Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Justice Integrity Act of 2009. I am pleased that Senator Specter, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, has joined me as an original cosponsor of this legislation. I think it is important to

begin this discussion with the first words that appear in the Constitution of the United States. ``We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice . . .'' The Founding Fathers chose Justice as a cornerstone for the foundation of our country. Justice is defined as fairness, moral rightness, and as a system of law in which every person receives his or her due from the system, including all of their guaranteed rights. There are many perceptions and realities that surround our criminal justice system.

Our Constitution guarantees that all Americans, no matter their race, color, creed or gender, have the right to equal protection under the law. Yet statistics, reports and data reflect a possibility of bias in our justice system. For example, a distressing statistic shows that one out of every three African-American males born today can expect to go to jail during his lifetime. African-Americans are disproportionately arrested and incarcerated, they are more likely to be pulled over by a police car while driving, and they are three times more likely to be arrested for a drug offense than white Americans and are nearly 10 times as likely to enter prison for drug offenses. Take for example, how two forms of the same drug are handled differently in our justice system: crack cocaine and powder cocaine. In 2006, blacks constituted 82 percent of those sentenced under federal crack cocaine laws while whites constituted of only 8.8 percent, despite the fact that more than 66 percent of people who use crack cocaine are white. Government data further demonstrates that drug rates are similar among all racial and ethnic groups.

A 2007 study released by the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Statistics revealed that while Black, Hispanic and White drivers are equally likely to be pulled over by police, Blacks and Hispanics are much more likely to be searched and arrested. These types of disparities and the perception of bias is unacceptable and we should take bold steps to correct these injustices. During the last Congress, my good friend and former member of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Biden, introduced this bill and during his introductory speech he stated ``nowhere is the guarantee of equal protection more important than in our criminal justice system.'' I couldn't agree more with that statement, which is why I have reintroduced this very important legislation.

Just last week Attorney General Eric Holder gave a speech for African-American History Month. In that speech, Attorney General Holder asked us, as a nation, to ``find ways to force ourselves to confront that which we have become experts at avoiding''. One way to do that is to look at the disparities in our justice system that have existed for many years and can be traced back to slavery and the Jim Crow era. In President Obama's March 2008 speech on Race, he asked Americans to ``march for a more just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous America.'' He further stated that in order to perfect our union we must continue to ``insist on a full measure of justice in every aspect of American life.'' I heard President Obama that day, and I heard Attorney General Holder last week. I believe we are at a crossroads today where we can either take on the challenges and attack these injustices or continue to turn our heads away from the problems in our justice system. The Justice Integrity Act responds to the racial and ethnic disparities and perceptions that surround our Federal justice system.

The Justice Integrity Act will create 10 pilot programs across the country that will help create a plan that will ensure that law enforcement priorities and initiatives--including charging and plea decisions, as well as sentencing recommendations are not influenced by racial or ethnic bias but instead apply the law in a just and fair manner to all individuals. These 10 pilot programs will be set up at the discretion of the Attorney General in 10 different U.S. attorney offices. Each U.S. attorney will create an advisory group including all the major stakeholders in the justice system. Each of the individuals will gather information and examine data which will lead to a report on their findings and recommendations to the district on how to reduce unjustified racial and ethnic disparities.

Our current justice system is not working at its greatest potential. This bill will not only help restore the public's trust in our justice system but also restore integrity in our justice system. Any form of bias in our criminal justice system erodes the core principles in our Constitution specifically that ``all men are created equal'' under the law and that our justice system is not only fair but just.

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

Mr. President, I believe I am scheduled for 5 minutes.

If the Chair would advise me when 5 minutes has been used, I would appreciate it.

It is interesting my friend from Arizona mentioned small business, because this morning on my way into the Capitol--I go home every night to Baltimore--I had a meeting with small business leaders in Prince George's County. We noticed this a couple days ago. The room was overflowing. These small business owners want us to take action to help them. Minority businesses, women-owned businesses, veterans' businesses--they want to see bold action because they are hurting. Their businesses are hurting. They are having a difficult time getting credit. They are using their credit cards for credit because they can't get SBA loans and credit from banks.

In this legislation, there is help for small business procurement from the Federal Government. There are provisions in this legislation that will make it easier for them to get 7(a) loans and 504 loans by eliminating the cost so it would be less expensive for small businesses.

The bottom line is that the American people are looking for us to take bold action, to give our new President the tools he needs to get our economy back on track.

In Maryland we have lost jobs, as has the rest of the country. Nationwide we have lost over 600,000 jobs last month, over a million jobs in the last 2 months. Foreclosures are at record numbers. Businesses are closing their doors. Consumer confidence is at an all- time low. We need to take action.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act will create jobs. In my State, it is estimated to be 66,000. It will provide tax relief for 2.2 million Marylanders of $800. It will provide for the American opportunity tax credit for 253,000 Marylanders which will help them pay for college education. It will increase unemployment insurance for 242,000 Marylanders who are on unemployment by $100 a month. It will help modernize 138 schools in my State.

Nationwide we will double the renewable energy capacity of America. We will computerize medical records which will make it safer for patients and less expensive. We will build roads and

bridges, the most expansive public infrastructure efforts literally since President Eisenhower.

I am pleased that the final bill includes the Mikulski amendment that will help auto sales by allowing taxpayers to deduct the cost of the sales tax. I am appreciative that the committee included an amendment I offered with Senator Ensign to expand the homeowners credit for first- time home buyers, introduced last year to make it a true credit of $7,500 and to extend that through November of this year. That will help home sales. It was the housing market that triggered the current recession. That is an important issue. It will restore consumer confidence in home buyers. I am pleased to see that was included.

I am pleased to see the amendment I offered for small business, for surety bonds to make it easier for small businesses to get surety bonds, increasing the limit from 2 million to 5 million for construction companies to get help from SBA to get the surety bonds so they can get part of this procurement.

