Floor Statements

Mr. President, the automobile is central to who we are as Michiganians. The automotive industry helped create the middle class, shape the labor movement, establish America's dominance in manufacturing, and spur new innovation across a range of other economic sectors.

For these reasons, Congressman Dingell in the House of Representatives and I in the Senate introduced legislation in 1998 to establish the Motor Cities National Heritage Area. That legislation specified the heritage area would serve not only to preserve and interpret the history of our Nation's automotive heritage, but that it would also promote current and future economic opportunities.

The MotorCities National Heritage Area has provided over one million dollars to support tourism projects that have boosted economic activity and jobs. These grants attract additional investment because funding is typically matched by more than $6 for each $1 in grant funding. MotorCities also connects a broad range of auto-related organizations and attractions, and has connected more than 100 organizations, which has bolstered their visibility and impact.

Michigan is a magnet for car enthusiasts and history buffs around the globe and MotorCities helps them learn about our history and celebrate it with us. When visitors come to Detroit to see where Henry Ford built the Model T or to Lansing to learn about the rise of Oldsmobile, the existence of the Motor Cities National Heritage Area enhances their visit.

These activities will not be supported by the National Park Service after September 30, 2014 due to a sunset clause in the original enabling legislation. For this reason I am introducing today legislation to extend the date for which federal assistance may still be provided. Congressman Dingell is introducing similar legislation in the House. We have extended the period during which the Park Service can support the Heritage Area to September 30, 2030.

Michigan's automotive heritage is worthy of celebration, remembrance and appreciation. I hope my colleagues will support the legislation I am introducing today.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I hope for and expect a strong bipartisan vote today for legislation to extend emergency unemployment benefits through the end of May and applies retroactively from the point emergency benefits expired in December.

This is an important victory I wish had come much sooner--sooner for the 80,000 Michiganians who already have gone without unemployment benefits and for the thousands more who stand to lose them if Congress fails to act.

These benefits keep food on the table and a roof overhead for families affected by job loss through no fault of their own. The idea that some of our colleagues have advanced--that unemployment insurance gives workers an excuse not to find a job--is as inaccurate as it is insulting. For all but a handful of recipients, unemployment benefits are not a free pass from working but the economic lifeline that keeps them going while searching for the job they so desperately want and need.

I wish to commend Senators on both sides of the aisle who have not given up on this issue and who worked so hard to forge a compromise, led by Senators Jack Reed and Dean Heller. Republicans have joined with Democrats on the procedural votes necessary to move this bill forward, and I hope the bipartisan support for this measure in the Senate will prompt Speaker Boehner to bring it to a vote in the House. There is a strong bipartisan majority for passage in the House. It is now up to Speaker Boehner to respond to the will of the American people who understand that people who are unemployed don't want to be unemployed. There may be a few exceptions and a few stories and a few anecdotes, but that is about it. The unemployed in this country are suffering. They have suffered for too long. The job growth that has come following the recession has been weak, and the least we can do is respond.

There is a bipartisan majority to do that here. It will be strong. My hunch is it will be well over 60, perhaps over two-thirds of the Senate, and there is no excuse for Speaker Boehner not to bring this bill to the floor of the House. I hope he does so. It is just in all conscience essential that he do so.

I yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, every 4 years elite athletes from across the globe gather together to share their prodigious talent and skill with a world audience through friendly competition. This year's Winter Games in Sochi, Russia was no different. Indeed, it is a tradition families across the Nation have gathered together to watch on TV and shared for generations.

We are transfixed by the Winter Olympics and the athletes who take part for many reasons. We enjoy the intense competition that is the hallmark of the games. We enjoy the gravity-defying athletes who only seem to get more daring with each passing year. And, we enjoy the speed and precision that is required to excel at the Olympic level. There are also many personal and heartwarming stories of triumph and perseverance that are highlighted at the games. They remind us of what is possible. We witness athletes both in victory and defeat, but always at their best. We admire their journey and the Olympic spirit that is embodied by each of them.

To become an Olympian is no easy task. Each athlete has sacrificed much to earn a spot at the Olympics. These games and the performances we bear witness to are often the capstone of careers that have spanned many years and are the product of an enormous amount of training, dedication, and focus. This year, as in years past, we glimpsed into the lives of these athletes, which includes parents, coaches and family members who shaped these athletes from the very beginning, spending countless hours and effort in training, travelling from competition to competition, and molding young athletes into the competitors we see before us.

