Floor Statements

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to continue to speak as in morning business.

Mr. President, I rise today with sadness in my heart to pay tribute to a very special individual, Gene M. Kirchner, a Baltimore County volunteer firefighter who died in the line of duty. Gene was just 25 and a volunteer firefighter for the Reisterstown Volunteer Fire Department. He rushed to the second floor of a house fire on April 24 in a vain attempt to save the resident. Gene was found unconscious and was rushed to Maryland's Shock Trauma Center, but succumbed to his injuries on May 2.

Gene joined the company's ranks when he was just 14 and served as a junior firefighter for 2 years before becoming a volunteer firefighter. He came from a family of firefighters. His twin brother Will is also a firefighter and so is his sister Shelly Brezicki. Craig Hewitt, assistant chief of the fire company, said that Gene ``was selfless, well-liked, funny; got along with everybody. He liked helping people.''

Gene was laid to rest this past Sunday and the entire Baltimore community is mourning the death of this kind, gentle young man who laid down his life in an attempt to save another's life. His brother and sister firefighters came from as far away as New York and North Carolina to pay special tribute to this young man who understood the risks he faced, but dedicated himself to helping ensure the safety of others. Gene was posthumously awarded the Fire Department's Medal of Honor because he embodied what we, as a Nation, come to look for in our first responders--courage, selflessness, and dedication to duty.

I know my U.S. Senate colleagues will want to join me in thanking Gene's family for giving our community such a special young man and in sending condolences to his family, friends, and fellow firefighters on the tragic loss of such a hero.

I thank Republic of Korea, ROK, President Park Geun-hye for her thought-provoking and heartfelt address on May 8 to a joint meeting of Congress. President Park is a testament to her nation's resilience. Like her country, she has courageously weathered difficulties and emerged as a strong leader on the global stage--her nation's first woman President.

Her momentous visit to the United States came at an opportune time to underscore the solidarity and cooperation between our two countries. Our deep ties with the Korean people stretch back to Korea's Chosun Dynasty, when we established diplomatic relations in 1882. One hundred and thirty-one years later, we are expanding our relationship in new ways.

This year we celebrate 60 years of the U.S.-ROK alliance, established in 1953 by our Mutual Defense Treaty. In Korean culture, which greatly respects its elders, the 60th birthday of a person's life, called a ``hwan-gap,'' holds great significance. It acknowledges the wisdom and maturity that a person attains by the peak of a productive life.

And so, too, has the U.S.-Korea relationship proven fruitful and productive. Our relationship is more than a military alliance; it is a comprehensive partnership. Our people-to-people ties are strong; per capita, South Korea sends more students to the United States to study than any other industrialized country. We cooperate on counterterrorism efforts and on development assistance. One year ago, we demonstrated our commitment to strengthen our economies with the signing of our free trade agreement.

South Koreans have created an economic ``Miracle on the Han River'' out of a country once leveled by war. The country has risen from being an aid recipient to becoming a world economic power, which now lends a hand to help other nations flourish.

The Republic of Korea had a GDP per capita of $79 in 1960; today its GDP per capita is over $30,000. It is one of the fastest growing developed countries in the world. And we are proud to have played a role in helping our friend climb from poverty to prosperity, in contrast to its northern neighbor, whose people continue to suffer greatly from poverty.

So there is much to celebrate during this 60th year of our alliance. And President Park has attested to the strength of the enduring global alliance between the Republic of Korea and the United States. This is an historic anniversary, not only of our friendship, but of the end of the Korean war.

Since the end of the war, the Republic of Korea has practiced restraint and mature diplomacy in the face of tremendous threats, continued bellicose rhetoric, and provocative actions from North Korea. This is in no small part due to the strength of the U.S.-ROK alliance and our close cooperation.

As President Park has demonstrated in her determined but flexible approach, we need to preserve stability on the Korean peninsula and in the region by acting decisively together to address both North Korea's provocations and the dire humanitarian situation there.

North Korea continues to threaten U.S. interests and the security of our friends and allies. As chairman of the Foreign Relations Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs, I have been closely watching the alarming developments following North Korea's February 12 nuclear test, including its declaration that it nullified the 1953 armistice, and its decision to shut down the Kaesong industrial complex, and its repeated threats to strike the United States and our allies. And I am deeply concerned about American citizen Kenneth Bae, who last week was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor in a North Korea gulag for ``hostile acts'' against the country and Kim Jong-Un's regime.

We must do more to reach an international solution on bringing North Korea back into the denuclearization process. It is essential to ensure the continued safety of Americans and our allies in the Asia-Pacific region and to prevent a nuclear arms race in the strategically critical Korean peninsula.

And we must not forget the humanitarian crisis that is besieging the North Korean people, as they are often imprisoned, starved, and deprived of civil liberties and freedoms at the hands of a ruthless authoritarian state.

So what more can we do? This March, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing on North Korea which underscored the importance of working with the United Nations Security Council to strengthen sanctions on North Korea. The United States has intensified coordination on addressing the North Korean threat with Japan and developed a new counter-provocation plan with the Republic of Korea. In April, I chaired a Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs hearing during which we discussed ways to work with China to help change North Korea's dangerous path.

I was pleased to see Secretary Kerry, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Dempsey, and Deputy Secretary Burns travel to China to seek China's help to rein in North Korea. And I welcomed the recent visit of the Chinese chairman of the six-party talks, Wu Dawei, to Washington.

It was encouraging to see China strongly support UN Security Council Resolution 2094. This resolution imposes tough new financial sanctions which will block North Korea from

moving money to pay for its nuclear and ballistic missile programs and makes arms smuggling and proliferation more difficult. The sanctions will only be successful if all countries rigorously implement and enforce them.

The international community, including the U.S., must sustain sanctions and continue systematic pressure. We hope that China will be sincere in implementing these sanctions and reduce its economic support of North Korea.

New sanctions alone, however, cannot halt the pattern of North Korean provocations and broken promises. The United States will not reward bad behavior. We must use all of the diplomatic, military, financial, and multilateral tools at our disposal in a newly coordinated effort to move beyond the current stalemate.

