Floor Statements

Mr. President, today I pay special tribute to the outstanding accomplishments of Jim McComb, executive director of the Maryland Association of Resources for Families and Youth--MARFY--since 1989. I have known Jim for many years and I have the utmost respect for him and what he has been able to accomplish for children in Maryland and across the Nation.

Jim McComb is known as one of our Nation's leading child advocates. He was among the first in the country to call for the elimination of restraints and seclusion in the treatment of children. He led the effort that made Maryland one of the first States in the country to ensure that college tuition would be available for young students in foster care.

During his tenure as executive director, MARFY greatly expanded its role in advocating for disadvantaged children and youth, those with disabilities, and their families. Under his leadership, the association played a prominent role in forming several advocacy coalitions including the Maryland Juvenile Justice Coalition and the Coalition to Protect Maryland's Children.

Jim McComb began his career in the early 1960s as a part-time childcare worker at Edgemeade, a residential treatment center and school for adolescents with mental illness and severe emotional disturbances in Prince George's County, MD. By the end of the 1960s, he had become the director of residential services for Edgemeade of Virginia.

In 1970, Jim went to Ironton, OH, to become the administrator of the Ohio Center for Youth and Family Development, a residential treatment center for adolescents. From 1975 through 1979 he was administrator for contracts and services with Youth Resources Centers, Inc., Roanoke VA. In 1979, he returned to Maryland as the chief executive officer for Edgemeade and in 1989 he became the executive director of MARFY.

I had the distinct pleasure of working with Jim on the Foster Care Independence Act that was enacted into law in 1999. The bill increased education and support services for foster care children between ages 18 and 21, an age group that had previously been tremendously underserved.

In the next phase of his life, Jim will serve on the board of directors of the

Maryland Foster Youth Resource Center, which provides a variety of supportive resources for both youth in foster care and alumni of the foster care system.

I ask my colleagues to join me in applauding the many accomplishments of Jim McComb and in wishing him success in his future endeavors.

Madam President, last November the American people voted for change. I think it is appropriate today, as we are considering the conference report on the budget, which is the blueprint for our Nation, and we also celebrate the 100th day of Barack Obama's Presidency and his administration--I think it is time to reflect where we have been in these last 100 days and the changes that have occurred. But first it is important to point out the mess President Obama inherited.

The United States is engaged in two wars. We have the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression inherited by this administration. We have record deficits inherited by this administration. The international reputation of the United States is badly damaged.

In 100 days, the Obama administration, working with us in Congress, has an impressive record of accomplishments. I think it is important to point out that the No. 1 priority, as all my constituents tell me on a daily basis, is to fix our economy. Our economy is in deep trouble. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act put the recovery of our economy first by creating jobs. We need more jobs, to save jobs, create jobs. The Obama administration put that as their top priority.

But they also invested in America's future in education, in health care, and in energy; protecting our essential services for America's most vulnerable people; and providing tax cuts to help restore consumer confidence in our economy.

That was the first priority. That bill has passed and its impact is now being felt in our country. But in the Congress, under the leadership of President Obama working with us, other things were accomplished in a very short period of time.

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Equity Act was passed, guaranteeing we have an enforceable right for equal pay.

We passed the Children's Health Insurance Program that now covers 4 million more children with health insurance. I am particularly pleased that law includes dental care so children will be able to see a dentist.

We passed legislation protecting public lands and protecting our environment for future generations.

We passed the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, for Americans to be able to engage in volunteer service to their country throughout their lifetime.

The Obama administration, working with this Congress, has restored America's international leadership. We have made it clear from the beginning that this Nation will not permit the use of torture, focused our missions in both Iraq and Afghanistan of going after the terrorists--which is what we should do to make America safe--and prepared to join the international community in combating global climate change.

We have done a lot during the first 100 days--quite a record. Today we are on the verge of passing the budget conference report which will provide a new blueprint for America's future. What are the priorities? The priority first, is the economy. Again, we have to get out of this recession. This budget allows us to invest in creating new jobs. It will do it in a fiscally responsible way and will invest in health care, energy, and education.

President Obama, as I pointed out earlier, inherited quite a fiscal mess. President Bush, during the 8 years of his Presidency, started with a surplus. Let me remind you, 8 years ago we had a surplus, a $236 billion surplus in 2000. The current year's deficit is $1.75 trillion. This was the fiscal recklessness of the Bush administration that has been inherited by the Obama administration. It has cost us jobs. We are losing half a million jobs each and every month. That is what was confronting the President back when he took office.

We have a housing crisis, people losing their homes. They are still losing their homes today. We have to pay attention to that. We have got to give confidence so that people can keep their homes. It is important for individuals, it is important for our communities, it is important for our economy.

Banks are not lending money. They still are not lending money. We have got to get our financial system working the way it should so that America can grow. We have got to help small business. That is the growth engine of America in order to create jobs and move forward with innovation.

What we need to do is have a budget that puts our priorities on America's future. Well, the budget President Obama has that we are about ready to pass does that. It helps our economy but does it in a fiscally responsible way. It puts us on a glide path to reduce the Federal budget by two-thirds by the year 2014.

We are working on the economy, working on creating jobs, but we are also working on fiscal responsibility to get out from this deficit. Because we not only have a moral obligation to our children and grandchildren to pay our bills, it is critically important for the fiscal strength of America that we get our budget back into balance. So as we come out of this recession, as we create the jobs that this budget will allow us to do, we also put us on a glidepath toward fiscal responsibility.

But the budget recognizes another essential point. We are not going to do things the way we have done them in the past. We have an administration that is prepared to tackle the tough problems. It is one thing to get out of this recession and to try to balance the budget and get our budget balanced, but we have got to deal with the underlying problems that America confronts. We have got to fix a broken health care system, because it is too expensive and drains our economy.

We have got to become energy independent, because that drains our economy and our budget. And we have got to invest in education. Our children are our future. We have got to put our resources with our children.

The budget recognizes that for America to be able to have a strong budget in the future, we need to fix our health care system. We talked about this for a long time. We have talked about fixing it. Well, we now have a President who has said the only option that is not on the table is the status quo. I agree with President Obama, we have got to fix the system. Why?

First, it is way too expensive. Not only is it a drain on Federal taxpayers but to every person in this country. Our health care system is twice as expensive, per capita, than the next most expensive system in the world. And yet we have seen, during the Bush years, the 8 years of his Presidency, the number of uninsured grow from 40 million to 47 million. There are 47 million Americans who do not have health insurance. And we do not have the health care results that would warrant such a large expenditure of our Federal economy in health care. We should have better results. We do not have those results, so we have got to fix our health care system.

What does this budget resolution do, the conference report that is before us--that will shortly be before us for a

vote? What this budget resolution does is allows us to move boldly toward universal health coverage, toward universal coverage. Why is that so important? Well, you see, someone who has no health insurance today enters a health care system in a very expensive way. They use our emergency rooms for primary care, to the extent that they get primary care. They do not have prevention. And they enter our system in a much more costly way. Illnesses that could have been detected early are left untreated. They enter our system in a very expensive way.