This underlying bill provides for significant opportunities to create jobs now in which small businesses will participate and be the driving engine for creation of new jobs in our country. That is how it should be. We need to take action in order to expand job opportunity now and make the type of investments so America can compete in the future. There is accountability. There is transparency in this legislation.

I have confidence that we will pull out of this recession. America will continue its economic strength. But let us give the tools to President Obama that he needs so we can answer that person who talked to me this morning, the small business owner who has to use personal credit cards in order to get a loan to keep the business open, because he can't get a loan from the bank even though he is creditworthy. We need to provide the type of economic stimulus to our economy to create the type of jobs now to fill the void to make sure America can compete in the future.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, as chairman of the Helsinki Commission, I would like to bring to the attention of the Senate a situation which is literally a matter of life and death for an American citizen, Emanuel Zeltser, who has been imprisoned in Belarus since March 12, 2008. Mr. Zeltser is in desperate and immediate need of serious medical treatment--including a coronary bypass operation.

The poor human rights record of President Lukashenka's regime is well known. No American--indeed no human being--should be subjected to the kind of treatment Mr. Zeltser has been forced to endure during his incarceration. Despite Mr. Zeltser's grave health condition--he suffers from heart disease, type 2 diabetes, severe arthritis, gout, and dangerously elevated blood pressure--Belarusian authorities have repeatedly refused to provide Mr. Zeltser with his prescribed medications.

He was initially denied two independent medical evaluations and he has reported being physically assaulted and abused while incarcerated. Amnesty International has urged that Belarusian authorities no longer subject Mr. Zeltser to ``further torture and other ill-treatment.''

Mr. Zeltser was convicted of ``using false official documents'' and ``attempted economic espionage'' in a closed judicial proceeding. The U.S. Embassy in Minsk criticized the proceedings, noting that it was denied the opportunity to observe the trial. The State Department has repeatedly called for Mr. Zeltser's release on humanitarian grounds. So have others in Congress, especially my colleague on the Helsinki Commission, cochairman Representative Alcee Hastings.

But now the situation appears dire. Earlier this month, Mr. Zeltser was examined by an American doctor. It was only the second time an American physician has been permitted to see Mr. Zeltser. The doctor concluded that ``there is a clear and high risk of sudden death from heart attack unless the patient is immediately transferred to a U.S. hospital with the proper equipment and facilities. . . . Refusal to transfer Mr. Zeltser to a U.S. hospital is equivalent to a death sentence.'' Specifically, Mr. Zeltser is in dire need of a coronary bypass procedure. The doctor also determined that because he had been denied prescribed diabetes medication, Mr. Zeltser's left foot may need to be amputated.

In response to a press inquiry in December, the State Department called for ``the Belarusian authorities to release Mr. Zeltser on humanitarian grounds before this situation takes an irrevocable turn.'' Based on the recent doctor's report it is apparent that such an irrevocable turn is imminent unless this American citizen can be brought home promptly for the medical treatment necessary to save his life.

Belarus has taken some tentative steps to improve its notably poor human rights record, in particular the release of several political prisoners last August. However, Mr. Zeltser's continued, and potentially terminal, imprisonment threatens to override those initially encouraging signs. As such, I strongly urge the Belarusian authorities to release Emanuel Zeltser on humanitarian grounds so that he may obtain the immediate medical treatment his doctor has concluded is required if he is to live.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. President, I congratulate the first graduating class of the Erickson School at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, UMBC. In December 2008, the Erickson School awarded degrees in the Management of Aging Services to 4 bachelors and 24 masters candidates.

In just 4 years, the Erickson School has grown from a vision of its founding benefactor, John Erickson, to a fully operational professional school addressing the leadership needs in the burgeoning arena of aging services. With the graduation of its first class, the school has begun to establish a community of change agents dedicated to improving the lives of older Americans.

Our Nation faces an urgent need for qualified professionals in the public and private sectors of health care and aging services to deal with our growing aging population. Every 8 seconds, a U.S. resident turns 60 years of age. By 2030, Americans 65 and over will increase from 12.5 percent to 20 percent of the population. Of particular significance is that the fastest growth is among those ages 85 and over. Between today and 2040, this group will increase by another 258 percent, a tribute to improvements in medicine and public health.

The job of caring for an aging population is one that cannot be outsourced. The demographic shift we are witnessing will demand the development of innovative and entrepreneurial services and products. Every aspect of our society will likely be transformed, from the workplace, to the way in which we provide health care, to the assumptions underlying fundamental Government programs.

The Erickson School's first graduates are positioned to respond to the urgent challenges and opportunities presented by the speed and scale with which the U.S. population is aging. This class includes the CEO of a Maryland retirement community, the executive directors of the Baltimore City and County departments of aging, and other experienced aging services professionals from across the Nation.

I ask my colleagues to join me in commending the leadership of Dean J. Kevin Eckert and congratulating the graduates. They are: Jessica Hallis, Tara McDonnell, Jena Rathell, Juliet Strachan, Eleanor Alvarez, Brenda Becker, Rebecca Bees, Mimi Burch, Richard Compton, Benjamin Cornthwaite, Seth Dudley, Christopher Emmett, Arnold Eppel, Diana Givens, Christopher Golen, Steve Gurney, William Holman, Jennifer Holz, Dorothea Johnson, Waclawa Kludziak, Susan Kraus, Jonathan May, Christine Mour, Margaret Mulcare, Elizabeth O'Connor, George Pasteur, Jr., Judith Shapiro, Chris Stewart, John Stewart, Nathaniel Sweeney, and Leonard Weiser.

The Erickson School will be a world leader in meeting the demands for new human capital, as well as policy analysis, research, and executive education. Erickson School alumni are at the leading edge, a new group of professionals that will revolutionize not only the field of aging services but also the way society views aging. They are part of a transformative force that will steer the field of aging services in new directions, and I am pleased to honor them today.

Madam President, will the Senator yield for a moment?

