indeed fortunate to have a person of her skills willing to serve as Deputy Secretary of the Treasury.

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

Mr. President, I would like to express my strong support for S. Res. 365, a resolution I cosponsored deploring the violent repression of peaceful demonstrators in Venezuela, calling for full accountability for human rights violations taking place in Venezuela, and supporting the right of the Venezuelan people to the free and peaceful exercise of representative democracy.

Since February 4, 2014, the Venezuelan people have taken to the streets on a daily basis to express frustration with the country's high inflation, corruption, food shortages, lack of press freedoms, lack of due process, violent crime, and other grievances. Addressing these legitimate concerns is a basic function of a democratic government. Instead, we have seen a crackdown on protests through unlawful use of force, a stifling of the media, and the detention of opposition leaders. Over 22 people have been killed, hundreds injured, and over 1,000 people arrested during these protests.

The Venezuelan Government is an elected government and, as such, it should act like a democratic government by immediately addressing the core concerns of its people through meaningful dialogue, halting the use of force, and providing a safe space for the Venezuelan people to express their views peacefully. Without a genuine, transparent conversation to address the central concerns raised by the protestors, Venezuela faces a bleak future.

Contrary to comments by the Venezuelan Government, this crisis is not about the United States; it is about the Venezuelan people. But the crisis does have implications for peace and security in the hemisphere and the broader international community. The United States always has stood and always will stand for basic freedoms, including freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of the press. We will not back down on protecting and promoting these universal values, nor should the international community. It is incumbent upon neighboring countries and regional organizations to be vocal during this critical point, to take a stand for universal human rights, and to expect the highest level of respect for representative democracy from its hemispheric neighbor.

Today, we see tension and unrest around the world. Each situation is unique; however, the desire for fundamental human rights is universally recognized. I call on my colleagues and nations around the world to stand up for these basic freedoms and support a path toward a stable, peaceful, and prosperous Venezuela.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, I have taken to the floor many times to talk about the Chesapeake Bay--the largest estuary in the Northern Hemisphere, and declared a national treasure by not only President Obama but by several U.S. Presidents.

For the 17 million people who live in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, it is part of their life. From the residents of Smith Island, which is the last inhabitable island in the Maryland part of the Chesapeake Bay, to those who enjoy fishing for rockfish in the bay, to its oysters, its crabs, the over 11,000 miles of shoreline created by the Chesapeake Bay, the 150 major rivers that feed into the Chesapeake Bay, and the $1 trillion to the economy, the Chesapeake Bay is truly part of the life of those of us who are privileged to live in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.

I have spoken about this bay many times because it is being threatened. Over 30 years ago, Maryland, Virginia, and Delaware, along with the EPA and other partners, entered into a Chesapeake Bay agreement.

This has grown to six States, including the Presiding Officer's State of West Virginia, and other governmental entities in the private sector. The Chesapeake Bay agreement has been revisited over time, and the most recent effort to update this agreement was the draft submitted by the Obama administration on January 29 of this year. This draft agreement is what I wish to speak about with my colleagues.

The development of sound policies to restore the Chesapeake Bay has been a top priority of mine over the course of my career in Congress. I have been fortunate to have great partners in Congress representing the Bay States. Together we have worked to develop effective conservation and ecosystem restoration programs in the farm bill, the Water Resources Development Act, the Clean Water Act, and elsewhere in law supporting a variety of conservation and ecosystem approaches across different sectors.

The Army Corps, USDA, and EPA are not the only Federal agencies doing important Chesapeake Bay work. NOAA, USGS, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Park Service are also important Federal partners in the broader effort to restore the Bay.

President Obama's May 2009 Chesapeake Bay Executive order recognized both the national interest in restoring the Chesapeake Bay and improving Federal coordination of restoration efforts because of a wide-ranging involvement of different departments and agencies of the Federal Government. The coordination of seven jurisdictions, hundreds of local communities, seven cabinet-level Federal departments, and stakeholders of all stripes have necessitated the development of the Chesapeake Bay agreement to affirm the conservation goals of everyone involved in this effort.

I wish to stress the importance of broad involvement of all stakeholders in the effort to restore the Chesapeake Bay. The populations living and working in the bay watershed must realize we are all in this together. The major stakeholders in regard to our conservation action include farmers. Farming is not only a way of life in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, it is a desirable activity within the Chesapeake Bay watershed for the future of the Chesapeake Bay. But there are certain challenges as a result of farming as it relates to nitrogen in the bay and in the sediments.

