Floor Statements

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

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

Mr. President, Missouri is full of amazing Americans. At the very top of this list is my friend, Frankie Muse Freeman. She has been selected to receive the extraordinary honor called the Spingarn Medal, the NAACP's highest national honor.

Each year, the NAACP selects only one person in this country to receive the prestigious Spingarn Medal in recognition of particularly outstanding achievement.

We in Missouri are so proud of Ms. Freeman for her many accomplishments, including receiving this most distinguished award. While I am honored to come to the floor and congratulate Frankie Freeman, I regret that I will not be able to be in St. Louis, at the St. Louis City and County Freedom Fund Dinner to deliver these remarks and celebrate this great woman and her many admirers and supporters in the St. Louis area.

Frankie Freeman is an amazing story. She is 94 years old and still has the passion to serve her community. At age 16, Ms. Freeman enrolled in her mother's alma mater, Hampton Institute. In 1947, before the Presiding Officer or I were ever born, she earned a law degree from Howard University Law School. During that time period, as one might imagine, there really were not law firms that hired either women or African Americans, much less an African-American woman.

So what did Frankie Freeman do? She decided to open her own law firm. She began her practice with divorce and criminal cases and with a huge dose of pro bono cases. After 2 years she became legal counsel to the NAACP legal team that filed suit against the St. Louis Board of Education in 1949. In 1954, Freeman was the lead attorney for the landmark case, Davis v. St. Louis Housing Authority, which ended legal racial discrimination in public housing in St. Louis.

In the almost 60 years since that decision, Ms. Freeman has tirelessly fought for civil rights at home in St. Louis and across the Nation. She has endured abuse and discrimination, but through it all she worked with intellect and dignity while employing one of her very best weapons, a warm and friendly personality and a very quick smile.

In 1964 President Lyndon Johnson appointed her to serve as the first woman on the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. She continued to serve on the Commission under Presidents Nixon, Ford, and Carter.

Recognizing that there was still much work to do to end discrimination, Ms. Freeman joined with others to help form the bipartisan Citizens Commission on Civil Rights. Frankie Freeman's work has earned her many awards. She holds honorary degrees from multiple universities, including Hampton University, the University of Missouri, St. Louis University, Washington University, and Howard University. Now she has been inducted into the National Bar Association's Hall of Fame.

Despite this long history of accomplishments, Frankie Freeman still knows what is important--serving the community she loves.

At age 94, she remains active in her local community by volunteering at her church. Throughout her career, she has served on several local boards, including the National Urban League of Metropolitan St. Louis and the United Way of Greater St. Louis. Along the way, she also found time to write a book about her life, which I highly recommend to anyone for an inspiring story, a uniquely American story of a woman who had a vision at a time when women who looked like her weren't supposed to have a vision.

Ms. Freeman will become the 96th recipient of the Spingarn Medal this July when she is honored during the NAACP national convention in Los Angeles. Past Spingarn medalists include Maya Angelou, W.E.B. Du Bois, and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. This impressive list of exceptional Americans whose company Attorney Freeman will now join gives you a sense of the caliber of person Attorney Freeman is.

There is no doubt that attorney Frankie Freeman is deserving of this distinction. I am so proud of her for being honored with this recognition of her lifelong dedication to justice and civil rights. She is such an inspiration to me, and she has been an inspiration to thousands of young people during her life, an inspiration to so many Americans, regardless of race, an inspiration for what she stands for and what she has accomplished in her lifetime. I am so grateful to call her my friend, and I thank her for all she has done for the people of St. Louis, the people of Missouri, and the people of this great Nation. Congratulations and thank you, Frankie Freeman.

Mr. President, I will spend a few moments talking about the Economic Development Administration. There are lots of times we debate legislation on the floor, and we do it in almost an academic way. We think of the proposals in the abstract. Unfortunately, there are many times we don't think about the real consequences of legislation. This year, at this time, this legislation feels very consequential to me. It feels very consequential because of what my State has gone through.

The Economic Development Administration plays a substantial role in making Federal resources available to assist communities that are affected by disasters to rebuild and recover.

As my colleagues in this Chamber are well aware, the first half of this year has been devastating to my State. Since the start of the year, 28 States have suffered at least one federally declared major disaster.

Missouri has been particularly hard hit, starting with the severe storms on New Year's Eve. We also had severe flooding along the Mississippi River, multiple tornadoes, including one that struck and caused severe damage to St. Louis and, obviously, the historic tornado that has, in fact, done such damage to the community of Joplin. We are also expecting additional extensive flooding along the Missouri River in northwest Missouri. Many families there are steeling for the worst as we wait for the waters to arrive.

When disaster strikes, the Federal Government steps in, as it should, to support the efforts of State and local government, nonprofit groups, and the faith community to help communities recover and rebuild.

In Missouri, EDA works with all 19 regional planning commissions in a collaborative role to help carry out projects deemed important by local elected officials and community leaders, particularly in the event of a natural disaster.

The Economic Development Administration's explicit mission includes the assistance of regions ``experiencing sudden and severe economic dislocations, such as those resulting from natural disasters.''

I just visited with people from a radio station in Joplin. The man I visited there was on the air for 23 straight hours. This radio station turned out to be one of the few methods of communication that everybody could rely on in the immediate hours after the tragedy struck. Eight of the twenty-eight employees who work at that radio station lost their homes, including the man who was on the air for 23 straight hours. There has been severe dislocation that has occurred in Joplin, MO. Two thousand homes were wiped away, clean gone. Another 6,000 structures, including homes and businesses, were severely damaged and are uninhabitable. There are thousands and thousands and thousands of people in Joplin, MO, who woke up that Monday morning--in fact, hadn't been to sleep the night before because they were busy huddling in rubble or were camped out at a relative's home because they had no place to go.

In the past few years alone, EDA has provided similar assistance in Kansas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Nebraska, and North Dakota after disasters hit communities in those States. EDA has already stepped up in Joplin and established a $3 million revolving fund to assist small businesses in the area, so that people have a place they can go back to, in terms of their work, after this kind of disaster.

We have a long history in this country of rolling up our sleeves and working together in difficult times. The Federal Government has always been a partner in those efforts, providing financial and technical support. The Economic Development Administration has been part of this support. It is my hope the EDA will continue to provide this invaluable service.

That is why this legislation is more important than words on a page. It could make the difference between someone being able to stay in the community, being able to go back to work, being able to put the pieces back together after a tragic loss. I hope my colleagues take this seriously and move quickly and promptly to support this legislation.

