Floor Statements

Madam President, I wish to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the Normandy invasion by Allied Forces. On June 6, 1944, a date known ever since as D-day, a mighty armada crossed a narrow strip of sea from England to Normandy, France and broke the Nazi grip on Western Europe. The day before--June 5, 1944--a fleet of 3,000 landing craft, 500 naval vessels, and 2,500 miscellaneous ships left English ports bound for Normandy, France. The amphibious landing was the largest effort ever in the history of mankind with the simultaneous landings of U.S., British, and Canadian forces on five separate beachheads in

Normandy. An additional 13,000 aircraft supported Allied Forces on D- day.

General Dwight D. Eisenhower--the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe--addressed the troops immediately prior to the invasion, saying:

Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen of the Allied Expeditionary

Force! You are about to embark upon a great crusade, toward

which we have striven these many months. The eyes of the

world are upon you. The hopes and prayers of liberty loving

people everywhere march with you. In company with our brave

Allies and brothers in arms on other fronts, you will bring

about the destruction of the German war machine, the

elimination of Nazi tyranny over the oppressed peoples of

Europe, and security for ourselves in a free world.

And by the end of August 1944, all of northern France was liberated and the invading forces were reorganized for the drive into Germany where they would eventually meet up with Soviet forces advancing from the east to bring an end to the Third Reich and its tyranny of terror.

The aftermath of World War II saw much of Europe devastated in a way that is now difficult to imagine. Over 36 million Europeans died in the conflict; 19 million of them were civilians. Millions more were left homeless, the European economy had collapsed, and much of the European industrial infrastructure was destroyed.

But from these ashes of war came the beginning of a new era for international cooperation and diplomacy. In the wake of World War II, the United Nations agreed to outlaw wars of aggression in an attempt to prevent a third world war. With the creation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO, in 1949 and the institutionalization of the Helsinki Accords 25 years later, we committed ourselves to the work that began with the assault on those beachheads--Utah, Omaha, Juno, Sword, and Gold Beach--in June 1944.

The guiding principles of the Helsinki Final Act are the foundations of lasting peace. These principles are worth enumerating: sovereign equality, respect for the rights inherent in sovereignty, refraining from threat or use of force, inviolability of frontiers, territorial integrity of States, peaceful settlement of disputes, non-intervention in internal affairs, respect for human rights, self determination of peoples, co-operation among States, and fulfillment in good faith of obligations under international law. Additionally, the Helsinki Final Act reaffirmed mankind's fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of thought, conscience, and religion or belief.

Today, we remember the tremendous efforts of Allied Forces as they signaled to the world that unprovoked aggression and genocide have no place in our international order and will be met with our greatest resolve. I am reminded of the Maryland National Guard units who participated in the D-day landings. These brave Marylanders served with great distinction in the 29th Infantry Division, fighting their way across Western Europe and liberating France and Holland. The 29th Division suffered one of the highest casualty rates of any American division during World War II. We must honor those heroes by safeguarding all that they fought and sacrificed for.

Today, there are one million surviving World War II veterans in the U.S., and 17,346 of them are Marylanders. These same heroes who landed on those beaches in Normandy and parachuted behind enemy lines 70 years ago are joined by veterans who have served in conflicts spanning from the Korean war to the war in Afghanistan. Today, I call on each of my colleagues to commit themselves to the work of meeting our obligations to all of these veterans. The best way to honor their sacrifices is to ensure that we are unwavering in our support for them and their families.

Madam President, let me underscore the point Senator Menendez, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, has made in regard to these tax treaties.

I want to make two principal points, and then a few other comments, and then I am going to propound a unanimous consent request in regard to the Swiss protocols.

The two points I want to raise--first on the standard of fraud, the relevancy standard that has been included in tax treaties ratified by the Senate since the 1990s. There are at least eight treaties that have used this standard. This is the international standard on fraud. It is not the U.S. Standard. It is not the Swiss standard. It is not the Chilean standard. It is the international standard.

There may have been one time when the United States could dictate what tax treaties would include. But we are part of an international community. It is part of international negotiations.

This is the international standard for cooperation among taxing authorities in order to establish a level playing field.

Secondly, our Constitution provides for the ratification of treaties by the Senate and provides for a two-thirds vote. It is an extraordinary vote. It is a heavy vote. It is a heavy burden for ratification of the treaties. It is not 100 percent; it does not require every Senator to agree to it, but it takes two-thirds of the Senators.

I would urge my colleagues that we need to return to regular order. Everyone talks about returning to regular order in the Senate. Well, if we need to go through lengthy debates and votes on a treaty that is totally noncontroversial, I am not sure we are serving the best interests in the Senate. Let's have an open debate, but let's vote. If some Senators disagree, well, at least allow the vote to go forward so we can get the two-thirds of the Senate to agree.

I want to thank the chairman of the committee. He gave me the opportunity to chair the hearings. So I was at the hearings during consideration of these treaties. We had a full panel of witnesses. Not one testified in opposition and not one was concerned about the issue that my colleague from Kentucky has raised on the fraud standard. In fact, they all said this is the level playing field. This will allow our country to support our companies and provide a level playing field for international investment in the United States.

The absence of this treaty affects America's ability to attract investment. Make no mistake about it. It hurts our companies. It hurts American companies that want to do business in other countries. They need a level playing field, to be protected against multiple layers of taxation and compliance issues. So this allows for that level playing field, so we can have fair agreements.

Let me mention one company that has come to us and said this is very important: McCormick. McCormick is a company that has been headquartered in Maryland for 125 years. They have 2,000 employees in my State of Maryland and 10,000 employees globally. They are hurt by the failure to have these treaties ratified.

It presents a level playing field. It allows for investment. It protects the privacy. Our laws protect privacy. Swiss laws protect privacy. What this does is establish a level playing field so all are protected.

I appreciate the fact that we may want to negotiate this in a different way. Well, let's work with our negotiators and work with the international community. It is not going to be the United States dictating what that standard should be. Quite frankly, the relevancy standard has worked well. There have been no complaints whatsoever on privacy issues on the eight treaties we have ratified. To the contrary, what it does is it removes the veil from those who are tax cheats, to allow us to get that information. It provides for the transparency necessary between taxing jurisdictions so you cannot hide and commit fraud against one country where you have the treaty.

So I would urge my colleagues to allow us to proceed on these treaties. It is very important to economic growth in our own State.

With that, Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader, in consultation with the Republican leader, the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 9, treaty document 112-1; that the treaty be considered as having advanced through the various parliamentary stages up to and including the presentation of the resolutions of ratification; that any committee declarations be agreed to as applicable; that any statements be printed in the Record; that if the resolution of ratification is agreed to, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate then resume legislative session.

Madam President, let me point out that it has now been 4 years since we have ratified treaties--4 years--because of time restraints of doing business in the Senate. It is one Senator holding up an expedited way under the Senate rules so we could get a vote. He can cast his vote any way he wishes on this issue.