Developers. We are proud of the fact people want to live in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. We have seen a major increase in population. But with that comes the challenge of storm runoff, and we have to do a better job of preventing storm runoff dumping pollution into the bay, and the municipalities which are responsible for the growth of populations have to deal with how they treat wastewater, and the wastewater treatment plants need to be updated so we can have the maximum results in removing the pollution which otherwise would end up threatening the future of the bay.

The Chesapeake Bay agreement outlines a fairly comprehensive approach to continuing efforts to restore the bay which is dependent upon all stakeholders doing their part. The draft agreement is a good outline, but there is room for improvement in the draft agreement as well. I hope that while the agreement is in this period of public comment, the final will be approved.

The Chesapeake Bay program partnership was formed in 1983, when the Governors of Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, the Mayor of the District of Columbia, the chair of the Chesapeake Bay Commission, and the EPA signed the first Chesapeake Bay agreement. For more than 30 years these entities have remained committed to the goal of restoring the Chesapeake Bay. As the science has determined and the interest in Bay stewardship has broadened, this partnership has since expanded to become a basin-wide effort where all six States of the basin are now party to the agreement.

Working together to achieve the various goals of the agreement is what will help ensure the Chesapeake Bay we will leave for our children is healthier tomorrow than it is today. The agreement does acknowledge the partnership cannot address every goal in the agreement instantaneously. Certainly some goals may take longer to realize than others, but all the goals are achievable, and some I think should be even more ambitious. They are based upon best science. We think science needs to judge what we can do as far as cleaning up the Chesapeake Bay.

The agreement wisely suggests action be taken in a strategic and cost-effective manner. We want to make sure this is doable. We understand the burdens which can be caused. We want to make sure this is layered in a way which achieves best science results but does it in the most cost-effective manner.

Of the principles laid out in the agreement, I wish to acknowledge the partnership's commitment to transparency and consensus building. We want all stakeholders involved in the process, and we want local involvement. We think local governments know how we can best achieve our results. The goals of the agreement deal with very sensitive issues such as natural land preservation, nutrient pollution reduction, and others.

The process must be fair and open. The strategic development process and achieving the agreement's conservation goals must be devised in an all-inclusive manner which is open to the public so that all are included in the process.

There is a great deal of skepticism in certain communities about the government's role and its actions to protect and restore the bay. I have heard that skepticism from certain constituencies. I have learned that having an open dialog with stakeholders, carefully explaining intentions, listening to concerns, and answering questions goes a long way toward building consensus and acceptance.

The agreement acknowledges the role the bay TMDL plays in achieving the water quality goals of the bay. A majority of the waters of the Chesapeake Bay are within the boundaries of the State of Maryland. Thousands of Maryland watermen make their living on the bay. The property value and tourism draw of communities up and down the Eastern and Western Shores of Maryland, not to mention the Marylanders who swim and fish in the bay, all depend upon a healthy bay.

But there is no degree of action Maryland can take on its own, no matter how drastic, which will improve the bay quality--not without the other five States and the District of Columbia in the watershed doing their part as well. The TMDL assures that all Bay States are coordinated in their efforts to improve bay water quality. The agreement acknowledges the importance of the TMDL.

The TMDL gives us a level playing field so we can make sure all stakeholders in all geographical areas are treated fairly in achieving the goals of reducing pollution in the bay. I support the fisheries goal of the agreement. Restoring the iconic Maryland blue crab in the bay is important for so many reasons. The agreement sets the goal of maintaining a population of 215 female adult crabs through 2025. Blue crabs are a vital part of the food chain throughout the bay's ecosystem and

they are at the heart of the Mid-Atlantic's multibillion dollar seafood industry.

Restoration of native oyster habitat and replenishing the bay's oyster population is critical from both an economic and water quality standpoint. The agreement sets the goals of restoring native oyster habitat and populations to the ten tributaries of the bay by 2025.

As I am sure the Presiding Officer is aware, our oyster population is a fraction of historic levels. The oyster is not only an important cash crop in the bay; it also acts as a filter to the pollution in the bay, restoring bay water quality. Bay oysters are another important seafood commodity for watermen making their living on the bay. Oysters are also important to improving water quality. Oysters are bivalve mollusks which play an important role in reducing nitrogen pollution in the bay.

