Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise today on behalf of myself and Senators Kirk and Mikulski to introduce the Responding to Urgent needs of Survivors of the Holocaust Act or the RUSH Act.

Our bill will provide needed protections for survivors of the Holocaust who managed to make it to the United States after years of prolonged terror, abuse, and desperation. Millions fled from the cruelty of the Nazi regime between 1933 and 1945, from territories annexed, invaded or occupied by Nazi Germany and from their Axis partner countries in Europe as well.

Millions of others were killed during the Holocaust, exterminated by a ruthless machine propagated by the Nazi party. Those who escaped the terror of the Nazi regime carried with them experiences that can never be forgotten, and have adversely affected their ability to cope with institutionalized settings.

Many Holocaust survivors living in the United States would prefer to spend their days at home with their families, rather than being moved into settings where they lose autonomy, privacy, and control, which can bring back painful trauma from their experiences under Nazi rule. This bill would amend the Older Americans Act to ensure that Holocaust survivors can better access needed services, such as health care and nutrition services, without having to live in a nursing or assisted living facility.

As of 2010, there were approximately 127,000 Holocaust survivors living in the United States, and more than three quarters of them are over age 75, with a majority in their 80s and 90s. By focusing on home and community-based long-term care, we can help ensure that fewer survivors are dependent on the unpaid support of family caregivers, or have to resort to unnecessary institutionalization.

All aging Americans deserve access to needed community supports and services in comfortable settings that are neither mentally nor physically traumatizing. These great Americans deserve our efforts to ensure that they are better able to age in place. I ask my colleagues to join me in support of this bill.

Mr. President, I rise today on behalf of myself and Senators Kirk and Mikulski to introduce the Responding to Urgent needs of Survivors of the Holocaust Act or the RUSH Act.

Our bill will provide needed protections for survivors of the Holocaust who managed to make it to the United States after years of prolonged terror, abuse, and desperation. Millions fled from the cruelty of the Nazi regime between 1933 and 1945, from territories annexed, invaded or occupied by Nazi Germany and from their Axis partner countries in Europe as well.

Millions of others were killed during the Holocaust, exterminated by a ruthless machine propagated by the Nazi party. Those who escaped the terror of the Nazi regime carried with them experiences that can never be forgotten, and have adversely affected their ability to cope with institutionalized settings.

Many Holocaust survivors living in the United States would prefer to spend their days at home with their families, rather than being moved into settings where they lose autonomy, privacy, and control, which can bring back painful trauma from their experiences under Nazi rule. This bill would amend the Older Americans Act to ensure that Holocaust survivors can better access needed services, such as health care and nutrition services, without having to live in a nursing or assisted living facility.

As of 2010, there were approximately 127,000 Holocaust survivors living in the United States, and more than three quarters of them are over age 75, with a majority in their 80s and 90s. By focusing on home and community-based long-term care, we can help ensure that fewer survivors are dependent on the unpaid support of family caregivers, or have to resort to unnecessary institutionalization.

All aging Americans deserve access to needed community supports and services in comfortable settings that are neither mentally nor physically traumatizing. These great Americans deserve our efforts to ensure that they are better able to age in place. I ask my colleagues to join me in support of this bill.

Mr. President, I rise today to recognize and commemorate Loyola University of Maryland's victory in the 2012 NCAA Men's Lacrosse Championship and to honor the players, coaches, and administrators who helped to secure Loyola's first Division I National Championship.

For much of recent history, NCAA Division I Lacrosse has been dominated by a small group of eight, elite programs. But last month, a Jesuit university on Charles Street in downtown Baltimore became the smallest school ever to win a Division I National Championship. Loyola joins the ranks of such universities as Johns Hopkins University, the University of Maryland, Syracuse, and Cornell, in becoming just the ninth team to win a championship since the event's creation in 1971.

This year's Division I National Championship set the stage for an afternoon of record-shattering lacrosse. The Greyhound defense and goalkeeper Jack Runkel set a new NCAA Division I record for fewest goals allowed in a national championship game, giving up only three goals despite a barrage of nearly thirty shots taken by the highly motivated University of Maryland offense.

Loyola University's star offensive player, Eric Lusby, had a busy day as well. He scored four goals in the championship game, bringing his total to 17 during the final four games of the season, setting a new NCAA tournament record. He also broke Loyola's single season scoring record with a total of 54 goals.

Loyola University players were not the only ones to break records last month. Head Coach Charley Toomey became the first coach ever to win an NCAA title on his first trip to the NCAA tournament. With 18 wins and only one loss, the players and coaches of the 2012 Greyhounds lacrosse team have firmly cemented themselves as the most successful team in Loyola's history. The team's achievements are even more impressive when you consider that the Greyhounds started the season as an unranked team.

Lacrosse has long played a central role in the athletic culture of Maryland, and I am proud to see that this year's All-Tournament Team selections reflect this reality. Eight of the ten players selected to receive All-Tournament honors call Maryland home, with five coming from the Loyola Greyhounds team and three from the University of Maryland. With Loyola's victory in this year's championship, Maryland is now home to three of the nine teams that have ever won a national championship, further securing our State's reputation as the center of collegiate lacrosse.

In light of these impressive accomplishments, I call upon my colleagues to join me in recognizing and congratulating Loyola University's players, Coach Charley Toomey, Athletic Director Jim Paquette, and President, the Rev. Brian Linnane, S.J. on a championship season and the many amazing achievements that carried the Greyhounds to victory.

Mr. President, I rise today to commemorate the bicentennial celebration of the War of 1812. The U.S. Congress declared war on Great Britain 200 years ago this week. The State of Maryland is proud of its contributions to this ``Second War for Independence,'' which reinforced United States sovereignty and gave birth to our national anthem.

A generation after the United States declared its independence from Great Britain, the mercantilist ties between the two countries were not fully severed. The British impressed American merchant seamen, enforced illegal and unfair trade regulations, colluded with certain Native American tribes to attack frontier settlements, and attempted to block westward expansion. The United States declared war to assert autonomy over its own affairs once again, establish free trade, protect sailors' rights, and ensure that our Nation could prosper from sea to shining sea.

President James Madison eloquently outlined these reasons 200 years ago when he called on ``all the good people of the United States, as they love their country, as they value the precious heritage derived from the virtue and valor of their fathers . . . [to] exert themselves in preserving order, in promoting concord, in maintaining the authority and efficacy of the laws, and in supporting and invigorating all the measures which may be adopted by the constituted authorities for obtaining a speedy, a just, and an honorable peace.''

The contributions of the U.S. Navy were instrumental in repelling the British during the War of 1812. The U.S. Navy hardly had a dozen warships compared to the hundreds of ships comprising the British fleet. British ships were undermanned, however, while well-trained and talented officers and seamen took command of American ships. These men were largely from coastal States, like Maryland, and were accustomed to seafaring. COMO Matthew Perry took on the British Navy on Lake Erie in 1813 with a scrappy fleet of light ships. Even though his force was seemingly decimated by the British, Commodore Perry resorted to paddling a rowboat with a banner that read ``Don't Give up the Ship.'' He then boarded the Niagara, double-loaded the carronades, and sailed directly into the British line, ultimately claiming victory.

The following summer, in 1814, the British Navy sailed up the Chesapeake Bay to attack our Nation's capital and seize the valuable port city of Baltimore. The British dealt heavy blows to Washington, DC, setting both the U.S. Capitol and the White House ablaze. British forces then moved toward 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 is important to note that American forces during the Battle of North Point were volunteer militia, heavily outnumbered by the highly trained British infantry, but 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 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.

The War of 1812 confirmed the legitimacy of the Revolution and served as a critical test for the U.S. Constitution and newly established democratic government. Our young Nation battled against the largest, most powerful military on the Earth at that time and emerged with an enhanced standing among the countries of the world, both militarily and diplomatically. The U.S. economy was freed of its dependence on British goods, which unleashed domestic manufacturing and spawned the industrial revolution. The U.S. Navy proved its worth and the U.S. Congress rewarded the Navy with funding for a permanent, more expansive fleet. A new generation of Americans too young to remember Lord Cornwallis's surrender at Yorktown, which effectively ended the Revolutionary War, and an older generation proud of defending American independence twice in their lifetimes, were inspired by Francis Scott Key's words, which embody our universal feelings of patriotism and courage.