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

Mr. President, this is a place that runs on words. The Senate is a place where there is always a great deal of speeches given and words spoken. Every once in a while, something comes along in life when words are completely inadequate. What happened in my State in the last few days is very difficult to express in words. I did want to take a few moments to recognize an incredible occurrence in the southwest portion of my State.

Having been there all day yesterday and arriving very early in the morning and spending time with the people of Joplin--with Missourians who have come to Joplin from every corner of our State, with Federal officials, I do want to take a short amount of time to recognize the tragedy and to rejoice in the response.

So many parts of this response, in fact, are the kinds of things we should celebrate. But the loss of life is staggering. An F-5 tornado, we now know, is the strongest tornado classification--in fact, this is the most devastating tornado we have had in this country in almost 60 years. The loss of life is staggering--122 lives. It is, unfortunately, a reality that that toll will probably continue to rise--I hope only slightly--in the coming days. But yesterday, there were another five or six confirmed deaths.

The loss of property--over 8,000 buildings were damaged; 2,000 homes are gone. When I say gone, I mean gone. I have responded to many natural disasters in Missouri during my time as a public official--a lot of tornadoes and flooding. I have never observed a scene that even comes close to what I observed yesterday. Walking among the rubble, you realize that what you are walking through is people's lives that have been spread far and wide, and that, in many ways, cannot be recovered, cannot be made exactly as they were before. From the air, the swathe of damage was incredible. We were able to get up there--because the weather finally cooperated--to look at the damage from the air. Governor Nixon and Mr. Fugate, the Administrator of FEMA, and I, with other officials, went up in helicopters yesterday morning. As you look down upon Joplin, from the air it looks like a stave mill. Through the middle of Joplin, miles and miles long and wide, surrounded by green, it looks like a massive amount of toothpicks. The trees are all gone. Many hundred-year-old trees are lying on their sides. The trees--what is left standing of them--have most of the bark ripped off by the force of the wind that swept through Joplin shortly before 6 p.m. on Sunday evening.

The emotional toll of this devastation is one you can't calculate. But you see it on people's faces. What I observed yesterday was friends and neighbors who were standing by hoping for a miracle, and firefighters dug under the rubble at the Walmart hoping they would find someone there who was alive. I witnessed other people going through the rubble of their homes. In talking to them, I think the initial reaction for the people of Joplin was intense gratitude that they were alive. Now it is being replaced with the reality of their loss and what they have lost--from schools, to churches, to a hospital that employs over 2,000 people in a community of just 50,000. This is an incredible loss. But the pain is palpable on these people's faces, and that is why it is so important that we don't lose sight of what they are going to need over the coming weeks, months and, yes, even years.

The response I witnessed, in terms of what was on the ground, was remarkable--from Federal, State, first responders in local communities, and obviously the officials of Joplin, Missouri, all working together seamlessly as a team. The Federal Government--unlike many disasters where they wait several weeks to declare a disaster--obviously understood that the flexibility and the immediacy of the response was incredibly important in this instance, and they declared a disaster within 18 hours. FEMA had people on the ground. Within 12 hours, the National Guard deployed. They had National Guardsmen there before midnight. Since that moment on, more and more people have been responding with more and more assets to help the people of Joplin and the recovery effort.

I want to call out particularly the fire chief in Joplin and the city manager there who have done remarkable work. The fire chief lost his home. As I walked through the firehouse going to the command center, I heard barking in one of the rooms. I said, ``Is that a K-9 unit?'' They said, ``No, the fire chief is living here with his family because his home is gone. That is his dog.'' So as he lost his home, he obviously had to turn to the important job of initially fighting fires, and then, obviously, participating in an unprecedented effort of search and rescue over the following 48 hours.

I am very proud of our National Guard. We have over 200 guardsmen there as we speak. They have done, as always, remarkable work. I talked to one man who had just finished duty in Poplar Bluff, with the flooding, and immediately came over to help in Joplin with the tornado response and recovery.

The State of Missouri Governor Nixon has been on the ground for much of the last 72 hours, along with his team. He is bringing his cabinet heads to Joplin to work on various parts of this over the next 48 hours, along with subcabinet members from the Federal Government, housing, HHS, to be of assistance.

Let me take a minute to talk about the first responders. I am so proud of the police and firefighters I encountered yesterday. I am so proud of these men and women. As I looked around, I realized there were search and rescue teams from every corner of our State. Task Force 1 from central Missouri and almost 100 Kansas City firefighters were there. I had an opportunity to visit with many of them as they were attempting a rescue on the scene yesterday afternoon. At 3 o'clock in the morning--yesterday morning--a caravan from St. Louis of over 100 firefighters and all of their equipment and assets rolled down I-44 to get to Joplin to help their brothers and sisters, in terms of this effort. St. Francis County, Camden County--you name it--from all over the State, police and firefighters and public safety officials responded to Joplin.

Frankly, people need to realize that the assets spread all over Joplin today, the emergency vehicles, K-9 units, HAZMAT teams, mobile rescue units that allow people to do very difficult rescues in very difficult circumstances--the vast majority of those assets were bought with Federal dollars. The vast majority of that equipment that came to these Missouri departments came from Federal grants. A lot of these guys worked without sleep for days. As I talked to them and

thanked them, it was almost as though they resented being thanked because, to them, this is what they do.

I tell you, one thing yesterday gave me was an incredible passion to fight for these folks' pensions and salaries. These are not the people who are causing economic chaos in this country. These are not the people who deserve to be diminished in public discussions about what they receive for their work. These are the best we have, and they deserve every dime of pension they have bargained and fought for.

I am so proud of Joplin for its response. This is a community of great faith. This is a community that will come together, as a lot of Midwest communities do in circumstances when their neighbors are in trouble. Everywhere I have gone--in fact, our phones are ringing off the hook--people are saying: What do we need to do to help Missourians?

The most important thing people can do right now is give blood, donate to the Salvation Army and Red Cross, and wait to hear from the officials from Joplin about when volunteers are needed. Right now, too many volunteers swarming into Joplin could cause more problems than it could solve. People need to check with the local Red Cross in Ozarks, and they need to check in with the city Web site. When there is a call for volunteers, it will go out, and those volunteers will be needed. But for now, the most important thing people can do is give money and blood.

The other thing I think we can do for all of the people who lost their lives in this tragedy is to have a plan when there is a tornado warning. Many families--and I think we are guilty of it in the Midwest maybe more so than other places in the country because we hear sirens and tornado warnings a lot. I grew up with that in Missouri. I will be honest, I probably have never taken it seriously enough. But that will not happen again in my life. My family will have a plan. My family will know where to go and what to do if, in fact, there is a tornado warning. Don't ever assume a tornado warning is not serious. These sirens rang at approximately 5:17 in the afternoon, and the tornado touched ground at approximately 5:41. So there was 20 minutes there.