Along with Senators Menendez, Corker, and others, I have cosponsored the North Korea Nonproliferation and Accountability Act of 2013, which would direct the Department of State to undertake a comprehensive review of our North Korea policy to look for creative ways to re- engage. If North Korea shows a serious intent to denuclearize, halt its proliferation activities and improve human rights, we should be open to bilateral talks, as Secretary Kerry stated on his April trip to the region. We must continue to prepare for the worst while hoping for the best. We stand by Japan, South Korea, and other allies in providing extended nuclear deterrence under our ``nuclear umbrella.'' And the international community stands with us in condemning North Korean aggression and belligerent actions.

At the same time, we should separate humanitarian concerns from politics. New ROK President Park Geun-hye has launched a policy of de- linking humanitarian aid to North Korea from diplomatic developments. Previously, the U.S. has done the same, funding food aid to North Korea from 2008 to 2009. We should consider reinstating such food aid to North Korea based on demonstrated need and our ability to verify that the food will reach the intended recipients. Congress and the administration must track the delivery of aid to make sure it reaches the people who so desperately need it.

American development workers now provide humanitarian assistance in North Korea without U.S. Government assistance, giving North Koreans an opportunity to encounter the goodwill of the American people. In June 2012, a United Nations evaluation team confirmed that over 60 percent of the population continues to suffer from chronic food insecurity. Hungry people can focus only on survival and have no additional energy to direct toward bettering their lives or changing the environment or regime around them. So we must extend our hand to the North Korean people by supporting the NGO community's basic humanitarian efforts to provide lifesaving services such as supplemental school feeding, increased agricultural production, clean water, and medical assistance programs.

The humanitarian crisis is further compounded by gross human rights violations. People are trying to cross the border in search of food and then being imprisoned in forced labor camps when they are caught leaving the country. Reports indicate that approximately 138,000 people were being held in detention centers in 2011, where they are beaten, tortured, and starved. These human rights violations merit international condemnation and accountability. I urge UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Pillay and Special Rapporteur Darusman to establish a mechanism of inquiry through the UN Human Rights Council to document these egregious human rights violations expeditiously.

I have great concerns about North Korea's political trajectory, but I believe that a broader humanitarian engagement holds a long-term promise of enhancing regional peace and security. President Park Geun- hye has taken a similar approach. I applaud her tremendous courage and welcome her visit on this historic occasion.

Mr. President, May is Mental Health Awareness Month. The Mental Health America organization began this campaign in 1949 in an effort to raise awareness of mental health conditions and mental wellness. Even after more than 60 years, however, we are still fighting against the stigma of mental illness and for greater access to mental health services for all Americans.

I would like to call particular attention to mental health issues affecting our Active-Duty service men and women, our veterans, and the impact of these issues on thousands of military families.

The protracted military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq have made mental health disorders some of the ``signature'' wounds our military members experience upon returning from these conflicts. A comprehensive study by RAND found that approximately 18.5 percent of those returning from deployment reported symptoms consistent with a diagnosis of post- traumatic stress disorder, PTSD, or depression. And up to 30 percent of troops returning home from combat develop serious mental health problems within 3 to 4 months. Unfortunately, due to the stigma associated with seeking help and the fear of risking their careers, our service men and women often do not seek the care they desperately need and are entitled to receive.

In fact, according to a recent Department of Defense, DoD, report, mental health disorders are the leading cause of disability among U.S. military members. Recent studies illustrate that out of the 1.4 million Active-Duty servicemembers, mental health disorders are the leading cause of hospitalization among men and the second leading cause for women, only after pregnancy-related conditions.

The five most common mental disorders our military members face are post-traumatic stress disorder, PTSD, major depression, bipolar disorder, alcohol dependence, and substance dependence. These disorders are likely to be chronic in nature or long-lasting in duration.

Since mental health issues often aren't immediately addressed on Active Duty, we see even higher numbers of mental illness diagnoses among our veterans. According to the Department of Veteran Affairs, VA, the number of veterans receiving specialized mental health treatment from the VA has risen each year, from 927,052 in fiscal year 2006 to more than 1.3 million in fiscal year 2012.

One major reason for this increase is the VA's proactive screening of all veterans to identify those who may have symptoms of depression, PTSD, or problem use of alcohol or drugs. As we anticipate a growing number of incoming veterans with this need for care, increasing availability of qualified mental health professionals is absolutely imperative.

I commend VA Secretary Shinseki's recent decision to hire an additional 1,600 mental health staff at the VA. We know our veterans need these services and we must do everything we can to provide them with the care they need.

The invisible wounds of war are not new--they were called ``shell shock'' or ``combat fatigue'' after World War I and World War II, or ``post-Vietnam syndrome'' after Vietnam. But there are unique features stemming from our prolonged engagement in Iraq and Afghanistan.

First, our troops have experienced more frequent deployments of longer duration while having shorter ``dwell time,'' creating a more stressful environment.

Second, we have the highest rate of survivability in history for serious injuries such as amputations, severe burns, and spinal cord damage, leading to greater need for mental health care.

Third, the prevalence of traumatic brain injury, TBI, from improvised explosive devices, IEDs, and other blasts have increased the number of combat veterans with mild to severe diagnoses, which are linked to other psychological comorbidities.

It took the DoD and the VA too long, unfortunately, to realize that their medical care system must provide the same level of expertise, resources, and dedication to address the psychological wounds of war as they do for physical ones.

Although the DoD and the VA have made progress in the past 5 years, there is still a great gap between the mental health needs of our military members and their access to quality care.

This is an epidemic that needs to be resolved. Recent reports indicate that nearly 22 veterans commit suicide every day. In 2012, more than 349 Active-Duty service men and women across the four branches took their own lives. That is an average of 1 every 25 hours, the highest suicide rate ever in the DoD.

It is not just about resources. In fact, having an adequate number of mental health professionals is just one component of ensuring access to care.

Former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta testified in a hearing the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense held last year that he was unsatisfied with the Pentagon's current approach to combating military suicides and admitted that the DoD needs to review its procedures for handling mental health cases. Secretary Panetta said that there are still huge gaps in the way a mental health diagnosis is determined. Furthermore, Secretary Panetta acknowledged that the greatest obstacle to service men and women receiving necessary mental health treatment is the stigma that continues to be associated with seeking help for psychological injuries.

Throughout Maryland, I hear from service men and women who believe that seeking mental health services will hurt their military careers. We must overcome these real and perceived barriers to care by changing the policies that govern how we provide mental health care to our military members. Those who are hurting in silence will seek treatment only when they can truly speak freely and off the record. As more and more of these individuals go untreated, we will continue to see a rise in suicides and other tragic incidents among our military members and veterans.