Oyster populations had been in sharp decline due to the destruction of oyster beds along the seafloor of the bay. Habitat restoration efforts led by the Army Corps, the growth of oyster farming operations, and Virginia and Maryland's efforts are helping oysters rebound across the bay, which is good for the economy and water quality of the bay.

The agreement's wildlife habitat and wetlands restoration goals are, in my opinion, too low. I would encourage the partnership to consider setting more ambitious goals. Wetland restoration is critical to flood protection and water quality improvement as well as providing important duck habitat and fish spawning habitat.

Reauthorizing the North American Wetland Conservation Act, which I am a cosponsor of and was happy to see the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee recently report with unanimous support, will provide additional financial and technical assistance to help achieve improved wetlands conservation in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.

Programs such as the North American Wetland Conservation Act, the Corps' Chesapeake Bay Ecosystem Restoration Program, and the farm bill's Regional Conservation Partnership Program, along with numerous State efforts to restore wetlands and habitats across the six-State region, are why I believe the agreement can do better.

I also believe the agreement's goals to improve fish passage along the bay's rivers and tributaries could be more ambitious. The agreement aims to open an additional 1,000 stream miles to fish passage. The revisions to the Continuing Authorities Program in WRDA will help fund critical dam removal projects around the watershed which will improve fish passage. If the decisions to remove dams and other barriers to fish passage are strategically made, this goal could be far exceeded, which is why I think the goal should be revised and be based upon the execution of strategic fish passage projects. This would include improving eel passage on the Conowingo Dam. I am pleased to know that the dam's operators are aware of and interested in helping us devise practical solutions.

With respect to the agreement's goals on forest buffer and tree canopy, I believe there is room for improvement in the goals the draft agreement sets. The agreement sets the goal of restoring 900 miles of riparian forest per year and expands the urban tree canopy by 2,400 acres by 2025. This seems to be low given the opportunity which exists to grow more trees in urban areas because of how desirable trees are to improving the quality of life and character of urban communities and importance of trees to reducing storm water runoff in urban areas.

The agreement sets the goal of protecting an additional 2 million acres of land throughout the watershed. This is critically important to stem poor land-use planning and sprawl while also establishing lands which serve as critical water quality improvement mechanisms.

One omission from this land conservation goal I think is important is to ensure public access to lands conserved by the State, local, and Federal Government. Public-preserved for the purpose of protecting habitat and improving the ecosystem within the watershed is important, but so is providing outdoor recreational access to the public. After all, ensuring public access to conservation lands and encouraging people to experience these lands is critical to building the public's understanding of the environment and developing an appreciation for all conservation efforts happening around the watershed.

In Maryland, my colleague in the House, Congressman Sarbanes, has been very instrumental in the leadership of No Child Left Inside. By this we mean the education of our children including getting outdoors to understand the importance of the Chesapeake Bay and understanding what they can do to help the bay. Access to these restoration projects--by the public, by our students, by all--helps build the support base we need to get these programs moving forward and also understanding what we do here in the watershed and the importance it has on the future of the Chesapeake Bay.

Lastly, I wish to speak about a couple issues the agreement does not address. Reducing the presence or improving the secure storage of toxic chemicals in use around the watershed is a growing problem. As the Presiding Officer knows, while the recent chemical spill in West Virginia was not in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, the incident does highlight the risk facilities such as the one which failed in Charleston pose to our great water bodies. In the Chesapeake Bay watershed there are dozens of chemical storage facilities and industrial activities which use toxic chemicals on a regular basis. Improving the security and reducing the contamination risks from these facilities should be a part of the Chesapeake Bay agreement.

The agreement also makes no mention of the single greatest threat to the bay and the world over. Adapting to the effects of climate change should also be part of the bay restoration plan. I talked about this earlier today, as many of the Senators who came to the floor to talk about climate change: Rising sea levels pose threats to the hundreds of Chesapeake Bay communities and millions of people who live in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.

Aquatic acidification poses a long-term threat to all aquatic species, including blue crabs, oysters, rockfish, sturgeon, menhaden, and other hallmark species of the bay. If the fish and shellfish go, so does a way of life for many thousands of families around the bay.