By the way, the weather people here deserve a great deal of credit. Nobody visually sighted this tornado. It was all done through radar. The fact that they were able to identify this tornado and make that warning 20 minutes ahead of time was very important. I cannot imagine the loss of life we would have had if it hadn't been for that 20-minute warning. Having said that, there were people who were not taking it seriously. There were people who didn't know exactly where to go or what to do. So, please, have a plan for your families as a tribute to all those who lost loved ones in Joplin on Sunday night.

We will survive this, with God's grace and determination. Joplin will roar back because of the values that are held so dearly in that part of our State--in fact, in our entire country.

We will come together, and we will do this. But make no mistake about it, the satellite cameras are going to pack up sometime in the next 48 hours. All those satellite trucks are going to go back from where they came. This will fade from the front pages. Just like the junior Member from Minnesota who is presiding right now, at the point in time the bridge collapsed, there was a great deal of attention, and then the attention goes away.

In this instance, we are going to need to sustain the support to this community far beyond the headlines, far beyond the satellite trucks going home. We have to get these schools open in September. We have to get this hospital rebuilt. We have to make sure this community is not left stranded without the assistance it needs.

There is no question that we have to be careful about the way we spend Federal money. But with all due respect to Congressman Cantor, I have a hard time believing that if this were in his congressional district, he would be talking about how additional disaster relief would not be available unless we found some other program from which to take it. It must be available. This cannot be a political football. We must provide the assistance. That is what Federal tax dollars are for, to provide assistance when there is no assistance available for communities and for States because of the wrath of Mother Nature. We must be there for them. We all must stand with Joplin. All of America must stand with Joplin. And we will.

My heart goes out to the families for their losses. I congratulate the people of Joplin for their response. I say ``bless you'' to all those first responders. Through the greatest tragedy sometimes comes the greatest strength.

I yield the floor.

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

Madam President, I rise to speak in support of the legislation that is going to be voted on in a few hours. I have listened to the last couple of speakers, and while I certainly respect Senator Coburn's commitment to fiscal responsibility--and he and I have worked together on a number of projects in that regard and have the same view of many of the spending habits around here--I have to say, I am a little confused by the opposition to this legislation by my friends across the aisle.

We have two ways to spend money around here: one, through the appropriations process; the other is what I call tax goodies. These goodies are called tax expenditures. What these do is they basically say to whatever group has successfully lobbied for them: You are not going to have to pay all your taxes. So there are two ways we deny the Treasury money. One is by spending money. The other is by telling people: You do not have to pay the money the Tax Code says you owe. And we put into the Tax Code special deals.

Many of those special deals are done because the case is made that they spur economic development or they spur some kind of activity in our country that we think is desirable. A good example is the interest deduction on people's homes. The notion is that we want to encourage people to buy homes, so we allow them to deduct the interest they pay on those home loans against their income tax.

Charitable deductions are another good example. We want people to give to charities, so we say: Do you know what. You do not have to pay as much in taxes if you give to charity.

The realty sector is full of tax goodies for the development of real estate and the creation of jobs that go with the development of real estate.

One of the big tax expenditures we have in our Tax Code is goodies for Big Oil. That is what this is about. Can we get to where we need to be on our structural debt and our annual deficit without touching the Tax Code? No way. Are we going to have to look at revenues for multimillionaires? I think we are. Are we, obviously, going to have to look at spending? Of course we are. And aren't we going to have to look at the tax goodies? Well, I would surely hope so, because, frankly, as some of my colleagues across the aisle have said--and I thought they agreed with us--cleaning out some of those goodies could potentially lower taxes for everyone.

So where do we start with the goodies that are in the Tax Code? Might we not start with the most profitable companies in the history of the planet? Do they need this extra money we give them by telling them they do not have to pay the taxes other companies have to pay? How many quarters will we have where we read the headlines: ``Record-Breaking Profits for Big Oil''? How many times are we going to read that before we are willing to take the baby step--just the baby step--of saying: Maybe these tax goodies for Big Oil are not a good idea in light of our deficit and our debt. Maybe this is a good place to start. They made north of $35 billion in the last 3 months.

I know there are all kinds of things that are being put out there to kind of hide behind as we cast this vote because this is a tough vote for people who vote no. How do you explain to your constituents--who are struggling around their kitchen table to figure out how they can afford to drive their kids to soccer practice--how do you explain to them that we think that instead of $123 billion of profit Big Oil is going to make this year, they need to make $125 billion? That is what this is. Instead of making $125 billion--north of $125 billion--of profit this year, Big Oil is going to have to suffer along with only $123 billion in profit. And that $2 billion we want to take back from them is going to go toward the deficit. How do you explain that to people around their kitchen table?

Oh, this means the cost of fuel is going to go up. Everyone has debunked that. Really? The cost of fuel has gone up just fine and they have all those subsidies. I remember when oil was $55 a barrel and they had all these subsidies. By the way, all these subsidies did not help them go out and do what they needed to do to keep the price of fuel down.

By the way, today a letter was sent to the FTC by myself and other Members of the Senate saying: What about this refinery process? Talk about economic illiteracy. Anybody who believes the oil companies today are making 7 cents of profit on a gallon of gas has no idea what is going on with refineries right now. A year ago at this time, refineries were operating at a capacity of close to 90 percent. Today, they are only operating at 80 percent. Why would that be? Their profit per gallon of gas--just the refineries--has gone from less than 40 cents a gallon to 80 cents a gallon in a matter of a few months: 80 cents a gallon of refinery profit. Some of these refineries are independently owned. But many of them are owned by the big five, the big five big oil.

So why is that capacity down? Is it because they do not have crude to go through the refining process? No. There is plenty of crude. And how about this. We are giving these big oil companies tax goodies, and what are they doing today? They are exporting a record amount of oil and fuel from the United States--exporting. They are sending it to South America and Mexico.

So while my constituents are suffering mightily at the gas pump, week after week, these guys are sending the oil they have produced with our tax goodies to another country, instead of putting that additional supply into our supply chain, which, in turn, reduces the price.

The more supply, the less the price. So, one, they have cut back refining capacity. Two, they are exporting more. And they want to say it is about drilling. Really? We have more rigs drilling right now in this country than we have had in many years. We have production higher at this point--domestic production--than it was at the end of the Bush administration. We just issued 12 new deepwater permits in the last few months. There are all kinds of leases out there that are not being explored. Meanwhile, cha-ching, cha-ching--these big oil companies are continuing to make profits that make your jaw drop.