Even as we wind down our combat operations in Afghanistan over the next year, I fear that we will continue to see an increasing number of our military members and veterans needing mental health care in the near future.

Yet the DoD now is facing looming furloughs and unnecessary funding cuts, which could force the DoD to lose many of the highly valued mental health and behavioral professionals who were hired to help treat soaring rates of PTSD. Recently, Dr. Jonathan Woodson, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, stated his concerns over the DoD's long-term capability to provide mental health care to the force, to counter the effects of PTSD. More than one-half of the mental health specialists serving the military are civilians, and they have options to seek employment elsewhere. I worry about sustaining this valuable workforce under constant threat from sequesters.

Mr. President, we need to ensure that we have the personnel, resources, and policies in place to guarantee access to quality mental health care for our men and women in uniform, our veterans, and their families. Active-Duty service men and women especially need access to such care without fear of being stigmatized of suffering career- damaging consequences. Providing such care isn't just a good idea to maintain the well-being and readiness of our troops; it is our solemn moral obligation to those who have sacrificed so much for our great Nation. It is important for us to remember that--especially during Mental Health Awareness Month and as we approach Memorial Day.

Mr. President, next week is American Craft Beer Week so I am pleased to rise today with my friend and colleague, the senior Senator from Maine, Senator Collins, to introduce the Small Brewer Reinvestment & Expanding Workforce Act of 2013, otherwise known as the Small BREW Act. Our esteemed former colleague, Senator Kerry, now Secretary of State, introduced this bill in the 112th Congress. I am honored to take up the mantel.

The Small BREW Act of 2013 would reduce the excise tax on America's craft brewers. Under current federal law, brewers producing fewer than 2 million barrels annually pay $7 per barrel on the first 60,000 barrels they brew, and $18 per barrel on every barrel thereafter, one

Mr. President, as we prepare to celebrate Mother's Day this Sunday, I am today introducing a joint resolution which would remove the deadline for the ratification by the States of the equal rights amendment, the ERA.

I thank my cosponsors. As of this morning my cosponsors included Senator Kirk, Senator Mikulski, Senator Murkowski, Senator Harkin, Senator Sanders, Senator Levin, Senator Menendez, Senator Stabenow, Senator Heinrich, Senator Boxer, Senator Gillibrand, Senator Durbin, Senator Lautenberg, Senator Murphy, Senator Baldwin, Senator Landrieu, Senator Brown, and Senator Begich.

When Congress passed the ERA in 1972, it provided that the measure had to be ratified by three-fourths of the States, or 38 States, within 7 years. This deadline was later extended to 10 years by a joint resolution enacted by Congress, but ultimately only 35 of the 38 States required ratified the ERA when the deadline expired in 1982. Congress has the authority to give the States another chance, and should do so. I want to point out to my colleagues that in 1992, the 27th Amendment to the Constitution prohibiting immediate Congressional pay raises was ratified after 203 years. So this additional delay is certainly in keeping with our prior precedent.

Article 5 of the Constitution contains no time limit for the ratification of constitutional changes, and the ERA time limit was contained in a joint resolution, not the actual text of the amendment.

The 14th Amendment of the Constitution requires equal protection of the laws, and so far the Supreme Court has held most sex and gender classifications are subject only to intermediate scrutiny when analyzing the laws that have a discriminatory impact. In other words, right now gender discrimination does not have the strict interpretation standard; it is not subject to the higher standard which it should be.

In 2011, Supreme Court Justice Scalia gave an interview in which he stated:

Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination

on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits

it. It doesn't.

In other words, we don't have that protection in the Constitution today. Ratification of the ERA by State legislatures would provide the courts with a clearer guidance in holding gender or sex clarification to the strict scrutiny standard.

The ERA is a simple and straightforward constitutional amendment. It reads:

Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or

abridged by the United States or by any State on account of

sex.

The amendment gives power to Congress to enforce its provisions by appropriate legislation, and the amendment would take effect 2 years after ratification.

Today nearly half the States have a version of ERA written into their State constitutions. The constitution of my own State of Maryland reads that ``Equality of rights under the law shall not be abridged or denied because of sex.''

I am therefore pleased to introduce this joint resolution today, and I thank Representative Andrews for introducing a companion version in the House today as well. This legislation is endorsed by a wide variety of groups, including United 4 Equality, the National Council of Women's Organizations, the American Association of University Women, Business & Professional Women's Foundation, Federally Employed Women, and the U.S. Women's Chamber of Commerce.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. President, next week is American Craft Beer Week so I am pleased to rise today with my friend and colleague, the senior Senator from Maine, Senator Collins, to introduce the Small Brewer Reinvestment & Expanding Workforce Act of 2013, otherwise known as the Small BREW Act. Our esteemed former colleague, Senator Kerry, now Secretary of State, introduced this bill in the 112th Congress. I am honored to take up the mantel.

The Small BREW Act of 2013 would reduce the excise tax on America's craft brewers. Under current federal law, brewers producing fewer than 2 million barrels annually pay $7 per barrel on the first 60,000 barrels they brew, and $18 per barrel on every barrel thereafter, one

Mr. President, as we prepare to celebrate Mother's Day this Sunday, I am today introducing a joint resolution which would remove the deadline for the ratification by the States of the equal rights amendment, the ERA.

I thank my cosponsors. As of this morning my cosponsors included Senator Kirk, Senator Mikulski, Senator Murkowski, Senator Harkin, Senator Sanders, Senator Levin, Senator Menendez, Senator Stabenow, Senator Heinrich, Senator Boxer, Senator Gillibrand, Senator Durbin, Senator Lautenberg, Senator Murphy, Senator Baldwin, Senator Landrieu, Senator Brown, and Senator Begich.

When Congress passed the ERA in 1972, it provided that the measure had to be ratified by three-fourths of the States, or 38 States, within 7 years. This deadline was later extended to 10 years by a joint resolution enacted by Congress, but ultimately only 35 of the 38 States required ratified the ERA when the deadline expired in 1982. Congress has the authority to give the States another chance, and should do so. I want to point out to my colleagues that in 1992, the 27th Amendment to the Constitution prohibiting immediate Congressional pay raises was ratified after 203 years. So this additional delay is certainly in keeping with our prior precedent.