Let's deal with these problems. We have a chance in the Chesapeake Bay agreement to be more ambitious in dealing with acidification in our ocean and in the bay. And we must adapt our water infrastructure to handle the effects of more intense weather events in the bay region to reduce the water quality impacts of these events and to protect individuals' property.

The agreement is an important step toward the restoration of the Chesapeake Bay. Billions have been spent and progress has been made. And I wish to stress that we have made progress. We have done a lot of good things in the Chesapeake Bay. But our resources are large and fragile and face unprecedented pressure, and it is going to continue to take increased resources to restore and protect for future generations. So the good news is we have made progress.

We can do much more. We can preserve the iconic Chesapeake Bay for future generations, so people, our children and grandchildren, can enjoy the fishing, crabbing, swimming, and the sheer beauty of the Chesapeake Bay, and can benefit from its economic importance to our region. We can do this for future generations.

Let's be more ambitious in the Chesapeake Bay agreement. Let's work together, use best science, and be practical. But let's be on a constant path of improving the Chesapeake Bay.

Mr. President, I would suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, as a member of the Climate Action Task Force, I couldn't be more proud of my colleagues on the floor tonight. I thank Senator Boxer, Senator Schatz, and Senator Whitehouse for organizing this evening.

The information we want to present is clear. The facts are clear. Science indicates what we do here on Earth is affecting the livability of our planet, and we can do something about it. This is an urgent issue, from climate refugees around the world, the visible signs we see in China, to each of our individual States.

I am honored to represent the people of Maryland, where 70 percent of citizens live in coastal zones. The Chesapeake Bay is iconic to the survival of Maryland as we know it today and yet it is at risk.

But here is the good news: We can do something about it. We can reduce our carbon footprint. We can reduce our carbon pollution, and in doing so we not only help our environment, we also help our economy and job growth, help make America more energy secure, which helps our national security. So let's take the reasonable steps necessary to help our future generations, help our economy, and help our environment.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, first, I wish to compliment and thank Senator Warren for her comments. Senator Warren has brought up a lot of issues that I can relate to because our States share the Atlantic Ocean. We talk about climate refugees around the world, and we are starting to see those in our own States. As sea levels are rising, we see dead zones in the oceans and in our bays. We need to take action in order to protect our people.

In my State of Maryland, you can see firsthand the effects of the rising sea-level. One example is Smith Island. Smith Island is a habitable island in the Chesapeake Bay that is home to many of our watermen who have been practicing their professions for many years. They are at risk.

You need a boat to get from one of the towns to the other. Smith Island only has a couple of hundred remaining residents, but they are losing their land daily as they fight to counter the rising sea level change--I think that is a very visible sign of what we are up against-- and the urgency of dealing with climate change.

I am so proud to be identified with the Climate Action Task force. Many of the leaders have been mentioned, and I thank Senator Schatz and Senator Whitehouse for organizing this opportunity for us to put a spotlight on climate change and the need for urgent action. I thank Senator Boxer, the chair of the Environment and Public Works Committee, for her extraordinary leadership.

Throughout last night and into this morning, we have highlighted the science, which is indisputable, as to the fact that over millions of years we have seen catastrophic changes on our own planet. Because of our activities and what we are doing on Earth, within a very short period of time--just hundreds of years, and less than that now--we are causing a catastrophic impact on our climate. It is urgent. We have seen firsthand the impacts of climate change.

I was in Beijing, China, last year. I was there 3 days. There wasn't a cloud in the sky, but I never saw the Sun because of the pollution that was in the air--their carbon emissions. We have seen the costs of climate change in lives and in dollars we spend to try to adapt to the new realities of extreme weather conditions.

I will use the few moments I have to talk about the issues that are closer to home in my own State of Maryland. Seventy percent of Maryland's population lives in coastal zones. It is now predicted by the Maryland Climate Change Commission that we will see a 1.4-foot increase in the sea level by 2050 and 3.7 feet by the end of this century. That is going to have a dramatic impact on many Marylanders who live in the coastal area.

I can give another example. Ocean City, MD, is a popular place for Marylanders and people from outside our State to enjoy the beautiful beaches. I must say that I am very proud that this Congress has appropriated millions of dollars for beach renourishment. Those dollars have returned multiple times because they prevent the full force of these nor'easter storms that are more frequent and more severe in Maryland and along the Maryland coast. There is a limit as to what we can do if we don't take action to deal with the sources of climate change. We want to protect our property owners, and the best way to protect our property owners is to do something about the causes of climate change.