The Winter Olympics seamlessly blends the events and traditions we have come to enjoy for many years with newer, fresher disciplines that leave us in awe and bravely test our limits. Young people are shaped by these moments. Some will even grow up and follow this impressive path.

Michigan was well-represented at the 2014 Winter Olympic Games. One area where Michigan shined was in ice dancing. Impressively, 15 of the 24 teams participating in the ice dancing trained in metro Detroit in one of three rinks: the Detroit Skating Club, Novi Ice Arena, and Arctic Edge in Canton, which is where the Gold and Silver Medal teams trained. This reflects the level of coaching and talent that resides in Michigan.

There were many inspired performances at these games. Fittingly, the couple that captured our imagination for the second straight Olympic Games, Meryl Davis and Charlie White, capped their Olympic career with a captivating, Gold Medal performance in ice dancing, adding this to their Silver Medal performance in 2010 and their team Bronze in Sochi. The list of ice dancers with strong ties to Michigan is long and includes Maia Shibutani, Alex Shibutani, Evan Bates, Madison Chock, Tessa Virtue, Scott Moir, Kaitlyn Weaver, Andrew Poje, Alexandra Paul, Mitch Islam, Anna Cappellini, Luca Lanotte, Charlene Guignard, Marco Fabbri, Nathalie Pechalat, Fabian Bourzat, Pernelle Carron, Lloyd Jones, Nelli Zhiganshina, Alexander Gazsi, Julia Zlobina, Alexei Sitnikov, Isabella Tobias, Deividas Stagniunas, Danielle O'Brien, Greg Merrian, Cathy Reed and Chris Reed.

Olympic hockey also showcased the talent Michigan has to offer. Players with ties to Michigan represented a number of different countries. They included Americans Ryan Miller, Ryan Kessler, Cam Fowler, Jimmy Howard, Patrick Kane, Phil Kessel, Justin Faulk, Kevin Shattenkirk, Ryan Suter, James van Riemsdyk, Max Pacioretty and Dan Bylsma. Those who skated for other countries included Henrik Zetterberg, Daniel Alfredsson, Niklas Kronwall, Jonathon Ericsson, Johan Franzen, Jonas Gustavsson, Pavel Datsyuk, Tomas Tatar, Tomas Jurco, Duncan Keith, Chris Kunitz, Mike Babcock and Brian Lebler. Each made a significant contribution and provided us ample reason to be proud.

In addition to these incredible athletes are Narumi Takahashi, Ryuichi Kihara, Jeremy Abbott, Valentina Marchei and Patrick Chan who competed admirably in figure skating. Jessica Smith, Jilleanne Rookard, Shani Davis, Jordan Malone, Kyle Carr, Chris Creveling and Anthony Lobello graced the speed skating track. And there were snowboarders Karly Shorr, Danny Davis and Nick Bumgartner whose style and flair was unmistakable.

Rounding out Michigan's contribution in Sochi was Lauryn Williams, a Summer Olympic star who became the first woman, and fifth person overall, to medal in both the Summer and Winter Olympics. Her Silver as part of a two-person bobsled team was one of the most memorable moments of the games.

I join many across Michigan in congratulating each of these athletes. It was gratifying to watch and reminds us all, especially young people across Michigan, that reaching for the stars, or in this case the Olympics, is firmly within their grasp. As one Olympic figure skater so aptly put it, ``To be able to come up here and feel stiff and white as a ghost but stare fear in the face is what I'm all about.'' That's the true Olympic spirit we tune in to watch, and that is a fitting way to describe the grit, grace, and athletic prowess we witnessed day after day in Sochi. This is why I am delighted to honor these athletes here today by placing their names in the Congressional Record.

Mr. President, the Russian invasion and annexation of Crimea is an affront to decent standards of international conduct. It is a violation of international law and of Russia's explicit commitment under the 1994 Bucharest Memorandum to respect Ukraine's territorial integrity. It has undermined the international order that has been put in place over the last 60 years to promote peace and stability.

President Putin and his advisers in Russia have resorted to these illegitimate actions in order to seize 10,000 square miles of Ukrainian territory. Perhaps the Kremlin believes its robbery has paid off. If so, Putin and his advisers have miscalculated. And we will aid in the task of making clear the costs of Russia's actions today with passage of this legislation.