Many times people without health insurance do not pay their bills. But they get paid. Guess who pays them. The taxpayers of this country. Those who have insurance pay more for their premiums and doctors and hospitals because of people who have no health insurance.

It is in our national interest to get everyone covered by insurance. This budget conference report will allow our committee to bring in a bill to fix our health care system to provide universal coverage that will provide better quality care and save us money.

This budget allows us to save money in the health care system by investing in preventive health care. If we get more people tested for early detection of diseases, it will save us money. We invest in health information technology so we can eliminate a lot of the waste in our health care system, the administrative costs. Not only will it eliminate costs, unnecessary costs, but you will have better management of care. Doctors and hospitals will be able to communicate with each other. They will understand the complexities of your own individual health history and be able to build health protocols to give you more cost-effective, quality care. That is using technology. This will help us.

We need to deal with the disparities in health care. We know there are gaps across racial and ethnic lines. We need to narrow that, pay attention to that. This budget allows us to move in that direction to eliminate these disparities.

The budget allows us to reform our own Medicare system. Medicare is the largest insurance program in our country. Our elderly and disabled depend upon our Medicare system. But our Medicare system needs to be changed and reformed. Ask any physician about the sustainable growth rate methodology for reforming, for paying their fees every year. We have got to change that. We have got to eliminate this physical therapy and rehab cap. It makes no sense at all.

This budget resolution allows us to reform the Medicare system to make it more cost effective, and the budget resolution provides for the backup of budget reconciliation instructions.

What does that mean? I want to give you my interpretation. That allows us to use regular order to get this issue dealt with, to get health care dealt with. We have been talking about it for years. It is time to act. It is time to fix our health care system. And this is not a partisan issue. It is not a Democratic issue or a Republican issue. This is an issue that affects our country. It is an American issue. We need to work together on it. But it is not regular order to use a filibuster to prevent this body from taking up these issues. And that is what the budget reform process was all about many years ago.

I hope every Member of this body will work together so we can fix this health care system. That is what we need to do. Nobody has a monopoly on the best ideas. President Obama has reached out and said: Look, I know what we need to accomplish. You know what we need to accomplish. Let's work together and get it done so we can make health care more accessible, and people can get quality care in a much more cost-effective way, saving the taxpayers of this country money, helping our economy grow, making American companies more competitive internationally. If we fix the health care system, all of that is possible if we get it done right.

I want to compliment--I see the Chairman of the Budget Committee is on the floor, Senator Conrad. I want to thank him for his leadership on these issues. You now have a budget that will allow us to deal with these priorities. But the budget resolution also recognizes that for America to be strong, we also need to become energy independent. And the budget resolution allows us, our committees, to do that. We need to become energy independent for the sake of our economy.

We saw the impact on our economy when energy prices went up and down, and we had very little to do with it. But if we get the energy policy right, we are going to create green jobs, more jobs in America. This is about our economy. This is about helping America grow. So smart energy, energy independence, is the right thing to help our economy. By the way, it is also important for national security. We should not be challenged to fight wars because we need imported oil. Let us become energy independent for the sake of our national security, and, yes, let us become energy independent using good green technology, because it is good for our environment and we can do something about global climate change, working with the international community.

But the budget goes further and says, look, if we are going to be a strong nation, if we are going to get our future budgets in balance, if we are going to be competitive internationally, if our economy is going to grow, and the American standard of living is going to grow, we are going to invest in education. Education has got to be our top priority.

We can do a much better job at pre-K through 12 and quality education. Every child should have access to a quality school. This budget resolution allows our committees to move in that direction, and to bring down the cost of higher education for the typical family. Too many families today are being denied the opportunity to send their child to college because they simply cannot afford the cost of higher education. We have increased Pell grants. It is another great record of this Congress. We increased the Pell grants. This budget resolution allows us to go further to bring down the cost of higher education.

The budget resolution recognizes that we have to empower families to be able to afford and to participate in our economy. So tax relief to middle-income families is extended and expanded in this budget resolution.

The budget resolution recognizes that small businesses are the driving force behind job creation. Most of our jobs are going to be created by small businesses. Innovation comes from small companies. So this budget resolution allows us to continue the incentive so that small companies can get the credit they need, can get the help they need to be able to not only survive this economic downturn but to turn it around and create new jobs.

I particularly thank the conferees for continuing to include the increases, the 2-percent increases, in the Small Business Administration, an agency that was decimated under the prior administration. I offered an amendment in the committee that was adopted that increased that appropriation to $880 million. We want the SBA to be the advocate for the small business community, to fight Government agencies to make sure they make contracts available to small companies, to help mentor small companies so they have a business plan that can get a loan from a bank. That is what we want the SBA to do. And now with this budget support, the SBA should be able to build and help our small businesses in America.

Last November America voted for a change. We are delivering on that expectation. This budget resolution that has come out of the conference committee allows our committees, working with President Obama, to tackle the challenges confronting our Nation. The conference committee gives us the blueprint we need by focusing on different areas for helping in tax relief, for bringing our budget better into balance, helping working families, and investing in universal health care and educational opportunities and energy independence.

I urge my colleagues to support the work that has been done by our conferees. Let's work together to refuel and revitalize our Nation.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, last October marked the fifth anniversary of the arrest of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the former head of Yukos, Russia's largest oil company. The Council of Europe, Freedom House, and Amnesty International, among others, have concluded he was charged and imprisoned in a process that did not follow the rule of law and was politically influenced. This miscarriage of justice in 2003 is significant because it was one of the early signs that Russia was retreating from democratic values and the rule of law.

Last month, Russian authorities decided to go to trial with a second set of charges first introduced in 2007 when Khodorkovsky was to become eligible for parole. Despite credible reports that he was a model prisoner, parole was denied on apparently flimsy and contrived technical grounds. Yet the Russian judiciary recently saw fit to grant parole to Colonel Yuri Budanov, who was serving a sentence for raping and murdering a Chechen girl. I would also like to note that it was Stanislav Markelov, a courageous attorney who was instrumental in putting Budanov behind bars. But Budanov is now free and Markelov was gunned down, along with Anastasia Baburova a journalist for Russia's premier independent newspaper Novaya Gazeta, in broad daylight in central Moscow last January. The message this sends is loud and clear and profoundly disturbing.

Based on the observations of many independent international lawyers and organizations, there was no compelling evidence that Khodorkovsky or any of his associates were guilty of the crimes for which they were originally charged or that the legal process reflected the rule of law or international standards of justice. Even Russian officials have acknowledged that Khodorkovsky's arrest and imprisonment were politically motivated. As reported by the Economist, Igor Shuvalov, First Deputy Prime Minister of Russia, admitted that Khodorkovsky was in a Siberian prison camp ``for political reasons.'' He added that ``Once you behead someone, you give a good example (to other Russian tycoons) of how to behave.'' In other words, freedom for Russia's businessmen is determined by the Kremlin's political expediency. As reported by The Washington Post and the Boston Globe, Shuvalov has called the trial and continued imprisonment of Khodorkovsky a ``showflogging'' intended to serve as an example to others on the political consequences of challenging the Kremlin's economic ambitions.