We saw the impact of Sandy along the east coast of the United States. I know that the most severe impact was in New Jersey and New York, but in Maryland we saw in Crisfield, MD, the full effect of Sandy. The people there know they are at risk because of the severe storms that are becoming more frequent and more severe.

The Chesapeake Bay itself is at risk. I have talked on the floor many times about the importance of the Chesapeake Bay, and how it is a national treasure. It is important just by the fact that it is the largest estuary in our hemisphere. It is important because of its coastline and its impact. It is also important because of its impact on our economy. The blue crabs and oysters are critically important to Maryland. Yet they are at risk.

The blue crab is a little complicated, but we know one of the factors that is affecting the blue crabs is the ability of juvenile crabs to be able to survive in seagrasses. Yet the seagrass population is declining because of temperature rise in the Chesapeake Bay. That is just one example of the challenges we have because of climate change. It is affecting the economy of my State, and it is affecting the economy of our country.

The Port of Baltimore is the largest single economic factor creating jobs in our community, and the Port of Baltimore depends upon a stable coastal climate.

The tourism industry is directly affected by climate change. People love to come to our State to hunt and fish. One of the most valuable assets we have along the bay is the Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge.

The Presiding Officer has heard me talk about that frequently in the Environment and Public Works Committee. The bald eagles have returned to Blackwater. It is an incredible sight. People go there just to see the beauty of nature and to visit our wildlife and our waterfowl.

Blackwater is at risk. It is important for tourism, and it is important for our environment. It is also the land in which Harriet Tubman conducted the underground railroad, so it has a lot of significance. Yet, between 1938 and 2006, we lost 5,000 acres of marshland to open water, and that is accelerating. It is not slowing down. If we don't reverse the impacts of climate change, we are going to see a more dramatic impact on those types of treasures in Maryland and nationally.

I will also mention the fact that, of course, this is a Federal legislature, and we should be concerned about the Federal facilities as well. In Maryland we have Pax River, which does incredibly important work for our Navy so they can do their research and flight testing on the coast of our State, and that is at risk by the rising sea-level.

I serve on the Board of Visitors at the Naval Academy, and I can tell you I have visited the Naval Academy when it has been flooded because of storms. It is a little below sea level at some of its locations. The rising sea level jeopardizes that iconic institution that is so important to our national defense.

The Aberdeen Proving Grounds is also located on our coast and does critical work in national security. All of these facilities are being jeopardized because of the climate change that is occurring in our community.

I will talk a little bit about some good news. We can reverse what has happened. We can slow down the effects. We can change the course that we are on. We have already done a significant amount. I congratulate President Obama and his policies because he has taken on the major areas that deal with climate change.

The United States has to lead internationally, but it starts with action right here in the United States. We have to lead by example. Other countries are far ahead of us. We have to join with other countries to produce a strategy that works because our environment does not end at our borders. We have to work internationally, but first we have to work at home.

What has President Obama done? He has taken on the transportation sector, which is one of the greatest uses of carbon fuels, with our CAFE standards--our efficiency of our automobiles. We now have standards that would lead to having an automobile get 54\1/2\ miles per gallon by 2025. That is ambitious. They said we couldn't do it before, but we did it. We met those standards, and we will meet these standards. We will significantly reduce the amount of fuels that we need to fuel our transportation in this country.

We are investing in transit facilities, and that reduces our carbon footprint. High-speed rail reduces our carbon footprint. We are committed to those types of solutions that are common sense to help our environment.

The Obama administration is moving ahead on the regulation of carbon pollution under the Clean Air Act. They

recognize that the energy sector can help reduce our carbon footprint substantially.

Senator Warren was absolutely correct when she said that we don't have a level playing field today. We subsidize the fossil fuels, but we don't with the renewable fuels. We can expand our renewable energy sources.

Quite frankly, we are showing innovation among all of our stakeholders. Buildings use a lot of energy and generate a lot of carbon. The Federal Government is leading in the LEED certification, as is the private sector, in doing things that are much more energy efficient in the building sector.