This bill sends a message to the people of Ukraine and all those in Europe concerned about Russia's aggressive provocations. We provide important loan guarantees that will help stabilize a Ukrainian economy that was struggling even before Russia's aggression. We authorize funding to help the Ukrainian government provide the fundamental necessities of democratic

governance, including free and fair elections, strong civic institutions and protections against corruption. It will aid the Ukrainian government in recovering assets stolen by its disgraced former prime minister and other kleptocratic public officials. It will support Ukraine's efforts to free itself from captivity to Russian energy supplies. And it provides for increased security cooperation with Ukraine and with other nations in Central and Eastern Europe, including military assistance, training, and advice.

Passage of this bill would also send a strong message to Russia. It mandates sanctions and asset freezes that target Russian and Ukrainian individuals responsible for the human rights abuses against peaceful protesters in Kiev under the previous Ukrainian government. It also targets those Russians or Ukrainians whose actions have undermined Ukraine's territorial integrity.

By demonstrating our support for Ukraine and the other democratic nations of Central and Eastern Europe, and by taking action against the individuals who have participated in Russia's aggression against Ukraine, Congress can provide a key element in the broad, sustained, and energetic diplomatic approach this situation requires. The United States must act together with our European allies and other nations around the world who have an interest in maintaining respect for established borders and international law. Key to exacting a high price for Russia's actions is isolating Russia in the international community.

While this legislation is important to accomplishing our goals, it must be part of a sustained and, if necessary, intensifying effort in Congress, by the administration, and internationally. President Obama has wisely refrained from responding to Russian provocation with actions that would further destabilize matters or work against Ukraine's interests or our own. One important step in de-escalating the tension in Ukraine is the dispatch of international observers to eastern Ukraine to monitor the ground truth and hopefully discourage further provocations. But, along with NATO, we have made clear that Russia's actions will not go without response. President Obama has stated that Russia will face an escalating diplomatic and economic response if it does not reverse its course. Russia should be under no illusion that the U.S. response to its actions ends today with the passage of this legislation. We must remain prepared to take additional steps to ratchet up the pressure on Russia and to help stabilize Eastern Europe.

Russia also should have no doubt that the United States and our NATO allies take seriously our responsibilities under article 5 of the NATO treaty. Under article 5, an armed attack against any NATO ally is considered an attack against all members, and will draw any actions deemed necessary to assist the ally under attack, which may include the use of military force. Actions such as redeployment of military assets, adding aircraft to the NATO Baltic Air Policing Mission and surveillance flights over Poland and Romania are evidence that we take those article 5 responsibilities seriously. And, as our NATO commander in Europe, General Breedlove, has said, if Russia continues such provocative actions, ``we need to think about our allies, the positioning of our forces in the alliance and the readiness of those forces in the alliance, such that we can be there to defend against it.''

And as this legislation makes clear, we will continue to enhance our security cooperation with Ukraine and other Eastern European nations. One important step will be for our uniformed military professionals to expand their relationships with counterparts in Ukraine and other Eastern European nations to help build the kind of capable, professional forces that can improve their security.

Some may wonder what these events in a distant land involving old territorial disputes have to do with us as a nation. But Russia's blatant flouting of its commitments, of the territorial integrity of its European neighbors, and its trampling on the international order is damaging to our security and to the values that define us.

By passing this legislation, supporting U.S. and international actions to impose consequences on Russia and reassure the nations of Eastern Europe, and standing ready to take additional actions if required, we protect our interests and the interests of those who value peace and stability.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I am pleased to support the nomination of Maria Contreras-Sweet to be Administrator of the Small Business Administration. The SBA Administrator plays an important role in helping small businesses create jobs, mainly by making sure small businesses have access to capital. Ms. Contreras-Sweet is remarkably qualified for this position,

having founded and run a bank that focuses on making small and mid-size loans. She also served as the head of California's Business, Transportation and Housing Agency. The SBA will benefit from the valuable insight Ms. Contreras-Sweet gained from this combination of experience working directly with small businesses and administering a large government agency. The experience will serve her well as SBA Administrator.

As a member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship I had the opportunity to engage Ms. Contreras-Sweet during her confirmation hearing. She impressed me with her understanding of all that it takes to launch and run a successful small business. She has the skills and the enthusiasm to help entrepreneurs drive our economic growth and create jobs.