As a Marylander, I am proud of the contributions of my State in the War of 1812 and I have been involved in legislative efforts to bring greater attention to this bicentennial celebration. My colleague, Representative Dutch Ruppersberger, and I sponsored the Commemorative Coin Act, which President Obama signed into law in August 2010, directing the U.S. Mint to create coins commemorating this important anniversary. These gold and silver coin designs are emblematic of the War of 1812, particularly the Battle of Baltimore that inspired our National Anthem. The coins are on sale this year only and the surcharges from these commemorative coins will provide support to the Maryland War of 1812 Bicentennial Commission to conduct activities, assist in educational outreach, and preserve sites and structures relating to the War of 1812.

I am proud that Maryland will lead the Star-Spangled 200 celebration, a 3-year celebration that just began with Baltimore's ``Sailabration'' this past weekend. The Navy's Blue Angels treated spectators to dazzling air shows; the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra premiered the ``Overture for 2012,'' composed by Philip Glass; and dozens of tall ships and naval warships from around the world anchored in the Inner Harbor, open for public tours. Through 2014, Maryland will host numerous events along the Star-Spangled Banner National Historic Trail and at Fort McHenry National Monument and Historic Shrine to celebrate the bicentennial. This commemoration is an opportunity to showcase to the world that Maryland is an exceptional place to live, work, and visit.

I am also proud that the U.S. Senate unanimously adopted a resolution I sponsored to mark the bicentennial, to celebrate the heroism of the American people during the conflict, and to recognize the various organizations involved in the bicentennial celebration, including the U.S. Armed Forces, the National Park Service, and the Maryland War of 1812 Bicentennial Commission. As we recognize all of these ongoing efforts during this commemorative period, I encourage all Americans to remember the sacrifice of those who gave their lives to defend our nation's freedom and democracy in its infancy, and to join in the bicentennial celebration of our victory in the War of 1812.

Madam President, first I want to thank Senator Boxer for her extraordinary leadership on these issues.

I invite my friend from Wyoming to come to Glen Burnie, MD, and see the 12,000 megawatt Brandon Shores powerplant which it is not only operating, but it is in full compliance with Maryland's healthy air law that is very similar to the proposed regulations we are debating today. That powerplant didn't close. It made the investments so that we have a clean energy source and in the process created 2,000 jobs in modernizing that powerplant.

That is why we have many companies that support the regulation, because they know it is going to mean more jobs--including Ceres and American Boiler Manufacturers Association, as well as companies such as WL Gore.

I want to thank Senator Rockefeller for his extraordinary statement. I was on the floor listening to him speaking on behalf of the people of West Virginia. They are interested in a clean economy, good health, and jobs.

I want to thank Senator Alexander for speaking up for the people of Tennessee, because he understands the importance of sensible air quality standards.

I want to speak on behalf of the people of Maryland, on behalf of the families I have the honor of representing in the Senate.

This is the week that summer camps start. Some parents are going to have to make a decision, when we have a day that is rated as a code orange or a code red because of air quality issues concerning ground- level ozone, as to whether they are going to send their child to camp that day if that child has a respiratory issue, an asthma issue, as to whether that child should be outdoors during that day when we have these air quality warnings. If the parent decides to keep the child at home, they have lost that day of camp and the cost of that day of camp. They have lost a day of work, because somebody is going to have to stay at home with the child. If they send the child to camp and they have an episode, they may be one of the over 12,000 children who will end up in emergency rooms as a result of dirty air that could be cleaned up by the passage and enactment of these regulations.

The chairman of the Environment and Public Works committee can tell us chapter and verse about the number of premature deaths and those with chronic bronchitis. These toxins that are going into our air cause cancers and neurological developmental and reproductive problems. It is particularly dangerous for children. And the source? Powerplants that have not put in the investment for clean air.

This is doable. It has been done in Maryland and in many powerplants around the Nation. In fact, my State--concerned about our children, concerned about our health--passed the Maryland Healthy Air Act, and the mercury standards in that legislation are very similar to what these regulations would require. Maryland has reduced its mercury and its SOX and NOX emissions from the 22-percent level, 90 percent mercury, 80 percent sulfur dioxide, and 70 percent NOX. And it helped our economy, as I have already pointed out, in the Brandon Shores work that was done.

But here is the challenge we have in Maryland. Maryland's experience shows that an aggressive timeline is not only achievable but it is also desirable. Powerplants are capable of meeting aggressive timelines, and the benefits are unparalleled. Air pollution control protects public health and saves billions of dollars associated with medical costs. The Environmental Protection Agency is required to do a study of cost benefit: How much cost for how much benefit? For every $1 of compliance cost, we save $3 to $9 for our economy. That is a great investment. We like those types of investments.

The Maryland experience also shows that we need a national standard to effectively address air pollution. Maryland has done what is right, but our children are still at risk. Why? Because air pollution knows no State boundary. We are downwind. We have done what is right, but our children are still at risk. That is why we need these standards. We showed that you can do it in a cost-effective way, creating jobs for our community. You can have a clean environment, you can have a growing economy. In fact, you can't do it without it. And that is what these regulations are about.

As Senator Alexander said, we have been waiting 20 years for these regulations. In 1990, Congress passed the Clean Air Act. In 2008, our courts said we can't delay it any longer.

It is our responsibility to protect the public health. It is our responsibility to do what is right. I urge my colleagues to reject this resolution that would deny us the opportunity of protecting our public health.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Is there a sufficient second?

There appears to be a sufficient second.

The clerk will call the roll.

Mr. President, I rise today to commemorate the 96th anniversary of Flag Day in the United

States and to draw attention to its heightened significance in this year, the 200th anniversary of the United States' `Second War of Independence,' the War of 1812. Since its adoption by the Second Continental Congress in 1777, our flag, with its thirteen stripes and fifty stars, has proudly stood as a beacon of liberty and justice throughout the world.

For more than 200 years our flag has stood as a tangible expression of our Nation and the lofty ideals it was created to protect. In 1916 President Woodrow Wilson sought to formally recognize the significant cultural and historical legacy that our flag embodies, proclaiming that the fourteenth of June should be known as Flag Day as a means of commemorating the Flag Resolution of 1777. While Flag Day was celebrated in many communities across the country in the years following Wilson's proclamation, it was not until 1949 that President Truman signed an Act of Congress designating June 14 of each year as National Flag Day and the week on which it falls as National Flag Week.

My State of Maryland plays a prominent role in the rich and storied history of our national Flag. Shortly after the British sack of Washington, D.C., the Royal Navy turned its gaze north, moving in force towards the strategic port city of Baltimore, MD. Despite the lack of formally trained, commissioned soldiers, the citizens of Baltimore diligently prepared the city's defenses and steadfastly stood their ground against the better equipped and trained forces of the British military. Despite their manifold disadvantages, the volunteer militia fought valiantly during the Battle of North Point, holding off the British infantry long enough for reinforcements to arrive. With their ground forces stymied, the British Navy commenced its intense, 25-hour bombardment of Fort McHenry. However, the bombardment was to no avail, as the stalwart American defenders refused to yield and the British were forced to depart.

During the bombardment, American lawyer Francis Scott Key, who was being held aboard an American flag-of-truce vessel in Baltimore Harbor, beheld by the dawns early light the American flag still fluttering in the breeze atop Fort McHenry. At that moment, Key realized the Americans had survived the assault and stopped the enemy advance. Deeply moved by the sight of the American flag after the devastating assault, he immortalized the event in a poem entitled ``The Defense of Fort McHenry,'' which was later set to music and renamed ``The Star Spangled Banner.'' On March 3, 1931, President Herbert Hoover signed a Congressional resolution, formally making the ``Star Spangled Banner'' the national anthem of the United States.