Therefore, we have seen progress in transportation and buildings and the generation of electricity. We have been reducing our carbon footprint, which will help the people on Smith Island by reducing the sea level changes.

The Presiding Officer and I saw firsthand the impact of the glacier melts when we were in Greenland. I thank Senator Boxer for arranging that opportunity. We saw very visually the glacier melts and how much has occurred in a very short period of time. We can reverse that by showing leadership in transportation and the way we use our buildings and the way we generate electricity. We can work together with the international community.

The good news is that the solutions for dealing with climate change will help our national security by consuming less fossil fuels. We want to get to zero as far as our need for imported energy in this country.

We can get that. We now know the threats that are made from Russia to Ukraine to the Middle East. We can eliminate that threat to our national security. We can create more jobs. Green energy will give us more jobs in the fossil fuel industry. We need good-paying jobs. We can leave our children and grandchildren a cleaner planet and a better future. That is what is at stake. That is why we have taken this time. I am proud to be identified with so many who have spoken on this issue.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, Russia's invasion of Ukraine is one of the most serious breaches of the OSCE principles since the signing of the 1975 Helsinki Final Act. These principles are at the foundation of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Russia, as a participating state, agreed to hold these principles, including territorial integrity of states, inviolability of frontiers, refraining from the threat of use of force, peaceful settlements of disputes, and others.

With this invasion, which is based, as Secretary Kerry has stated, on a completely trumped-up set of pretexts, Russia has shown its utter contempt for these core principles, indeed, for the entire OSCE process--not only the OSCE but the 1994 Budapest Memorandum signed by the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia, and Ukraine that provides security assurances for Ukraine, the 1997 Ukraine-Russia bilateral treaty, and the U.N. charter, and other international agreements. Russia's military invasion of Ukraine is also a gross violation of the Vienna Document's confidence and security building mechanisms which govern military relations and arms control.

So let's examine Vladimir Putin's justification for this unprovoked invasion. He claims there is a need to protect Russian interests and the rights of Russian-speaking minorities. They characterize it as a human rights protection mission that it clearly is not. Russian officials fail to show any real evidence that the rights of ethnic Russians in Crimea--where they actually constitute a majority and have the most clout politically--and Ukraine at large have been violated. In fact, there is overwhelming evidence that the protests in some Ukrainian cities is being stoked by the Russians.

Putin and other Russian officials make all sorts of unfounded accusations, including that masked militia are roaming the streets of Kiev, although the Ukrainian capital and most

of Ukraine has been calm for the last few weeks. Mr. Putin claims there is a ``rampage of reactionary forces, nationalist and anti-Semitic forces going on in certain parts of Ukraine.'' Yet Kiev's chief rabbi and a vice president of the World Jewish Congress on Monday accused Russia of staging anti-Semitic provocations in Crimea.

Mr. Putin accuses Ukraine's new legitimate transition government--not yet 2 weeks old--of threatening ethnic Russians. Yet there is a myriad of credible reports to the contrary. Indeed, although there has been unrest in some cities, there has been no serious movement in the mostly Russian-speaking eastern and southern regions to join with Russia.

The clear majority of Ukrainians wants to see their country remain unified and do not welcome Russian intervention. All Ukrainian religious groups have come out against the Russian intervention and stand in support of Ukraine's territorial integrity and inviolability of its borders, as have minority groups such as the Crimean Tatars and the Roma.

I submit that the real threat posed by the new government is that it wants to assertively move Ukraine in the direction of political and economic reforms and in the direction of democracy, respect for how human rights, the rule of law--away from the unbridled corruption of the previous regime and the kind of autocratic rule found in today's Russia.

As for protecting Russian interests in Crimea, the Russians have not produced one iota of evidence that the Russian Black Sea Fleet, based in the Crimean city of Sevastopol, is under any kind of threat. Indeed, when the Ukrainians reached out to the Russians to try to engage them peacefully, they have been rebuffed.

Russian authorities need to send their troops back to the barracks and instead engage through diplomacy, not the threat or use of force. The Russian actions pose a threat beyond Ukraine and threaten to destabilize neighboring states.

I pointed out at a hearing we had this week in the subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and in a hearing of the Helsinki Commission, that if Russia can use force to try to change territories, what message does that send to the South China Sea, what message does that send to the Western Balkans?