I will just say, we have so many of these tax treaties that are backed up now, not just the two we have spoken about today. There are other tax protocols and treaties that are waiting for Senate ratification. I would hope we could find a way that would satisfy colleagues to allow an up-or-down vote on these treaties. They are noncontroversial, but they are extremely important to the businesses of our country and moving our economy along.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the majority control the time from 2 p.m. until 3 p.m. today and the Republicans control the time from 3 p.m. until 4 p.m. today.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on June 4, 2014, at 9:30 am, in room SD-406 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled, ``NRC's Implementation of the Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendations and other Actions to Enhance and Maintain Nuclear Safety.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on June 4, 2014, at 10:30 a.m. to conduct a hearing entitled ``Evaluating Port Security: Progress Made and Challenges Ahead.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on June 4, 2014, at 10 a.m., in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Judicial Nominations.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on June 4, 2014, at 3 pm in Room 432 of the Russell Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled, ``From Military Service to Small Business Owners: Supporting America's Veteran Entrepreneurs.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Protection be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on June 4, 2014, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Student Loan Servicing: The Borrower's Experience.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on June 4, 2014, at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled, ``The Location Privacy Protection Act of 2014.''

Mr. President, we yield back the time.

Mr. President, later today we are going to have the opportunity to pass a very important bill,

the Water Resources Reform and Development Act, the WRRDA bill. The Presiding Officer knows firsthand the importance of this legislation to our ports of New Jersey and Maryland. This is a very important bill, and it is going to get passed. It is going to get signed by the President. It is a bipartisan bill.

I congratulate Senator Boxer and Senator Vitter, our chair and ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, for developing a process where Democrats and Republicans, all members of the Senate, could work to develop the very best water resources bill for our country. This follows in the best traditions of the last Congress, when we were able to pass MAP-21, the surface transportation reauthorization that provided for the building of our roads, our bridges, our transit systems, and the FAA, which dealt with our air highways, dealing with the most modern air system that we could have. We are now moving forward with the Water Resources Reform and Development Act that deals with our Nation's locks, levees, dams, ports, channels, and harbors. There is something in common with both this bill and the two other bills I talked about, the highway and Transportation bill, and the aviation bill. They all involve economic progress and growth, planning for our future, creating the types of job opportunities we need, and having a modern infrastructure in order to carry that out.

This bill is vitally important for my State of Maryland. The Port of Baltimore is an economic engine for the State of Maryland. We have the ninth busiest port in the Nation in Baltimore. The port is No. 1 in the country as far as the roll-on/roll-off automobile and truck import- export service. We are also ranked No. 1 on ores, sugar, and gypsum-- the bulk products. Our port is critically important to this country, critically important to our national economy, and vitally important to the Maryland economy.

Last summer the Port of Baltimore entered into a new contract with several car manufacturers--including Mazda--in order to increase its traffic within the Port of Baltimore.

My point is that there are tens of thousands of jobs in my community directly and indirectly related to the activities of the port.

Why is this legislation so important? I will give many reasons, but the primary reason is that we need to make sure we have acceptable sites to deal with the dredge material in order to maintain our harbor's depth so that the big cargo ships can come into our port. That has been a continuous struggle for many years.

Several years ago in Maryland we developed the Poplar Island solution. Poplar Island is a barrier island that was disappearing in the Chesapeake. At one time it was habitable, but it is no longer habitable. It was just about gone. Before Poplar Island, the popular thought was to just pick a site and dump the material and not worry about it. But Poplar Island is not only a site where we can put the dredge material, it is an environmental restoration. It provides a haven or wildlife, birds, and habitat. It offers the original purpose for a barrier island, and that is to protect against the extreme effects of storms. So this is a win-win situation. It gives us a dredge site for the materials so we can keep the harbor at the proper depth, it gives us an environmental plus so we can deal with wildlife in the Chesapeake, and it protects against the extreme weather conditions that occur too often.

It was absolutely essential to change the authorization in order to be able to continue to use Poplar Island as a site for dredge material. In this legislation, we get that done. We accelerated the Army Corps' reports, we got it back in time, and now that location will be available for many years to come in order to accept the dredge materials so we can keep the harbor dredged at the appropriate level.

There is also authorization in this bill to make sure our harbor is maintained at its current depth. We have gone even further than that. We have planned far into the future by now authorizing Mid Bay, the next Poplar Island for the Chesapeake. It is a barrier island that is disappearing, and it will be restored and used for economic purposes and dredge material, and it will also be converted into a positive for the environment and protect us against storms.

That is what this bill means to my State, and that is just one example. We could mention examples all over the country.

With regard to the Chesapeake Bay, I have taken to the floor many times to talk about it. Mr. President, $1 trillion of our economy comes from the bay. Watermen, fisheries, tourists, commerce, and real estate values are all affected by the quality of the Chesapeake Bay.

We made commonsense reforms to the environmental restoration program in the bill we will be voting on this afternoon. There is a lot in here.

I thank Senator Warner, my colleague from Virginia. The oyster restoration program is also in this bill, which is vital in order to restore the oyster crops in the Chesapeake Bay. We are making progress on oysters in the bay, and we need to continue that effort. The bill we will have a chance to vote on this afternoon will allow us to continue to make progress on oyster restoration in the Chesapeake Bay.

There is a continuing authorities program--reforms to those programs. I mention that because some people may not pick this up, the legal significance of the changes we are making on the continuing authorization programs. Those programs will help our smaller communities.

In Maryland and New Jersey there are a lot of smaller communities that very much depend upon projects which may not be as big as Poplar Island or Mid Bay, but they are very important for the local community.

For example, in Cumberland we have a dam that needs to be removed. As a result of the enactment of the legislation we are going to be taking up this afternoon, it is going to be easier to get that type of project accomplished.

We have barrier island restorations off Crisfield on the lower Eastern Shore which will be assisted by the changes we make in this legislation. We deauthorize certain portions of two channels of the lower shore. That is important because the community needs and wants to have boat slips in that area. By deauthorizing, they can do that, and that will improve the community.

Those are the commonsense changes we have made as a result of the legislation we will be voting on this afternoon.

I want to mention one other provision that is in this bill, and I really want to thank the conferees. I was proud to be a part of the conference committee. Senator Boxer and Senator Vitter conferred with us frequently, and we came out with a good, bipartisan, bicameral bill. This is a responsible bill that will help the economy.

We also put in the report reauthorization of the State revolving fund. We have not reauthorized the State revolving fund since 1993. This is a program that is critical to our State and local governments in dealing with how we treat our waste. The wastewater treatment facility plants get their funding from the State revolving fund. It is important to get it authorized, and that is in the bill we will be taking up this afternoon.

I introduced the reauthorization bill in 2009. In that bill I would have liked to have seen the program more robust than it is today. This is a reauthorization that allows us to at least make some significant improvements in the State revolving fund.

We deal with green infrastructure and make it easier for green infrastructure in our wastewater treatment plants. We address water recapture and reuse. Water is a valuable commodity. We take steps in this bill to do that.

As to energy efficiency, we waste a lot of energy in our water infrastructure. This bill makes us more energy efficient, which helps our country and helps our environment. It helps economically disadvantaged communities have a better shot at dealing with wastewater issues.