The current charges against Khodorkovsky amount to legal hooliganism and highlight the petty meanness of the senior government officials behind this travesty of justice.The charges and verdicts have been inexplicable to Russian and Western lawyers, leading international organizations, courts, and human rights groups to condemn the trial as politically inspired. The second set of charges against Khodorkovsky should be dropped and the new trial should be abandoned.

I strongly support President Obama's call to reset the U.S.-Russian relationship and welcome the statement that emerged from his meeting in London with Russian President Medvedev. We have many common interests with Russia and must seek to improve the atmosophere and substance of our ties with Moscow. But the Helsinki process is predicated on the idea that domestic politics and inter-state relations are linked. I hope that President Medvedev, a trained jurist from whom many hope to see evidence of a reformist approach, will make that connection. The case of Mikhail Khodorsky is a good place to start.

Mr. President, I would like to report to my colleagues on the work of the U.S. delegation to the eighth Winter Meeting of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. This meeting was held on February 19 and 20 in Vienna, Austria. Prior to attending the Winter Meeting, the delegation traveled to Israel and Syria to ascertain the prospects for the Middle East peace process at this critical time.

I had the honor to lead this delegation as chairman of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, better known as the Helsinki Commission.

Joining me as delegation leader in Vienna was my Helsinki Commission Cochair, Representative Alcee L. Hastings. Three Senate colleagues on the Commission--Senator Roger Wicker, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, and Senator Tom Udall--also joined the delegation for the entire trip, as did fellow Commission member Representative Mike McIntyre. Although not a member of the Helsinki Commission, Representative Gwen Moore also joined the delegation.

The delegation first visited Israel. Our arrival came 3 days after that country's parliamentary elections and in the aftermath of the events in Gaza. We met with Israeli President Shimon Peres, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Likud leader and now Prime Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu and numerous other officials. We also visited Yad Veshem and laid a wreath in memory of the millions lost in the Holocaust.

The delegation met with Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad in East Jerusalem and Palestinian Authority Chief Negotiator Sa'eb Erakat in the West Bank and in each of these meetings discussed the current situation in Gaza and the West Bank, the potential for reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas, and how the United States can be a constructive partner in facilitating the peace process.

In Damascus, Syria, our delegation had a country team briefing with U.S. Embassy staff, including U.S. Charge d'Affaires to Syria, Maura Connelly. We also held a constructive meeting with Syrian President Bashar al-Asad and Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Al-Muallim, where the delegation pressed them on the need to improve human rights in Syria, encouraged them to assist the international community in bringing Iran into compliance with the International Atomic Energy Agency, and promoted restarting peace talks with Israel.

The delegation paid a courtesy visit to the historic Omayyad Mosque as well as visited the only surviving synagogue in Damascus. A briefing on the Iraqi refugee situation by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, UNHCR, Site Director in Damascus was extremely informative. The delegation was particularly moved by its meeting with a group of Iraqi refugees living in Syria. Their stories of hardship and suffering have galvanized our efforts to improve U.S. policies and activities in support of these refugees in Syria and in other surrounding countries.

The delegation's final stop was Vienna for the Winter Meeting. During the first day of the meeting, our delegation was joined by a delegation led by Representative John Tanner that attended a meeting of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly in Brussels earlier in the week.

A meeting of the Standing Committee, composed of the officers and heads of delegation to the OSCE PA, took place prior to the formal opening. As an OSCE PA vice president, I reported on the latest efforts of the Obama administration to close Guantanamo Bay as a detention facility, an issue of continued concern in the Assembly. Our efforts in recent years to be responsive to criticism of U.S. performance have been well received and provide a stronger basis for us to raise concern about the human rights performance of other countries. In addition to detailing the specific policy changes already announced by the Obama administration, I expressed hope that ``these measures will help restore faith in the United States as a friend, ally and leader in the global community. If the United States wants to lead, we must lead by example.''

Cochairman Hastings also made a presentation on his work as the Assembly's Special Representative on Mediterranean Affairs, in particular his travel to Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt and Israel-- all Mediterranean Partner states--last December. He met with parliamentarians and senior government officials to discuss greater OSCE engagement, the Middle East peace process, regional economic cooperation, the prospects of the Union for the Mediterranean, and the Iraqi refugee crisis.

OSCE PA President Joao Soares, Portugal, opened the Winter Meeting before 250 parliamentarians. The opening plenary was addressed by Barbara Prammer, President of Austria's National Council; Greek Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyannis, who chairs the OSCE in 2009; French diplomat Marc Perrin de Brichambaut, the OSCE's Secretary General, and by Representative John Tanner in his capacity as President of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly.

Following the opening plenary, additional discussions were held in each of the Assembly's three General Committees: the First Committee, dealing with political affairs and security; the Second Committee, focusing on economic Affairs, science, technology and environment; and the Third Committee, which covers democracy, human rights and humanitarian questions. Rapporteurs and guest speakers discussed current issues and the prospects for OSCE PA work in the coming year. Among the OSCE officials speaking in committee were Knut Vollebaek of Norway, the High Commissioner on National Minorities; Goran Svilanovic of Serbia, Economic and Environmental Coordinator; Miklos Haraszti of Hungary, Representative of Free Media; and Janez Lenarcic of Slovenia, Director of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights.

Every member of the U.S. delegation was active throughout the committee sessions. In the First Committee, Representative McIntyre reported on the delegation's visit to Israel and Syria, and Represenative Moore called attention to the plight of children in armed conflict and especially their use as child soldiers around the globe. In the Second Committee, Senator Udall discussed the new prospects for U.S. engagement with Europe on climate change, and Senator Whitehouse called for greater transparency regarding extractive industries, where corruption limits economic progress in developing countries. Senator Wicker responded to criticisms of the United States related to the economic crisis and pushed back against calls for greater trade protectionism. In the Third Committee, Senator Wicker stressed the continued need to focus on religious freedom, which is threatened in many countries of the OSCE region, while Cochairman Hastings explained the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly's

important contribution to election observation in the region.

The Winter Meeting traditionally includes a plenary debate on issues that are particularly relevant and timely. This year, the debate focused on a proposal by Russian President Dmitri Medvedev and supported by French President Nicolas Sarkozy for a new European security architecture. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko and senior French Foreign Ministry official Veronique Bujon- Barre made opening presentations. Senators Whitehouse, Wicker, and I each spoke in the debate. We stressed the need to maintain a comprehensive definition of security to include respect for human rights and commitment to democratic governance and, while not opposing further work, defended the NATO Alliance which some believe the Russian proposal intends to undercut. There was also considerable criticism of Russia's actions against neighboring Georgia in 2008, with considerable opposition to any attempt to legitimize this action in any new security talks.