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to be recognized after the Senator from Georgia has completed his comments.

Madam President, let me comment on the underlying bill and then I will ask unanimous consent to set aside an amendment so I can offer an amendment.

First, let me comment on the underlying bill. We need to give President Obama the tools necessary for our economic recovery. President Obama said 2 weeks ago in his inaugural address the challenges we face are real, they are serious, and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time, but they will be met.

I think our responsibility is to make sure he has the tools necessary in order to be able to deal with our economic crisis. The current status of our economy is worse than any of us have seen in our lifetime. The gross national product fell 4 percent in the final quarter of 2008; our unemployment rates are at 7.2 percent.

Regarding home ownership and foreclosure, I know my Republican colleagues have had some discussion about trying to do more in that regard. This bill will save homeowners their homes. In my State of Maryland, we had 41,500 foreclosures in 2008, an increase of 71 percent. I need to point out that last year, it was the Senate Republicans who required seven cloture votes on the Foreclosure Prevention Act before we could take it up. At that time, 8,500 families were in some stage of foreclosure every day. The five months of stalling caused 1.2 million families to receive some form of foreclosure filings. The Republicans blocked amendments to provide additional funding for housing counseling and to let bankruptcy judges modify terms of subprime mortgages which could have kept 600,000 families in their homes.

So let me make it clear. We all want to preserve home ownership. We all want to prevent foreclosure. The underlying bill will help us get to that moment which we should have done earlier, and I regret that the filibusters prevented us from doing that.

Now, it is not only home ownership. People are losing their jobs. Retailers, automobile dealers, and restaurants are feeling the pinch. Small business owners are closing their doors. We need jobs and we need consumer confidence. The underlying legislation will allow for job growth. That is the No. 1 objective: Create more jobs in America because we are losing them today. President Obama made it clear the criteria for this bill must be that the investments we make must be targeted to new job growth. He does that through targeted tax credits and tax cuts, through aid to our local governments to avoid the layoffs that each one of our States will confront with State workers. In my State of Maryland, Governor O'Malley is having a very difficult time with the State budget. He knows we need help in order to preserve State employment and to preserve the type of services that the State must provide for essential services during a recession.

This legislation provides direct investment for projects that are ready to go, that will create jobs, and that are the right investments for America's future. I don't disagree with my colleagues as we look at each individual request that is made here. There are no earmarks in this legislation, but we

want to make sure there are right investments for America's future, whether it is improving education, educational facilities, energy so we can become energy independent, broadband so that we can compete in the future, health care technology so we can become more efficient in the way we deliver health care, our transportation system--I particularly mention public transportation which is critically important for our communities--or whether it is preserving home ownership. Also, the underlying bill must be temporary. We need to get back to balancing the budget; we understand that.

So what does this bill mean for the people of Maryland? Well, our State will receive directly $3.1 billion. We will receive $420 million for highways, $240 million for transit projects, $27 million for drinking water improvements, $96 million to improve wastewater facility plants, which is in desperate need in Maryland. The State energy program will get $8.5 million; weatherization assistance so that homeowners can have their homes much more efficient as it relates to the use of energy, $56.5 million. Many of the infrastructures that are being improved by this bill are 30, 40, 50 years old. A lot of our wastewater treatment facilities are in need of modernization. They are ready to go. The money has not been there for it. These are capital improvements so we can compete and have a better society. Once it is done, we can get back to being more competitive and get back to the budget discipline that is so necessary in this Congress.

Let me talk for a moment about the real estate market. The real estate market triggered this recession. We know that. I was listening to my colleagues talk about that on the floor and I agree with them. It is difficult for people to get into the mood to buy a home. They don't know whether we have hit bottom. So I particularly appreciate the Finance Committee for bringing out in this legislation the first-time homeowners tax credits, legislation that I introduced last Congress. It was included in the bill we passed in the last Congress, but it was a noninterest-bearing loan of $7,500. The Finance Committee has now changed that to a credit, which I think will be much more effective. First-time home buyers now know that if they get into the home buying market, the Federal Government is going to help them with a credit. That is what it should be, and I know there will be some additional efforts made to strengthen that amendment.

In regards to small business, I said earlier small businesses are the heart of America. It is where our economic strength is. The American dream is not only owning a home; the American dream is also owning a small business, being your own boss. Unfortunately, too many small businesses today have on their front door ``going out of business.'' We have to do more to protect small businesses. At the end of the day, when we pull out of this recession, we need to have small businesses in place because they are the economic engine of America. Madam President, 99.7 percent of the businesses in Maryland are small businesses and 80 percent of all new job growth is created by small businesses.

We had in the Small Business Committee a roundtable where we talked to small businesses in our State, in our country. It is interesting that a year ago, one out of every seven small business owners used their personal credit cards in order to get credit for their business. We understand that. Today that is 50 percent. It is the only place they can get credit. It is the most expensive and it can be pulled at any time. We have to help small business owners with their credit problems. We have to make sure the government procurement actually gets down to the small business owner. In this underlying legislation, the SBA loans, the 504 program, the 7(a) loans, there are major provisions to make it less expensive for small businesses. That is good. I support that. There is a microborrowing provision in this legislation for small businesses. That is important. That is going to help. But we need to do more. We need to do more to help small businesses, minority businesses, women-owned businesses, veterans' businesses.

Amendment No. 237 to Amendment No. 98

For that reason, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment so that I may offer amendment No. 237.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Madam President, let me very briefly explain this amendment.

This amendment improves the SBA program for surety bonds for small businesses. In the underlying bill the committee has brought out an additional $15 million that will allow SBA to help with the surety program.

The challenge today is that for small business to get a government contract of over $100,000, they have to put up a surety bond. It is very difficult for them to get that surety bond. The SBA has a program to help them obtain a surety bond. The challenge is that the current limit is $2 million. For any contract over $2 million the program cannot be used. Well, with the underlying bill and the types of procurement we are anticipating, there are going to be larger contracts. What this amendment does is increase the $2 million to $5 million.