Article 5 of the Constitution contains no time limit for the ratification of constitutional changes, and the ERA time limit was contained in a joint resolution, not the actual text of the amendment.

The 14th Amendment of the Constitution requires equal protection of the laws, and so far the Supreme Court has held most sex and gender classifications are subject only to intermediate scrutiny when analyzing the laws that have a discriminatory impact. In other words, right now gender discrimination does not have the strict interpretation standard; it is not subject to the higher standard which it should be.

In 2011, Supreme Court Justice Scalia gave an interview in which he stated:

Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination

on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits

it. It doesn't.

In other words, we don't have that protection in the Constitution today. Ratification of the ERA by State legislatures would provide the courts with a clearer guidance in holding gender or sex clarification to the strict scrutiny standard.

The ERA is a simple and straightforward constitutional amendment. It reads:

Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or

abridged by the United States or by any State on account of

sex.

The amendment gives power to Congress to enforce its provisions by appropriate legislation, and the amendment would take effect 2 years after ratification.

Today nearly half the States have a version of ERA written into their State constitutions. The constitution of my own State of Maryland reads that ``Equality of rights under the law shall not be abridged or denied because of sex.''

I am therefore pleased to introduce this joint resolution today, and I thank Representative Andrews for introducing a companion version in the House today as well. This legislation is endorsed by a wide variety of groups, including United 4 Equality, the National Council of Women's Organizations, the American Association of University Women, Business & Professional Women's Foundation, Federally Employed Women, and the U.S. Women's Chamber of Commerce.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

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

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

Madam President, I think 2 weeks ago the American public understood one of the consequences of the sequester cuts, these across- the-board, mindless cuts, when they saw what was going to happen with furloughs with the air traffic controllers and the air traffic service in this country.

I never supported sequestration. These are mindless across-the-board cuts. I certainly did not want to see what would have happened to the FAA happen. That was mindless across-the-board cuts. We provided system flexibility to be able to avoid that circumstance. But what we need to do is replace sequestration for all agencies that are affected because similar occurrences are happening in other agencies.

The reason is these are across-the-board mindless cuts. They are deep cuts. To the agencies that are affected, it is equivalent to about a 10-percent cut. This is on top of 3 years of reduced appropriations for these agencies. So it is affecting the core mission of the agencies. They have no flexibility, and therefore they have to cut back on their mission. That is what happened at the FAA. Of course, we provided some flexibility so they can do some other things. But we have not done that as far as providing relief from these across-the-board cuts in other agencies.

So we are going to see many Federal agencies having to fundamentally change what they do. Let me give a couple of examples. I was recently at the National Institutes of Health and saw firsthand the great work they are doing. I could tell the Presiding Officer many of the missions they are doing are critically important to our health.

I was briefed on the work they are doing for an influenza vaccine that will help us deal not with every season having to deal with a different type of influenza and not knowing whether we get it right but looking at one that will work for multiple years. That is the type of work that is done at the National Institutes of Health, the kind of work in dealing with finding the answers to cancer. I remember when I was young, if you got cancer, it was a death sentence.

Now we reduce the fatalities of cancer. The survival rates are much higher. That is the work that is done at the National Institutes of Health, NIH. That work is being compromised by these across-the-board cuts that affect the grants NIH can give to the institutes around the country, including in Massachusetts and in Maryland.

What is happening with Head Start is 70,000 children who could benefit from Head Start will not be able to this fall. Why? Because of these across-the-board cuts. Head Start is a program that works. We know that. The children who have participated in Head Start do much better. We have waiting lists now. Do we want to tell 70,000 families they are not going to be able to send their children to Head Start this fall?

Senior eating together programs are being cut. Do we truly want to reduce our commitment to seniors in this country so they can get a nutritional meal? The border security protections we are going to be debating on the floor in a short period of time, how we can deal with comprehensive immigration reform. We want to do what is right, but we want to protect our borders. Do we truly want to cut back on border security in this country?

Food safety. The list goes on and on and on to basic missions that will be affected by these across-the-board cuts. Why? I have heard people say this is not such a big deal, about 2 percent of the budget. The difficulty is it applies to only a small part of the budget; that is, basically our discretionary spending accounts. These discretionary spending accounts have already gone through several years of freezes and cuts. They have been really stretched. So the cut is condensed into a short period of time. There is no flexibility that is given in order to deal with it. It is going to have a negative impact on our economy.

I used the example at a forum I had 2 weeks ago with a group of business leaders; that is, if you had trouble in your business, you knew you had to cut back, you would look at your budget, your money planned for rent or your mortgage payment, you have some money planned for your family for the food budget, maybe you had some money put aside for a weekend vacation or trip with your family.

You do not cut every category the same. You are going to save your house and make sure there is food on the table. We have to do the same at the Federal level. We have to make the tough decisions as to where the priorities of this country need to be. I saw the impact on our Federal workforce. I am honored to represent a large number of Federal workers who are very dedicated people working to provide services to the people of this country. Many are going to go through what is known as furloughs. Furloughs are nothing more than telling you you are going to get a pay cut.

Now, they have already had 3 years of a freeze. They have seen a lot of vacant positions go unfilled so they are being asked to do more with less. Now they are being told they have to go through furloughs. That is not right. We can do better than that. This country can do better than that. What we need to do is replace sequestration and we need to do it now.

The majority leader made a unanimous consent request. I am sorry it was not agreed to. What it said, very basically, is we can find other ways to get the budget savings, but let's not do this meat-ax, across- the-board approach that compromises the missions of this country. Unfortunately, that was objected to. I have spoken on the floor before about areas we can reduce spending.

I hear my friends on the other side of the aisle talking about mandatory spending. I agree. We can save money in health care. As the Presiding Officer knows, the work being done in Massachusetts, and I can tell you the work being done in Maryland, we see how we can reduce hospital readmissions, how we can deal with individuals with complicated illnesses and treat their conditions in a more comprehensive way, saving on less tests that need to be done, saving on hospitalizations.

We know how we can reduce hospital infection rates. There are ways we can cut back on health care costs that will reduce Medicare and Medicaid and health care costs. That is what we need to do. That will save money. Let's implement some of those cost savings.

I am honored to serve on the Senate Finance Committee. Our committee has jurisdiction over the Tax Code. We spend $1.2 trillion a year in tax expenditures. That is not touched at all by sequestration. We need to take a look at the Tax Code. There are parts of the Tax Code that are not efficient. Let's get rid of those provisions and we can save money and use that to help balance the budget without these across-the- board cuts.