As the Winter Meeting came to a close, Representative Moore took the floor during debate on gender issues to announce her intention to introduce a resolution on the issue of maternal mortality, calling for action to reduce the number of women around the world and especially in developing countries who die due to the lack of medical care in response to complications associated with pregnancy and childbirth. A Greek presentation on piracy as a new security threat and presentations on Kazakhstan's preparations to chair the OSCE in 2010, rounded out the closing issues of the meeting.

In addition to the sessions of the Winter Meeting, the congressional delegation was briefed by the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly Secretary General, Spencer Oliver of the United States, and by the Charge d'Affaires of the U.S. Mission to the OSCE, Kyle Scott. The delegation had bilateral sessions with OSCE Chair-in-Office Bakoyannis and numerous OSCE officials.

The U.S. delegation also held a lengthy bilateral session with the Russian delegation, during which dialogue between the U.S. Congress and the Russian Duma, among other issues, was discussed. While we do not agree on many issues, we did firmly agree on the importance of continued dialogue.

By all accounts, the Winter Meeting was 2 days of robust debate, and the U.S. Delegation was an active part of that debate, engaging European friends and allies on a variety of issues of importance to the United States. I want to thank my colleagues for the active participation throughout the trip.

At the invitation of the Government of Slovakia, I traveled the very short distance from Vienna to Slovakia's capital, Bratislava. My other colleagues remained in Vienna actively engaged in the work of the assembly discussed above.

Immediately upon arrival in Bratislava, I had a substantive and lengthy discussion with Foreign Minister Miroslav Lajcak. As the Minister had taken office just 2 weeks prior to our arrival, I had the privilege of being the first Member of Congress to meet with him in this capacity. Our wide-ranging discussion touched on the global economic crisis, the Middle East peace process, the situation in the Balkans--the Minister was recently the EU Special Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina--anti-Semitism, and the plight of Slovakia's Roma population.

Following that meeting, Keith Eddins, the U.S. Charge d'Affaires, hosted a lunch with leading academics and NGO leaders to discuss current events in Slovakia and the state of U.S.-Slovak relations. After lunch, I met with the chief rabbi and the lay leadership of Slovakia's Jewish community. Finally, before heading back to Vienna, I met with a cross-section of Slovakia's Roma community. As Europe's largest ethnic minority group, the Roma have been victims of some of postwar Europe's greatest discrimination. Congress's attention to issues of importance to this community has been inadequate in the past, but I hope to see that change in the future.

The U.S. House and Senate should both take great pride in the unique ability of the Helsinki Commission to represent the views and values of our country abroad, something which I, as chairman, intend to continue at future OSCE Parliamentary Assembly gatherings, including the Annual Session which convenes in Vilnius, Lithuania, in June and July of this year.

Madam President, I take this time to urge my colleagues to support the budget resolution that came out of the Budget Committee. I am proud to serve on the Budget Committee. I congratulate Senator Conrad for his extraordinary work in bringing out a well-balanced budget resolution during extremely difficult times. I think we all know the economic crisis we are in, and Senator Conrad's budget does what a budget should do. It is the blueprint of our Nation's priorities. President Obama brought forward a budget that gives new hope for America's future. Then Senator Conrad had to fit those priorities into the realities of our revenues.

We all know we have the new Congressional Budget Office numbers. It shows the economy is a lot weaker than when President Obama submitted his budget. But Senator Conrad's budget fits the priorities of President Obama into the realities of our projected revenues. I thank Senator Conrad for bringing forward this budget.

President Obama inherited an economic mess. That is worth repeating. Take a look at the mess the President inherited. The Congressional Budget Office shows it is more severe than President Obama thought when he first took office.

The deficit in 2000, when President Bush took office, was not a deficit. It was a surplus of $236 billion. Congress worked hard during those years to balance the Federal budget. In 2009, we are now projecting a deficit of $1.75 trillion. How did we get there? There has been a lot of time spent going over the mistakes that have been made over the last 8 years. But we had tax cuts we did not pay for. We had spending we did not pay for. We had a war in Iraq we never budgeted for correctly. And we ignored the underlying problems of our economy.

The Bush administration took our health care system, which had 40 million people without health insurance from when President Bush took office, to a health care system that now has 47 million people without health insurance. Health costs in America grew during those years to be twice any other industrial nation's spending on health care. We do not have the results to reflect that type of economic expenditures.

We found that the Bush administration wanted to privatize our health care system. As a result, we spent more money--more money on prescription drugs because we only used a private insurance option; more money for private insurance within Medicare, paying those who enroll in private insurance more than the Government would pay if they stayed in traditional Medicare. This past administration did everything it could to privatize even if it cost more public money.

In energy, the Bush administration never dealt with the energy problems of our country. We became more dependent rather than less dependent upon imported energy sources. This prior administration subsidized the oil industry, even knowing full well that the energy we imported very much affected our national security and the moneys we had to spend on national security.

We now have these large deficits. We cannot do anything about that. President Obama inherited these deficits. He also inherited a governmental system that failed to deal with the underlying problems of our economy.

President Obama says there is a different course. If we take the same type of budget and do that for our future and try to address the deficits today, we are going to have the deficits of tomorrow. We need to deal with the underlying problems.

President Obama has submitted a very open and honest budget. He is actually budgeting for the costs of government rather than saying, Well, we will pay for it after the fact. He has tackled the tough problems of our time, and he is prepared to make difficult choices to meet tomorrow's challenges.

The first issue this budget deals with is the economic problems of our Nation. We need to make that our top priority. The budget allows for investment in job creation. We are losing over 500,000 jobs a month in America today--about 600,000. We have been doing that now for the last several months because of the economic crisis. This budget allows us to invest in job creation so we can provide new jobs for Americans. It provides money in the hands of consumers. Middle-class tax cuts are extended. The AMT--alternative minimum tax--relief is provided. We extend the marriage penalty provisions to avoid the marriage penalty. There are credits for savers. The estate tax issue is accommodated in the budget. So the budget provides for the realities of a recession that consumers need to have more money in their family budgets in order to help stimulate our economy.

The budget Senator Conrad has brought forward protects critical programs for Americans to meet economic challenges, whether it is unemployment insurance, health care, veterans, transportation, job training, research, education, or small business issues. I wish to mention for 1 minute the SBA, the Small Business Administration. We all know if we are going to get out of this recession, we need to create jobs, and we create jobs mainly through small businesses. Over 99 percent of America's businesses are small businesses, and they are particularly vulnerable today. Most of our job growth comes from small companies. The President has brought forward initiatives that allow for the SBA loan programs--the 7(a) program and the 504 program--to be less costly to small business. He has also instructed Treasury to go out and help with the secondary markets to make money available for small business loans. We need a Small Business Administration that can provide the services to small businesses. During the Bush years, the SBA budget was decimated. This will allow the SBA to have the resources necessary not only to administer these programs but to provide counseling and mentoring to small businesses and to oversee what other Federal agencies do to make sure that small businesses get their fair share of government procurement contracts. I particularly appreciate the fact that the Budget Committee passed an amendment I offered that increased the SBA's budget to $880 million, up from $700 million. That money is going to be used for the right reasons.