I am happy to support Ms. Contreras-Sweet's nomination and I look forward to working with her as the SBA Administrator.

Mr. President, for the Committee on Armed Services I report favorably the following nomination lists which were printed in the Records on the dates indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators .

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs has scheduled a hearing entitled, ``Caterpillar's Offshore Tax Strategy.'' The Subcommittee will continue its examination of the structures and methods employed by multinational corporations to allocate income outside of the United States and how such activities are affected by the Internal Revenue Code and related regulations. Witnesses will include representatives of Caterpillar Inc. and PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, as well as tax experts. A witness list will be available Friday, March 28, 2014.

The Subcommittee hearing has been scheduled for Tuesday, April 1, 2014, at 9:30 a.m., in Room 106 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. For further information, please contact Elise Bean of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations at (202) 224-9505.

Madam President, Americans believe in the power of hard work as the key to getting ahead, the key to prosperity, the key to a better future. We also believe in the importance of family, and in the responsibility we all share for making sure that America's children are cared for and protected.

The legislation before us today furthers both these values the value of hard work and the value of family. It would update and modernize a program that for two decades has helped families pursue rewarding employment or important education and training while obtaining essential care for their children. It is bipartisan legislation, unanimously approved in committee, with support from a broad range of education and child advocacy groups.

For all working parents, but particularly for low-income families, the demands of work and parenting are enormous challenges. Quality childcare can be hard to find and expensive so expensive that, for many families, the cost all but wipes out their paycheck. The Child Care and Development Block Grant Program is designed to help families meet this challenge. The program provides block grants to States so they can provide financial assistance to families coping with childcare expenses. Nationwide, more than 1.5 million children receive care through these grants. In Michigan, these grants helped more than 50,000 children receive the care they needed in Fiscal Year 2013.

The legislation Senators Harkin and Alexander have brought to the floor reauthorizes the block grant program so this important assistance can continue. The bill also makes important improvements. It requires States to establish education and training requirements for childcare workers, and ensures that States will inspect childcare facilities before they are granted licenses, and at least once a year thereafter. These requirements will improve our ability to ensure that children are cared for in a safe and secure environment. The bill makes important changes to improve care for children with special needs. It makes changes to eligibility requirements to make assistance more stable and dependable for families.

More than 30 national education, child-advocacy, parenting and violence prevention advocacy groups have endorsed this legislation, strongly supporting the reauthorization of the grant program and the changes to make the program more modern and effective. These groups also point out that in addition to authorization, programs require appropriations to be successful. Childcare is one of many important domestic priorities that Congress could more effectively address if we are willing to reach a balanced deficit reduction agreement that eliminates sequestration and provides needed funding. I remain hopeful we can reach such an agreement.

I wish to thank Senator Harkin, chairman of the HELP Committee, and Senator Alexander, Ranking Member of the HELP Committee, as well as Senators Mikulski, Burr, Gillibrand, and Ayotte for sponsoring this important legislation. I support its passage and I encourage my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. President, consideration of judicial nominees is among the most important duties of the Senate. I am pleased that four, well- qualified nominees to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan will now be before the Senate, and I urge my colleagues to confirm them. Each of them has demonstrated a commitment to impartial justice and a thorough knowledge of the law. Each was recommended by an independent screening committee that Senator Stabenow and I have formed. It is broadly based and chaired by one of Michigan's truly outstanding lawyers, Eugene Driker.

Each of the nominees has a distinguished background. Matthew Leitman served as a clerk to Justice Charles Levin on the Michigan Supreme Court and has extensive experience in private practice, focusing on complex commercial litigation, criminal defense, and appellate litigation. He has argued before State and Federal trial courts, as well as numerous appeals before State and Federal appellate courts, and has written a number of influential journal articles on important aspects of State and Federal law such as immigration and fraud enforcement. He has on many occasions been recognized by his peers as one of the most effective and knowledgeable litigators in our State.

He is also dedicated to public service. He has been a pro bono honoree for the Eastern District of Michigan every year since 2008.

Judith Ellen Levy worked in private practice and as a trial attorney for the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in Detroit. She has conducted research and taught classes and seminars at the University of Michigan. Since 2000, she has served as an assistant U.S. attorney and Civil Rights Unit chief in the U.S. Attorney's Office in Detroit. There, she is responsible for investigating and litigating civil rights cases on behalf of the United States, including fair housing, fair lending,

disability access, and police misconduct cases, and for handling citizen civil rights complaints addressed to the office and conducting outreach regarding a variety of office programs.