The flag that flew over Fort McHenry during that fateful night is now a national treasure that remains on display at the Smithsonian Institution as a stirring inspiration to all Americans. Each year the National Flag Day Foundation of Baltimore sponsors a moving ceremony at the Fort McHenry National Monument and Historical Shrine which brings our community together in celebration and remembrance of our illustrious history.

America's flag graces classrooms, statehouses, courtrooms, and churches, serving as a daily reminder of this Nation's past accomplishments and ongoing dedication to safeguarding individual rights and political freedom. Whether it is being carried into battle by the brave members of our armed forces as they fulfill their missions in defense of democracy and peace or flying over the public buildings, the flag is a badge of honor for all to see--a sign of our citizens' common purpose.

This week and throughout the year let us do all we can to teach younger generations the significance of our flag and to respect the men and women who have fallen to protect it. In red, white, and blue, we see the spirit of a Nation, the resilience of our Union, and the promise of a future forged in common purpose and dedication to the principles that have always kept America strong. As we reflect on our heritage, let us remember that our destiny is stitched together like those 50 stars and 13 stripes, united as one, with liberty and justice for all.

Madam President, I join Senators Shaheen and Klobuchar, and I particularly thank Senator

Whitehouse for bringing us together. Senator Boxer was on the floor earlier talking about the transportation conference committee, and Senator Begich is also here.

We are all here because of the urgency of the conference report being presented to us so that we have a multiyear reauthorization of the transportation programs of this country.

Let me point out, I know a lot of times our constituents are confused as to why legislation cannot move here. Clearly, the holdup in passing the surface transportation reauthorization is the Republicans in the House of Representatives. They are blocking a bill that has broad support from the industries that are affected by it, from the public, and from both Democrats and Republicans here in the Senate.

We passed a consensus bill. It is not even bipartisan, it is consensus. We were able to get the right balance between public transportation and transit and highways and bridges. We have the proper balance between how the money is controlled at the State level and how it is controlled at the local level. We have worked out a reform of our transportation programs to do this in a most efficient way. That bill is being held up for one reason and one reason alone; that is, the politics of the Republicans in the House of Representatives. They believe they can score political points by blocking any legislation from moving.

Let me underscore the points my colleagues have mentioned. This bill is all about jobs. It is all about rebuilding America and saving and preserving jobs.

On Sunday I was in Cumberland, MD, talking about the first Federal highway, the national highway that was built over 200 years ago, which was the first subsidized road in America. That brought jobs to our communities. It connected the East with the expanding Nation. Quite frankly, this Transportation bill connects our Nation, and it is important for jobs. In the western part of Maryland, we have the Appalachian highway that we need to complete, the north-south highway. That will affect jobs in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and West Virginia. That is what this is about here.

A short-term extension costs us jobs. Last month we lost 28,000 jobs as a result of not being able to pass a multiyear surface transportation program. We lose the construction season, as my colleagues have pointed out. And quite frankly, we have the bill before us. We have the votes to pass it.

So what we are asking today is that the Republicans in the House release this bill, allow us to move forward so we can create jobs for America and continue the economic expansion for America that we need through modern transportation. That is what this is about, and that is why we are here today, to remind our colleagues, the Republicans in the House--the extremists who are holding up this bill--this is a bill that is important for our Nation. Let's move forward with the people's business.

With that, Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the extraordinary accomplishments of T. Susan Gladhill, MSW, who will be retiring as Chief Government & Community Affairs Officer and Vice President after more than three decades of service to the University of Maryland, Baltimore--UMB.

Sue began her career at UMB as an instructor at the School of Social Work, where she had earned her Master's degree in Social Work. Then, she joined the president's office, first as an assistant in government affairs. One of her first tasks was to secure passage of legislation to privatize the University of Maryland Hospital. During Sue's tenure, she has served as associate vice president for government affairs, vice president for government affairs, and--since 1995--vice president for external affairs, a position which also includes managing UMB's communications and development. Sue has done an admirable job representing the University of Maryland's legislative interests. She helped to acquire construction funding for the R. Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center and she was involved in landmark legislation that re- established the University System of Maryland as a public corporation. She also worked on passage of the Public Private Partnership Act, which made it possible for university faculty to enter into business relationships with the private sector. This act was critically important with regard to establishing a highly successful technology transfer program.

Sue has also been a prolific fundraiser for the university, raising money for the Health Sciences & Human Service Library and the Schools of Social Work, Nursing, Law, Dentistry, Pharmacy, and Health Science Facilities I, II, and III. She has raised funds for renovating research space in Howard Hall. She was instrumental in establishing an institutional-affiliated foundation

known as the University of Maryland Baltimore Foundation, which has grown its assets to just under $200 million since 2000. She is the foundation's president and chief executive officer. Through it all, Sue has also managed to serve as an adjunct clinical associate professor at the University of Maryland School of Social Work.

I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Sue Gladhill for her dedicated service and consummate leadership at the University of Maryland, Baltimore. She has contributed greatly to the success of the excellent education and services provided by the University of Maryland's prestigious graduate schools and medical center, and she will be missed. Please join me in wishing her well in her retirement. She certainly has earned it.

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

Madam President, I rise to support the Paycheck Fairness

Act that we are going to have a chance to vote on tomorrow. I hope my colleagues will support the effort of my colleague Senator Mikulski in allowing S. 3220 to move forward. I congratulate my colleague Senator Mikulski for her incredible leadership on behalf of women's issues. She has done that throughout her entire career, and we knew she would be in the forefront of this effort for paycheck fairness. I am proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with her in this fight for basic justice in our Nation, to provide equality of pay in this country based upon a person's work and not a person's gender.

It builds on the Equal Pay Act of 1963 that was signed by President Kennedy. Yes, 1963 was the year Congress first spoke and said we are going to have equal pay for equal work in America, that America would show leadership internationally to say: Let's end discrimination against women in the workplace.

That legislation fought sex discrimination in employment wages, including the fact that such discrimination not only depressed wages and living standards for female employees, but it affected our entire labor resources here in America, holding back the development of our country. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from engaging in discrimination against their employees based on gender.

Today, women still face a pay gap. In 1963, women made 59 cents for every $1 made by a man. Those were the numbers in 1963. Today, women make just 77 cents for every $1 made by a man for equal work or comparable duties. That means a woman has to work 4 days to get 3 days' pay. That is not acceptable. I understand we have made some progress since 1963, but one would think that within a 50-year span we could have done better.

The Paycheck Fairness Act will allow us to reach our goal of equal pay for equal work. Estimates indicate that the wage gap costs women, on average, $434,000 over their careers. While I am pleased we are making progress, this progress is just too slow, and we need to move more aggressively to close this pay gap in the year 2012.

Congress took another important step forward for equal rights for women by passing the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. The legislation allows plaintiffs to sue for wage discrimination based on each new discriminatory paycheck they receive. In this case, Congress overturned a decision of the U.S. Supreme Court which held that women were only allowed to sue their employers within 180 days after the discrimination began, even if the women were not aware the discrimination was occurring, as a result of not knowing their coworkers' wages.

Quite frankly, I think the Supreme Court decision defies logic. How can someone possibly bring a case within 180 days if they do not know about the discriminatory pay differential? Congress did the right thing. But basically we held the line on allowing enforcement rather than advancing what we need to, to make sure we have an effective remedy for discrimination against women in our workplaces.

That is exactly what the Paycheck Fairness Act does. It provides for an effective enforcement so women, in fact, can hold their employers responsible if the disparity is based upon their gender, which should not be in America.

The Paycheck Fairness Act would require employers to show pay disparity is truly related to business justifications and job performance and not gender. It prohibits employer retaliation for sharing salary information with coworkers. Under current law, employers can sue and punish employees for sharing such information. In addition, this legislation strengthens remedies for pay discrimination by increasing compensation women can seek.

The Paycheck Fairness Act also would strengthen the ability of the Department of Labor to help women achieve pay equity by requiring the Department of Labor to enhance outreach and training efforts to work with employers to eliminate pay disparities and to continue to collect and disseminate wage information based on gender.