There is a lot in here that will help everything from the smallest to the largest community and our economy. This is a good day for our Nation because we are going to pass the bill. The bill passed with over 400 votes in the House of Representatives. We are going to pass this bill and the President is going to sign it. This is a good day. Our water infrastructure will have a brighter future. The modernization of our

water infrastructure gives us a brighter future for our economy.

I was proud to be on the conference committee that developed the bill and proud to join the Presiding Officer from New Jersey in moving this bill forward, and I look forward to the vote this afternoon.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I wish to recognize our military servicemembers, their families, and all veterans who have sacrificed in the service of this great country. After a long winter, Americans are finally enjoying the outdoors and spending precious time with their loved ones this month. But we should always remember that we enjoy these freedoms because the Guard, Reserve, and Active members of the U.S. military remain diligent, ready and willing to serve and sacrifice.

We celebrate our 15th annual National Military Appreciation Month this year, thanks to the leadership of my colleague Senator McCain, who sponsored legislation in 1999 that set aside an entire month to honor, remember, and appreciate the patriotism and dedication of the military and their families. Military Appreciation Month includes specific recognition of Loyalty Day on May 1, Victory in Europe Day on May 8, Military Spouse Appreciation Day on May 9, Armed Forces Day on May 17, and, most importantly, Memorial Day on May 26.

From the American Revolution to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, military men and women have always made

enormous sacrifices in order to defend our Nation. I am inspired by their patriotism, their courage, and their dedication to freedom. Military Appreciation Month also recognizes the more than 90 million Americans who have family members serving in the military. Military families are also making tremendous sacrifices on behalf of the American people, and they are equally deserving of recognition during National Military Appreciation Month.

Recent events have provided another reminder of the constant guard our brave servicemembers provide. Earlier this year, 24-year-old PO2 Mark Mayo of Hagerstown, MD, gave his life, without hesitation, to protect his fellow shipmate. As a civilian assaulted a fellow sailor and grabbed her gun, Petty Officer Mayo stepped into harm's way, shielded his shipmate, and died so that she could live. Petty Officer Mayo was laid to rest in Arlington National Cemetery on April 25, 2014, and posthumously awarded The Navy and Marine Corps Medal, the highest noncombat decoration for heroism awarded by the U.S. Department of the Navy.

Petty Officer Mayo is just one example of the heroism of our servicemembers; heroism that has been displayed countless times, both at home and abroad, throughout our Nation's history.

Young military men and women represent the best of our country. They choose to serve our communities, fight for their fellow Americans and defend our liberties with the fullest measure of devotion. Similar to generations before them, they have committed themselves to the defense of our Constitution against all enemies. Their devotion to their fellow Americans makes our Nation exceptional.

Not all those who support our national defense have worn a uniform or have been called away to distant battlefields. World War II's ``Rosie the Riveter'' saying ``We can do it'' sounds an awful lot like today's young people saying ``Yes, we can.'' I urge my colleagues to keep this spirit of our ``Rosies'' in mind today as we commit ourselves to answering the challenges that face our Nation.

We are fortunate to have so many women still living in Maryland who evoke the spirit of Rosie the Riveter. Crena Anderson riveted airplanes in Hagerstown, MD, during World War II. Ruth Staples of Brunswick, MD, worked on the railroad in support of allied efforts during the war. Even today, Crena and Ruth are both actively helping their local communities create replicable projects that teach and preserve World War II-era history and advance positive roles that women can play in our changing world.

This Memorial Day should be a time when all Americans can reconnect with our history and core values by honoring those who gave their lives for the ideals we cherish. In addition to remembering the servicemembers who fought and died in our Nation's wars, I believe that we must also take care of the servicemembers and veterans who are still with us, especially when they return home. There are serious issues that need to be addressed in the military and veteran communities. Active-Duty military and veteran suicide rates are at record high, Veterans' Administration disability claims continue to face unacceptable delays, and many programs that help discharged servicemembers make the transition to civilian life are inadequate. It is unacceptable that many of our servicemembers, veterans, and their caregivers lack the health care they need after a decade of war. Too many of these men and women are suffering from not only visible injuries but invisible ones too. We must do better. In these challenging times, let us pledge to redouble our efforts to provide for our veterans, not just on this Memorial Day but every day.

Military Appreciation Month is a time we should hold close to our hearts. In our hectic daily lives, let us not forget why our country endures. Throughout this month we will see many American flags and flowers adorning the graves of those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for our Nation. We honor them and remember their families, who wear the Gold Star Pin, because they bear the greatest burden of sacrifice. I remember in particular the 114 Marylanders who have been killed in our most recent conflicts and am reminded that our freedom isn't free. The best way to honor their sacrifice is to ensure that we are unwavering in our support for those who return to us wounded, ill, and injured. Let us affirm our commitment to them today and every day.

Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Menendez, I ask unanimous consent that Chris Landberg, a detailee from the State Department to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, be granted floor privileges through June 12, 2014.

Mr. President, I take this time to urge my colleagues to find a way to proceed with the EXPIRE Act that Senator Wyden and Senator Hatch worked on.

I am proud to be a member of the Senate Finance Committee, where this legislation was passed by a unanimous vote. We had an extensive markup where members offered numerous amendments.

This deals with expiring tax provisions, and if we don't take action, we will find that those who depend upon this tax policy remaining in effect--such as small business owners, students, people who use certain benefits, and some of our energy provisions--will find that policy expires at the end of the year. If that happens, what happens, quite frankly, is that--it has already expired in some provisions, and if we don't extend it, there will be continued uncertainty in our Tax Code.

It also means that if we don't pass this bill, it effectively raises taxes on a large number of Americans. So it will affect those who ride our transit systems. It is already affecting those who use transit systems. It is already having an impact because we haven't taken timely action. We can't wait any longer on the passage of this bill.

I would like to take this time to express my strong support for giving a fair shot to all Americans who depend upon a stable tax policy and are finding that our inactions are causing more uncertainty. It affects job creation in our communities. Let me give a few examples.

Small businesses depend upon the passage of this bill. Why do I say that? The research and development tax credit is very much at stake. Small businesses depend upon the help in the Tax Code to take risks, to invest in new innovation. More innovation occurs through small businesses than large businesses. More jobs are created through small businesses than large businesses. They need a tax code that is friendly for small business owners to accumulate capital, to take risk, and to develop the next cure for a dread disease, the next technology that will help us deal with cyber security, and the list goes on and on. But without the extension of the research and development tax credit, small businesses particularly are put at a tremendous disadvantage.

We have the expensing provision, which is a very popular provision, which allows small business owners to be able to take off immediately the cost of their investments in their company. It is bipartisan. We have always thought of that as a good idea.

If you are a small business owner and you are trying to plan as to your next investment but you don't know what the tax policy is going to be, you are going to withhold. You are not going to make those plans to put in that new piece of equipment that perhaps expands capacity or makes you more efficient so you hire more people, sell more product, and create more jobs. If you don't have the certainty in the Tax Code, you put off that decision, delaying the acquisition. Then maybe when you get back to it, times are different and maybe it is more challenging and you never go forward with that expansion. Those jobs are lost forever.

Literally, the passage of this bill helps small business owners to be able to make decisions to expand opportunity and create more jobs. That is at jeopardy if we do not move this bill forward.