Ms. Levy has also received numerous awards for her dedication to community service, including several Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Certificates of Commendation and an award from the University of Michigan Council for Disability Concerns.

Judge Laurie J. Michelson served as law clerk to the Honorable Cornelia G. Kennedy of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit and then for nearly 18 years worked in private practice in the areas of white-collar criminal defense and media and intellectual property law. She was sworn in as a magistrate judge for the Eastern District of Michigan in February 2011.

In private practice and as a magistrate judge, Judge Michelson has ably navigated some of the most complex areas of Federal law but has never lost sight of the fact that the law has a human impact.

Judge Linda Vivienne Parker served as the director of the Michigan Department of Civil Rights from 2003 to 2008. She also worked in private practice and served as the first executive assistant U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan under U.S. attorney Saul A. Green from 1994 to 2000. In 2008, she was appointed to the Third Judicial Circuit Court in Wayne County. In addition to her criminal docket, Judge Parker serves as a judge in the Adult Drug Treatment Court.

Judge Parker has dedicated her legal career to public service and has committed a great deal of time to serving and advocating for homeless families and teenage mothers. She served as the Chair of New Steps, an organization committed to providing services for economically disadvantaged new mothers in substance abuse recovery.

Each of these nominees knows the law and is ready to bear the responsibilities of a Federal judge. I urge my colleagues to confirm their nominations so they can begin serving the people of the Eastern District of Michigan.

I would yield the floor.

I ask unanimous consent that the time be yielded back.

Madam President, I want to assure our colleagues that these nominees from Michigan have been selected--obviously by us-- following a very thorough screening committee with its broadly based recommendations. All four of these nominees are highly qualified, have judicial temperament, and Senator Stabenow and I can recommend them highly to the Senate.

I thank my colleagues who are voting for cloture and then hope that the next vote after cloture we will see them confirmed.

Again, we want to provide that assurance to our colleagues that this is a broadly based screening committee that we appoint which has recommended these nominees.

I ask that all time be yielded back.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent all time be yielded back.

Madam President, I was saddened to learn of the passing of Thomas Edward ``Ed'' Braswell, Jr., and I offer my sincerest condolences to his family. Two former chairmen of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sam Nunn and John Warner, joined in expressing their gratitude for Mr. Braswell's exemplary service at a recent committee hearing.

Mr. Braswell joined the Armed Services Committee staff in 1953 and served as staff director and chief counsel to the committee under the leadership of two of the titans of the Senate--Richard Russell and John Stennis--for 23 years. Mr. Braswell served the committee from the beginning of the Eisenhower Presidency to the end of Gerald Ford's, helping see the committee through most of the Cold War and all of the Vietnam war and its aftermath. As chief counsel to the committee, Mr. Braswell helped to write the first of our annual National Defense Authorization Acts in 1962, and stayed on long enough to play a key role in the next 14 NDAAs, helping start a tradition of legislative accomplishment that continues to this day.

The Armed Services Committee has been blessed over the years with a number of staff members who have served the committee for a period of decades, dedicating their careers to the committee, the Congress, our national security, and our men and women in uniform and their families. Our staffers work behind the scenes, providing us with the informed advice that we need as we consider the myriad of national security issues facing the Department of Defense and the Congress. The long hours and large workloads required for such a career often require significant sacrifices by both our staffers and their families. Without the advice and assistance of these committed public servants, the business of the Senate could not be carried out.

Ed Braswell began his career by serving in the old Army Air Corps during World War II. He went on to go to Harvard Law School and worked briefly for the Department of Justice before joining the committee staff. In addition to his hefty commitments in the U.S. Senate, Mr. Braswell also made time to give back to his community. He served as the chairman of the Alexandria Planning Commission for more than 30 years and was instrumental in many of the commission's historic preservation efforts.

I know my Senate colleagues join me in recognizing the mighty contributions of our staff members, both past and present. It is the hard work and dedication of individuals like Ed Braswell who make our work possible, and for that we are very grateful.

Madam President, the Senate takes another step forward in combating sexual assault in the military. Thanks to the leadership of Senators McCaskill, Ayotte, Fischer, and others, we can improve legislation which adds important new protections for victims of sexual assault and strengthens our ability to investigate and prosecute these crimes.