Secondly, in order to qualify for a small business, your annual revenue must be below the Federal guidelines or State guidelines if it is a State contract.

What the underlying amendment does is use the Federal guidelines, which is $31 million, for construction contractor businesses and $13 million for specific trades as the standard for being eligible for the Federal SBA program on your surety bond. I am very pleased that this amendment has the support of the leadership of the Small Business Committee, Senators Landrieu and Snowe. It is bipartisan. The CBO scored this at no cost, so it will not cost money. I urge my colleagues to support it.

Lastly, Senator Snowe will be offering an amendment to make sure Federal procurement laws and regulations apply to all the contracts awarded under this legislation and that SBA regularly reports on these contracts to Congress. I am a cosponsor of that amendment; I strongly support that amendment. I hope we will also consider that amendment.

In conclusion, I am optimistic about our future, but we have a lot of work to do. We need to pass this legislation quickly and give President Obama the tools he needs so we can see that our economy is rebuilt and grown to its full capacity. I am confident we will reach that day by acting on this legislation, and it will be sooner rather than later.

I thank my colleague and yield the floor.

Mr. President, I thank the chairman. This amendment will make it easier for small businesses to be able to get surety bonds in order to participate in these contracts with Government. It has the support of the chairman and ranking member of the Small Business Committee. I am prepared to accept a voice vote.

Mr. President, this amendment directs $25 billion to a targeted list of infrastructure programs, including highway, transit, and water and sewer programs. Adopting the amendment will make investments in our Nation's physical infrastructure a clear focal point in the economic recovery bill. And it will create 654,818 jobs.

We have shovel-ready projects in every jurisdiction in my home State of Maryland.

Let me take just a few minutes to explain how this amendment will benefit my State. It is a story that will be repeated across America.

Transportation:

The amendment calls for a $2 billion increase in transit grants for local communities, which will be allocated by well-established formula. This provision alone would increase Maryland's share of transit funds by $35.8 million.

Fixed guideway modernization funding will be increased by $2 billion as well, resulting in an $88 million boost for Maryland. Together these two transit provisions will provide nearly 3,000 jobs in Maryland.

The highway provisions in the bill will add $13 billion to repairing and improving our network of roads. Maryland's share will be $208 million, creating 5,580 jobs here in this state alone.

Water:

Drinking water: the amendment sends an additional $13.8 million for drinking water projects to Maryland to upgrade our aging drinking water facilities.

Clean water: this amendment will send an additional $146.4 million into Maryland. We have over a billion dollars in needs to repair and upgrade our sewer systems in Maryland. These additional funds will protect Marylanders

from the health effects associated with sewerage overflows. It will improve our water quality in rivers and streams across the State, including our national treasure, the Chesapeake Bay.

Together the water infrastructure funds total an additional $160.2 million in Maryland that will create 6,270 jobs.

This is an amendment that meets our critical infrastructure needs and creates jobs right away, giving our economy the stimulus it needs.

But this is also an amendment that is temporary and targeted. We will get major infrastructure improvements that will last much longer than the funds themselves. These are investments roads, bridges, sewer systems, drinking water facilities--that typically last 30, 40 even 50 years. This is a smart investment in America's future.

I am proud to serve as an original cosponsor of this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to give it their enthusiastic support. This is an amendment that is an investment in America.

About 5 minutes.

Mr. President, first, I thank the Senator from Vermont, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, for his work regarding the Eric Holder nomination. I think the confirmation process has been very fair. I must point out that when then-President-elect Obama indicated that his choice for Attorney General would be Eric Holder, I was very excited and supportive of his selection.

The confirmation process of the chairman of the Judiciary Committee has been conducted in a very fair and open manner. It has only made my support for Eric Holder more strong. The documents made available to the committee and the letters we have received from interested parties--many from those who have served in the Department of Justice under Republican administrations--have all strongly endorsed Eric Holder to be the next Attorney General of the United States.

I am convinced he is the right person at the right time for many reasons. First, his experience; he brings a wealth of experience to the position of Attorney General. He was a former judge and a former U.S. attorney. He has been in the Office of the Attorney General in the Department of Justice, and he has been a private attorney. He brings a sense of independence that we need in the Office of the Attorney General. He must be the Attorney General for the people of this country. He doesn't serve one person or just the President; he serves all Americans. We need an Attorney General who is going to be independent and willing to stand for what is right; stand up to a Cabinet Secretary or even the President with independent advice as to what the law states.

We are a nation of laws. The rule of law is extremely important. Eric Holder, throughout his career, has demonstrated that independence. I will give you one example. When Ken Starr, who was investigating former President Bill Clinton, wanted to expand his investigation of the President, it was up to Eric Holder to make that recommendation, and he made that recommendation in favor of the Independent Counsel. So he has shown his ability to do what is right, even if it is not popular to the person who appointed him, the President.

Secondly, I believe Eric Holder will restore the right priorities for the good of justice. When asked about torture, without any equivocation he said torture is illegal and cannot be accepted under any situation. He didn't equivocate. We know when we need to restore the strength of the Civil Rights Division in the Department of Justice, he said he would do that. He clearly will restore to the Department of Justice the priorities that are most important for the Department of Justice.

Let me point out, in short, Eric Holder will restore the reputation of the Department of Justice, and he will retain and recruit the very best legal minds to represent the interests of all of the people of our Nation. I strongly endorse his confirmation and urge my colleagues to do that. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, let me compliment my friend, Senator Hatch, for his longstanding work on behalf of the Children's Health Insurance Program. He points out--and rightly so--that this legislation was developed in a bipartisan manner, where Democrats and Republicans worked together to establish a Federal program that allowed our States to use their mechanism to cover children. That is where our difference might be now. We are looking

at reauthorization legislation. We are looking at how we can make this program more effective, covering more children, giving States the tools they need so children can be covered under the CHIP program. The concerns my friend from Utah raises basically would impede on State discretion. We have a national program that is built upon allowing the States to implement and cover children. Each State is different. The priorities among States are certainly different. We need to give the States the tools they need so children actually are covered effectively by this program.