This budget also deals with fiscal responsibility. It deals with the economic crisis but also with fiscal responsibility. The President's goal was to halve the budget deficit in 5 years. Well, it has gone beyond that. The budget Senator Conrad has brought to the floor will take the budget deficit from $1.7 trillion this year to 5 years from now a budget deficit of $508 billion. We want to see it lower than that, but reducing it by two-thirds over that period of time is certainly moving in the right direction. That is fiscal responsibility. That is making the tough decisions. It also allows us, when we get out of this recession, to deal with the underlying problems in our economy.

We deal with energy in this budget by allowing a cap-and-trade system so we can become energy independent for the sake of our national security; so we can create good jobs for the sake of our economy; so we can reduce carbon emissions for the sake of our environment. Global climate change is a real problem, and this budget allows us to deal with it by creating jobs and reducing the deficit, while also dealing with energy independence.

It deals with the underlying problems in our health care system by allowing our committees to bring out legislation that will provide for universal health coverage for the 47 million Americans who don't have health insurance; by moving forward with preventive health care which we know will save money; by improving health information technology which will save money; by investing in research which will give us the answers to how to deal with the health challenges of tomorrow; by improving our Medicare system to deal with physician reimbursement rates, and an amendment I offered that deals with the outpatient therapy caps. So our committees will be able to deal with the health care issues that will, if we don't deal with them, add to the budget deficits of the future.

We invest in education, from Head Start to making college affordable. The 1979 Pell grants covered 70 percent of the tuition and fees of public 4-year colleges. Today, it is less than one-third. We need to do better in making college affordable. The Obama budget does that. The Conrad budget does that. It invests in America's future so we can meet the challenges of the future so we will have an easier time, not only balancing our budgets in the future, but having the type of economic growth this Nation needs.

I wish to deal with one last issue on which there is disagreement in our caucus, and that is reconciliation instructions. I regret that the budget does not bring forward reconciliation instructions, particularly on the energy issue. I know there is a bad taste among my colleagues on the use of reconciliation, considering how it has been used in the past with the Republican leadership to bring about tax cuts. It is supposed to be used to reduce the deficit. In fact, they increased the deficit and that was wrong, but the proper use of reconciliation instructions can help us reduce the Federal deficit and avoid the misuse by the minority of filibusters. Does anyone here believe that the right number of filibusters has been used by the minority over the last years? Of course not. It has been used way too often.

So what proper budget reconciliation instructions will allow us to do is have an up-or-down vote on a critical issue that is important to reducing the deficit. Why do I say that? Because the cap and trade will produce $237 billion of revenue over the next 5 years. Some of that revenue will be used for direct--direct--deficit reduction. If we do the cap-and-trade system right, if we become energy independent--we all know the secondary impact of becoming energy independent, of not having to bring our energy in from foreign sources--it will help us balance our budgets in the future. We also know if we do it right and use the market forces, as a cap-and-trade system will do, we will create good green jobs here in America, using American technology, keeping jobs here. That will also help us balance the budget in the future.

So I hope we will get back in time to the proper use of reconciliation instructions. That was part of budget reform, and that should be included in our budget document.

However, today we have a choice on the resolution that is before us. I strongly support the budget resolution that came out of the committee. We have a choice. We can continue down the same path we have in the past, which is not dealing with the underlying problems of our country--and I dare say we will have a much more difficult time balancing our budgets in the future, and certainly being competitive internationally, as we need to be for the sake of growth of our economy--or we can choose a different direction for our economy; one that embraces fiscal responsibility; one that provides an opportunity to reform our health care system; one that allows us to have an energy policy that not only brings about energy independence but does it in a way that will reduce greenhouse gases and deal with the international issue of global climate change; and one that will invest in the critical investments for America's future, including education. That choice is the one offered by the budget brought out by the Budget Committee.

I urge my colleagues to support the budget resolution so we can change the

direction of America, so we can invest in our future, so we not only deal with the economic crisis we are in today, we not only deal with the budget deficits we are facing, but we deal with the underlying problems and invest in America's future. I urge my colleagues to support the budget resolution.

With that, I yield the floor.

Madam President, I rise today in support of S. 277, the Serve America Act. First, let me thank Chairman Kennedy, Senator Mikulski, and Senators Hatch and Enzi, for their leadership and their vision in crafting this bipartisan legislation. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this bill, because it will foster the best of what it means to be an American--our sense of community and shared responsibility for one another.

This bill helps Americans respond to the call to national service. In the 63 days since President Obama took office, nowhere have we seen a more vibrant example than that set by the First Lady, Michelle Obama. Just last week, Mrs. Obama brought a diverse group of successful women to the White House--among them an astronaut, musicians, actors, businesswomen, scientists, authors--before dispersing them to Washington, DC, Maryland, and Virginia schools to meet with students and help them to aspire to greatness as well. Three weeks ago, on March 5, she served lunch to homeless men and women at a soup kitchen in downtown Washington. The menu for the day featured fruit salad made with donations from White House employees. Mrs. Obama's message was simple and eloquent--that times are tough and people need a helping hand. She said that those who could not donate food or money should try to donate time instead. These are but two examples of how Mrs. Obama has inspired civic interest and engagement in others. But one need not be First Lady or even a celebrity to serve the community and that is what S. 277, the Serve America Act, is all about.

The Serve America Act promotes public service as one avenue to address the most pressing challenges facing America. Who can help keep our children in school and out of gangs? Mentors provided through Education Corps. How can a single mother without insurance get her children basic dental care? Through oral health access programs offered through Healthy Futures Corps. How can a retiree better afford her heating bills? The Clean Energy Service Corps can weatherize her house to improve energy efficiency. How can a veteran recently returned from Afghanistan readjust to life at home? By working with volunteers at the Veterans Corps to pursue educational opportunities and professional certification. How can a recently laid-off father get gainful employment? Through the job-training and job-placement services and financial literacy programs offered through Opportunity Corps. These are just a few examples of how this legislation builds on the success of AmeriCorps to develop a volunteer base of civic engagement. It would reauthorize the basic AmeriCorps program with the goal of increasing the number of volunteers from 75,000 up to 250,000.

As our recession has spread and deepened, I have talked with many of Maryland's nonprofit service organizations, and the message is the same: our communities' need for services has increased, while donations have decreased. But true to the American spirit, the number of volunteers eager to serve has increased. People are willing to donate their time, even though they might be less able to afford monetary donations. And for many affected by layoffs and cutbacks, time is all they have to give. When I visit with high school and college students, I find they are more enthusiastic than ever about the notion of public service. S. 277 will harness that enthusiasm and help translate their interest into action.