One of the provisions that I have worked on with other Members in the Senate is the S corporation. S corporations are preferred by small companies because it allows them to pass through their income and expenses as if they are an individual taxpayer, avoiding the double taxation of a C corporation. Well, there have been changes over time on how businesses operate, and we need to reform the S corporation provisions so that they are friendlier toward small businesses and give them more flexibility on the use of this structure.

These are the provisions we want incorporated into the EXPIRE Act.

Let me mention one other provision that I think is very important in New Jersey, Maryland, and in all of our States. We have yet to recover fully from the housing crisis. We still have too many people in Maryland and--I am sure the Presiding Officer would agree--in New Jersey who are in danger of losing their homes through foreclosure. We still have a disconnect between many of the balances that are on mortgages and the value of the homes. So it is in everyone's interest to readjust the numbers so that it works; the person can afford to stay in the house. It makes sense economically, it is less costly to the mortgage holder, and it is certainly better for our community and certainly better for the homeowner to be able to maintain their house. So we restructure the loan.

We have had a policy in place that said restructuring those loans with loan forgiveness does not trigger a taxable event. That makes sense. Everybody agrees with that. We have to extend that policy because it is still needed today. We still need to make that connection between homeowners and the mortgage holders to adjust mortgages where it is appropriate to avoid foreclosure, to keep neighborhoods more stable, to help individual

families and, by the way, it will also help the banking institutions because they will lose less money if they have a person paying their mortgage on time. That policy will be at stake if we do not pass the EXPIRE Act.

Another issue I have been working on personally--and I know this one will be very important to the Presiding Officer--is the transit benefit, the parity provision. We had a policy in place that provided parity between those who use transit to get to work and those who are provided parking spaces, and that parity expired. So we need to extend that provision so those who help us--help our energy policy in this country by using transit rather than driving a car, help those who drive cars by having fewer cars on the road so that they can get into work a little easier, and help our environment by taking cars off the road--receive a comparable tax break as those who drive their cars to work. That is another provision that is critically important in the EXPIRE Act and another reason we have to get it done.

The low-income housing tax credit--we have worked on this, and it is the most important tool we have for affordable housing in this country today. It is the No. 1 tool today. Senator Cantwell and others have worked together to try to make it more effective with certain floors to guarantee a certain amount of help to different communities. We extend that policy in the EXPIRE Act so that we again are able to maintain the existing tools of today to help provide affordable housing by partnerships with the private sector. This is jobs. This is the private sector being incentivized to construct affordable housing in the community, privately owned, with the government as a partner. It is more cost-effective to the taxpayer and provides a greater stock of affordable housing. That policy will be in jeopardy if we cannot pass the underlying bill.

A section I have worked on with many of my colleagues is the extension of 179D, which deals with energy efficiency. We all talk about incentives so that when you build a building, you make it energy efficient. It is good policy for our energy and for our environment. We all know it makes us less dependent upon foreign sources of energy--all of the above.

This energy credit has been very, very effective in getting businesses and institutions to incorporate energy efficiency when they construct their buildings. So we want to extend that policy, absolutely, and I am proud of the role many of us have played in this area to get that extended.

We also want to improve that, and one of the provisions that is improved in the underlying bill is to help nonprofits take advantage of the 179D credit. It makes no difference whether it is a commercial or a nonprofit venture; we should be friendly to all from the point of view of being able to make buildings more efficient. That is what is incorporated in the underlying bill.

I must say I hope we will have an opportunity to offer some amendments, and I would hope, if we do, we can expand that to retrofitted buildings. We should be dealing not just with new construction, but we should also be dealing with older buildings from the point of view of giving incentives for retrofitting and saving energy, saving costs, making this country more efficient, creating more jobs and, by the way, also helping our environment. All of that can be done, and the EXPIRE bill helps us move forward on all those issues.

A provision I worked on with Senator Schumer on section 181 deals with film expensing rules. This is very important because filmmaking, whether it is for the theater or for TV, is a global competition. It is no longer whether it is going to be done in your State or in my State; it is whether it is going to be done in America or in another country. We have certain provisions in the code that make it easier for companies to locate in our States.

I am proud of the filmmaking industry in Maryland. It is very important to our economy, with literally hundreds of jobs dependent on that every week when we have new companies coming in. So extending this credit will help us in that regard, and that is in the underlying bill.

A provision I worked on with Senator Portman, the work opportunity tax credit, is a credit we give to employers who hire very difficult- to-hire individuals. It has been very successful in getting jobs for people who would otherwise be unemployed. The company takes a risk, and they are compensated for it because it is a more vulnerable group of unemployed workers.

Senator Portman and I have introduced an amendment to expand that to the long-term unemployed. When an employer is looking for someone to hire, they do not normally go to the long-term unemployed list. This will allow us to deal with that. It takes the pressure off the unemployment insurance system, and it provides incentives for job growth. That is in this bill.

I could go on and on. There are literally dozens and dozens of similar provisions that are extended and improved--extended and improved--in the underlying bill. That is what the Finance Committee did under the leadership of Senator Wyden and Senator Hatch. We looked at all these provisions and asked: Which ones should we extend and which should we modify?

The next thing we want to do is to make permanent decisions. We know uncertainty is not healthy. We know we have to make permanent decisions on which credits should be there and which ones should not. We want to level the playing field as far as the Tax Code is concerned, but you can't get there unless this bill is first passed. This gives us a 2- year window in order to pass tax reform.

It is called EXPIRE for a reason--because we don't want to see temporary provisions in the Tax Code. We think we should make permanent judgments, and this bill gives us a chance to do that. So it will help us from the point of view of a more predictable tax policy. It will help us create jobs. There is no question about that. It does help small businesses. They are the ones most at risk by our failure to act. The uncertainty and the timing of this affects small businesses more. Based upon current policy, it would increase the tax burden of companies in this country and individuals. It is not only businesses but also individuals' tax burdens which will go up if we don't pass this bill.

This is not the time that any of this should be done. It makes more sense for us to move this bill forward. So let us find a way to do it. I might add that, traditionally, tax bills coming out of the Finance Committee are not an open process for amendments. I understand that. I think most of my colleagues understand that. So let us use reason to figure out a path forward so that at the end of the day we can pass this most important piece of legislation and help our economy grow.

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

Mr. President, as I think my colleagues know, this is National Police Week. I know I express the sentiment of every Member of this body who wishes to show their appreciation for the 900,000 Federal, State, and local law enforcement officers who literally put their lives on the line every day to keep us safe. We cannot thank them enough, but we can help them by our actions. In 2013 there were 105 who lost their lives in the line of duty, so obviously this is a matter that requires the attention of the Senate.

Let me cite the most recent casualty in the State of Maryland. On August 28, 2013, Baltimore County police officer Jason Schneider, who was only 36 years of age, was shot and killed while serving a search warrant at a home on Roberts Avenue in Catonsville at approximately 5 o'clock in the morning. Officer Schneider was part of a tactical team that had entered the house in search of a juvenile subject wanted in relation to a shooting of the previous week. The entry team encountered four subjects inside the house who attempted to flee. Officer Schneider was pursuing a subject toward the rear of the house when another subject attacked him and opened fire, striking him several times. Despite being mortally wounded, Officer Schneider returned fire and killed the subject. Officer Schneider is survived by his wife and two children.