So, honestly, seriously, you talk about economic illiteracy. I will tell you what economic illiteracy is. It is thinking these companies-- what about the free market I always hear about from the other side of the aisle? What about that free market? Why do they need our tax goodies to help them if this is truly a free market?

Maybe they are right. Maybe we shouldn't pick on Big Oil. But what a great place to start. Frankly, if we can't take these things away from the most profitable companies in the history of the planet, how are we ever going to take them away from the mohair industry or how are we ever going to do what we need to do with the Tax Code in the real estate sector or any of the other goodies we have larded up our Tax Code with to make it so complicated and so long that, frankly, the people who get the most advantages out of it are the families who can afford to hire accountants and tax lawyers. Meanwhile, the real tax rate for most Americans is much higher than the real tax rate for most multinational corporations.

So I think economic illiteracy is to spend a lot of time talking about the debt and deficit and not being willing to take this baby step to take back $2 billion a year that these companies get that they do not need and they are not using to hold down the price of gas.

I mean, when I realized how cynical this whole process has become is when today I got a question from a reporter that said: Well, the oil companies say most of these profits are going to these pension companies. Give me a break. You know, really? Really? These guys want to talk about free market and how this is all about the bottom line, and then they want to try to hide behind the fact that some of the pension funds have stock in their companies, that somehow that justifies them feeding at the public trough? Talk about greed. Talk about greed.

So I think this legislation is a real litmus test because if we can't do this, then I question what we can do to right this ship that is all about the footprint of the Federal Government, how much money we are spending and how many tax expenditures are out there. And anybody who tells you this is about raising their taxes--no, this is about saying to them: You have to pay the taxes the free market says you should pay, not avoid taxes by these extra goodies. This isn't about raising their taxes; this is about saying: You need to pay your taxes the way average citizens do, as it relates to their businesses. You should not get this extra help in the Tax Code that allows you to avoid taxes. It is a tax expenditure. It is real money that will come to our bottom line as it relates to our deficit, and it is important to get it done.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I honor the 30th anniversary of Brewer Science, an innovative, high-technology company from Rolla, MO.

When Brewer Science was started by Dr. Terry and Paula Brewer in 1981, it had only three employees. Like so many small businesses in our country, the company has grown and expanded because of its commitment to hard work, innovative solutions and exceptional service for its customers. From humble beginnings, the company has grown today to 263 employees working globally to bring groundbreaking technology to companies worldwide.

Brewer Science is best known in the microelectronics industry for introducing ARC brand bottom antireflecting coatings in 1981 to microchip makers. In the past 30 years, they have expanded their portfolio to include optoelectronic coatings, protective coatings, bonding processes and nanotechnology products, which enable the manufacturing of advanced integrated circuits, sensors and displays throughout the world.

As Brewer Science has continued to grow, their vision and philosophy have remained consistent. The milestone that I ask us to honor today is a tribute to this vision.

Brewer Science has translated their success in business into a better community for Missourians. Brewer Science has had a positive impact on its community through service, volunteering, and donations to various arts, educational and environment programs.

Brewer Science's passion for providing dedicated service and their emphasis on innovation serve as an inspiration for all Missourians. Their achievements deserve the highest commemoration.

Mr. President, I ask that the Senate join me in recognizing the 30th anniversary of Brewer Science.

Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to the thousands of peace officers who tirelessly serve our country and our communities. Having just commemorated Peace Officers Memorial Day on May 15, I want to specifically acknowledge the 162 officers killed in 2010, including 5 from my home State of Missouri, who laid down their lives in service to others.

This past week in our Nation's Capital thousands of police officers, deputy sheriffs, State troopers, investigators, and agents gathered in fellowship as brothers and sisters united by a bond of service and sacrifice. Every year, they gather to commemorate their fallen at the National Law Enforcement Officer Memorial where the names of nearly 19,000 officers who have been killed in the line of duty are etched. Nationally, the average age of the officers killed in 2010 was 41; the average length of their law enforcement service was nearly 12 years; and, on average, each officer left behind 2 children. While there is no way we can fully restore the families, the coworkers, and the communities of our fallen law enforcement professionals, we can offer solace and tribute in the hope that they know we honor them and their sacrifice.

The profession of a being a peace officer in this country is unique in many ways and its challenges are many. We expect our officers, deputies, troopers, agents, and investigators to uphold the law of the land without compromise and without blemish. We expect them to run toward the sounds of gunfire, to transform chaos into order, to provide comfort to the afflicted and injured, to protect the vulnerable, and to facilitate justice for the victimized. We ask them to do this at every hour of the day, every day of the year, in every climate and place where the American flag flies. The most amazing thing is that our peace officers exceed every one of these expectations, and for this we remain eternally grateful.

Much like our military, peace officers are ordinary men and women who choose to answer a call to become extraordinary heroes. They are our moms, our dads, our brothers, our sisters, our neighbors, and our friends. Our peace officers understand duty before self. They understand what it means to miss holiday meals with their loved ones. They understand that long hours of calm may turn into moments of intense violence. They understand they are sentinels, standing in the gap between our loved ones and those who would do them harm.

In closing, I offer my humblest and sincerest gratitude to the families and loved ones of our wonderful peace officers. They, too understand sacrifice and commitment, and without their enduring support, the men and women behind the badge would not be able to accomplish all they do. To those who wear the badge and answer the call to serve, I humbly say thank you, and I ask my fellow Senators to join me in acknowledging them.

Madam President, I rise to make some brief comments about people at home I am so proud of. Over the past 3 weeks, my home State has been the site of heartbreaking destruction that resulted from a series of severe weather incidents throughout the State. We have also had the privilege of witnessing great acts of bravery, compassion, and neighbors being neighbors in response to these incidents. I wish to take just a moment to recognize the incredible character of Missourians and particularly to recognize the contributions made by the citizen- soldiers and airmen of the Missouri National Guard.

Today, weeks after historic flooding began, we continue to see its life-altering effects, in my State and others all along the Mississippi River. My prayers, and those of my colleagues, go out to all those who have and will continue to have their lives altered by this tragedy.

I will continue to work with my colleagues in the Missouri delegation to make sure that the Federal Government provides the assistance necessary to help Missourians affected be tragedy to get back on their feet. Already, the President has granted the first Federal disaster assistance to individuals and households across the State. More announcements will come as damage assessments are completed. USDA is also poised to assist and will start holding public meetings in the affected areas to inform farmers and landowners of the help that they can receive.