By promoting the involvement of Americans of all ages, this bill supports a lifetime of service. It strengthens the current Learn and Serve America program to engage middle and high school students in meeting community needs. The bill establishes youth engagement zones-- low-income, high-need districts where community based service learning projects can be coordinated for secondary school students. For college students, in addition to AmeriCorps service opportunities, the bill allows institutions of higher education to include service-learning as a component of other curriculae such as nursing and criminal justice. The bill also creates a ``Campuses of Service'' program, through which up to 25 colleges and universities can receive grants to provide service learning programs, or to share their programs with other institutions.

In addition, the bill provides opportunities for America's seniors. Our Nation can benefit from seniors' many years of experience as we confront today's problems. S. 277 will enhance current Senior Corps programs and offer incentives for service. It will also allow participants to transfer any earned educational benefits to their children or grandchildren.

I want to draw particular attention to the Healthy Futures Corps. This program will provide grants to the states and nonprofit organizations so they can fund national service in low-income communities. Healthy Futures Corps members will address certain health indicators, including chronic diseases, such as diabetes, and other conditions where we know there are socioeconomic, geographic, and racial and ethnic disparities. It will allow us to put into action tools that can help close the gaps in health status--prevention and health promotion. For too long, we have acknowledged health disparities, studied them, written reports about them. This bill will help us eliminate them through community-based interventions. I want to express my deep appreciation to the committee for adding language specifying oral health as an area of focus. Often overlooked when we consider health care, oral health is an essential component of health throughout life. No one can be truly considered healthy if they have untreated cavities, periodontal disease, or other dental problems. Maryland learned that lesson two years ago when 12 year old Prince George's County resident Deamonte Driver died of a brain infection brought on by an untreated tooth abscess. This measure will help recruit young people to work in the dental profession, where there are severe shortages of providers in many urban and rural areas. It will fund the work of individuals who can help parents find available oral health services for themselves and their children. It will make a difference in the lives of the Healthy Futures Corps members who work in underserved communities and in the lives and health of those who get access to care, and so I want to thank the committee for this addition to the bill.

I am proud to say that Maryland already has a great track record in public service. The Corporation for National and Community Service reports that more than 170,000 Marylanders now participate through 115 national service projects across our State. But there is always room for more. This legislation gives our State and the Nation additional tools to answer the call to service. I urge my colleagues to support this bill and it is my hope that it will receive the unanimous support of the Senate.

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

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act with the support of my colleagues, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Menendez, and Mr. Nelson. This bill supports habitat protection, education, research, monitoring, and capacity building to provide for the long-term protection of neotropical migratory birds. It does this by providing grants to countries in Latin America and the Caribbean for the conservation of these birds, through a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service competitive matching grants program. Up to one-quarter of the annual grants can also be used for projects in the United States. Projects include activities that benefit bird populations, such as habitat restoration, research and monitoring, law enforcement, and outreach and education.

Neotropical migratory birds breed in Canada and the U.S. during our summer and spend our winters in Latin America and the Caribbean. There are nearly 500 species of these birds, and they face a range of threats, including development pressures, invasive species, climate change, and avian diseases. Protecting these birds requires international cooperation.

The NMBCA program has a proven track record of reversing habitat loss and advancing conservation strategies for the broad range of neotropical birds that populate the United States and the rest of the Western hemisphere. The public-private partnerships and international collaboration provided by this program are integral to preserving vulnerable bird populations. Just as importantly, this Federal program is a good value for taxpayers, leveraging over four dollars in partner contributions for every one that we spend.

Migratory birds are not only beautiful creatures eagerly welcomed by millions of Americans into their backyards every year; they help generate $2.7 billion annually for the U.S. economy through wildlife watching activities, and they help our farmers by consuming billions of harmful insect pests. Bird watchers include over 48 million Americans, 20 million of whom take annual trips to watch birds. In 2006, 20 million American wildlife watchers spent $12.8 billion on trip-related expenditures. Americans spend $3.3 billion each year on bird food. 16 million Americans spend $790 million each year on bird houses, nest boxes, feeders, and baths.

The Baltimore Oriole, the state bird of my state of Maryland, migrates in flocks to southern Mexico, Central America, and northern South America. The Oriole has recently been threatened by destruction of breeding habitat and tropical winter habitat, and by toxic pesticides ingested by the insects which constitute the Oriole's main diet. This legislation will help ensure that the broad range of migratory birds, from the Cerulean Warbler to the Baltimore Oriole, will have the healthy habitat they need on both ends of their annual migration routes so they can continue to play their vital biological, recreational, and economic roles.

Congress passed the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 2000 and it became public law 106-527. It authorized an annual $5 million for each of the fiscal years 2001 through 2005. Since 2002, the U.S. has invested more than $25 million in 262 projects in 44 U.S. states, Canada, and 33 Latin American and Caribbean countries, and leveraged an additional $112 million in partner funds to support these projects. The reauthorization legislation would authorize $8 million for fiscal year 2010, gradually escalating to $20 million for fiscal year 2015, in order to meet expanding funding needs.

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

Mr. President, today the Obama administration is taking an important first step in ending mountaintop mining, one of the most environmentally destructive practices currently in use in this country. More than 1 million acres of Appalachia have already been destroyed. An estimated 1,200 miles of headwater streams have been buried under tons of mining wastes. Over 500 mountains have been permanently scarred. Homes have been ruined and drinking water supplies contaminated. It is time to end this especially destructive method of coal mining.

By stopping the issuance of some of the most destructive permits, today the administration is sending the right signals that the days of mountaintop mining are being relegated to the dust bin of the past, where they belong.

Today, Senator Lamar Alexander and I are introducing bipartisan legislation that will go one step further. Our bill, the Appalachia Restoration Act, will make clear that mining wastes cannot be dumped into our streams, smothering them and sending plumes of toxic run-off into groundwater systems. This Cardin-Alexander legislation amends the Clean Water Act, specifically preventing the so-called ``excess spoil'' of mining wastes from entering our streams and rivers. This simple legislation will restore the Clean Water Act to its original purpose. In doing so, it will stop the wholesale destruction of some of America's most beautiful and ecologically significant regions.

Mountaintop mining produces less than five percent of the coal mined in the United States. This bill does not ban other methods of coal mining. Instead, it is narrowly tailored to stop a practice that has earned the condemnation of communities across Appalachia as well as citizens across the rest of the country.

I applaud the Obama administration for the steps it is taking today, and Senator Alexander and I look forward to working with the Administration to pass the Cardin-Alexander Appalachia Restoration Act later this year.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act with the support of my colleagues, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Menendez, and Mr. Nelson. This bill supports habitat protection, education, research, monitoring, and capacity building to provide for the long-term protection of neotropical migratory birds. It does this by providing grants to countries in Latin America and the Caribbean for the conservation of these birds, through a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service competitive matching grants program. Up to one-quarter of the annual grants can also be used for projects in the United States. Projects include activities that benefit bird populations, such as habitat restoration, research and monitoring, law enforcement, and outreach and education.

Neotropical migratory birds breed in Canada and the U.S. during our summer and spend our winters in Latin America and the Caribbean. There are nearly 500 species of these birds, and they face a range of threats, including development pressures, invasive species, climate change, and avian diseases. Protecting these birds requires international cooperation.