Then we are bringing our troops home from Afghanistan. I hope we can do that at a more rapid rate for many reasons. But those savings can also be used to close the gap on the budget problems and to allow us to replace sequestration.

The bottom line is what my constituents want is for Democrats and Republicans to work together and to come up with a responsible budget plan for this

country. They want that for many reasons. First, that is the way business should be done. Secondly, it gives predictability; we know what the budget is going to be. People can plan if they know what the Tax Code looks like and they know what the Federal budget looks like. They can plan and our economy will take off. Predictability is very important.

Bottom line, what I urge us all to do: Let's get rid of these across- the-board cuts as soon as possible. We never should have been in this position. We have seen it in a couple agencies where the public was outraged and they flooded our phones. We are going to see that happen more and more because these are irrational cuts. We have a responsibility to act. The sooner we do, the better it is going to be for the American people, the better it is going to be for our economy. It is the responsible thing for the Senate to do.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, first let me thank Senator Enzi and Senator Alexander. I completely agree with their position.

I had a chance to talk about this issue when we were debating it on the budget issue. The bill simply removes an impediment from the States being able to collect the sales taxes that are due. It responds to the Quill decision about requiring a physical presence in a State in order to require that State to collect the sales tax.

Senator Enzi points out there are no new taxes; that it is a matter of basic fairness. It really does help small businesses. The brick-and- mortar companies located in our neighborhoods, small shopowners who build a neighborhood and build a community, are the ones who are at risk where they have to pay sales taxes and yet their competitors don't.

I will give a short example with a story told to me about a retailer selling electronic goods. The consumer came into the shop, looked and found the product she wanted, went on the Internet, found the product for the same price on the Internet but didn't have to pay the sales tax, and literally bought it while the shopowner was watching--after the shopowner had given that individual personal service. The shopowner didn't lose the sale because of competitiveness but lost the sale because of tax avoidance. This bill would correct that.

This is $23 billion. This is a lot of money our States are not collecting. These are taxes that are already imposed. In my own State of Maryland, it is somewhere between $150 million and $300 million of taxes that could be used to reduce tax burdens to the taxpayers in my State.

It is a matter of basic fairness, something that needs to be done. As Senator Enzi pointed out, it will simplify the sales tax collections by using the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement, and we exempt small sellers of $1-million-or-below sales. So it is an issue that needs to be passed, and I am pleased that we are finally getting around to passing it.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 10 minutes as if in morning business.

I have never supported the sequestration. I always thought it was a big mistake. These are across-the-board, mindless cuts that say every priority in government is identical to the other. That is not the case.

If you had a problem in your family budget and you had to reduce some spending and you had money put aside for your mortgage payment, your rent payment, or your family food budget, and maybe some money for a weekend

trip, you wouldn't identically cut every category. You may give up that weekend trip in order to be able to save the roof over your family or put food on the table. Sequestration says every priority in government is the same.

It is also not directed to where we need to go to reduce the deficit. Once again, sequestration primarily applies to domestic discretionary spending. It provides a fourth round of cuts when we have already had cuts over the last 3 years. For the agencies that are affected, it is equivalent to about a 10-percent cut. You can't do that without seriously affecting the mission of the agencies, and that is wrong. That is why I have said from the beginning, let's replace sequestration.

March 1 came; sequestration came; people woke up the next day and said, What is the big deal? Well, we are finding out what the big deal is all about. We just heard from the FAA, the air traffic controllers, that because of sequestration they have very little option--85 percent of their operational budget is in personnel, and air traffic controllers are most of the personnel. Therefore, they have announced they have to furlough 11 days during the remainder of this fiscal year. That comes out to about one furlough day over each work period. It is as much as a 10-percent reduction in the workforce to man our towers to make sure air traffic is managed safely. You can't do that with that type of reduction, and we are now looking at whether there are going to be significant delays of flights. Those types of cuts are ridiculous. We know better than that. There is no question about it, these are the types of things that are going to hurt our economy if we can't have a reliable air traffic service.

I was talking to one of the nonprofits in Maryland that manages a Head Start Program, and they were telling me about what the fall enrollment is going to be. They have a waiting list of families who want their children in Head Start and qualify for Head Start and aren't going to be able to get into a Head Start Program. Why? Because of sequestration. The waiting list will get longer. Children will be denied the ability to go to Head Start Programs. Did we intend that? I don't think so. I don't think our colleagues wanted to say we were going to balance our budgets on the backs of children being denied Head Start placement.

I was at the National Institutes of Health not too long ago. The research they do is so critically important to our country's future. It is not only the fact that they are discovering the answers to dread diseases or ways in which we can keep people healthy. They are now working on developing a universal flu vaccine against the influenza so you don't have to get a vaccine every year. Think how many lives that can save. It is also the basic research we need in order to create the jobs in the bioscience areas and the tech areas. This is about creating more jobs in our communities. Now they are going to have to give up grants as a result of sequestration even though today they are only approving about one out of every seven worthwhile grant applications. We certainly didn't intend that through sequestration.

I could talk about new transit starts. We have some very exciting programs in Baltimore, Washington, and Maryland--a purple line to provide transit between the Washington suburban counties and Maryland. We have transit programs in Baltimore. We have the corridor cities along the 270 corridor. We have southern Maryland that needs help. All these programs need to compete for a limited amount of funds. Now, because of sequestration, there are going to be less funds available, meaning we are going to have more traffic jams rather than less. Do we mean for that to happen?

I could go on and on. I could talk about the cuts to the Department of Defense and what they have to go through. These weren't cuts we initiated, saying this program needs to be reduced. These aren't the types of deliberative actions a Congress would do. It is saying we are going to do a meat ax approach and tell the agency: You cut your program by this percentage amount. We advertised it a little over 5 percent, but in reality it is much higher than that because these cuts over a 7-month period reflect a year's reduction. So the cuts are even more severe when used on an annual basis.

Our Federal workforce deserves more. These are people working hard providing vital services in our country, whether it is protecting our borders or doing research or keeping our food supply safe or making sure our seniors get Social Security checks. The list goes on and on. It is not fair to those who signed up to serve the public as Federal workers, and it is certainly not fair to our economy. This is having a very damaging impact on the economy of this country. We have already seen in the most recent job reports a slowdown of more than we predicted, and most economists say it is directly related to these across-the-board sequestration cuts.