Just as Poland has already invoked article 4 NATO consultations, the Baltic States and others in the region are wary of Russian goals.

As chairman of the Helsinki Commission and a former vice president of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, I am encouraged to see active and wide-ranging engagement of the OSCE to deescalate tensions and to foster peace and security in Ukraine. The OSCE has the tools to address concerns with regard to security on the ground in Crimea, minority rights, and with regard to preparations for this democratic transition to lead to free and fair elections.

In response to a request by the Ukrainian Government, 18 OSCE participating states, including the United States, are sending 35 unarmed military personnel to Ukraine. This is taking place under the Vienna Document, which allows for voluntary hosting of visits to dispel concerns about unusual military activities.

Various OSCE institutions are activating, at the request of the Ukrainian Government, including the OSCE's human rights office, known as the ODIHR, to provide human rights monitoring as well as election observation for the May 25 Presidential elections. The OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities, Representative on Freedom of the Media, and the head of the Strategic Police Matters Unit, among others, are all in Kiev this week conducting factfinding missions. A full- scale, long-term OSCE Monitoring Mission is being proposed, and this mission needs to go forward.

All of these OSCE efforts are aimed at deescalating tensions, fostering peace and stability, ensuring the observance of OSCE principles, including the human dimension, helping Ukraine in its transition, especially in the runup to the May elections.

These OSCE on-the-ground efforts are being thwarted by the Russian- controlled newly installed Crimean authorities. The OSCE Unusual Military Activities observers have been stopped from entering Crimea by unidentified men in military fatigues.

Also, the OSCE Media Freedom Representative and her staff were temporarily blocked from leaving a hotel in Crimea where she was meeting with journalists and civil society activists. The U.N. special envoy was accosted by unidentified gunmen after visiting a naval headquarters in the Sevastopol.

The blocking of international monitors--who were invited by the Ukrainian Government and who clearly are trying to seek peaceful resolutions to the conflict--is completely unacceptable and we should hold Russia responsible for their safety.

Russia is a member of the OSCE--one of the founding members--and they are openly violating the core principles of the Helsinki Final Act. Russia signed on to the institutions that are available under OSCE for this exact type of circumstance--to give independent observation as to what is happening on the ground. Sending this mission, at the request of the host country, into Crimea is exactly the commitments made to reduce tensions in OSCE states, and Russia is blocking the use of that mechanism.

The United States and the international community are deploying wide- ranging resources to contain and roll back Russia's aggression and to assist Ukraine's transition to a democratic, secure, and prosperous country. Both the Executive and the Congress are working around the clock on this. President Obama has taken concrete action and made concrete recommendations.

As the author of the Magnitsky Act, I welcome the White House sanctions announced today, including visa restrictions on officials and individuals threatening Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity and financial sanctions against those ``responsible for activities undermining democratic processes or institutions in Ukraine.''

It was just a little while ago that we passed the Magnitsky Act. We did that in response to gross human rights violations within Russia against an individual named Sergei Magnitsky. What we did is say that those who were responsible for these gross violations of internationally recognized rules should be held accountable, and if they are not held accountable, the least we can do in the United States is not give them safe haven in our country, not allow the corrupt dollars they have earned to be housed in America--no visas, no use of our banking system. The President is taking a similar action against those responsible for the invasion and military use against international rules in Ukraine.

These steps are in addition to many other actions, including the suspension of bilateral discussions with Russia on trade and investment, stopping United States-Russia military-to-military engagement, and suspending preparations for the June G8 summit in Sochi. Both Chambers are working expeditiously on legislation to help Ukraine in this delicate period of transition. We also need to work expeditiously with our European friends and allies, and I am encouraged by the news that the EU is preparing a $15 billion aid package.

Ukraine has exercised amazing restraint in not escalating the conflict, particularly in Crimea. I applaud their restraint and their action. The people of Ukraine have suffered an incredibly difficult history, and over the last century they have been subjected to two World Wars, 70 years of Soviet domination, including Stalin's genocidal famine. They certainly do not need another senseless war. Nothing justifies Russia's aggression--nothing. Our political and economic assistance at this time would be a testament to those who died at the Maidan just 2 weeks ago and a concrete manifestation that our words mean something and that we do indeed stand by the people of Ukraine as they make their historic choice for freedom, democracy, and a better life.

I yield the floor.