Unfortunately, that story was told 105 other times in 2013 with law enforcement officers who lost their lives in the line of duty.

I have introduced legislation--S. 357--which provides for a national blue alert. I think most Members are familiar with AMBER alerts. It means the

rapid dissemination of information to help law enforcement. Well, a blue alert would deal with an officer who has been assaulted, attacked, or killed.

Law enforcement will tell us rapid dissemination is the most important part of law enforcement. So it is critically important that information be made available.

This is a bipartisan bill. I originally filed the bill with Senator Graham, and I appreciate his help.

Senator Leahy has been a real champion. As chairman of the Judiciary Committee, I can't thank him enough for his help with this legislation and the work he has done on behalf of law enforcement.

Senator McConnell today in his leader time discussed that this week is National Police Week and mentioned he is a cosponsor of the legislation I am referring to and urged that this is the type of bill we need to pass.

Senator Blunt is on the floor. I thank him very much. He has been a real leader in regards to law enforcement issues and Blue Alert.

This bill passed with 406 votes in the House of Representatives. It is a bill which provides for smart ways to help law enforcement. It is endorsed and supported by a whole host of groups, including the Fraternal Order of Police, the National Association of Police Organizations, the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, the Concerns of Police Survivors, and the Sergeants Benevolent Association of the New York Police Department. The list goes on and on. So we are looking for a way we can not only express our appreciation to those in law enforcement but we can tangibly do something to help.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent as if in legislative session the Senate proceed to Calendar No. 194, S. 357, the National Blue Alert Act; that the bill be read a third time and passed; and the motion to reconsider be laid upon table, with no intervening action or debate.

Madam President, first I want to thank Senator Hatch. I deeply respect his views. He is one of the most effective Members of the Senate. He has deep views and reaches across party lines to try to get things done, which I think is very important, and I respect him greatly.

I want to agree with the conclusion of Senator Hatch. The problem with corporate inversion is best fixed if we do comprehensive tax reform. I believe he is right. We have two paths we can take. One is to try and reform our current tax structure, which I think will not work, and I will give my reasons why; or we can look for a competitive tax structure that is fairer to the American people and makes measures such as corporate inversions something that would not be happening in our communities.

Pfizer and AstraZeneca are looking at a merger. AstraZeneca is a British company. They own major operations in my State of Maryland, affecting thousands of workers. We would think a merger between a British company and an American company would mean more jobs in America, but we know Pfizer has made certain commitments to the British Government about maintaining and expanding jobs in Great Britain, which we worry is at the cost of American jobs and jobs in my home State of Maryland.

We have heard one of the reasons for the merger is corporate inversion. What do we mean by that? It means Pfizer, an American company, will merge with a British company and then use that to transfer its revenues, which are legitimately earned in America, many as the result of intellectual property developed in America, and then attribute that income to foreign sourced, rather than to domestic sourced, trying to avoid U.S. taxes.

Our Tax Code should not encourage that action. Several Members of the Senate and I are working within our current Tax Code to make sure that doesn't happen here in America. Our Tax Code should not encourage companies to take their income offshore. They should pay their fair share of taxes in the United States.

But as Senator Hatch pointed out, and I agree, we need a more competitive Tax Code. We need a Tax Code that would allow for better competition for American companies, for our manufacturers, for our producers, for our farmers, that will allow easier capital formations so we could raise in America more of the capital we need and be less dependent upon foreign-sourced investment, although foreign-sourced investment is certainly helpful to our country and something we encourage.

We need a Tax Code that is fair, that people believe they are being treated fairly with their neighbor, which is not the current situation. Most Americans cannot figure out the income tax code and don't know whether they are being treated fairly with other taxpayers, and we need a code that is much more efficient.

So one path we could pursue and that Senator Hatch was alluding to is to try to reform our current income tax codes--our corporate income tax code and our personal income tax code.

We have an example of that. Congressman Camp has come up with a comprehensive proposal in the House of Representatives. I must say I don't think Congressman Camp's proposal adds up from the point of view of producing the revenue we produce today, let alone the revenue we need in order to pay our bills and not be dependent upon borrowing money from other countries. But putting that aside, I think we see the difficulty in the Camp proposal, which causes major disruptions among different industries, and we are hearing from those industries that it would create major problems for competitiveness for the United States.

I think the most fundamental flaw with trying to reform our current Tax Code is we tried that once before in 1986, and it was comprehensive and it did spread the burden and it did reduce the rate. It lasted for less than 1 year before Congress continued to change the Tax Code.

Today we have tens of thousands of changes since the 1986 tax reform and we have many temporary provisions. That is why we have the bill before us right now to deal with these expiring tax provisions. I don't think there is any way of getting around these types of problems moving forward under our current Tax Code.

I will point out a fact I don't think most Americans have understood. If we look at all the OECD countries--the industrial countries of the world, countries that we like to compare ourselves to, countries that we want to be competitive with--of all the industrial nations of the world, the United States is near the bottom in regard to their reliance upon government services. In Europe they have much stronger government services in health care and housing and income support-type programs than we do in the United States.

If we rely less on governmental services, wouldn't that mean we should have the lowest competitive tax rates among the industrial nations? Instead, as Senator Hatch pointed out, we have the highest marginal tax rates among the industrial nations, and the reason is quite simple. Of all the industrial nations in the world, only the United States does not have a national consumption tax. We rely on income tax revenues. Why? Because we thought that was the right way to go, and we didn't have to worry about international competition. After all, we are America.

Guess what. We are in global competition today, and the tax rates of this country matter in regard to our manufacturers being able to sell products overseas.

One other fact about international competition. International competition rules at the WTO were developed based upon consumption taxes. So if a company manufactures an automobile in Germany and wants to bring it into the United States, the taxes they pay--the consumption taxes--are taken off of that product. So basically their autos sell in America tax free; whereas, U.S. auto manufacturers that have to pay taxes, those taxes still apply to the cost of the product because it is not border adjusted.

Then, to make matters worse, if they manufacture a car in the United States and try to sell it in Germany, they not only have to pay the corporate taxes here, the income taxes--because they are not taken off at the border, they are not border adjusted--when they go into Germany, they have to pay the value-added tax, the consumption tax. How do we compete under those circumstances? The answer is it is very difficult. In global competition today, we have to be smart.

This is why we should have the lowest marginal tax rates in the world. If we did, corporate inversion would not be an issue because we wouldn't find a Pfizer trying to pay British taxes when the U.S. taxes are the lowest taxes among the industrial nations of the world.

So I have a proposal called the progressive consumption tax. ``Progressive,'' what do I mean by that? It means the taxes paid at the Federal level will be more reflective of a person's ability to pay than our current income tax code is. We make it progressive so it is fair, in that they pay according to their ability to pay a progressive consumption tax. That consumption tax rate will be the lowest among the industrial nations of the world.

I will give some examples. I will be the first to acknowledge we have to get these scored and these numbers can change as we go along, but we are looking at a consumption tax rate of about 10 percent. This would put us at the bottom of the consumption taxes among industrial nations. Individuals who earn under $25,000 and families up to $50,000 would pay no consumption taxes. They would get a credit for the consumption taxes they otherwise would pay.