The NMBCA program has a proven track record of reversing habitat loss and advancing conservation strategies for the broad range of neotropical birds that populate the United States and the rest of the Western hemisphere. The public-private partnerships and international collaboration provided by this program are integral to preserving vulnerable bird populations. Just as importantly, this Federal program is a good value for taxpayers, leveraging over four dollars in partner contributions for every one that we spend.

Migratory birds are not only beautiful creatures eagerly welcomed by millions of Americans into their backyards every year; they help generate $2.7 billion annually for the U.S. economy through wildlife watching activities, and they help our farmers by consuming billions of harmful insect pests. Bird watchers include over 48 million Americans, 20 million of whom take annual trips to watch birds. In 2006, 20 million American wildlife watchers spent $12.8 billion on trip-related expenditures. Americans spend $3.3 billion each year on bird food. 16 million Americans spend $790 million each year on bird houses, nest boxes, feeders, and baths.

The Baltimore Oriole, the state bird of my state of Maryland, migrates in flocks to southern Mexico, Central America, and northern South America. The Oriole has recently been threatened by destruction of breeding habitat and tropical winter habitat, and by toxic pesticides ingested by the insects which constitute the Oriole's main diet. This legislation will help ensure that the broad range of migratory birds, from the Cerulean Warbler to the Baltimore Oriole, will have the healthy habitat they need on both ends of their annual migration routes so they can continue to play their vital biological, recreational, and economic roles.

Congress passed the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 2000 and it became public law 106-527. It authorized an annual $5 million for each of the fiscal years 2001 through 2005. Since 2002, the U.S. has invested more than $25 million in 262 projects in 44 U.S. states, Canada, and 33 Latin American and Caribbean countries, and leveraged an additional $112 million in partner funds to support these projects. The reauthorization legislation would authorize $8 million for fiscal year 2010, gradually escalating to $20 million for fiscal year 2015, in order to meet expanding funding needs.

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

Mr. President, today the Obama administration is taking an important first step in ending mountaintop mining, one of the most environmentally destructive practices currently in use in this country. More than 1 million acres of Appalachia have already been destroyed. An estimated 1,200 miles of headwater streams have been buried under tons of mining wastes. Over 500 mountains have been permanently scarred. Homes have been ruined and drinking water supplies contaminated. It is time to end this especially destructive method of coal mining.

By stopping the issuance of some of the most destructive permits, today the administration is sending the right signals that the days of mountaintop mining are being relegated to the dust bin of the past, where they belong.

Today, Senator Lamar Alexander and I are introducing bipartisan legislation that will go one step further. Our bill, the Appalachia Restoration Act, will make clear that mining wastes cannot be dumped into our streams, smothering them and sending plumes of toxic run-off into groundwater systems. This Cardin-Alexander legislation amends the Clean Water Act, specifically preventing the so-called ``excess spoil'' of mining wastes from entering our streams and rivers. This simple legislation will restore the Clean Water Act to its original purpose. In doing so, it will stop the wholesale destruction of some of America's most beautiful and ecologically significant regions.

Mountaintop mining produces less than five percent of the coal mined in the United States. This bill does not ban other methods of coal mining. Instead, it is narrowly tailored to stop a practice that has earned the condemnation of communities across Appalachia as well as citizens across the rest of the country.

I applaud the Obama administration for the steps it is taking today, and Senator Alexander and I look forward to working with the Administration to pass the Cardin-Alexander Appalachia Restoration Act later this year.

Madam President, first, let me congratulate my colleague from Maryland and my colleague from Utah for their leadership on this legislation. This is extremely important legislation expanding the opportunities for people to serve our country in national service. Both have been leaders on this issue for many years. I am pleased that we are on the verge of really expanding opportunity, particularly for young people, to have a meaningful impact in helping their communities.

I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 10 minutes as in morning business.

Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, Thomas Jefferson, a man who was vilified by newspapers daily, once said ``If I had to choose between government without newspapers, and newspapers without government, I wouldn't hesitate to choose the latter.'' Like Jefferson, I believe that a well- informed public is a core foundation of our democracy. Watergate. AIDS. Tobacco. ENRON. AIG. News stories, uncovered by journalists, bring the most important stories of our nation's history to the front page, and thus into public debate.

I rise today to introduce the Newspaper Revitalization Act, to help our disappearing community and metropolitan papers by allowing them to become non-profit organizations. Newspapers across the country are closing their doors, slashing their staff, and shuttering bureaus in the United States and around the world. The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, The Rocky Mountain News, the Philadelphia Daily News, the San Francisco Chronicle, and my own Baltimore Sun are either in bankruptcy, or facing bankruptcy and closure. The Los Angeles Times has reduced its newsroom by one-half, the Miami Herald and twenty-eight other dailies have laid off at least one-quarter of their workforces in the past year. At the largest daily newspaper in New Jersey, The Star-Ledger, 45 percent of the editorial staff took buyouts when the owner threatened to sell the newspaper. Increasing numbers of metropolitan regions may soon have no local daily newspapers.

The economy has caused an immediate problem, but the business model for newspapers, based on circulation and advertising revenue, has been weakening for years. At the end of 2008, advertising revenue was down by about 25 percent and according to a December forecast by Barclays Capital, advertising revenue will drop another 17 percent in 2009. Circulation is also down because of the many other sources for news. Today we have the internet, television, radio and blogs around the clock. Now, some might say these are all reasons why we may not need daily print newspapers anymore. But they are wrong.

While Americans have quick access to the news, there remains one clear fact, when it comes to original in-depth reporting that records and exposes actions, issues, and opportunities in our communities, nothing has replaced a newspaper. Most, if not all sources of journalistic information, from Google to broadcast news or punditry, gain their original news from the laborious and expensive work of experienced newspaper reporters diligently working their beats over the course of years, not hours. According to the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism, a typical metropolitan paper ran 70 stories a day, counting the national, local and business sections, whereas a half-hour of television news included only ten to twelve. Research further shows that broadcast news follows the agenda set by newspapers, often repeating the same items with less detail. Newspaper reporters forge relationships with people; they build a network, which creates avenues to information.

These relationships and the information that follows are essential in a free, democratic society. Without it, accountability is lost. In a 2003 study published in the Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, the relationship between corruption and ``free circulation of daily newspapers per person'' was examined. The study found that the lower the circulation of newspapers in a country, the higher it stands on the corruption index. In another study, published in 2006, it is suggested that the growth of a more information-oriented press may have been a factor in reducing government corruption in the United States between the Gilded Age and the Progressive Era. Newspapers provide a form of accountability. They provide a ``check'' on local governments, State governments, the Federal Government, elected officials, corporations, school districts, businesses, individuals and more. We need to save community newspapers.