This legislation we will be voting on bolsters and improves upon the provisions to combat sexual assault which were included in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014. Among the reforms included in that bill and are now law were provisions which make it a crime to retaliate against a servicemember for reporting a sexual assault; that require every servicemember who reports a sexual assault to get a special victims' advocate who works for them, not for the command or for the court; and also this recently enacted law requires a higher level review of decisions not to prosecute an allegation of sexual assault.

The reforms in the bill we will be voting on shortly are significant additions to that recently enacted law. First, this bill will be making an important change in how we prosecute sexual assault crimes by amending the Military Rules of Evidence to eliminate what is known as the good soldier defense, which has allowed servicemembers to argue that their good military performance is evidence of their innocence when charged with a crime. The military culture has been too slow to grasp the painful truth that even a successful professional can also be a sexual predator. This important reform in the bill we are considering will help to alter that culture.

The bill also strengthens oversight of commanders' decisions on prosecution. Under reforms we passed last year, any decision by a commander not to prosecute a sexual assault case is reviewed by the next highest authority in the chain of command. When that decision contradicts a recommendation to prosecute from the commander's senior legal adviser, that review is done by the service Secretary, the highest civilian authority in each military service. The bill we are now going to consider would require the same review if a commander's decision not to prosecute conflicts with the recommendation of the senior prosecutor who would try the case.

The bill also strengthens victims' input into prosecution decisions. The reforms we passed last year require that every victim of a military sexual assault be provided with a special victims' counsel--an attorney who works

not for the commander or the court but for the victim. The bill before us requires that these victims' counsels advise victims on the advantages and disadvantages of seeing their case prosecuted in a military court or in a civilian court. The bill also requires that when victims express a preference for one or the other, that preference be given great weight.

The bill before us includes other important new protections for sexual assault victims. For example, it allows victims of a sexual assault who leave the military to challenge the terms or the characterization of their discharge. The bill requires a confidential process enabling victims to seek a review of discharge decisions in order to look for possible instances of retaliation for their having reported a crime.

The bill we will soon vote on also includes an important new provision to boost accountability for commanders. It requires their performance appraisals analyze whether they have established a command climate in which sexual assault allegations are properly and fairly handled and in which a victim can report a sexual assault without fear of reprisal or ostracism.

These and other provisions in the McCaskill-Ayotte-Fischer bill add further weight to the important reforms included in the National Defense Authorization Act we adopted and was enacted very recently. The bill we will be voting on contains real important reforms which deserve not just our support and our votes but our thanks to Senators McCaskill, Ayotte, Fischer, and others for crafting these additional reforms because they will surely make a major contribution in protecting the troops who protect us.

Madam President, first let me thank Senator McCaskill for her terrific leadership on this matter and Senator Ayotte and others on our committee who worked so hard to strengthen our laws against sexual assault and strengthen the ability of our commanders to act, as we did in our defense authorization bill and in the second bill we will be voting on today.

We will be voting today on two bills regarding sexual assault in our military, and I believe the strongest, most effective approach we can take to reduce sexual assault is to hold commanders accountable for establishing and maintaining a command climate that does not tolerate sexual assault. In order to do that, we must maintain the important authority to prosecute sexual assaults that our military commanders now have, and we must add greater accountability for those commanders.

The evidence shows that removing this authority from our commanders would weaken, not strengthen, our response to this urgent problem. That is why I believe the bill offered by Senator Gillibrand and others, though offered in the hope that it would strengthen our efforts against sexual assault, will in fact have the opposite effect.

In the last year we have learned that in scores of cases during the period study, commanders prosecuted sexual assault cases that civilian attorneys had declined to prosecute. We have learned our military allies, whose policies have been cited in support of removing commanders' authority, generally made their changes to protect the rights of the accused, not the victim. We have learned there is no evidence that their changes resulted in any increase in reporting of assaults. So when the allies made the change--not to protect victims but to increase the rights of the accused--it did not lead to any increase in the reporting of assaults.

On January 29, we received the conclusions of a report from the Response Systems to Adult Sexual Assault Crimes Panel--an independent panel of legal and military experts of diverse backgrounds that was established by Congress to advise us on how to respond to this issue. A subcommittee of the panel addressed the role of commanders in prosecuting sexual assaults, the very issue we will be voting on today.