The purpose of this act is to avoid discriminatory pay, not to sue employers after the fact. Therefore, this bill, the Paycheck Fairness Act, is well balanced in providing remedies, yes, if, in fact, an employer is discriminating on pay based on gender but to provide help to employers so they can take the appropriate steps to make sure, in fact, their workforce is fairly paying their employees.

The legislation makes clear that employers are liable only for wage differentials that are not bona fide factors. Bona fide factors include items such as education, training or experience and must be job related and consistent with business necessity. Employees will also be able to argue that employers should use alternative employment practices that would serve the same business purpose without producing the wage differential.

The legislation is crafted to avoid any undue burden on small businesses. I think the Presiding Officer and I both understand the importance of small businesses with the work we do on the Small Business Committee. This act is delayed from taking effect until 6 months after its passage so the Labor Secretary and EEOC can develop technical assistance materials to assist small businesses in complying with the new law, and the agencies are charged with engaging in research, education, and outreach on the new law.

The EEOC is charged with issuing regulations to provide for the collection of pay information from employers. The law specifically states that these regulations should ``consider factors including the imposition of burdens on the employers, the frequency of required data collection reports . . . and the most effective format for data collection.''

We have heard about the cumulative information: Why can't we simplify it? Why can't we combine it? Why can't we be sensitive to small businesses? The Paycheck Fairness Act in our language makes it clear these regulations must be sensitive to the special needs of small businesses to make sure, in fact, this bill provides an effective remedy without excessive burdens on the business community.

In my own State of Maryland, the gender pay gap is 14.6 percent, according to the Joint Economic Committee. In Maryland, women's median weekly wage for full-time workers is $822, while men's is $962. That is not right. In Maryland, over one-third of married, employed mothers are their families' primary wage earner. Maryland women contribute, on average, over 40 percent of family wages and salary income to their households. It is time for women who live in Maryland--or who live in any State in our Nation--to get fair pay for the work they do.

I have the opportunity to chair the subcommittee on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that deals with international development assistance. I have worked very closely with Secretary of State Clinton to deal with gender issues internationally.

We have discovered something that should be pretty obvious, but it is something that is very telling. The way a nation treats its women will very much be a barometer as to how well that nation is doing--how well they are doing with economic growth, how stable their government is. The United States has been a leader in working with countries around the world to treat women right, to do land reform so that the women who work the fields also own the property they are working, to make sure they share fairly in the fruits of their labor. We have been a leader internationally. I am proud of the progress we are making. I am proud of what Secretary Clinton and President Obama have done in showing the world that it is in a nation's interests to make sure women are properly dealt with, that they have proper education, that they are included in the system for education, for health care, for job training, for all of those issues, and are treated fairly when it comes to the economic rewards for the work they do. But it starts with us doing what is right in America.

Fifty years is too long for women to wait for equal pay after Congress took action in 1963. As a father and grandfather of strong, intelligent women, pay equity is a personal issue for me. I want my two granddaughters to know that when they grow up, they will be paid fairly for the work and not 77 cents for every dollar of their male counterparts.

I am proud to stand with Senator Mikulski in this fight to finally ensure that equal pay for equal work becomes

a reality for all women and men. I am pleased that this legislation is endorsed by a large number of organizations that have been in the forefront of fighting for equal justice in America. It is time to act and pass the Paycheck Fairness Act.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I wish to commemorate the life of retired Navy LCDR Wesley Anthony Brown, who passed away on May 22, 2012, at the age of 85. Lieutenant Commander Brown was the sixth African American to attend and first to graduate from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1949, where he excelled as a notable student and athlete. Lieutenant Commander Brown went on to have a distinguished career in the Navy Civil Engineer Corps and retired in 1969 after serving 20 years. Lieutenant Commander Brown is survived by his wife, Crystal Brown; two daughters, Wiletta Scott and Carol Jackson; two sons, Wesley Jr., and Gary; and seven grandchildren. I would like to take a moment to remember his life and what his accomplishments meant not just for the African American midshipmen who followed him at the Naval Academy, but also for our military and for our Nation.

Lieutenant Commander Brown was born on April 3, 1927 in Baltimore, MD. He was the only child of William and Rosetta Brown. He grew up in Washington, D.C., and graduated from Dunbar High School, where he showed strong proficiency for math and a profound interest in the Navy. In fact, he worked on afternoons and evenings as a junior clerk for the Navy and during his senior year in high school he served as the Cadet Corps Battalion Commander. He later wrote an article in the Saturday Evening Post: ``I've been thinking about the Navy since I was about 8 or 10 since the time I pinned the photograph of the old USS Lexington on my bedroom wall. I arranged my high school studies to get as much math and science as possible.'' This dedication and love of the Navy lasted throughout Lieutenant Commander Brown's life.

Lieutenant Commander Brown was the first in his family to attend college. He first enrolled at Howard University before being nominated by Harlem Congressman Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. to attend the U.S. Naval Academy (USNA) in 1945. Five young African American men had entered USNA before Lieutenant Commander Brown, but they all left within a year because they could not endure the brutal hazing from hostile classmates. Lieutenant Commander Brown recalled that his first year at the Academy was ``tough,'' being subject to the constant torrent of racial epithets, taunts, and excessive demerits from upperclassman who wanted to see him fail the Naval Academy. Other midshipmen refused to sit next to him, room with him, or even allow him to join the choir. He once told an interviewer that he thought about quitting every day. Yet, he endured.

Lieutenant Commander Brown did have a few supporters at the Naval Academy. There were a handful of fellow midshipmen who were friendly to him in spite of threats from other classmates. One of them who visited his dorm room to chat and encourage him to ``hang in there'' was future president Jimmy Carter, an upperclassman and teammate on the Academy's cross-country team at the time. In a speech President Carter gave at the Naval Academy last year, he mentioned Lieutenant Commander Brown. President Carter remarked that Midshipman Brown had a significant impact on his views on the issue of race in America. He called his encounter with Wesley Brown at USNA ``my first personal experience with total integration'' and said, ``A few members of my senior class attempted to find ways to give him demerits so that he would be discharged, but Brown's good performance prevailed.''

Although African Americans had served and fought in our wars since the American Revolution, the Armed

Forces remained segregated by units until President Truman integrated the military services by executive order in 1948. There was intense resistance against any attempts to integrate the military academies and only a half dozen or so African Americans had graduated from West Point by the time Lieutenant Commander Brown was commissioned as the first African American graduate of the Naval Academy.

After Lieutenant Commander Brown graduated from the Naval Academy in 1949, he was commissioned into the Navy Civil Engineer Corps. Prior to that, he served honorably in World War II and after he graduated, he served in Korea and Vietnam. As a Navy civil engineer, he also built houses in Hawaii, roads in Liberia, waterfront facilities in the Philippines, and a seawater conversion plan in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba before retiring from the Navy in 1969. Lieutenant Commander Brown continued his professional life working for the New York State University Construction Fund, the Dormitory Authority of the State of New York, and Howard University before retiring in 1998. He also served as chairman of District of Columbia Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton's Service Academy Selection Board.

In spite of the challenges Lieutenant Commander Brown faced at the Naval Academy, he maintained a close connection to the school throughout his life and served as a member of the Naval Academy Alumni Association Board of Trustees. And in 2008, USNA honored Lieutenant Commander Brown by dedicating a new athletic facility in his name, a decision I supported while I served in the House of Representatives and since I have become a United States Senator. The Wesley A. Brown Field House was the first and only building dedicated to a living alumnus and, in his honor, the building hosts an annual track and field invitational. During the dedication of the building on the banks of the Severn River, ADM Michael Mullen, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stated, ``He fought a war his whole life for all of us to improve who we are as individuals, who we are both as a Navy and a nation. It was his noble calling and it was his call to service and citizenship that led to lasting change in our Navy and in our nation.'' In another tribute to this pioneer, a consortium of minority Naval Academy alumni established the Lieutenant Commander Wesley A. Brown '49 Honor Scholar scholarship in 2007 which awards up to $5,000 annually to four individuals who are accepted into any 4-year university in Maryland.