Similar to the current income tax code where they do not pay income taxes, they would not pay consumption taxes. It would be immediately rebated to them. If they work, it would be rebated under the payroll tax payments. If they don't work, they would get a debit card to get instant rebates and use it as people use debit cards.

So we would make it progressive. We would then be able to start the income tax rates at $100,000, approximately, of taxable income, and 90 percent of Americans would pay no income taxes. It would start at 15 percent. There would be an additional bracket of 25 percent, starting at $40,000 of taxable income. So a progressive income tax, simplified, with only four deductions, not this complexity today as we figure out whether something is deductible and all the complications.

We would have four deductions for State and local--with respect to federalism--State and local taxes: for charitable deductions because our charities are critically important to carrying out the important work of our country, for real estate and the needs for the real estate to reflect--so we don't see destruction of the real estate market, and we also allow deductions for employer-provided health benefits and retirement benefits. It is simplified, it rewards simplicity, and allows for the progressiveness of fairness in our Tax Code that does not exist today.

The corporate tax rate would get down to 15 percent. That is what corporate America tells us we need to be competitive in the industrial world. This adds up.

Some say: Gee. Consumption taxes raise a lot of revenue. We put in our proposal an automatic adjustment of the rate to make sure it doesn't bring in more revenue than we say. So we are fair on the progressive side to make sure it is fair from the point of view of the ability of middle-class families to pay, and it is fair from the point of view of those who are concerned about government growing, in that it has a circuit break as to the rate based upon the revenue that you need.

What have we accomplished by this? We have accomplished a much simpler Tax Code that people can understand, a fairer Tax Code, one that rewards savings. Savings are not taxed. There is a greater ability to raise capital in the United States. It is border adjusted, which means the taxes come off our exported products so we can compete globally in a much easier way. This is what we accomplish.

So when people talk about fundamental reform, to me, this is what we need to do.

I am going to move this proposal as quickly as I can, but obviously it is going to take some discussion and debate. We are hopeful we will be able to answer anyone's questions on it. We are very optimistic, but in the meantime what do we do? We can't just stand by and allow Pfizer to take American jobs overseas because of corporate inversion. So I hope we will stand for what is right in our Tax Code, that we have the capacity to improve our current Tax Code to avoid the loss of jobs and shipping jobs overseas, as well as working to reform our Tax Code and provide the type of structure so the country that relies the least on government among the industrial nations has the lowest tax rate and has a fairer system for all Americans.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess until 2:15 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 13, 2014, at 10 a.m., in room SR-328A of the Russell Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``High Frequency and Automated Trading in Futures Markets.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 13, 2014, at 10 a.m., in room SD-366A of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 13, 2014, at 3:30 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 13, 2014, at 10 a.m., in room SD-430 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled ``Strengthening Minority Serving Institutions: Best Practices and Innovations for Student Success.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 13, 2014, at 10:30 a.m. to conduct a hearing entitled ``Improving Financial Management at the Department of Defense.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, on May 13, 2014, at 9:30 a.m., in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``Judicial Nominations.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 13, 2014, at 2:30 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism, be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 13, 2014, at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``Economic Espionage and Trade Secret Theft: Are Our Laws Adequate for Today's Threats?''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife of the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 13, at 3 p.m. in room SD-406 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Solving the Problem of Polluted Transportation Infrastructure Stormwater Runoff.''

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

Mr. President, I, along with most Americans, celebrated Mother's Day yesterday with my wife, my daughter, and my grandchildren, to express our appreciation for what mothers all over the world have done in order to help our communities. In America, we have taken action to help women in this country. I am referring to the passage of the Affordable Care Act, which has helped childbearing women and child rearing throughout the child's life, as well as the mother and the family.

Let me give some examples because I think it is good to point out where we have made progress and to celebrate what we have done to help women in America. We have taken on the arbitrary practices of private insurance companies that discriminated against women, against pregnant women, and against mothers. A woman can now choose her own OB/GYN doctor as her primary care doctor, no longer having to wait for authorization or to get a referral in order to have OB/GYN care. Women now have the absolute right to choose their own primary care doctor, including an OB/GYN.

Under the Affordable Care Act, every woman in America is guaranteed an annual well-woman visit to be able to assess their health, including mammography screening, pap smears, diabetes screening, and other preventive screenings services at no cost. That is all provided in the Affordable Care Act, so a woman can take care of her own health care needs and, in many cases, avoiding much more costly and debilitating care. Again, this is at no cost. So there is no reason why a woman cannot take advantage of these services. HPV DNA testing is now available every 3 years under the Affordable Care Act to deal with the sexual health of women. STI counseling and HIV screening for sexually active women are now available under the Affordable Care Act. This is now guaranteed. Women don't have to go look at the fine print of an insurance policy to see whether they have coverage. Before, in most cases, they didn't have coverage. Women don't have to wait for authorization, having to show a need. These are given rights that are now available to every woman under the Affordable Care Act.

No longer can pregnancy be considered a preexisting condition. Before the passage of the Affordable Care Act, if a woman wanted to get an insurance policy, insurers excluded childbirth during the first perhaps 9 months or later. It was considered a preexisting condition. Now we have a seamless system, so women can get the type of care they need.

Why does that become so important? So they can get the necessary prenatal care in order to keep their baby healthy, to get the type of tests that are necessary.

Pregnant women can now get a gestational diabetes screening to see whether they are at high risk and, if so, they can get the type of treatment they need in order to make sure their baby is born as healthy as possible.

Prenatal care is available and it is covered, and we now have, through the Affordable Care Act, a provision we added that provides support for qualified health centers. I have visited qualified health centers in Maryland that are now providing prenatal care that wasn't there before. It is not only that we are providing coverage; we are providing access to care, so we can reduce low birth weight babies in our community. Look at the numbers of infant survival. Look at the numbers of low birth weight babies. We are improving those numbers daily because of the Affordable Care Act. To be able to prevent and discover complications during pregnancy, including preterm outcomes-- all of that is now available.

Women now have access to folic acid to make sure a woman has a healthier fetus and birth. All of that is now available under the Affordable Care Act.

We help newborns and their mothers. Breast feeding has been proven to be a very strong part of a healthy infancy and for a baby. There are certain needs a mother has, including having the time to breast feed, and the cost of breast feeding, including breast pumps. That is now covered under the Affordable Care Act.

We understand the need to keep people healthier, and that is why we call it

a wellness program. No longer is it insurance just to take care of an illness or injury; it is to keep people healthy and for women particularly. We didn't do a good job for many years. We are now making up for it in the Affordable Care Act, making a huge difference.

We are giving peace of mind to women all over this country about having adequate third-party coverage so they can afford to take care of their own health and the health of their families.

Adult children can remain on parents' insurance policies until age 26. We have all received so many letters from our constituents saying: Thank goodness we have that provision. My 24-year-old never thought she would get ill. Now she has this insurance coverage so we can take care of her and keep her healthy, and when she needs health care, it is available, thanks to the Affordable Care Act.