The amendment my friend from Utah has offered would prohibit States from covering legal immigrants and pregnant women. These are, in many cases, people who have been here for a long time, hard-working, tax- paying families, and they are playing according to the rules.

This restriction was imposed in 1996 by Congress. Since that time, many of the restrictions that have been placed upon legal immigrants have been removed. In this instance, what the committee is recommending is to give the States the option of covering legal immigrants without the 5-year wait period. It is not mandating it. It gives all States the option, if they so desire, to cover. Currently, 23 States want to cover these children.

The last time an amendment was offered and we tried to do away with the prohibition on States, our Republican colleagues said: This shouldn't be done as an independent issue. Why don't we take it up when we reauthorize the Children's Health Insurance Program. That is where it should come up. It should not come up on an unrelated bill. That is exactly what we are doing.

This is the reauthorization bill for the Children's Health Insurance Program. This is the time to correct what was done in 1996, in haste, that in many other Federal programs we have already changed. This allows the States to do it.

Many other issues my friend from Utah raised, I assume, will have individual amendments to deal with them. But in most cases, it is the issue of whether we are going to trust our States to run the program. That was the compromise reached between Democrats and Republicans. Quite frankly, there are more people on the Democratic side of the aisle who wanted a stronger Federal presence. But our Republican colleagues said: Let's build upon the State programs. That is what we did in the compromise. That is why the Children's Health Insurance Program has truly been a bipartisan bill.

The bill reported out by the committee is a bipartisan bill. So let me talk for a few minutes about the importance of S. 275, the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009. For millions of children across America who are waiting for the comprehensive health care coverage they need, this week could not have come soon enough. There is a crisis in health care in this country. The United States spends far more per capita than any other nation on health care services. Yet our health status lags in many areas, especially in preventable diseases. This is primarily because we have so many Americans who lack coverage and a fragmented, inefficient health care system that shifts costs onto those who are covered. This is no longer a matter of whether we take action to achieve universal health insurance but how.

We can begin, in the 111th Congress, by guaranteeing children access to the care they need to grow into healthy adults. We can make great strides by reauthorizing CHIP and covering millions of uninsured children now.

Most uninsured Americans belong to working families. It is the CHIP program, first established 12 years ago, that can provide children in these families with affordable health insurance. As a Member of the House, I voted for the bill that created CHIP. At the time, 37 million Americans were uninsured. At the time, I did so with the hope that CHIP would be the first step toward universal health coverage. Although we did not reach the goal then, I believe we are on track to achieve it this year. In the years since, more employers have dropped their coverage. The number of uninsured has increased. Today the number stands at 46 million and growing. I say ``growing'' because today's headlines contain more grim news for our workforce. The New York Times reported a staggering list of companies that announced job cuts on Monday: Caterpillar, 20,000 jobs; Sprint-Nextel, 8,000 jobs; Home Depot, 7,000 jobs; General Motors, 2,000 jobs; Texas Instruments, 3,400 jobs; Philips Electronics, 6,000 jobs.

Over the past year, more than 12.5 million Americans have lost their jobs. Our unemployment rate is now 7.2 percent, the highest in 16 years. As President Obama said yesterday:

These are not just numbers. These are working men and women

whose families have been disrupted and whose dreams have been

put on hold.

Whenever we have a family who loses their job, in many cases, they lose their health insurance. If they lose their health insurance, in many cases, they lose their access to quality health care. The numbers are increasing. In many cases, we have two working families. One person loses their job which may cover the family, the other spouse has only single coverage and can't get family coverage or doesn't have the money to afford family coverage. This disrupts a family's ability to take care of their own health care needs. We know CHIP works. Studies have shown and proved that enrollment in CHIP improves the health care of children. When previously uninsured children sign up for CHIP, they are far more likely to get regular primary medical and dental care. They are less likely to visit the emergency room for services that could be rendered in a doctor's office. That saves us health care dollars. They are more likely to receive immunizations and other services they need to stay healthy and lead to healthier schools and communities. They are more likely to get the prescription drugs they need to recover from illness.

The best evidence of the program's success doesn't rest in studies or surveys. It rests in the families themselves. The Bedford family from Baltimore is a success story, one of millions of families in CHIP. Craig and Kim Lee Bedford and their five children have testified on Capitol Hill about the difference the Maryland CHIP program has made in their lives. Mrs. Bedford said:

Perhaps the greatest impact the Maryland Children's Health

Insurance Program has had on our family is that we no longer

have to make impossible health choices based on a financial

perspective. We no longer have to decide whether a child is

really sick enough to warrant a doctor's visit. We no longer

have to decide whether a child really needs a certain

medication prescribed by his pediatrician.

Mr. Bedford said:

The face of CHIP is families such as ours, families that

work hard, play by the rules, trying to live the American

dream.

So for the Bedford family and millions more, CHIP has been a success. But there are still millions of children who have not enrolled in the program offered by their States. Our State is making progress, simplifying their enrollment procedures, expanding outreach efforts and using joint applications for Medicaid and CHIP so families can enroll together. The States are making progress, but as we reauthorize the Children's Health Insurance Program, let's make sure we make real progress.

Our bill will extend the program for 4.5 years and allow an additional 4.1 million children nationwide to enroll. We have to get this bill done.

I wish to talk about the MCHIP program, the Maryland State program. It has one of the highest income eligibility thresholds in the Nation. I know my colleagues have talked about this. This is needed because of the high cost of living in our State. Eligibility is 300 percent of the Federal poverty level, not because our Governor wants to move people from private insurance to public insurance plans. It is at 300 percent because working families at this income level do not have access to affordable health insurance. That is the statistics in my State. Those families need CHIP. This is a State option.