Although we have come a long way since Lieutenant Commander Brown's days as a midshipman at the U.S. Naval Academy, our Armed Forces and Nation are still challenged with discrimination based on race, gender, religion, and the other attributes of heterogeneity that make up this great country. While minority and female students may walk freely through our military academies without the audible taunts and slurs, we know that some of them face hazing and harassment behind closed doors because of who they are. While I know that Department of Defense leaders have a zero-tolerance policy regarding discrimination and harassment in their Service Academies, commands and units, that is not enough. I call on them to go a step further and redouble their efforts to communicate to those who currently serve and those who will serve our Nation in the future what makes our military the greatest force in history: the fact that our Armed Forces reflect the rich diversity of America. We owe it to Lieutenant Commander Brown and others like him who bravely endured racism and discrimination to pave the way so that others could serve honorably, too, and accomplish exceptional achievements on behalf of our country. Therefore, let Lieutenant Commander Brown's life be a testament to how his strength, courage, and humility through adversity not only transformed the people around him but profoundly affected the Naval Academy and our Nation. Today, minorities comprise more than 20 percent of the brigade of midshipmen and many of these young men and women have stated that Lieutenant Commander Brown was their inspiration. All Americans are fortunate to have had Lieutenant Commander Wesley Anthony Brown's selfless service and example.

Mr. President, Memorial Day is a time to pay tribute to those who have given ``the last full measure of devotion'' in the service of our great country. I believe this Memorial Day is especially significant as we pause to reflect on some of the events of the past year and acknowledge the passing of the last surviving veteran of World War I, the end the Iraq War, and a renewed commitment to wind down our engagement in Afghanistan by 2014.

Since the first colonial troops took up arms in the fight for our independence in 1775, more than 1.1 million American soldiers, sailors, and airmen have died in the wars and conflicts fought to defend our Nation, our freedom, and our ideals. In the past 10 years, we have lost over 6,400 brave Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan. The death of each one of these servicemen and women represents not only a tragic loss to their loved ones, but to their community, and to our Nation.

The American tradition of Memorial Day--originally known as Decoration Day--has its roots in local springtime tributes that were held in the North and the South during and immediately after the Civil War and following the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln on April 14, 1865. On May 1, 1865, nearly 10,000 freedmen, teachers, preachers, missionaries, and Union troops properly landscaped and covered with flowers the unmarked graves of some 250 or more Union prisoners of war who had died in captivity at the Charleston Race Course, a site now known as Hampton Park. On April 26, 1866, grieving mothers, sisters, wives, and daughters in Columbus, MS placed flowers on the graves of Confederate soldiers who had died in the Battle of Shiloh. While they grieved for their own lost loved ones, they saw that nearby graves of the Union soldiers were neglected, so they placed flowers on these graves as well. On May 5, 1866, an official commemoration was held in Waterloo, NY to honor local veterans of the Civil War. Businesses were closed and flags were flown at half-mast to honor the dead. On May 5, 1868, MG John A. Logan, who headed the Grand Army of the Republic, GAR, which was an organization of Union veterans, declared that May 30 of each year should be Decoration Day, a time for the Nation to festoon the graves of Union and Confederate war dead with flowers. Logan said, ``We should guard their graves with sacred vigilance. . . . Let pleasant paths invite the coming and going of reverent visitors and fond mourners. Let no neglect, no ravages of time, testify to the present or to the coming generations that we have forgotten as a people the cost of a free and undivided republic.'' The first large observance was held that same year at Arlington National Cemetery. In 1966, Congress and President Lyndon Johnson declared that Waterloo is the official birthplace of Memorial Day but it is apparent that many communities and people across America can claim some of the credit.

Shortly after World War I, Decoration Day ceremonies were no longer limited to honoring those who had died in the Civil War. Rather, the commemoration was altered to embrace the men and women who have died in all American wars. In 1971, Congress passed legislation to make Memorial Day a national holiday and to fix its date as the last Monday in May. In December 2000, Congress passed ``The National Moment of Remembrance Act'' (Public Law 106 579, which encourages all Americans to pause wherever they are at 3:00 PM local time on Memorial Day for 1 minute of silence to remember and honor those who have died in service to our Nation.

While the Memorial Day we will celebrate this Monday is approaching the sesquicentennial of its birth, the tradition of honoring those who have fallen in war is probably as old--or nearly as old--as human history itself. Over 2,400 years ago--in 431 B.C.E.--Pericles paid tribute to the Athenian soldiers who had fallen in battle at the beginning of the Peloponnesian War, saying

For this offering of their lives made in common by them all

they each of them individually received that renown which

never grows old, and for a sepulchre, not so much that in

which their bones have been deposited, but that noblest of

shrines wherein their glory is laid up to be eternally

remembered upon every occasion on which deed or story shall

call for its commemoration. For heroes have the whole earth

for their tomb;

and in lands far from their own, where the column with its

epitaph declares it, there is enshrined in every breast a

record unwritten with no tablet to preserve it, except that

of the heart.

This Memorial Day, in the spirit of compassion and empathy shown by the Confederate widows who placed flowers on the graves of Union soldiers in Columbus, MS nearly 150 years ago, I would like to mention some facts about those fallen servicemen and women we too often neglect to consider. According to a recent study by the Army, suicides among U.S. servicemembers increased 80 percent from 2004 to 2008. The study confirmed that there is an increased risk of suicide among those who experience mental health disorder diagnosis associated with the stress of combat. Protracted military operations requiring multiple deployments over the past decade have made mental health disorders the signature wounds for our military members returning from the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. A comprehensive study by RAND found that approximately 18.5 percent of those servicemen and women returning from deployment reported symptoms consistent with a diagnosis of post- traumatic stress disorder, PTSD, or depression. Up to 30 percent of troops returning home from combat develop serious mental health problems within 3 to 4 months. And since mental health issues often are not immediately addressed while our servicemen and women are on active duty, or because of the lasting traumas of war, we see even higher numbers of mental illness diagnosis among our veterans. According to a Government Accountability Office report, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, VA, data ``show that from fiscal year 2004 through fiscal year 2008, the number of unique veterans receiving treatment for PTSD increased by 60 percent from over 274,000 to over 442,000.''

I believe that the best way we can truly honor those who have sacrificed themselves upon the altar of freedom is not just to fulfill our solemn obligation to care for their widows and orphans. More than that, we must care for their brothers and sisters in arms who have also borne the battle, and who have returned to us wounded, ill and injured, and for the family members and other individuals who selflessly care for them. These soldiers and sailors and airmen and their caregivers also deserve our gratitude, our accolades, our compassion--and our support. Therefore, I commend the VA Secretary Shinseki's recent decision to hire an additional 1,900 mental health staff at VA facilities to ensure greater care for our servicemembers suffering from the wounds of war, both physical and emotional.

It is not just about providing adequate resources, however. Having an adequate number of mental health professionals is just one component of ensuring access to care. Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates correctly acknowledged that the greatest obstacle to servicemembers receiving necessary mental health treatment is the stigma too often associated with seeking help for their psychological injuries. I frequently hear from servicemembers who believe that seeking mental health services will hurt their military and post-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 active duty military members, reservists, and veterans. Those who suffer in silence will seek treatment only when they are assured they can truly seek such treatment and speak about their problems freely and off-the- record. Meanwhile, as more and more go untreated, we will continue to see a rise in suicides and other tragic incidents among our military members and veterans--a preventable epidemic, which is heaping tragedy upon tragedy.

During this holiday weekend and on Monday in particular we will see many American flags and flowers adorning the graves of those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for our Nation. I will remember in particular the 114 Marylanders who have been killed in our most recent conflicts as I remind myself that our freedom is not free. And I will remind myself that the best way to honor their ultimate sacrifice is to ensure that we are unwavering in our resolve not only to care for their widows and orphans, but also for those who do return to us wounded, ill, and injured--including those whose injuries are emotional. Let us reaffirm our commitment to support all of these individuals and their families and other caregivers this Memorial Day, and every Memorial Day hereafter.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amended be set aside so that I may call up amendment No. 2125.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that that amendment be set aside so I may call up my amendment No. 2141.