Today millions of Americans today who didn't have it before, now have quality, affordable health insurance as a result of the Affordable Care Act. It is peace of mind. They can now carry an insurance card. I got a letter from one of my constituents saying how it felt to have an insurance card in her possession, knowing that it worked as a ticket to take care of her health care and the health care of her family.

No longer can an insurance company discriminate in ratings against women--a huge deal. The discriminatory rates were aimed against women, and we have eliminated that under the Affordable Care Act.

We have eliminated preexisting condition restrictions. I already talked about pregnancy. But it was amazing how women particularly were discriminated against because of preexisting conditions, where they couldn't get full coverage to take care of all of their needs. That is over, including for their children. Many families told us they had a child with asthma and they couldn't get full coverage. Now they can get full coverage, thanks to the Affordable Care Act. They now have peace of mind and adequate coverage to take care of their needs.

We had the end of the caps on health insurance. No longer do people have to worry: Should I do this or not? Will I hit my annual limit or my lifetime limit?

They are gone. If they need insurance, it is there to protect them. That is what insurance should do: Protect families.

So we have made a huge difference.

I am particularly proud of the prudent layperson provision for emergency care. I can't tell my colleagues how many times we had circumstances where people needed to go to the emergency room because they thought they had a true emergency with chest pain and sweating, and they would go to the emergency room. The good news was they weren't having a heart attack. The bad news is they got a bill from their insurance company telling them that because they didn't have a heart attack they have to pay this bill. That is over. We have now legislated the prudent layperson standard so it is now right for a person to seek urgent care, and the insurance company must cover that visit for urgent care.

I could continue to list so many ways we have helped all people in this country but particularly women. It is tough enough to give birth to a baby and to raise a child. We have made it easier by taking away some of the burdens regarding our health care system.

So this past Sunday, when we celebrated Mother's Day, we could also point to a very tangible accomplishment this Congress has been able to deliver for all of our mothers in this country, and I was proud to be a part of making that a reality.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, people often wonder why they pay taxes. Well, the short answer, former Associate Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. famously wrote in a 1927 Supreme Court decision, is that ``taxes are what we pay for civilized society,'' (Companniia General de Tabacos de Filipinas v. Collector of Internal Revenue. The longer answer is that people pay taxes for government goods and services that make their families, businesses, communities, and the United States of America stronger, safer, and more prosperous. The people who provide government goods and services are public servants.

This week is Public Service Recognition Week, an opportunity to acknowledge and thank the 21.9 million men and women who work in local, county, State, and Federal Government. Each day, these people teach our children; patrol our borders and ports; protect our food, land, air, and water; care for our veterans and senior citizens; develop treatments and cures for illness and disease; fight fires and respond to natural disasters; make our communities safer; help domestic manufacturers compete abroad; enforce our laws and administer justice; advance human understanding of the smallest particles, the vastness of the universe, and the origin of life; and promote and defend American values and ideals abroad.

The knowledge, expertise, skill, and commitment of our public sector workforce is one of America's greatest assets. No other nation can match our public workforce's professionalism and level of accomplishment. Yet, too often public servants are disparaged and denigrated. Too often public servants bear the brunt of deficit reduction. Too often, public servants are asked to do more and more with less and less. We need to strengthen and encourage our public workforce. We should always strive to make government better, more responsive, more efficient.

On May 6 I had the honor of delivering brief remarks at a breakfast organized by the Partnership for Public Service to announce the finalists for the 2014 Samuel J. Heyman Service to America Medals. These individuals and teams have been chosen for their commitment to public service and because they have made ``a significant contribution in their field of government that is innovative, high-impact and critical for the nation,'' according to the partnership.

I would like to take a few moments to talk about the finalists. If Americans want to see their tax dollars at work, what follows are a few examples.

Call to Service Medal finalists are Federal employees whose professional achievements reflect the important contributions that a new generation brings to public service.

Jonathan Baker, Delta IV launch systems deputy chief engineer, U.S. Air Force Space & Missile Systems Center Launch Systems Directorate, El Segundo, CA saved taxpayers more than $4 billion on the purchase of 40 new rockets and led the engineering team responsible for launching 13 Air Force satellites into orbit.

Anthony Cotton, Amanda Femal, Jason Fleming, J.P. Gibbons and the Development Credit Authority Transaction Teams, Africa team leader, Cotton; Asia and Middle East team leader, Femal; Latin America/ Caribbean and Eastern Europe team leader, Fleming; and Strategic Transactions team leader, Gibbons, U.S. Agency for International Development, Development Credit Authority, Washington, D.C. generated nearly $1 billion in aid for 60 projects in 42 developing countries during the past 2 years through an innovative, public-private loan guarantee program.

Sofia Hussain, senior forensic accountant, Division of Enforcement, Securities and Exchange Commission, Boston, MA, helped Federal investigators crack intricate securities fraud cases and return hundreds of millions of dollars to investors by introducing cutting- edge technology and data analysis.

Sara Meyers, director, Sandy Program Management Office, Department of Housing & Urban Development, Washington, DC, created sophisticated data analysis systems to evaluate the performance of Federal housing programs and set up processes to track $13.6 billion in economic stimulus and $50 billion for Hurricane Sandy disaster recovery;

Miguel O. Romaan, research physical scientist, Terrestrial Information Systems Laboratory, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD--provided timely and reliable information on wildfires, storm damage and global energy consumption to help scientists and policymakers better understand and respond to natural disasters and climate change.

This is your tax dollars at work.

Career Achievement Medal finalists are Federal employees with significant accomplishments throughout a lifetime of achievement in public service.

Scott Gerald Borg, head, Antarctic Sciences Section, Division of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA, directed a world-class research program in Antarctica that led to important scientific discoveries about climate change, the origins of the universe, previously unknown sea life, and two new dinosaur species;

Thomas Browne, Deputy Director, Office of Anticrime Programs, Department of State, Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, Washington, DC, transformed drug prevention and addiction treatment programs in 70 countries around the world, providing special care and assistance to women and children;

Robert A. Canino, regional attorney, Dallas District Office Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Dallas, TX, pioneered the use of civil rights laws to try human trafficking cases when criminal enforcement and labor laws proved ineffective in defending foreign-born and intellectually disabled workers who were abused and exploited:

Edwin Kneedler, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued 125 cases and helped shape the Federal Government's legal position on hundreds more before the Supreme Court, while setting a high standard for integrity and protecting the long term interests of the United States;

E. Ramona Trovato, Associate Assistant Administrator, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, helped transform national environmental health policy by focusing attention on the impact of pollutants on children, and by devising strategies to respond to biological, chemical and radiological contamination from a terrorist attack;

This is your tax dollars at work.

Citizen Services Medal finalists are Federal employees who have made a significant contribution to the Nation in activities related to citizen services, including economic development, education, health care, housing, labor and transportation.

Michael Byrne, former geographic information officer, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC, put detailed data about our Nation's broadband availability and communications systems in the hands of citizens and policymakers through the use of interactive online maps and other visualizations.

Marcia Crosse, Director, Health Care, Government Accountability Office, Washington, DC, directed congressional attention and prompted reforms to the Food and Drug Administration's global role in the regulation of drugs and medical devices to help the agency better protect public health.