So what should we do? We are in session. It is time for us to act. We are in the fiscal budget year 2013. Yes, we passed a budget at the end of last year. I think it was on January 1 when it finally got around to passing. We passed it at the sequestration levels saying we hoped we would figure out a budget plan to avoid the sequestration cuts in this year. So let us consider a way to avoid these mindless across-the-board cuts, and substitute it for sensible reductions that we know will not have the same type of unintended consequences on services that are vitally important to our economy and to the people of this country.

There are areas where we have savings. We know that. We have that in the overseas contingency accounts under the Department of Defense. We know we can find savings in tax expenditures. We spend $1.2 trillion a year in tax expenditures. We know we can certainly find some savings on tax expenditures. I think we have to look at a broader level than just these discretionary spending accounts that are particularly devastated by these sequestration cuts.

I urge this body to find a way we can replace sequestration for fiscal year 2013--this current fiscal year--by more responsible budget savings, and then, working through our appropriations committees, working through the Budget Committee and the other committees for fiscal year 2014, have time under a more normal legislative process to figure out our spending priorities to go beyond the appropriate dollars--what we do on the Tax Code, what we do under mandatory spending. Let's bring up that game plan after the next fiscal year, 2014, which begins October 1. But for the current situation, let's replace sequestration with a more sensible way to get those savings, rather than causing harm--whether it is to those who depend upon air traffic, those who depend upon a place in Head Start, those who rely upon the research done at NIH, or those who depend upon having adequate support within our military. All of the above are adversely affected by sequestration. It is time for us to take action, to do what we were supposed to do: Make the tough decisions. Don't take the way out that every program in government is of equal importance.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today marks an important day in history as our nation continues to honor the sesquicentennial of the Civil War. There are many landmarks in my hometown of Baltimore that are significant to the history of the Civil War that I believe are in the Nation's interests to protect for future generations to experience. As our nation pays tribute to this trying time in our nation's history, I am proud to re-introduce the President Street Station Study Act which would initiate the process for preserving one such landmark in the heart of Baltimore. President Street Station played a crucial role in the Civil War, the Underground Railroad, the growth of Baltimore's railroad industry, and is a historically significant landmark to the presidency of Abraham Lincoln.

The station was constructed for the Philadelphia, Wilmington, and Baltimore, PW&B, Railroad in 1849 and remains the oldest surviving big city railroad terminal in the United States. This historical structure is a unique architectural gem, arguably the first example and last survivor of the early barrel-vault train shed arches, also known as the Howe Truss. The arch-rib design became the blueprint for railroad bridges and roofs well into the 20th century and was replicated for every similarly designed train shed and roof for the next 20 years.

The growth of President Street Station and the PW&B railroad mirror the expansion of the railroad industry throughout the country in the latter half of the 19th century. This station played an essential role in making Baltimore the first railroad and sea-rail link in the nation and helped the city become the international port hub it is today.

In its heyday, President Street Station was the key link connecting Washington D.C. with the northeast States. Hundreds of passengers traveling north passed through this station and, by the start of the Civil War, Baltimore had become our Nation's major southern railroad hub. Not surprisingly, the station played a critical role in both the Civil War and the Underground Railroad.

Perhaps the most famous passenger to travel through the station was President Abraham Lincoln. He came through the station at least four times, including secretly on his way to his first inauguration in 1861. President-elect Lincoln was warned by a PW&B private detective of a possible assassination plot in Baltimore as he transferred trains. While it is unclear if this plot existed and posed a serious threat, Lincoln nevertheless was secretly smuggled aboard a train in the dead of night to complete his trip to Washington.

Just a few months later, President Street Station served as a backdrop for what many historians consider to be the first bloodshed of the Civil War. The Baltimore Riot of 1861 occurred when Lincoln called for Union volunteers to quell the rebellion at Fort Sumter in Charleston. On this day in history, April 19, 1861, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania volunteers were met and attacked by a mob of secessionist and Confederate sympathizers. The

bloody confrontation left four dead and 36 wounded. As the war continued, the Station remained a critical link for the Union. Troops and supplies from the north were regularly shuttled through the station to support Union soldiers.

It is well known that Maryland was a common starting point along the Underground Railroad and that many escaped slaves from Maryland's Eastern Shore plantations were destined for Baltimore and the President Street Station to travel North to freedom. A few weeks ago, President Barack Obama honored Maryland's own Harriet Tubman, the Underground Railroad's most famous ``conductor'' by establishing the Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad National Monument, the first National Monument to commemorate an African American woman. While she personally led dozens of people to freedom, her courage and fortitude also inspired others to find their own strength to seek freedom. President Street Station was indeed a station on this secret network. Prior to emancipation in 1863, several renowned escapees, including Frederick Douglass, William and Ellen Craft, and Henry ``Box'' Brown, traveled through the Station, risking their lives for a better and freer life.

Others' journeys for a better life also passed through President Street Station. From its beginning and into the 20th century, Baltimore was both a destination and departure point for immigrants. New arrivals from Ireland, Russia, and Europe arriving on the eastern seaboard traveled by way of the PW&B railroads to the west.

For decades, President Street Station has long been recognized as having an important place in history: In 1992, it was listed on the National Register of Historic Places and the city of Baltimore has dedicated it a local historical landmark. For many years it served as the Baltimore Civil War Museum, educating generations of people about the role Maryland and Baltimore played in the Civil War and the early history of the city. In recent years, the museum, run by dedicated volunteers from the Maryland Historical Society and Friends of President Street Station, have struggled to keep the station's doors open and keeping the station's character true to its historical roots. The area around President Street Station has changed dramatically over the decades, but the Station has worked to preserve its place in history. It has been many years since trains passed through the Presidents Street Station and it is clear that today the best use for this building is to preserve the building and use it to tell Station's American story.