Madam President, I rise to discuss the FDA Safety and Innovation Act, the bill now under consideration here in the Senate.

I applaud Chairman Harkin and Ranking Member Enzi for their leadership in moving this critical legislation through the HELP committee, and now to the Senate floor.

As an agency of the Department of Health and Human Services, the FDA has as part of its broad mission to protect Americans' health by assuring the safety of drugs, biologics, medical devices, our Nation's food supply, vaccines, tobacco, cosmetics, and animal food and drugs. Every single day, every single American depends on the vital work of FDA's employees.

There is a second key element to the FDA's work--helping to speed innovations to the marketplace through the drug, biologic, and medical device approval process. It's that component of the FDA's mission that we are addressing this week--reauthorizing the user fees that help fund the approval process.

I'm proud of the FDA's workers--the majority of the agency's more than 11,000 employees are based at its headquarters in Silver Spring, MD. It's

there that the process of medical innovation, which begins at NIH with basic research, is completed as lifesaving drugs and medical devices are approved for use.

A recent report from the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics found that in 2011 ``medicines with new mechanisms of action were launched in greater numbers than in prior years, with many representing significant breakthroughs and first-time therapies became available to treat several types of cancer, multiple sclerosis, hepatitis C, and cardiovascular conditions.''

At the same time, we know that greater resources are needed for the agency to be able to fulfill its mission in a timely and effective manner. For all of our Nation's investment in health care research, additional new medicines will not reach patients promptly unless the FDA has the necessary funds to perform its regulatory duties.

That's why the user fee amendments are so important. This 5-year reauthorization bill is Congress' opportunity to improve and update the regulatory process, and augment appropriations so that the agency can achieve its goals.

The purpose of the user fee program is to reduce the time in which FDA can review and make decisions on marketing applications. Lengthy review times affect drug and medical device manufacturers, who face delays in bringing their products to market, and more importantly they affect patients, who face delays in receiving needed treatments and cures.

The bill reported out of committee will move us forward. It will reauthorize the prescription drug user fee program, PDUFA, through October 1, 2017.

This is necessary so that the Federal Goverment can continue to collect application, establishment, and product fees from drug companies to support the review process for the next five years.

It will also reauthorize the medical device user fee program, MDUFA, through 2017 as well, and in an effort to ensure that the FDA's personnel needs are met, it would authorize a streamlined hiring of employees. Additionally, the Critical Path Public-Private partnerships, which are so important in encouraging medical product innovation, are reauthorized through 2017.

Two new user fee programs are established in the bill for generics and one for biosimilars. It's estimated that the monies generated from the generic user fee program will enable the FDA approval time for generics to be shortened from the current time frame of 30 months to 10, speeding savings to patients and to all taxpayers, as Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP programs will reap considerable cost savings.

The base bill takes key first steps toward resolving the vexing issue of drug shortages. I want to acknowledge Senator Klobuchar's work in this area.

All of us have heard from our community hospitals and physicians about the anguish they feel when they cannot secure medicines necessary to treat the patients in their care. I certainly have, and I have also heard from patients themselves who cannot fathom how such shortages could occur.

Carey Fitzmaurice of Bethesda, who is undergoing treatment for ovarian cancer, wrote to me:

My doctor put me on Doxil and carboplatin to try to get rid

of some tumors. Doxil was chosen because of recent research

showing that it works especially well in those patients with

the BRCA gene, like me.

I had four treatments with both drugs and was responding

very, very well. I have now missed three doses of Doxil due

to the shortage. I am ``treading water'' with the Carbo but

am frustrated that I am no longer making progress towards

remission. Then there is all of the stress involved with the

shortage--not knowing if there is anything I can do, or what

will happen next or how long I will be in treatment.

I am trying to continue to be a wife and mother and to hold

down a job. This shortage is adding insult to injury. I

wonder why we are being asked to raise money to find cures

when we can't even get access to the cures that exist now.

Carey is one reason why I am a cosponsor of Senator Klobuchar's bipartisan bill, the Preserving Access to Life Saving Medications Act, and I am pleased that the bill's early notification requirement provisions are included in the PDUFA bill we are considering today. It also requires the Secretary to establish a task force and create a strategic plan to address shortages.

This is also an urgent matter because shortages affect the ability to conduct clinical trials. Senator Rockefeller and I worked together some years ago to get Medicare beneficiaries coverage for the routine costs associated with clinical trials.

As a result of Senator Brown's work on the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies now must also cover the routine costs of trials. Access to trials often means the difference between life and death for cancer patients, and the availability of trials has enormous implications for the effectiveness of treatments for all patients going forward. There are more than 150 cancer clinical trials being conducted now at the NIH Clinical Center in Bethesda.

But the impact of shortages on clinical trials has not received a great deal of attention outside the research world. It is an extremely important issue for Medicare beneficiaries, who have the highest rates of cancer incidence. Cancer trials do not usually use placebos.

Rather, they compare standard of care drugs, versus, or in combination with, the experimental drug.

Doctors face difficult choices when the standard of care drug is in short supply. They must decide whether to use the limited supply of an existing drug to treat new patients, or use it in clinical trials to help find a cure for those who are seeking new therapies. Cancer trials have been delayed, limited the number of patients enrolled in the trial or stopped the trial entirely because there is simply not enough of the standard of care drug.

So I am pleased that the bill contains language requiring the Secretary's strategic plan to considering the impact of drug shortages on research and clinical trials.

The Finance Committee held hearings on drug shortages earlier this year as well, and we learned that the majority of shortages are found in the generic drug market. Some are due to a lack of raw materials, while others occur because the drugs yield lower profits than newer generics, and the interest in continuing to market those drugs is no longer there.

The notification language in this bill is a good start, but I believe it should be strengthened to better ensure compliance, and so I have cosponsored Senator Blumenthal's amendment establishing civil monetary penalties for manufacturers who knowingly fail to notify the FDA of shortages for essential medicines.

I express my appreciation to Senator Pryor for his leadership on nanotechnology. I am pleased to join him in this effort and am hopeful that the language we have sponsored can be included in this bill.

Nanotechnology has become increasingly indispensible in our daily lives--everything from cellphones and MP3 players, to packaging of our snack foods, to cancer treatments in development employ the use of nanotechnology.

As this burgeoning technology continues to power more of our consumer products and drive job creation in America, it is essential that we fully assess, understand, and address any risks that it may pose to safety, public health and our environment.

By soundly assessing the safety of nanotechnology and developing best practices, the Nanotechnology Regulatory Science Act of 2011 will further job creation, public safety and growth in the industry.

Our bill would establish a program within the FDA to assess the health and safety implications of using nanotechnology in everyday products, and develop best practices for companies using nanotechnology. This new program would bring more highly-skilled research jobs to Maryland.

FDA's laboratories and research facilities at its consolidated headquarters are ideally suited to conduct the scientific studies required under the bill.

The USDA's Beltsville Agricultural Research Center, BARC, is similarly equipped to provide innovative scientific technology, training, methods development, and technical expertise to improve public health.

Lastly, I urge my colleagues to support language addressing the lack of available information on the benefits and adverse effects of drugs and medical devices for minority populations.

Today, warnings and safety precautions are included as part of the initial approval by the FDA. The Agency

may also require them post approval--after the drug has been approved and sold for months or years. We know that additional side effects or risks may become known once a product is in the market and a much larger, diverse patient population is using it.

Ideally, a detailed conversation between physician and patient about the risks versus the potential benefit of taking a drug would always take place in a timely and informed manner. However, this is not always the case and is especially true if the warning is added after drug is initially prescribed and been on the market for an appreciable time period.

The randomized controlled trials used by the FDA when reviewing new drug applications, while the gold standard for examining efficacy, do not necessarily reflect the overall population for a variety of reasons.

For example, members of minority groups are generally underrepresented in clinical drug trials even though they are disproportionately affected by diseases such as diabetes, hypertension, colorectal, prostate and cervical cancer, stroke, congestive heart failure, acute coronary disease, and asthma.