As to one point my friend from Utah mentioned, I don't think the Federal Government should be prescriptive. Allow the States to figure out what program works best. There are incentives to cover low-income families. There are higher matches from the Federal Government, as it should be. We should make sure the lower income families are covered first, and we do under CHIP. Children under the age of 19 may be eligible for MCHIP, if their

family income is at or below 200 percent of the Federal poverty level or up to $34,000 for a family of three. Our program has been a true success. Enrollment has grown from about 38,000 enrollees in 1999 to more than 100,000 today. In Maryland, the need has always exceeded available funds. We actually spend more money than the Federal Government will give us. The Federal match through the CHIP formula established in 1997 is not enough to meet all the costs of the MCHIP program. Some States do not use their entire allotment, while other States, such as Maryland, have expenditures that exceed their allotment. Congress has addressed this problem by redistributing the excesses of the States that have them to States that have shortfalls. Now we must move forward for future years.

This is what we are doing on the floor of the Senate today. I thank Chairman Baucus and Senator Rockefeller for their efforts on this bill. This bill will allow us to continue to cover children and families with incomes up to 300 percent of poverty. Maryland would also have access to contingent funds, if a shortfall arises, and additional funds based on enrollment gains. With this new money, Maryland can cover an estimated 42,800 children who are currently uninsured over the next 5 years.

There is another important part of this bill I wish to talk about for a moment, section 501. It hasn't gotten much attention, but it certainly has received a lot of attention around the country. Section 501 ensures that dental care is a guaranteed benefit under CHIP. I agree with my friend from Utah, we need to set standards at the national level. Dental benefits must be included. According to the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, dental decay is the most common chronic childhood disease among children. It affects 1 in 5 children between the ages of 2 and 4 and half of those between the ages of 6 and 8. Children living in poverty suffer twice as much tooth decay as middle- and upper-income children. Nearly 40 percent of Black children have untreated tooth decay in their permanent teeth. More than 10 percent of the Nation's rural population has never visited a dentist. More than 25 million people live in areas that lack adequate dental services.

Next month will mark 2 years since a young man from suburban Maryland named Deamonte Driver passed away. He was 12 years old, when he died in February of 2007 from an untreated tooth abscess. His mother tried to access the system, tried to get him to a dentist. What was needed was an $80 tooth extraction. Because of the failure of the system to cover his services, an inability to get to a dentist, Deamonte ended up in an emergency room. A quarter of a million dollars was spent in emergency surgeries. He lost his life in the United States in 2007.

This bill will do something about it by covering oral health care, as it should. Deamonte's death has shown us that, as C. Everett Koop once said, ``There is no health without oral health.'' No children should ever go without dental care. I have said before, I hoped that Deamonte Driver's death will serve as a wake-up call for Congress. Section 501 of this bill shows that it has. We must never forget that behind all the data about enrollment and behind every CBO estimate, there are real children who need care.

When I spoke about Deamonte Driver after his death, I urged my colleagues to ensure that the CHIP reauthorization bill we send to the President includes guaranteed dental coverage. This bill does include guaranteed dental coverage. It also provides ways in which families will have a better understanding of the need for oral health care. It also provides ways in which families can access dentists who will treat them under either the CHIP program or the Medicaid Program.

This legislation is a major step forward on dental care. We need to do more. I want to acknowledge the work particularly of Senators Bingaman and Snowe on oral health care. They have been real champions in this body in moving forward on these types of legislation.

This bill will also require GAO to study and report on access to dental services by children in underserved areas, access to oral health care through Medicaid and CHIP, and how we can use midlevel dental health providers in coordination with dentists to improve access to dental care for children. The results of this study will give us the information we need to further improve coverage.

We still have to raise reimbursement for dental providers, and send grants to the States to allow them to offer wraparound coverage for those who have basic health insurance but no dental insurance. But these provisions are an excellent start.

After two vetoes of a bipartisan CHIP bill by the former President, I am so pleased to stand here today on the floor of the Senate and express my strong support for S. 275. This is the week in which we can make progress in covering people in this country, particularly our children, with health insurance. One week after the inauguration of President Obama, we are poised to move this bill through the Congress and to his desk so it can finally become law.

I urge all my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation, as we start down the path to universal health coverage for all Americans.

With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I do object. The reason, quite frankly, is that we have worked out with the Republican leader that we would have three amendments pending. We have those three amendments pending. I think it is important we have an opportunity to act on those three amendments. We certainly look forward to other opportunities where my colleague will be able to offer the amendment, but at this point I object.

Mr. President, if my colleague will yield?

We would be pleased to allow the Senator to call up amendment No. 43 but not the entire list of amendments the Senator sought.

To point out to my friend, we already have three amendments that are pending, and we are hoping to make progress, and we want to get votes on these amendments. I will not raise an objection to setting aside the amendment for the sole purpose of offering amendment No. 43.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. President, let me thank our distinguished chairman for yielding me this time.

My colleagues have talked frequently about how our colleague, Senator Clinton, is the right person at the right time to be the Secretary of State. We have talked a great deal about her experience. As First Lady of this Nation, she traveled frequently around the world. She knows firsthand the problems that America confronts internationally. With experience as the Senator for New York, serving on the Armed Services Committee, she understands the critical role the State Department plays in our national security. With her service on the Helsinki Commission, she knows firsthand the importance that the Department of State can play in human rights issues around the world. For all of those reasons, she is truly the right person to represent our Nation as Secretary of State. She is an iconic figure for American values and for hope for people around the world.

I wanted to comment about how President and Mrs. Clinton have provided disclosure. It is unprecedented the amount of the financial information they have opened to the public.