Here is what that subcommittee concluded:

There is no evidentiary basis at this time supporting a

conclusion that removing senior commanders as convening

authority will reduce the incidence of sexual assault or

increase sexual assault reporting.

The subcommittee reached that conclusion, despite the fact that many members began the process sympathetic--if not outright supportive--of the notion that we should remove the commanders' authority.

Here is what one member of the subcommittee, former Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman, said:

I've changed my mind, because I was just listening to what

we heard. I started out . . . thinking, why not change it and

now I am saying, why change it. . . . Just turning it over to

prosecutors doesn't mean you are going to get the results you

are looking for. . . .

Congresswoman Holtzman authored the Federal rape shield law when she was a Member of Congress.

Another member of the subcommittee, former Federal Judge Barbara Jones, said that if you remove this authority from commanders ``there is no empirical evidence that reporting is going to increase. . . . If I were persuaded that removing the convening authority would encourage victims to report then this would be a different story. But I am not persuaded of that.''

Listen to Mai Fernandez, the executive director of the National Center for Victims of Crime. She was a member of the panel, and this is what she said about the proposal to remove commanders' authority to prosecute:

When you hear it at first blush, you go, ``Yeah, I want to

go with that.'' But when you hear the facts, like you would

in a case, it just doesn't hold up.

The women making those statements had no stars on their shoulders; they are not Pentagon insiders. They are members of the independent panel that we in Congress tasked with reporting to us on these issues.

Underlying the crisis of sexual assault in our military is a problem of culture, a culture that has been too permissive of sexual misconduct, too unaware that a person who is successful in his professional life may also be a sexual predator. It is a culture too prone to ostracize or even act against those who report sexual assaults.

The military has unique tools to address those problems. Foremost among those tools is the authority of the commander to establish a command climate by giving orders and enforcing discipline. At every time in our history when our military has faced such cultural challenges--such as the challenge of ending racial discrimination in the 1940s and 1950s or the challenge of ending don't ask, don't tell in our time--commanders with the authority to initiate courts-martial have been essential in achieving change.

But we are not going to achieve change if--at the same time we demand of our commanders that they change the military culture to take on the sexual assault problem--we remove their most powerful tool to achieve that change.

Senator Gillibrand's bill creates a new, separate disposition authority to deal with the sexual assault and other serious crimes. Our focus throughout this debate has been, rightly, on how to improve our approach to sexual assault. As a matter of fact, sexual assault would make up just a fraction of the cases this new disposition authority would deal with.

In a letter to me, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Jessica Wright recently reported in fiscal year 2012, the Department of Defense estimates it handled more than 5,600 cases that would be referred to this new disposition authority if it were created, but two-thirds of those cases did not involve sexual assault. The Gillibrand bill would shift dozens of our top military lawyers to a new authority that would spend only one-third of its time dealing with the problem we are trying to solve, the problem of sexual assault.

The National Defense Authorization Act, which we enacted just a few months ago, provides our commanders with additional tools to meet this challenge and important new protections for victims. It provides victims of sexual assault with their own legal counsel specially trained to assist them. It makes retaliation a crime when that retaliation is against victims who report a sexual assault. It requires that the inspector general investigate all complaints of retaliation. It requires that any decision by a commander not to prosecute a sexual assault complaint will have an automatic review by a higher command authority--in nearly all cases by a general or flag officer and in certain cases by the service Secretary, the highest civilian authority in each service.

The second bill we are going to vote on today--offered by Senators McCaskill, Ayotte, and others--provides additional protections to those we just added in the National Defense Authorization Act. The McCaskill- Ayotte bill ensures victims have a voice in deciding whether their cases will be prosecuted in the military or civilian justice system. Indeed, it requires that special victims' counsel established by the National Defense Authorization Act advise victims on the pros and cons of those two approaches. It requires that commanding officers be graded on their success or failure in creating a climate in which there is no tolerance for sexual misconduct and in which victims can come forward without fear.

These additional protections in the McCaskill-Ayotte bill help us answer

the key question of how can we best strengthen our protections against military sexual assault. I believe we do so by empowering victims and by holding our commanders accountable, but we threaten to weaken those protections if we undermine the authority of the very commanders who must be at the heart of the solution. Powerful evidence should lead us to the conclusion that we should not remove the authority of commanders to prosecute these cases.

I thank the Presiding Officer and yield the floor.