James D. Green, project officer, Division of Safety Research, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, WV, collaborated with the ambulance manufacturing industry and multiple Federal agencies to create ambulance crash standards to help reduce injuries and fatalities among EMS workers and patients;

Douglas James Norton, senior environmental scientist, Watershed Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, engaged citizens, scientists, and State agencies in protecting their local streams, lakes, and rivers by providing access to water quality data and assessment tools via the Web;

Guunter Waibel, Adam Metallo, and Vincent Rossi, Director, Digitization Program Office, Waibel, and 3D program officers, Metallo and Rossi, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, made iconic treasures from the Smithsonian's vast collection accessible to students, teachers, historians, and curious visitors everywhere through the use of computerized 3D imaging and printing technologies.

This is your tax dollars at work.

Homeland Security and Law Enforcement Medal finalists are Federal employees who have made a significant contribution to the Nation in activities related to homeland security and law enforcement, including border and transportation security, civil rights, counterterrorism, emergency response, fraud prevention, and intelligence.

Omar Peerez Aybar, Reginald J. France, and the Miami HEAT teams, assistant special agents in charge, Miami Regional Office, Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General, Miami Lakes, FL, led hundreds of Medicare fraud investigations that have resulted in more than 600 convictions in South Florida, recovering hundreds of millions of dollars and providing an investigative ``roadmap'' for other jurisdictions to follow.

Susan M. Hanson, senior resident agent, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Dothan, AL, brought to justice four prison guards who brutally beat and murdered an inmate, and exposed a culture of abuse in Alabama prisons.

Anthony Regalbuto, Chief, Office of International and Domestic Port Security, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington, DC, assessed the vulnerabilities of hundreds of marine facilities and created comprehensive security plans for domestic and international shipping ports to guard against terrorist attacks.

Gilbert Bindewald, Alice A. Lippert, and Patrick Willging, program manager, Advanced Grid Modeling Research, Bindewald; senior technical advisor, Energy Infrastructure Modeling and Analysis, Lippert; senior logistics specialist, Willging, Department of Energy, Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, Bindewald and Lippert; Office of Petroleum Reserve, Willging, Washington, DC, helped government authorities and power companies deliver emergency services and restore electricity following widespread natural disasters by creating critical information sharing and assessment tools.

This is your tax dollars at work.

Management Excellence Medal finalists are Federal employees demonstrating superior leadership and management excellence through a significant contribution to the Nation that exemplifies efficient, effective, and results-oriented government.

Sonny Hashmi, Acting Chief Information Officer, General Services Administration, Washington, DC, led the General Services Administration's ``Cloud Initiative,'' improving employee effectiveness, reducing agency costs, and creating a model for other Federal agencies to follow.

Alan J. Lindenmoyer, program manager, Commercial Crew and Cargo Program, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX, transformed NASA's space travel programs, helping the United States continue important space research while reducing taxpayer costs and stimulating the commercial space industry.

Marion Mollegen McFadden and the Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Task Force staff, senior attorney for disaster recovery, Department of Housing and Urban Development Washington, DC, in the months following Hurricane Sandy, coordinated efforts of numerous Federal agencies to help rebuild stronger and safer communities.

Ronald E. Walters, Acting Principal Deputy Undersecretary for Memorial Affairs; Department of Veterans Affairs Washington, DC, honored our Nation's veterans by delivering the pinnacle of care and service at their final resting place, while increasing availability and access to burial sites throughout the country.

This is your tax dollars at work.

National Security and International Affairs Medal finalists are Federal employees who have made significant contributions to the Nation in activities related to national security and international affairs, including defense, military affairs, diplomacy, foreign assistance and trade.

Jill Boezwinkle, senior program manager, Development Innovation Ventures, U.S. Agency for International Development, Washington, DC, guided a U.S. initiative to provide safe drinking water to 5 million people in Kenya

and Uganda, saving lives and preventing illnesses for thousands of individuals.

R. Patrick DeGroodt, deputy product manager, Department of the Army, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Aberdeen, MD, helped America's war fighters achieve mission success and stay out of harm's way by developing and deploying a new mobile communications network that gives Army units continuous connectivity on the battlefield.

Jonathan Gandomi, former field representative for the counter-Lord's Resistance Army mission, Department of State, Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations Washington, DC, coordinated U.S. efforts to end the atrocities of the Lord's Resistance Army, one of Africa's oldest and most brutal extremist groups, and help victims overcome decades of violence.

Dr. Rana A. Hajjeh and the Hib Initiative Team, Director, Division of Bacterial Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, led a global campaign to convince some of the world's poorest countries to use a vaccine to fight bacterial meningitis and pneumonia, an initiative that is estimated to save the lives of 7 million children by 2020.

Sean C. Young and Benjamin J. Tran, electronics engineers, Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, OH saved U.S. soldiers' lives in Afghanistan by creating and deploying a new aerial sensor system to help Army and Special Forces units detect and destroy deadly improvised explosive devices.

This is your tax dollars at work.

Science and Environment Medal finalists are Federal employees who have made significant contributions to the Nation in activities related to science and environment, including biomedicine, economics, energy, information technology, meteorology, resource conservation, and space.

William A. Bauman, M.D. and Ann M. Spungen, Ph.D., Director, Bauman, and Associate Director, Spungen, National Center of Excellence for the Medical Consequences of Spinal Cord Injury, Department of Veterans Affairs, James J. Peters VA Medical Center Bronx, NY, greatly improved the health care and the quality of life of paralyzed veterans by developing new ways to treat long-overlooked medical problems.

William Charmley and James Tamm, Division Director, Assessment and Standards Division, Charmley, and Chief, Fuel Economy Division, Tamm, Environmental Protection Agency, Charmley; National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Tamm, Ann Arbor, MI, Charmley; Washington, DC, Tamm, led an interagency team that developed standards for cars and light trucks that will double fuel economy by 2025 and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 6 billion metric tons;

John Cymbalsky, program manager, Appliance and Equipment Standards, Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Washington, D.C., brought together industry and environmental groups to adopt new efficiency standards for appliances and commercial equipment that will save consumers money and reduce energy consumption and air pollution.

Richard Rast, senior engineer, Air Force Research Laboratory, Kirtland Air Force Base, Albuquerque, NM, developed a new, low-cost method of locating and tracking space debris that could severely damage or destroy spacecraft and vital communications, navigation, and weather satellites.

Jeffrey Rogers, program manager, Ret., Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Arlington, VA, created a wearable sensor that provides real-time information on the risk of traumatic brain injuries to soldiers exposed to bomb blasts, resulting in quicker medical treatment and uncovering previously undiagnosed injuries.

This is your tax dollars at work.

The individuals I have just named are the best of the best. But they would be the first to acknowledge that they stand on the shoulders of many colleagues. Yet these men and women who have done so much in service to the American people have endured pay freezes, furloughs, benefit cuts, a government shutdown, and shrinking budgets. The Service to America Medals finalists--and countless other dedicated public servants across our country--strive to serve their fellow citizens every day. They remind us why we pay taxes. It is important that we pause to reflect on their contributions, celebrate their successes, and give thanks for their service and their devotion to helping create and sustain a civilized society.