One thing that has struck me about the response to the storms has been the dignity and class with which Missourians have carried themselves. In my State, families have been driven from their homes, pushed away from their jobs, lost everything. Whether it is a family in North St. Louis whose home was destroyed by a tornado, or a producer whose family farm was submerged when the levee protecting it was intentionally breached, Missourians have drawn on their faith, their families, and their neighbors to pull through. I had the opportunity to spend time with some of these families during my trip to view flooding in southeast Missouri. Their courage is inspiring, and is an example of the American spirit that we all hold dear.

We have had a rough year. The last 3 weeks have been particularly destructive, starting with the tornado and strong winds that ripped through the St. Louis area on Good Friday, April 22. This tornado, rated an EF-4, was estimated to be the strongest to hit the area in nearly four decades.

As the tornado and storms battered the St. Louis area, rain continued to fall on southeast and southern Missouri. When Governor Jay Nixon made the decision to deploy the Missouri National Guard to assist local emergency responders in their efforts, it marked the 20th time in the past 6 years that the Missouri National Guard has provided such assistance, including the last time that catastrophic flooding struck the State, in 2008.

Since their deployment to respond to this latest disaster, the Missouri National Guard, under the strong leadership of their adjutant general MG Stephen Danner, has provided invaluable support to the Governor, the Army Corps of Engineers, local responders and citizens across the scores of communities that have suffered damage. Two events from recent days provide a perfect summary of the service that these brave men and women continue to perform for the people of my State.

Last week, the citizen-soldiers and airmen of the Missouri National Guard joined the people of Caruthersville, in Pemiscot County, to rapidly erect a secondary flood wall to support the existing wall. This wall, made of 60,000 sandbags stretched across over 3,000 feet, helped to provide safety and peace of mind for a community that feared the worst.

A couple of counties away, Missouri National Guard members helped to save a 93-year-old trapped in her car as she tried to cross a flooded Black River. One of the guardsmen on the scene, seeing his first emergency duty, remarked ``we weren't there to be heroes, we were just doing our jobs.''

The citizen-soldiers and airmen of the Missouri National Guard, while ``just doing their jobs,'' have played an important role in supporting the flood response efforts of their neighbors.

A member of the 1138th Military Police Company said it best when he said ``nothing makes you feel as good as being able to help your neighbors in Missouri.'' The Missouri National Guard, and the people they valiantly serve, are and will continue to be the embodiment of those words and the spirit that we all strive to personify. I thank them for their bravery, for their selflessness and for being great neighbors.

We will all stand by to be of assistance as everyone recovers from the natural disasters that have brought such destruction to the State I love.

Mr. President, I think there are times around here that we lose sight about what real people are doing in our home States. I think we lose sight of the struggles, their

daily struggles, how they live their lives with integrity and honor every day and go to work.

Yesterday, we got a call in my office from a young lady. She was on her cell phone. She is a nurse, a nurse's aide at the VA hospital in St. Louis. She was on her break, and she was on her cell phone.

She talked to the young lady who answers our phone and said: I want you to tell the Senator that I have got kids, and I bring home the paycheck. The way I feed my kids is with my paycheck I get working here at the VA hospital, and I am scared. I am scared about what is going to happen if all of a sudden I quit getting my paycheck. I have no place to turn. I am a single mom, and I am very worried.

Then, she said: Would you hold on a minute? Then she handed her cell phone to someone else in the break room at John Cochran VA Hospital, and then that woman handed the cell phone to another woman. By the time this conversation was over, the young lady who answers the phone in my office had talked to half a dozen women who do not make a lot of money, who go to work every day caring for our veterans in a veterans hospital.

You know what they all said? Why is this happening? Why is this happening? If Latonya and her friends were here right now, I would say: You know what, that is a darn good question, why this is happening. This is not a game. This is not a game of ping-pong, where we are hitting the ball up and down this hall from the House to the Senate, fighting over divisive social issues that, frankly, our country has struggled with for decades and will continue to struggle with.

This is about running our government and about the money it takes to run our government. That is all it should be about. It should not be a time for us to argue about Gitmo. It should not be a time for us to argue about women's reproductive health. It should be about funding our government. We have many other occasions we can debate those issues and disagree. And reasonable people do disagree.

But now is not the time to debate those issues at the 11th hour, when Latonya is not going to get a paycheck to feed her kids. I am for cuts. I have been the odd man out many times in caucus fighting for cuts. I worked on spending cuts last year with Senator Sessions from Alabama. I continue to work with Senator Corker about cuts.

I am somebody who said the original proposals that my caucus made were way too little. But you know what I am beginning to feel like? I am beginning to feel like I have been duped, because I thought that was what this was about. I thought it was about cuts.

Let's review the facts. The chairman of the House Republican Budget Committee and the Speaker of the Republican House said we need to cut $32 billion out of the remaining budget this year. I have to tell you the truth. I did not think that was unreasonable. I will admit, I am to the right of much of my caucus on some of this cutting stuff. But I did not think that was unreasonable. So I was glad when we went to the Republicans and said: You know what, we will cut. We will cut what you wanted to cut. In fact, we will cut more than what the House Speaker and the chairman of the House Budget Committee wanted to cut. That is where we are today. We have put more cuts on the table than they initially recommended.

I am beginning to realize this is not about cuts. This is about a much more extreme agenda that has to do with social policy, not about money. They keep moving the goalpost. What is the number? They keep moving the goalpost. We have gone more than halfway. In my neck of the woods, that is called a compromise.

We have the Republicans controlling the House, the Democrats control the Senate. That is why compromise is so important. What is wrong with a compromise? Let's do the compromise, fund the government, and get on with it, so Latonya can get her paycheck and the other women who work with her at the VA hospital can get their paycheck.

They will not take yes for an answer on cuts at this point. They want to make it about something else. Was the CR today just about military pay? No. No, it was not. I did notice one thing they did not put in the CR today. Why will the House Republicans not pass the bill we had asked them to pass to cut our pay if the government shuts down?

I will certainly not take a paycheck, and no one should take a paycheck. Why is that not being passed by the Republican House of Representatives? Why was that not put on the CR today? They want to, once again, pass something about moving people out of Gitmo, which has nothing to do with the budget for the rest of the year. When they were doing the Gitmo thing, why did they not put the pay for Members in there? Why did that not occur? I know the talking point is that--this is one of the talking points we are hearing from the other side: Well, you should have gotten this done last year. We can get it done today-- we can get it done today.

We have gone more than halfway on a compromise. This is no longer about the cuts. This is not about the money; this is about an extreme agenda.