The Newspaper Revitalization Act provides help. It will allow newspapers to operate as non-profit organizations, if they choose, under 501(c)(3) status for educational purposes, much like public broadcasting. These newspapers would not be allowed to make political endorsements, but would be allowed to freely report on all issues, including political races. Advertising and subscription revenue would be tax exempt and contributions to support coverage or operations could be tax deductible.

While this may not be an optimal choice for some major newspapers or corporate media chains interested in profit, it should be an option for many local newspapers fast disappearing in our States, cities and towns. This option should cause minimal revenue loss to the Federal Government as most newspaper profits have been falling for years. In this economic climate, and with the real possibility of losing community newspapers, this would be a voluntary option for owners to save their paper. It is also a model that could enable local citizens or foundations to step in and preserve their local papers. I want to urge my colleagues to support this legislation and take action to save newspapers.

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

Mr. President, Thomas Jefferson, a man who was vilified by newspapers daily, once said ``If I had to choose between government without newspapers, and newspapers without government, I wouldn't hesitate to choose the latter.'' Like Jefferson, I believe that a well- informed public is a core foundation of our democracy. Watergate. AIDS. Tobacco. ENRON. AIG. News stories, uncovered by journalists, bring the most important stories of our nation's history to the front page, and thus into public debate.

I rise today to introduce the Newspaper Revitalization Act, to help our disappearing community and metropolitan papers by allowing them to become non-profit organizations. Newspapers across the country are closing their doors, slashing their staff, and shuttering bureaus in the United States and around the world. The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, The Rocky Mountain News, the Philadelphia Daily News, the San Francisco Chronicle, and my own Baltimore Sun are either in bankruptcy, or facing bankruptcy and closure. The Los Angeles Times has reduced its newsroom by one-half, the Miami Herald and twenty-eight other dailies have laid off at least one-quarter of their workforces in the past year. At the largest daily newspaper in New Jersey, The Star-Ledger, 45 percent of the editorial staff took buyouts when the owner threatened to sell the newspaper. Increasing numbers of metropolitan regions may soon have no local daily newspapers.

The economy has caused an immediate problem, but the business model for newspapers, based on circulation and advertising revenue, has been weakening for years. At the end of 2008, advertising revenue was down by about 25 percent and according to a December forecast by Barclays Capital, advertising revenue will drop another 17 percent in 2009. Circulation is also down because of the many other sources for news. Today we have the internet, television, radio and blogs around the clock. Now, some might say these are all reasons why we may not need daily print newspapers anymore. But they are wrong.

While Americans have quick access to the news, there remains one clear fact, when it comes to original in-depth reporting that records and exposes actions, issues, and opportunities in our communities, nothing has replaced a newspaper. Most, if not all sources of journalistic information, from Google to broadcast news or punditry, gain their original news from the laborious and expensive work of experienced newspaper reporters diligently working their beats over the course of years, not hours. According to the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism, a typical metropolitan paper ran 70 stories a day, counting the national, local and business sections, whereas a half-hour of television news included only ten to twelve. Research further shows that broadcast news follows the agenda set by newspapers, often repeating the same items with less detail. Newspaper reporters forge relationships with people; they build a network, which creates avenues to information.

These relationships and the information that follows are essential in a free, democratic society. Without it, accountability is lost. In a 2003 study published in the Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, the relationship between corruption and ``free circulation of daily newspapers per person'' was examined. The study found that the lower the circulation of newspapers in a country, the higher it stands on the corruption index. In another study, published in 2006, it is suggested that the growth of a more information-oriented press may have been a factor in reducing government corruption in the United States between the Gilded Age and the Progressive Era. Newspapers provide a form of accountability. They provide a ``check'' on local governments, State governments, the Federal Government, elected officials, corporations, school districts, businesses, individuals and more. We need to save community newspapers.

The Newspaper Revitalization Act provides help. It will allow newspapers to operate as non-profit organizations, if they choose, under 501(c)(3) status for educational purposes, much like public broadcasting. These newspapers would not be allowed to make political endorsements, but would be allowed to freely report on all issues, including political races. Advertising and subscription revenue would be tax exempt and contributions to support coverage or operations could be tax deductible.

While this may not be an optimal choice for some major newspapers or corporate media chains interested in profit, it should be an option for many local newspapers fast disappearing in our States, cities and towns. This option should cause minimal revenue loss to the Federal Government as most newspaper profits have been falling for years. In this economic climate, and with the real possibility of losing community newspapers, this would be a voluntary option for owners to save their paper. It is also a model that could enable local citizens or foundations to step in and preserve their local papers. I want to urge my colleagues to support this legislation and take action to save newspapers.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Star- Spangled Banner Commemorative Coin Act. I am pleased that my colleague, the senior Senator from Maryland, is a co-sponsor. This legislation will honor our National Anthem and the Battle for Baltimore, which was a key turning point of the War of 1812, by creating two commemorative U.S. Mint coins.

The War of 1812 confirmed American independence from Great Britain in the eyes of the world. Before the war, the British had been routinely imposing on American sovereignty. They had impressed American merchant seamen into the British Royal Navy, enforced illegal and unfair trade rules with the United States, and allegedly offered assistance to American Indian tribes which were attacking frontier settlements. In response, the United States declared war on Great Britain on June 18, 1812, to protest these violations of ``free trade and sailors rights''.

After 2 \1/2\ years of conflict, the British Royal Navy sailed up the Chesapeake Bay with combined military and naval forces, and in August 1814 attacked Washington, DC, burning to the ground the U.S. Capitol, the White House, and much of the rest of the capital city. After finishing with Washington, DC, the British moved to capture Baltimore, which in 1814 was a larger city.

As the British Royal Navy sailed up the Patapsco River on its way to Baltimore, American forces held the British fleet at Fort McHenry, located just outside of the city. After 25 hours of bombardment, the British failed to take the Fort and were forced to depart. American lawyer Francis Scott Key, who was being held on board an American flag- of-truce vessel, beheld at dawn's early light an American flag still flying atop Fort McHenry. He immortalized the event in a song which later became known as the Star-Spangled Banner.

The flag to which Key referred was a 30' x 42' foot flag made specifically for Fort McHenry. The commanding officer desired a flag so large that the British would have no trouble seeing it from a distance. This proved to be the case as Key visited the British fleet on September 7, 1814, to secure the release of Dr. William Beanes. Dr. Beanes was released, but Key and Beanes were detained on an American flag-of-truce vessel until the end of the bombardment. It was on September 14, 1814, that Key saw the great banner that inspired him to write the song that ultimately became our National Anthem.

The Star-Spangled Banner Commemorative Coins will honor this symbol of our nation and our National Anthem. Under this Act, the U.S. Treasury would mint up to 100,000 $5 gold coins and 500,000 $1 silver coins in 2012, in coordination with the 200th Anniversary of the War of 1812. Proceeds from surcharges for the coins will be paid to the Maryland War of 1812 Bicentennial Commission, for bicentennial activities, educational outreach, and preservation and improvement activities pertaining to the sites and structures relating to the War of 1812. I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this measure in a fitting tribute to a seminal chapter in American history.

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