We know that there are racial and ethnic differences in responses to pharmaceuticals, and they may not become known until the drug is in wide use, certainly beyond the constraints of a controlled clinical trial.

In today's world, post-approval surveys and studies are becoming more prevalent, and our ability to discern the effect of a drug over time on a variety of patient types is significantly improving. This information should be made available in a variety of ways to ensure that it reaches physicians, payors and patients, and I have filed an amendment that would greatly improve access to this information.

It would build on the current HHS ``Strategic Action Plan to Reduce Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities'' by directing the Secretary to develop a communications plan to ``address the best strategy for communicating safety alerts, changes to the label or labeling of drugs, including black box warnings, biological products or devices, health advisories, any information identifying particular subpopulations, and any other relevant information as determined appropriate to enhance communication, including varied means of electronic communication.''

This amendment has the support of the chairman and the ranking member, as well as the FDA and BIO, and I urge the Senate to adopt it.

Mr. President, PDUFA reauthorization is essential to furthering the Nation's health, bringing the medical innovations conceived by researchers and entrepreneurs into practice, and creating jobs. I look forward to working through the process to improve this bipartisan legislation.

Again, I thank and congratulate Senator Harkin and Senator Enzi for their incredible work in bringing forward this bill that is so important to the public health of our Nation. We are dealing with the safety of drugs, biologics, medical devices, our Nation's food supply, vaccines, cosmetics, and the list goes on and on. It is critically important that we have the proper authorization so that the FDA has the resources it needs to advance innovation into the marketplace, products that fall within the jurisdiction of the FDA.

We know that the basic research has gone on at NIH. To get products to market, it is important that the FDA have the resources in order to move the process forward. I am proud of the 11,000-member workforce headquartered in Silver Spring, MD, for the FDA. They work very hard. This reauthorization legislation of the user fees will give them the tools in order to get the job done. I am particularly impressed that this is a 5-year reauthorization bill that will give them predictability, which is needed in order to get the job done.

I applaud Senator Harkin and Senator Enzi. We don't see enough of these bills moving forward with the type of process our leaders have brought forward. They have resolved a lot of the issues, and we thank them for that. They have brought us a bill that enjoys broad bipartisan support and is in the best interest of our Nation. I am proud to support this legislation, and I thank them for the manner in which they have proceeded in committee and now on the floor.

Also, I point out that this bill deals with the drug shortage issues. I applaud the occupant of the chair, Senator Klobuchar, and her efforts in dealing with those issues. We need more effective notification of potential shortages so that we can take appropriate action to make sure the people of this Nation have an adequate supply of medicines.

Let me share with my colleagues a letter I received from Carey Fitzmaurice of Bethesda, MD, who is undergoing treatment for ovarian cancer. She wrote:

My doctor put me on Doxil and carboplatin to try to get rid

of some tumors. Doxil was chosen because of recent research

showing that it works especially well in those patients with

the BRCA gene, like me.

I had four treatments with both drugs and was responding

very, very well. I have now missed three doses of Doxil due

to the shortage. I am ``treading water'' with the Carbo but

am frustrated that I am no longer making progress towards

remission. Then there is all of the stress involved with the

shortage--not knowing if there is anything I can do, or what

will happen next, or how long I will be in treatment.

I am trying to continue to be a wife and mother and to hold

down a job. This shortage is adding insult to injury. I

wonder why we are being asked to raise money to find cures

when we can't even get access to the cures that exist now.

That is a frustration that is out there on drug shortages. I am very pleased that this legislation will move us in the right direction in answering that question.

It doesn't only affect those under active treatment, it also affects a number of clinical trials. There are currently about 150 clinical trials at NIH involving cancer and trying to find answers and cures for cancer. The problem is that on these clinical trials they don't use placebos, they use the current drug therapy that is known for the treatment against an experimental process. If there are not enough drugs available to treat people for the current protocols, how can those drugs be used in a clinical trial. As a result, we are finding it very challenging to move forward with the clinical trials that are needed. This legislation recognizes that concern and specifically deals with it. I congratulate the committee leadership for addressing that issue.

I also will mention one other issue: nanotechnology. I congratulate Senator Pryor for his leadership in this area. Programs at FDA to access health safety facts and using nanotechnology in everyday products is something we need to do. This legislation advances that. I point out that I am proud that the lab facilities at the FDA are fully capable of dealing with the challenges presented by nanotechnology. This legislation acknowledges that.

We also, in Maryland, are proud of the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center, which will advance nanotechnology and the impact it has on everyday products and safety. Those issues will be addressed also by the underlying bill. We very much appreciate the leadership of the committee.

Let me talk for a moment about the two amendments I have brought forward. Amendment No. 2125 deals with safety warnings, particularly as they affect the minority community. Clinical trials don't always represent the diversity of our community. We know there is underrepresentation of minorities within clinical trials. Quite frankly, when the FDA gives approval, they give approval to the known risks, as I am sure you are all aware, but it doesn't always represent the impact on all communities. We also know there are racial and ethnic differences in response to pharmaceuticals, and they may not become known until the drug is in wide use, certainly beyond the constraints of a controlled clinical trial. So we do have the initial approval of FDA that includes the known risks, but we also have the capacity under FDA to do postapproval warnings. My amendment deals with that aspect.

Health and Human Services has a strategy to deal with minority health and health disparities. It is called the Strategic Action Plan to Reduce Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities. We also now have an institute at the National Institutes of Health that deals solely with minority health and health disparities. We have a commitment to do a better job as a nation in dealing with minority health disparities. This amendment would help us move forward in that regard.

One particular drug that is used to treat an inflammatory disorder has been determined by several studies to have a mortality risk that is three times higher for African-Americans than the general public. However, it is still widely prescribed, and ads for the product on the Internet and on television prominently feature African-American actors.

This is an area in which the National Medical Association and many other groups concerned about the quality of minority health have focused on for years. Beyond the black box warning, which is the most serious warning that can be issued about the side effects of approved drugs, there are other concerns about products that are marketed for the overall population that may have side effects, but the specific data has not been developed yet to warrant a black box warning.

The amendment I have offered directs the FDA to develop communication plans to address the best strategy for communicating benefits and risks, safety alerts, changes to the label or labeling of drugs, including black box warnings, biological products or devices, health advisories, any information identifying particular subpopulations, and any other relevant information as determined appropriate to enhance communication, including a variety of means of electronic communication.

I might point out this amendment has the support of the FDA and BIO, and it is budget neutral. So I would urge my colleagues to support this amendment to advance the commitment we all have made to deal with reducing and hopefully one day eliminating minority health disparities in our health care system. It is totally consistent with the Strategic Action Plan to Reduce Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities at the Department of Health and Human Services.

The second amendment I have brought forward, amendment No. 2141, deals with small businesses. This is a very appropriate amendment, as it is being considered during Small Business Week. We all acknowledge the importance of small business in the growth of our economy. Two out of every three new jobs are created through small business. We get more innovation through our small businesses on a per-employee basis than we do through larger companies. It is critically important small businesses be energized if our economy is going to rebound, as we know it needs to.

This is particularly true as we deal with innovation in drug development or medical devices. My amendment deals with the issues of coordinating the work between the FDA and small business. It provides a listing of the staffing levels at the small business offices of the FDA so that we know the capacity we have and we can evaluate that. It is our responsibility to do that. It provides an overview of the status of partnership efforts between the FDA and the SBA. We want the two agencies, the Food and Drug Administration and the Small Business Administration, to be working in concert to advance the cause for small businesses as well as the mission of the FDA.

My amendment provides a summary of all outreach efforts to small businesses and small business associations. It details the number of small businesses receiving protocol assistance. It shows the number of unsolicited and solicited grant applications to small businesses, again, so we can evaluate that. Most importantly, it calls for the examination of existing barriers, particularly as it relates to the generic drug shortages.