I particularly want to thank our former President, Bill Clinton, for his humanitarian work. We all know that Government cannot do it alone. Yet he has been able to deal with the international humanitarian needs through the use of foundations and getting other people involved. But I particularly want to thank the former President and the foundation for which he is responsible for the unprecedented disclosures that they are making. We will know all the contributors. They have agreed that before new contributions are made it will be cleared through the Government ethics bureau to make sure there is not even the appearance of a conflict. So they are doing good things for our country. The foundation is doing good things for humanitarian needs. We know that.

The Clintons have taken extraordinary steps to do the right thing for this country in the disclosure and the work they do. It is now time for us to do the right thing and confirm Hillary Clinton as the next Secretary of State for our Nation.

I thank the Chair for yielding me the time. I would yield back the remainder of my time to the chairman.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Stabenow.) The Senator from Massachusetts.

Mr. President, let me first thank my colleague from Maryland for giving me the opportunity to speak, but also to thank her for her extraordinary leadership on behalf of gender equality in our Nation. Senator Mikulski is no stranger to this issue. She has fought her entire life on behalf of equality for all people in this country. From her days as a social worker to her service on the City Council of Baltimore and now to the Senate, she has been our leader on speaking out for what is right on behalf of women, on behalf of all of the people of our Nation. So I thank Senator Mikulski very much for everything she has done, not just on this issue but on so many issues that affect equality for the people of our country.

This has been an extraordinary week. On Monday we celebrated the life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Dr. King had a dream that everyone in this country would have the equal opportunity of this great land, regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation, or gender. He had a dream. Then, yesterday, we saw this Nation take a giant step forward in reaching that dream with the inauguration of Barack Obama as the 44th President of the United States. We can take another giant step forward now by passing the legislation that my colleague from Maryland is bringing forward, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. It is so important that we do this.

Let me give my colleagues some of the facts. They know this, but it is worth repeating. Today in the workplace women are being discriminated against. On average, women make 77 percent of what a male makes for the same work. That is unacceptable and inexcusable. We need to change that.

Lilly Ledbetter worked for 19 years at Goodyear Tire Company. It was shown that she was making $15,000 less than her male counterparts were making in the United States of America. Well, we passed legislation to make sure that could not happen and that there were rights to protect women who were discriminated against by that type of action by an employer. Lilly Ledbetter did what was right. She filed her case and it was found that, yes, she was discriminated against, but guess what. Her claim was denied by the Supreme Court of the United States by a 5-to-4 vote because she didn't bring her case within 180 days of the discrimination. She didn't know about the discrimination until a fellow worker told her about it, well past 180 days. She couldn't possibly have brought the case within 180 days.

Now it is time for us to correct that Supreme Court decision, and that is exactly what the legislation Senator Mikulski has brought forward will do. It will reverse the Supreme Court decision giving women and giving people of this Nation an effective remedy if an employer discriminates based upon gender.

I have listened to some of the debate on the floor. I don't want to see us put additional roadblocks in the way of women being able to have an effective remedy. I respect greatly my colleague from Texas. She is very sincere and a very effective Member of this body. However, I don't want to have lawyers debating whether a person can bring a claim, as to whether they had reasonable cause or try to think of what someone was thinking about at the time. This is very simple. If you discriminate against your employee, they should have an effective remedy. The Supreme Court turned down that remedy. The legislation that is on the floor corrects it. It is our obligation, I believe, to make sure that is done.

So I wish to take these few moments to urge my colleagues to pass the legislation that is before us. Let's not put additional roadblocks in the way. Let's not pass amendments that will become ways in which employers such as Goodyear Tire could prevent their employees from getting fair pay. The time is now. Let's pass this legislation.

I again congratulate my colleague from Maryland for her leadership on this issue.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce a bill, the Giving Incentives to Volunteers Everywhere Act. In today's economic climate, Americans need relief--especially people who volunteer to help the less fortunate in their communities. We can't let an out-of-date mileage rate for volunteers who use their vehicles for charitable purposes exacerbate the pinch at the pump they are experiencing. Now,

while it is true that gas prices have retreated from their historic highs since last summer, the principle still stands: the Internal Revenue Service, IRS, should have discretion in setting the mileage rate for charitable organizations. This legislation will provide immediate relief for volunteers serving our elderly, poor, frail, and at-risk Americans. I'm pleased that the senior Senator from Maine, Senator Snowe, and my other colleagues, the senior Senator from New York, Senator Schumer, and the junior Senator from Nevada, Senator Ensign, have joined me in introducing this legislation. They have worked extremely hard on this issue. I would also like to thank Senators Grassley, Feingold, Leahy, Alexander, Sanders, Burr, Dodd, and Cantwell for being original co-sponsors of this bill.

The Internal Revenue Code does not fix a rate for individuals who are required to use their own vehicle for work, or for individuals taking a mileage deduction for moving purposes. The IRS is able to increase the deduction amount for these purposes to reflect the current economic climate and dramatically higher fuel prices. This is exactly what the IRS recently did.

Last July, the IRS modified the standard mileage rates for computing the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business, medical, or moving expenses. The revised standard mileage rate for business purposes increased from 50.5 cents per mile to 58.5 cents. For medical and moving expenses, the IRS increased the rate from 19 cents per mile to 27 cents per mile. I think the Nation's volunteers who travel on behalf of charitable organizations deserve an increase in their mileage rate, too.

Just recently, the IRS again modified the standard mileage rates for computing the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business, medical, or moving expenses. As of January 1, the revised standard mileage rate for business purposes was decreased from 58.5 cents to 55 cents. For medical and moving expenses, the IRS decreased the rate from 27 cents per mile to 24 cents per mile. This ability to change the rate due to the cost of gasoline or the economic climate is crucial and should be permitted for the Nation's charitable organizations.

My bill gives the IRS flexibility in setting the rate so that volunteers for charitable organizations could be given the same tax benefit accruing for moving, medical, and business expenses. It also provides a floor for volunteers, not allowing their rate to be set lower than moving and medical rate. In today's climate of increasing food and fuel prices, this bill will help relieve some of the pressure on charitable organizations and their volunteers. Additionally, this bill will allow the organization to reimburse the volunteer up to the business rate without any tax impact to volunteers.