President Street Station is one of America's historical treasures. As we commemorate the 152nd Anniversary of the Baltimore Riot and the start of National Park Week this weekend, we honor some of our country's greatest leaders and remember our own rich and innovative history. This bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study of President Street Station to evaluate the suitability and feasibility of establishing the Station as a unit of the National Park Service. President Street Station, a contributor to the growth of the railroad, and a vital player in the Underground Railroad, Lincoln Presidency and Civil War, is part of this history. I urge my colleagues to join me in giving this station the recognition it deserves and support this bill.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, today marks an important day in history as our nation continues to honor the sesquicentennial of the Civil War. There are many landmarks in my hometown of Baltimore that are significant to the history of the Civil War that I believe are in the Nation's interests to protect for future generations to experience. As our nation pays tribute to this trying time in our nation's history, I am proud to re-introduce the President Street Station Study Act which would initiate the process for preserving one such landmark in the heart of Baltimore. President Street Station played a crucial role in the Civil War, the Underground Railroad, the growth of Baltimore's railroad industry, and is a historically significant landmark to the presidency of Abraham Lincoln.

The station was constructed for the Philadelphia, Wilmington, and Baltimore, PW&B, Railroad in 1849 and remains the oldest surviving big city railroad terminal in the United States. This historical structure is a unique architectural gem, arguably the first example and last survivor of the early barrel-vault train shed arches, also known as the Howe Truss. The arch-rib design became the blueprint for railroad bridges and roofs well into the 20th century and was replicated for every similarly designed train shed and roof for the next 20 years.

The growth of President Street Station and the PW&B railroad mirror the expansion of the railroad industry throughout the country in the latter half of the 19th century. This station played an essential role in making Baltimore the first railroad and sea-rail link in the nation and helped the city become the international port hub it is today.

In its heyday, President Street Station was the key link connecting Washington D.C. with the northeast States. Hundreds of passengers traveling north passed through this station and, by the start of the Civil War, Baltimore had become our Nation's major southern railroad hub. Not surprisingly, the station played a critical role in both the Civil War and the Underground Railroad.

Perhaps the most famous passenger to travel through the station was President Abraham Lincoln. He came through the station at least four times, including secretly on his way to his first inauguration in 1861. President-elect Lincoln was warned by a PW&B private detective of a possible assassination plot in Baltimore as he transferred trains. While it is unclear if this plot existed and posed a serious threat, Lincoln nevertheless was secretly smuggled aboard a train in the dead of night to complete his trip to Washington.

Just a few months later, President Street Station served as a backdrop for what many historians consider to be the first bloodshed of the Civil War. The Baltimore Riot of 1861 occurred when Lincoln called for Union volunteers to quell the rebellion at Fort Sumter in Charleston. On this day in history, April 19, 1861, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania volunteers were met and attacked by a mob of secessionist and Confederate sympathizers. The

bloody confrontation left four dead and 36 wounded. As the war continued, the Station remained a critical link for the Union. Troops and supplies from the north were regularly shuttled through the station to support Union soldiers.

It is well known that Maryland was a common starting point along the Underground Railroad and that many escaped slaves from Maryland's Eastern Shore plantations were destined for Baltimore and the President Street Station to travel North to freedom. A few weeks ago, President Barack Obama honored Maryland's own Harriet Tubman, the Underground Railroad's most famous ``conductor'' by establishing the Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad National Monument, the first National Monument to commemorate an African American woman. While she personally led dozens of people to freedom, her courage and fortitude also inspired others to find their own strength to seek freedom. President Street Station was indeed a station on this secret network. Prior to emancipation in 1863, several renowned escapees, including Frederick Douglass, William and Ellen Craft, and Henry ``Box'' Brown, traveled through the Station, risking their lives for a better and freer life.

Others' journeys for a better life also passed through President Street Station. From its beginning and into the 20th century, Baltimore was both a destination and departure point for immigrants. New arrivals from Ireland, Russia, and Europe arriving on the eastern seaboard traveled by way of the PW&B railroads to the west.

For decades, President Street Station has long been recognized as having an important place in history: In 1992, it was listed on the National Register of Historic Places and the city of Baltimore has dedicated it a local historical landmark. For many years it served as the Baltimore Civil War Museum, educating generations of people about the role Maryland and Baltimore played in the Civil War and the early history of the city. In recent years, the museum, run by dedicated volunteers from the Maryland Historical Society and Friends of President Street Station, have struggled to keep the station's doors open and keeping the station's character true to its historical roots. The area around President Street Station has changed dramatically over the decades, but the Station has worked to preserve its place in history. It has been many years since trains passed through the Presidents Street Station and it is clear that today the best use for this building is to preserve the building and use it to tell Station's American story.

President Street Station is one of America's historical treasures. As we commemorate the 152nd Anniversary of the Baltimore Riot and the start of National Park Week this weekend, we honor some of our country's greatest leaders and remember our own rich and innovative history. This bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study of President Street Station to evaluate the suitability and feasibility of establishing the Station as a unit of the National Park Service. President Street Station, a contributor to the growth of the railroad, and a vital player in the Underground Railroad, Lincoln Presidency and Civil War, is part of this history. I urge my colleagues to join me in giving this station the recognition it deserves and support this bill.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 720

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I would like to recognize the National Coalition for the Homeless, an outstanding organization of activists, advocates, and community and faith-based service providers working to end homelessness in America. This year, the coalition celebrates its 30th anniversary, marking three decades of triumphs and challenges in defense of our Nation's most vulnerable individuals and families.

During the 1970s and 1980s, homelessness was thrust into the national spotlight as a growing problem. Structural changes in the economy, exacerbated by some tough economic downturns, thrust thousands of men, women, and children onto the streets, living without shelter. Out of concern for the rights of this vulnerable population, a group of State and local homeless coalitions gathered together and established the National Coalition for the Homeless in 1982. In these last 30 years, the National Coalition for the Homeless has been at the forefront of the fight against homelessness. The coalition's advocacy and passion have helped define housing policy for the disenfranchised in America.

Through creative initiatives and outspoken advocacy, the coalition played an instrumental role in passage of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, the first comprehensive legislation to address the issue of homelessness in our country. Most recently, the coalition has spearheaded advocacy for the Hate Crimes Against the Homeless Statistics Act, a bill that would include crimes against the homeless in the crime data the Department of Justice collects. I was a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee during the 111th Congress and I was a proud sponsor of this bill. Homeless people are particularly vulnerable targets for acts of humiliation and violence. I believe more needs to be done to protect those who can't protect themselves. I am proud to report Maryland was a pioneer in extending hate crime protections to homeless people.

I have been concerned about homelessness for a long time. I believe having adequate shelter is a human right.