Latonya's paycheck and the paychecks of her friends in the break room at the VA hospital hang in the balance. Let's review what happened last year on the budget. The Republican Party participated in every Appropriations Committee in the Senate, and every Appropriations Committee passed a bill.

At the end of the year, that bill was brought to the floor because the appropriators believed the Republican appropriators were supporting the bills they helped write. In fact, those Republican appropriators stuffed that bill full of earmarks for Republicans. Hundreds of earmarks for Republicans were stuffed in that bill.

It was brought to the floor. I remember the night it was brought to the floor. It was in the lameduck. Then the Republicans decided they did not want to support it anymore. By the way, it was not as if passing anything around here was easy last year. If anybody was paying attention, it was about: Let's drag this out. Let's be stubborn. Let's make sure they have to get 60 on everything.

Is there blame to go around that the budget did not get done last year? Sure. There is blame that can go on both sides of this aisle. I am not here to say it was the Republicans' fault or the Democrats' fault. But certainly it takes a lot of nerve to say the only reason we do not have a budget is because the Democrats were not willing to pass a budget last year.

It was a little more complicated than that, if people will remember the facts as they occurred at the time. So it appears to me now that there are certainly a lot of people down the hall who want the shutdown. I was interested when I saw in the paper that when Speaker Boehner announced to his caucus they were preparing for a shutdown, he got a standing ovation.

Well, I can assure you, there are no standing ovations in our caucus. There are no standing ovations. I will tell you what, when I go to sleep tonight, I am going to be thinking about Latonya. I am going to be thinking about her kids and what she is telling them tonight and what not getting one paycheck means to that family. Just one paycheck can make the difference, can send a family down the path of getting behind on the mortgage, behind on the bills, and then not having a way to catch up. That is what we should be thinking about right now, not about those social issues that we disagree on and that we can debate and disagree on for many years, as we have for the last 40. But really, can we get a number? Can we make the goalpost quit moving? Can we agree on the cuts and then get on to the hard work? How embarrassing is it that we are fighting over literally a few billion dollars in difference.

If this is so much about cutting the debt--for another day, I want to talk about this, but, really, the Republican budget was released this week. Guess what it adds to the deficit over the next decade. The Ryan roadmap adds $8.2 trillion to the deficit over the next decade. That is how serious they are getting about the deficit. It cuts taxes for a lot of wealthy people. It doesn't do much on the deficit.

I am all for cuts. I have stood for cuts. I will continue to stand for cuts. This government has to shrink. But what is going on right now is a political game. It is shameful. It should

stop. We should make an agreement on the numbers, move on, and make sure Latonya gets paid.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I am honored to chair a subcommittee of

the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee that focuses on contracting oversight. I can stand here with certainty and tell my colleagues and America and Missourians that contract problems in the Federal Government are substantial, they are expensive, and they have to be fixed.

While we are all focused right now on trying to make the Federal Government spend less money and be more efficient, there are times that contracting problems have significant consequences beyond that of money being misspent or wasted. Sometimes contracting problems have human consequences. One example would be some of our soldiers who were electrocuted because of substandard contracting work as it relates to showers in Iraq when they were standing up for us in a military conflict.

Last summer, a problem surfaced relating to Arlington National Cemetery, and this was a contracting problem. So last summer, my subcommittee held a hearing on the contracting incompetence at Arlington and what the consequences of that incompetence were. As heartbreaking as it is, we learned that because of mismanagement of contracts at Arlington, graves had been misidentified and remains had been buried someplace other than where families had been told they had been buried. Obviously, this is a breathtaking revelation when we think about what Arlington National Cemetery means to the veterans of this country and to our Nation. It is sacred ground. It is the kind of place that America needs to know is being run well and that the remains of our heroes are being handled with the utmost deference, respect, and dignity, and certainly Americans have the right to know we are burying our heroes exactly where their families are told they are being buried.

In the committee hearing last summer, I estimated, based on what we knew at that time, that as many as 6,600 graves had been misidentified. The Army responded quickly and forcefully. I wish to recognize that Kathryn Condon, the Executive Director of the Army National Cemeteries Program, and Pat Hallinan, the Superintendent of Arlington National Cemetery, have been responsive and I think have been working hard to clean up this mess. However, we now have recent reports which indicate that maybe I underestimated the significance of this problem and maybe this problem is much larger than I even anticipated. At the time, when I used those numbers, people seemed to think I was exaggerating.

So we introduced a bill to make sure there is accountability as it relates to Arlington, with a number of cosponsors, including Senator Brown, who was the ranking member of the committee at the time, along with Senator Collins and Senator Burr and Senator Lieberman.

We introduced a bill that would aim at accountability at Arlington, requiring some reporting to us in 9 months, requiring that the Secretary of the Army continue to be held accountable on this huge problem at Arlington National Cemetery.

I think now is the time to get some interim information because information has now surfaced that potentially many more graves have been mishandled. There is now a criminal investigation because we had eight urns discovered in one grave site last fall as we were working on this legislation.

While I am glad the legislation has become law, that doesn't change the urgency of the situation. I have today written to the Secretary of the Army, Secretary McHugh, and I have asked for immediate information on an interim basis about what has happened to clean up this mess at Arlington, where they are in the process, and what is the truth about graves that have been identified, have not been identified, and potentially never will be identified.

I have asked the following information of Secretary McHugh:

First, I want to know the number of grave sites that have been physically examined to identify the remains there. I want to know how many grave sites have been determined to be incorrectly identified, labeled, or occupied, and the methodology used to make that determination. I want to know immediately how many families have been contacted regarding problems with the grave sites and the number of families who have requested that those grave sites be physically examined. I want to know what the procedure is for contacting families regarding actual or potential problems with the grave sites and how these procedures have been implemented since our hearing last July. I want to know from the Army how they will be able to correctly identify all grave sites by the end of the year and the estimated costs and time required to complete an examination of that nature.

I have asked the Secretary of the Army to respond to this letter in a week. I have asked what progress they have made. This is not something we can sweep under the rug and say we have done the best we can. This is not that kind of problem. I have veterans all over Missouri who walk up to me when I am in the grocery store, when I am at the mall, wherever I am, and say: Don't give up on fixing Arlington; it is too important to all of us.

I do not want this cloud hanging over Arlington National Cemetery. I have been honored to attend funerals at Arlington National Cemetery. I compliment the Army for the job they do in terms of the Honor Guard and the dignity those services embrace. But management has a challenge. I want to make sure this does not go off the radar screen in terms of a problem that has to be fixed. It has to be fixed because of the values we embrace in this country.