Take Meals on Wheels, for example. This organization delivers nutritious meals and other nutrition services to men and women who are elderly, homebound, disabled, frail, or otherwise at-risk. The services Meals on Wheels provides significantly improve the recipients' quality of life and health, and often help to postpone institutionalization.

Over the past year, there has been nearly a 20 percent increase in fuel and food prices, coupled with reduced government funding and fewer donations across the country. Nearly 60 percent of the estimated 5,000 programs that operate under the auspices of the Meals on Wheels Association of America have lost volunteers, in large part because it became too expensive for the volunteers to drive back and forth. Nearly half the programs have eliminated routes or consolidated meal services. About 38 percent of the programs have switched to delivering frozen meals, and about 30 percent are cutting personal visits from 5 days a week to one.

In Maryland, the Central Maryland Meals on Wheels has experienced an increase of 7 percent in food costs and suppliers are charging higher delivery fees. The cost to fill up the vans with gas has increased. Fuel costs averaged $72,538.70 in fiscal year 2007; this year, the costs have jumped to $86,790.63. This is an organization with volunteers serving over 3,100 elderly, disabled, frail, and at-risk Marylanders. Its volunteers deserve relief from high gas prices just as much as people who use their car for work or for medical purposes or for moving.

Throughout the United States, Meals on Wheels served over 3 million people and more than 250 million meals in fiscal year 2006. This is just one of thousands of charitable organizations. We need to encourage and support the Meals on Wheels volunteers and all other volunteers who need their cars to help their neighbors and communities. The Giving Incentives to Volunteers Everywhere bill will do just that, and I hope my colleagues will support it.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce a bill, the Giving Incentives to Volunteers Everywhere Act. In today's economic climate, Americans need relief--especially people who volunteer to help the less fortunate in their communities. We can't let an out-of-date mileage rate for volunteers who use their vehicles for charitable purposes exacerbate the pinch at the pump they are experiencing. Now,

while it is true that gas prices have retreated from their historic highs since last summer, the principle still stands: the Internal Revenue Service, IRS, should have discretion in setting the mileage rate for charitable organizations. This legislation will provide immediate relief for volunteers serving our elderly, poor, frail, and at-risk Americans. I'm pleased that the senior Senator from Maine, Senator Snowe, and my other colleagues, the senior Senator from New York, Senator Schumer, and the junior Senator from Nevada, Senator Ensign, have joined me in introducing this legislation. They have worked extremely hard on this issue. I would also like to thank Senators Grassley, Feingold, Leahy, Alexander, Sanders, Burr, Dodd, and Cantwell for being original co-sponsors of this bill.

The Internal Revenue Code does not fix a rate for individuals who are required to use their own vehicle for work, or for individuals taking a mileage deduction for moving purposes. The IRS is able to increase the deduction amount for these purposes to reflect the current economic climate and dramatically higher fuel prices. This is exactly what the IRS recently did.

Last July, the IRS modified the standard mileage rates for computing the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business, medical, or moving expenses. The revised standard mileage rate for business purposes increased from 50.5 cents per mile to 58.5 cents. For medical and moving expenses, the IRS increased the rate from 19 cents per mile to 27 cents per mile. I think the Nation's volunteers who travel on behalf of charitable organizations deserve an increase in their mileage rate, too.

Just recently, the IRS again modified the standard mileage rates for computing the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business, medical, or moving expenses. As of January 1, the revised standard mileage rate for business purposes was decreased from 58.5 cents to 55 cents. For medical and moving expenses, the IRS decreased the rate from 27 cents per mile to 24 cents per mile. This ability to change the rate due to the cost of gasoline or the economic climate is crucial and should be permitted for the Nation's charitable organizations.

My bill gives the IRS flexibility in setting the rate so that volunteers for charitable organizations could be given the same tax benefit accruing for moving, medical, and business expenses. It also provides a floor for volunteers, not allowing their rate to be set lower than moving and medical rate. In today's climate of increasing food and fuel prices, this bill will help relieve some of the pressure on charitable organizations and their volunteers. Additionally, this bill will allow the organization to reimburse the volunteer up to the business rate without any tax impact to volunteers.

Take Meals on Wheels, for example. This organization delivers nutritious meals and other nutrition services to men and women who are elderly, homebound, disabled, frail, or otherwise at-risk. The services Meals on Wheels provides significantly improve the recipients' quality of life and health, and often help to postpone institutionalization.

Over the past year, there has been nearly a 20 percent increase in fuel and food prices, coupled with reduced government funding and fewer donations across the country. Nearly 60 percent of the estimated 5,000 programs that operate under the auspices of the Meals on Wheels Association of America have lost volunteers, in large part because it became too expensive for the volunteers to drive back and forth. Nearly half the programs have eliminated routes or consolidated meal services. About 38 percent of the programs have switched to delivering frozen meals, and about 30 percent are cutting personal visits from 5 days a week to one.

In Maryland, the Central Maryland Meals on Wheels has experienced an increase of 7 percent in food costs and suppliers are charging higher delivery fees. The cost to fill up the vans with gas has increased. Fuel costs averaged $72,538.70 in fiscal year 2007; this year, the costs have jumped to $86,790.63. This is an organization with volunteers serving over 3,100 elderly, disabled, frail, and at-risk Marylanders. Its volunteers deserve relief from high gas prices just as much as people who use their car for work or for medical purposes or for moving.

Throughout the United States, Meals on Wheels served over 3 million people and more than 250 million meals in fiscal year 2006. This is just one of thousands of charitable organizations. We need to encourage and support the Meals on Wheels volunteers and all other volunteers who need their cars to help their neighbors and communities. The Giving Incentives to Volunteers Everywhere bill will do just that, and I hope my colleagues will support it.

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