A home provides safety from the elements and random acts of violence. It is a place where possessions and items as fundamental as medications can be kept safely. Yet, homelessness persists as one of our Nation's most pressing social problems and has grown more challenging in the wake of the housing market collapse and the return of veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. As we continue to recover from the economic downturn, it is imperative that the Nation not lose ground in the struggle against homelessness, especially among Americans who have lost jobs through no fault of their own, those homeowners and families who are struggling due to the ongoing foreclosure crisis, and our veterans.

I applaud the courage of the members and volunteers of the National Coalition for the Homeless. Their selfless striving to end homelessness in America has changed the lives of thousands and thousands of our fellow Americans, even when so many others have averted their gaze. I hope my colleagues will join me in congratulating the National Coalition for the Homeless on 30 years of service to our communities and in rededicating ourselves to work with the coalition on ending the tragedy and scourge of homelessness in the richest nation on Earth.

Mr. President, Baltimore, like many other major cities, has struggled to educate its children. Recent statistics indicate that the number of third graders reading below grade level in Baltimore is double the State average. This is especially troubling in light of the numerous national studies showing that for every six students who are not reading proficiently by third grade, one will not graduate.

Across the United States, research has shown that students in schools with good school libraries learn more, get better grades, and score higher on standardized tests than their peers in schools without libraries.

We have a program, the qualified zone academy bonds, that is available to help school districts in areas such as improving their libraries. Since 2001 Baltimore City has used those funds. Recently we extended the program through 2013. Academy bonds are important, but much more needs to be done to help our students.

Let me share with my colleagues a wonderful initiative, the Baltimore Elementary and Middle School Library Project, which is leveraging academy bonds and bringing in additional partners to maximize the resources available for hard-pressed schools and students. The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation is spearheading this initiative. The Weinberg Foundation is one of the largest private charitable foundations in the United States. The Weinberg Foundation provides approximately $100 million each year to nonprofits that provide direct services to low-income and vulnerable individuals and families, primarily in the United States and Israel. Since 1990 the foundation has made grants totaling $1.6 billion--that is billion with a ``b.''

The foundation was created by Harry Weinberg. His family emigrated from Eastern Europe to the United States in 1911. Harry Weinberg began his life in poverty, but he eventually built a transportation empire which extended into real estate. The fortune Harry Weinberg amassed now has grown to more than $2 billion. These are the assets behind the Weinberg Foundation's grant-making.

Senator Mikulski and I are very proud that the Weinberg Foundation is based in our Baltimore City. I knew Harry Weinberg. I know the Weinberg family. I am very fortunate to have that relationship. The foundation has helped so many people, particularly in affordable housing, immigrant services, poverty issues, and humanitarian needs.

I would like to acknowledge the role my former State director, Bailey Fine, has played with the Weinberg Foundation.

I could list dozens of major charitable projects and initiatives that bear the name of the Weinberg Foundation, including a $10-million grant to fund emergency services for Holocaust survivors in North America; a $9.6 million commitment to make Maryland a model for care of lower income, older adults; a $3 million investment in affordable housing for persons with disabilities, which includes a joint venture with the State of Maryland--the

first of its kind in the Nation. The Weinberg Foundation also has stepped up in times of global crisis, providing millions of dollars of relief grants in the wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy and emergency funding for humanitarian efforts following the Haiti earthquake in 2010 and the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004.

In 2011 the Weinberg Foundation joined forces with a group of innovative and committed individuals to initiate a simple vision: transform Baltimore City school libraries to create larger, lasting change by increasing literacy rates and inspiring students. Words such as ``partnership'' and ``collaboration'' are often overused, but these concepts are central to the library project, a real-world demonstration of the power of combining resources directed toward a common goal.

To date, with the help of more than 30 government, nongovernment, and community partners and individuals, many who have traveled to Washington today, the library project has gone far beyond a simple makeover by creating completely transformed, well-designed, well- equipped spaces that send a simple but powerful message to young students in Baltimore City: They deserve the best. The Weinberg Foundation and its partners believe this manuscript for meaningful change can be applied to any city where people from nonprofits and public and private entities are willing to focus on a plan and then roll up their sleeves to make it happen.

The first of these refurbished libraries was dedicated in the fall of 2012. I was privileged to be able to visit and see firsthand how impressive this refurbished library is. Three more are scheduled to open this fall, with a total of 12 planned through 2015. The Weinberg Foundation has supported 30 percent of the capital project cost, is providing 4 years of additional staff support and professional development funds for the library. The Weinberg Foundation's support also goes to fund new books, up to 4,000 per space. Overall, the foundation has made a $5 million, 4-year commitment to this initiative, and the children of Baltimore will benefit.

Each transformed library features thousands of new books and the latest in learning technology, including new computers and e-readers. As you can see from the photo I have brought to the floor, these are very impressive spaces and really go a long way to making them friendly places for students.

In addition to the direct educational benefits of these new spaces, one of the goals of the library project is to help each transformed library become a hub for greater school community. Because the Weinberg Foundation wants this project to be a successful model for years to come, it has partnered with the Baltimore Education Research Consortium to evaluate the impact of this space within the school community. Evaluations are underway at the first three libraries and involve students, teachers, and community members.

In addition to supplying books as part of each renovation, the Weinberg Foundation and its partners wanted to do even more to equip these new spaces with the gift and adventure of reading. As part of the first year of the library project, the foundation launched a huge book drive with more than 40 partners and 100 pickup locations. It was clear that my fellow Marylanders were eager to contribute directly to this project, donating some 13,000 books valued at over $75,000.

I share the story with my colleagues and the rest of the country because, just like a favorite book, it should be shared. The library project goes beyond funding, blueprints, bright new designs, and even state-of-the-art learning technologies. These libraries will improve reading and learning opportunities for countless children, helping to break the grinding cycle of poverty by providing young people with the hope and the tools for success in life.

As I said, this is a story that needs to be shared. The devoted officers and staff of the Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation and all the other participants in the library project would welcome the opportunity to tell this marvelous tale over and over and see it duplicated across the country.

Time constraints prevent me from talking about all of the partners in the library project. I mentioned the Federal partners, and I have highlighted the Weinberg Foundation's lead role, but everyone involved deserves recognition and our heartfelt thanks.

I ask unanimous consent that the list of the other partners and the descriptions of their contributions be printed in the Record.

I yield the floor.