I look forward to the response from the Secretary of the Army. I look forward to continuing to work with Kathryn Condon and Patrick Hallinan, who I do know are trying, but this is something we have to continually be transparent about in terms of reporting to the public the progress we are making so every family member and every American, when they go to Arlington National Cemetery, doesn't ever have to wonder if they are showing respect to the hero at the grave site that is identified on the marker.

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

Mr. President, last week Kansas City lost a treasure. A very special person to the Kansas City community passed away last week. This is a man, Mike Murphy, who was loved by just about everybody in the area. While his family and friends are gathered now in Kansas City for his memorial service--I am sure there are hundreds who are there--I would like to place these words in the Congressional Record in his memory. Obviously, my prayers go out to his family.

Mike Murphy has been part of the fabric of Kansas City for almost 50 years. For over 40 years, he was the most dominant local radio personality in all of the Midwest. He was popular. In fact, he became radio lore. At times over his career, over 50 percent of people listening to the radio in Kansas City were listening to his program.

He began his career in radio in 1968. He went on to rise to a class by himself in local and regional radio and, in fact, was the winner of the prestigious Marconi award in 1998.

Thousands of truckers and salesmen throughout the Midwest heard him on the mighty KCMO and became his fans and his friends. His program was an essential part of their day. Why? What was there about this guy? He really did not have a political agenda. Unlike today, he was not busy trying to get people all upset about the issues of the day. He did not take sides on political issues. He rarely had big stars as guests, but from time to time they came through wanting to promote something. Because his show was such a dominant show in the area, they wanted to get on it. He was just a funny, irreverent guy who always made you feel as if you knew him when you listened to his program. He talked like a real person. He did not try to show off his intellect. He was smart as a whip, but he never felt the need to impress anybody--I mean anybody. He just wanted to be your pal. He was fun and funny.

He is most famous in Kansas City for starting the second largest St. Patrick's Day parade in the country. How did he start it? In 1973, he was having a drink at a bar that a buddy of his owned. He and a very prominent PR guy who worked in campaigns around Kansas City, Pat O'Neill, Sr., and maybe one or two of their other friends, called Larry Moore, a local news reporter, and said: We are going to start a parade. They went out of Hogarty's bar, marched a few blocks, and they got a little film on TV that night, and the Kansas City St. Patrick's Day parade was born.

Years later, and thousands of floats and hundreds of thousands of spectators, every year in the St. Patrick's Day parade, where was Mike Murphy? On a garbage truck. He always rode on a garbage truck. It was his way of signaling to the people of Kansas City: I am no big deal. I don't need a fancy car. I am happy up here on the garbage truck.

He was getting upset about Kansas City's heritage at one point, so in 1996 he decided: We need to have a cattle drive again through Kansas City--harkening back to the days of a frontier town, and the stockyards were an important part of Kansas City's legacy. What did he do? He started a cattle drive through downtown Kansas City. He would get some amateur cowboys and then invite a lot of his pals to get on horses and take these cattle down the main street of Kansas City.

He loved characters. He thought being called ``a little goofy'' was the highest compliment you could pay him.

He loved to talk about UFOs and aliens. His show was a vacation from serious. His humor was never at the expense of someone else.

I was so fortunate to be one of the many who became part of his large group of regulars. It all began with a phone call to his show when I was driving back from Jefferson City to Kansas City as a young State legislator. This was over 20 years ago. He was saying stuff on the radio--of course, I was listening to Mike Murphy as I drove because everybody listened to Mike Murphy. He was saying something on the radio that was not correct. This is before cell phones. I pulled my car off the highway. I remember to this day exactly where it was. I got on a pay phone, and I called his show because he was saying something that was not correct. I was scared to death. He took my call. I was scared. He was funny. And we became friends. Like hundreds of other people just like me, we became friends.

In fact, we became such close friends that he taunted me until I agreed to be part of the cattle drive. One year, there I was on the top of a horse riding through downtown Kansas City behind a bunch of cattle. That might have been the last year of the cattle drive because I think that was the year some of them escaped into a parking garage in downtown Kansas City, and the Kansas City police were called to see if we couldn't get them off the top of a multistory garage in downtown Kansas City.

I was blessed to be in a bleacher seat to watch his heart at work-- from his annual Salvation Army show to small acts of kindness to mere acquaintances, to his incredible loyalty to his friends.

His heart was as enormous as his patience for BS was small. He also had no patience for pompous. Some of his famous shows were shows where someone came on his show who would be considered a big deal, a star. If that person began being arrogant on Mike Murphy's show, if that person started talking down to Mike Murphy's friends--his listeners--Mike would let him know in no uncertain terms that the interview was over, that he was not interested in allowing anyone to talk down to his pals--his listening audience.

I will never, ever forget the twinkle in Mike Murphy's eye. It is important that he remain one of Kansas City's brightest legends of all time.

My hope for Mike Murphy's memory--I am not surprised that Mike chose the first 17 days of March to meet his Maker because of the fun he had around St. Patrick's Day. My hope is that every St. Patrick's Day in Kansas City, people will raise a glass to Mike Murphy, and when they do, they will tell a funny story. It would be great if that story would be about Mike Murphy, but the most important thing is that it is a funny story. Let me tell you, Mike will not care if it is not even true.

To Mike Murphy, the kind of man who walks as a giant among us and we do not even realize it until he is gone, a man who never lost sight that the little salesman out there driving in his car and the mother at home doing her family's laundry were the most important people on the Earth--here's to you, Mike. Godspeed, my pal.

I yield the floor.

I would like to discuss my amendment, No. 139, to S. 23, the America Invents Act, on pending claims in false marking cases. I want to raise the issue so we can consider it in the future as this legislation progresses.

The Patent Act provides a cause of action against those who ``falsely claim that their products are patented. A successful false-marking claimant must prove two elements: first, that an unpatented article has been marked as patented; and second that the marking was done with intent to deceive the public. These actions can hurt small businesses, start-ups and inventors who will be deterred from competing with such products.

The underlying bill alters the false marking provision by stipulating that the statute may only be privately enforced by a person who has suffered a competitive injury. In addition, damages would be limited to those that are adequate to compensate for the injury.

However, the legislation would also apply the newer rules to pending claims. These include claims that are now in the court system and under negotiation. By changing the rules in pending claims, the legislation allows potential wrongdoers to use the new law to protect themselves from past conduct.

This sets a bad precedent for our legal system and could absolve potential wrongdoers. My amendment would simply require that the changes to false marking provisions to apply only to prospective cases going forward. Small businesses and inventors that have expended considerable resources to protect themselves should not be penalized by a provision that retroactively eliminates pending claims.