It is interesting that with regard to the fee schedule, the FDA has the authority to do waivers as it relates to brand names. We know a lot of the generics are where we have our shortages because of the economics of the circumstances. But the SBA has limited ability to waive the fee structure as it relates to the general development of generic drugs. My amendment would ask the SBA to report back to Congress on what impact that has on small businesses being innovative in developing generic drugs to help us generally with less costly drugs that are available for treatment, but also to make sure we deal with the drug shortage issue, which I alluded to earlier.

This amendment is also supported by Senator Landrieu, the chairman of the Small Business Committee, on which I have the pleasure of serving. I urge my colleagues to support both amendments I have brought forward. I believe they only enhance the strength of the bill before us and are totally consistent with the work of the chairman and the ranking member of the committee.

With that, Madam President, I would again urge my colleagues to support both amendments and to support the underlying bill.

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

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 take this time to bring to the attention of my colleagues that we are celebrating National Small Business Week, which is a very important occasion because, as the Senator from New Hampshire understands, the growth engine for America is our small businesses. When we are looking at job growth, which we all know we need in order to get our economy moving again, we know there will be more jobs created from small companies than from large companies. About two out of every three jobs created in America will come from small companies.

We also know when we are looking at innovation, it is the small businesses that file the patents and come up with the creative new ideas for America to become as competitive as we need to be. There are an incredibly larger number of patents per employee from small companies than from large companies. So the growth engine for America's economy rests with our small businesses.

I am proud to serve on the Small Business Committee under the leadership of Chairman Landrieu. We have brought forward many initiatives that help small businesses, and I think it has made a huge difference as our economy is starting to recover. We are now looking at 25 consecutive months of continuous private sector job growth where we have turned around the economy and we are now growing. In large measure I think it is because of the attention we have paid to the small business community. We are proud of what it has meant for our entire country.

Let me speak a little bit about my State of Maryland. We have over 500,000 small businesses in Maryland that employ over 1 million people. So it is by far a huge part of the Maryland economy. Our strategy over the last several years during the Obama administration has been to concentrate on small businesses and, in particular, to help them recover from this economic recession.

The first effort was to increase the capacity of the Small Business Administration. I was proud of the Obama budget that put more money back into the Small Business Administration. I was proud of the initiative we had in the Senate to add funds to the Small Business Administration so that the SBA could indeed be the advocate for the small business community; so that small businesses have an agency in the government that is fighting for their issues. It has made a huge difference. When I speak with the small businesses in Maryland, they tell me they now have a much greater capacity for help through counselors and advocates at the Small Business Administration.

We then dealt with the No. 1 issue that was brought to our attention--and I am sure the Presiding Officer has heard the same stories in New Hampshire I have heard in Maryland--that small businesses have had a hard time getting access to capital; that we need to do a better job of providing capital, particularly during a tough economic period where small businesses don't have the same deep pockets as the larger companies.

So we increased the SBA loan limits, increased the amount of the Federal loan guarantee in order to make it more attractive for banks to lend money to small businesses, knowing full well the government was standing behind those loans. That made some monies available. We looked for creative new programs to help our small businesses, including one in the Treasury Department. We also looked at helping our States by initiating partnerships with our States.

The additional funds we made available in Washington to help build the State programs has made many more loans available to small companies in Maryland. All of that has helped in providing opportunities for our small businesses.

The reauthorization of the SBIR Program and the STTR Program has made

a huge difference. Since 1983, in my State of Maryland, $1.5 billion of funding has come from the SBIR Program. For those who are listening who may not know what this program is about, it is about innovation. It is small companies that are involved in biotech and cybertech areas where they use innovation to create jobs. In my State and in the Presiding Officer's State, they are using these funds to create opportunities for America to be competitive internationally.

We can state chapter and verse for our national defense research or for clean energy technology where small businesses are taking advantage of these innovative research grants and have been able to build jobs in our communities and make America more competitive for the future. The reauthorization and thus predictability of funding under the SBIR Program and the increased amounts that are available will create, and has already created, more job opportunities. We got that done, and that was certainly a major step forward.

We passed bills providing tax breaks to small businesses, including the expensing of their equipment, so they can go out and buy equipment and keep things moving.

I ask unanimous consent for an additional 5 minutes.

Madam President, I thank my friend from Arizona for his courtesy. I will try not to use the entire 5 minutes.

There are other areas where we have also moved forward to help our small businesses, including credits for their health insurance so they can cover their employees. In my own State of Maryland, we have set up an African Trade Office which has provided opportunities in international trade--an area where we think we can still make progress.

I could talk about many of the success stories of Maryland small businesses that have used the SBIR Program, including one to develop new treatment for smallpox vaccines to make them more efficient. We have had examples of where we are now developing a vaccine to deal with the common cold.

I was at an SBA event where we honored the leading entrepreneurs in our State, and I can cite an example of a small businessperson, Janet Amirault, who was the small businessperson of the year--the CEO of a software development company. She has had some personal issues with her health, but despite that, for the last 3 years she has had 90 percent growth in her revenues. This is the innovation we have in Maryland that comes out of the small business community.

Taylor Made Transportation Services, which first qualified under the 8(a) program, has now graduated from that. They started with a small transportation company that provided transportation for people with special needs and is now providing for diverse transportation needs in our communities. All of that has developed through small business programs that we helped develop.

So I come to the floor today to announce a new initiative that I will be filing today, the Small Business Goaling Act, to deal with another problem we have with small businesses that I hope we will be able to take up on the floor of the Senate in the very near future. It would increase the prime goals for small businesses in government procurement from 23 percent to 25 percent and increase the subcontracting goals to 40 percent, adding transparency to how government provides procurement opportunities for government contracts to small businesses.

We have also taken some action in dealing with bundling and trying to prevent the bundling of small contracts into large contracts that makes it more difficult for small businesses to get prime contracts. I believe this legislation will improve transparency and visibility so we can, in fact, provide more opportunities; so the government leads by example, by using small companies more to help them grow. It will help a variety of small businesses, including disabled veteran companies, women-owned companies, and minority-owned companies so that all will benefit from these opportunities.

I wish to thank the chairperson of the Small Business Committee, Senator Landrieu, for her extraordinary help in getting this bill together. It will help small businesses by allowing them to grow and create jobs, thereby helping our country in recovery.

Once again, I thank my friend from Arizona for giving me these extra few minutes. The best way to help celebrate National Small Business Week is for us to pay more attention to helping small businesses grow.

With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today I wish to honor the life and legacy of Sister Jeannette Murray, Order of Saint Benedict, who cofounded the Benedictine School in Ridgely, MD. According to Sister Jeannette, it has always been her lifetime dream to provide a complete and total program that will meet the needs of individuals with developmental disabilities. She has more than accomplished that goal. The Sisters of St. Benedict recognized the need for a school that would educate children and young adults with developmental disabilities and established the Benedictine School in 1959 with 19 students. Since that time, the school has provided comprehensive services for more than 1,000 individuals, including those with no meaningful family support. In 2009, the Benedictine School celebrated 50 years as a nationally recognized, accredited, and cost-effective living and learning environment for children and adults with developmental disabilities. Most recently, Sister Jeannette led the charge for the school's therapeutic aquatic center, spearheaded a $10 million campaign for capital projects and endowments, and challenged the community to realize her dream of providing 24/7 care for aging loved ones. In April 2012, the Benedictine School broke ground for Senior Homes, ``universal design'' homes for seniors with disabilities that will offer around- the-clock care.

Earlier this year, Sister Jeannette retired as executive director of Benedictine School, and on June 24 she is being honored by the community--donors, students, residents, civic and community leaders-- for her work on behalf of the developmentally disabled. Sister Jeannette has made a tremendous difference in the lives of her students and their families and to all who hear and believe in her work. Her dream has benefitted not only her students and their families but also the larger community.

I hope my colleagues will join me in thanking Sister Jeannette Murray--the ``little woman with the huge heart'' as the parents of her students call her--for her vision, dedication, and service and in wishing her well in her retirement as she continues to inspire others to share her vision ``to see people with developmental disabilities living meaningful, personally satisfying and well supported lives in the community of their choice.''