My amendment is not an attempt to gut or strike the false markings provision. It is simply a modification to address the concerns of current litigants, consumers and small businesses. I urge my colleagues to strongly consider this issue going forward.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 5 minutes.

Mr. President, we need to make serious and substantial cuts and we also need to compromise. Cuts and compromise need to be the dialog occurring across the aisle and with each other. I have great respect for some of my colleagues on the other side who say we have a structural debt problem and we have to get to it. Certainly we do.

But it is completely wrong that we would do massive cuts all in one fell swoop right now with our economy in the position that it is. That would cause as big a crisis as our failure to deal with our long-term structural debt. So that is where the compromise part comes in. We have to do significant cuts now, we have to put everything on the table and look at our long-term debt structure and we need to figure out how we do that in a bipartisan way, because we are going to fail our country if no one is willing to compromise.

The House resolution, frankly, was not smart in the way they did the cuts. No one in any business would take all the cuts out of one small sliver of their business. They would look at their entire business to try to find cost savings. It was not smart that all the pain was in one place, and they are killing off the very part of our budget that has the best chance of increasing economic activity in this country--the building of roads and bridges, the educating of our kids, the research and the science and development. So while their cuts were more substantial than the Democrats' plan in the Senate, they were not smart cuts. They did not spread the pain around.

On the other hand, the Senate has not gone far enough. It is, frankly, disappointing to me. I still think there are way too many people in denial around here about the nature of the problem and how serious it is, and I don't think we are demonstrating to the American people we understand the nature of the problem when we present an alternative proposal with such a small number of cuts. The sweet spot is somewhere in between these two approaches. Pain needs to be spread more broadly throughout the budget so the pain is not so acute in one area of the budget, and we need to look at all the programs, put it all on the table, and we need to be able to compromise.

Let me point out where I think some of the compromises could come easy. The Senate version, which I will not be able to support--the Senate Democratic version--increases the President's budget in 15 different programs. Think about that. We are trying to cut, and our appropriators have come up with a plan to increase 15 of the President's budget requests by a total of $2.6 billion. We are going the wrong direction. We should be, at a minimum, cutting what the President has recommended cutting. Frankly, I think we need to go even further.

The Pentagon. Let me give one example that came up in a hearing yesterday so people understand there are real savings. We have a Pentagon that we can't audit, and we haven't been able to audit for decades. It is frustrating that we don't have business systems in place that allow transparency and that allow wise choices in terms of the expenditure of dollars. In a hearing yesterday in the Armed Services Committee, I talked with the head of the Navy and the Marines about a system they are putting in place to track equipment. Good idea; right? We want to track equipment. The Army is also putting in a system to track equipment. Here is the rub. They share equipment. You might think these two systems will be able to talk to each other. Oh, no, they have been done separately. They do not talk to each other. It is different software. We are going to have to spend more money for a mechanism so the two systems' tracking equipment--sometimes the equipment they are sharing--can see what is going on. By the way, each of these systems is billions of dollars. We could save billions of dollars by saying to the Army and to the Marines: Use the same software. Use the same program.

That is the kind of savings we can find in the Pentagon if we just look at the GAO high-risk list. The Air Force has been trying for years to put resource management software in place. They are saying they can't even get there until 2017. Are you kidding?

We have to be more efficient with the dollars we spend at the Pentagon, and we will not be if we always say yes and we never say no. There will be no incentive to find savings or to find more jointness among our different military branches in terms of administrative costs if we always say yes and never say no. So the pain has to be felt at the Pentagon too. We cannot do this without pain being felt at the Pentagon.

It has to be across the board, it has to be more substantial than $6.5 billion, and we all have to be willing to compromise.

I will be voting no on both proposals for that reason, but I am anxious to sit down, I am anxious to sit down at the table and find those compromises.

I wish to make real cuts and move forward in a responsible way to show the American people we get it.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today I pay tribute to a patriot, a businessman, a loyal father, and an American hero. Though Leonard Truman Ferrell--``Buck'' to his many family and friends--was laid to rest at Arlington Cemetery this morning, I know that his legacy lives on in the community that he helped build, the family that he nurtured, and the soldiers with whom he served. Today I would like to take a few moments to honor Buck's life and the contributions he made to his community.

Born and raised in southeast Missouri, Buck was imbued from an early age with those quintessential American values so prevalent among the members of the Greatest Generation: integrity, service to others, determination, and an undying sense of patriotism. Since Buck's family didn't have much money growing up, he learned at a young age to live within his means and to place little value on worldly possessions. ``My father didn't have a lot of worldly goods,'' Buck once said, ``but he was a rich man in character.'' I know I speak for many when I say that Buck, first and foremost, was also a man rich in character.

Buck was also a patriot of the highest order. Having served in the U.S. Army during the Korean war, he fought for 2 years on the Korean Peninsula and earned, among other decorations, the Combat Infantry Badge, the Presidential Unit Citation, two Silver Stars, and two Purple Hearts. Wounded multiple times, Buck never faltered and steadfastly manned his post, whether in a frontline foxhole or as a heavy weapons trainer for new recruits. In light of his outstanding service, Buck was even offered a battlefield commission. Though he chose not to accept the commission, Buck returned home and remained an active member in a number of veterans' organizations, like the American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars, for the rest of his life. Never forgetting the country that he fought to protect, he raised--every morning--an American flag in his front yard.

As you can guess, Buck's dedication to others and stalwart work ethic continued long after his military service ended. For 25 years, he worked at the McCrate Equipment store in Caruthersville, MO, and retired as the general manager. As a member and former deacon at First Baptist Church, Buck helped sustain a thriving congregation, and he also took on a number of leadership roles in the local Masonic Lodge and Kiwanis Club. His extensive community involvement earned him the Pioneer Heritage Award from the Pemiscot County Historical Society and recognition by the Missouri State Legislature for his enduring impact in southeast Missouri.

But even with all of these commitments, Buck always had time for family. He and his wife Patsy Malin Ferrell raised four wonderful children, were the beloved grandparents to four grandchildren, and one great-granddaughter. In fact, I can personally attest to the great job the Ferrells did with their children--their talented daughter Christy is currently an invaluable member of my staff and is seated along with many other members of the Ferrell family, in the gallery today. My prayers are with them all in this time of loss.

Mr. President, I ask today that my fellow Senators join me in recognizing Buck Ferrell, not only because he was a great Missourian, but also because he embodied the true American values that have cemented American society for generations. Buck worked hard, served God, fought for his country, and loved his family. In short, he lived a life worth living.