Floor Statements

Mr. President, I wish to announce that the Impeachment Trial Committee on the Articles Against Judge G. Thomas Porteous, Jr. will meet September 21 and 22, 2010, at 8 a.m., to conduct evidentiary hearings.

For further information regarding this meeting, please contact Erin Johnson.

Mr. President, today I pay tribute to Mr. Michael Frey, a disabled Missouri veteran whose courage, perseverance, and fortitude are remarkable and in keeping with the finest traditions of Missouri and American values: hard work, independence, humbleness, selfless sacrifice, and more.

As a young 19-year old soldier in Vietnam, Mr. Frey served as a squad leader in Alpha Company 3/21 of the 19th Infantry Brigade. On July 14, 1969, Mr. Frey and the members of Alpha Company were ambushed near the Chu Lai base camp. His spinal cord was shattered by enemy fire, and the injuries rendered him paralyzed from the neck down and dependent on a ventilator for assistance in breathing. Given the extent of his injuries, many doctors would have given Mr. Frey a short time to live, but this special Missourian was about to prove that his case and that he himself was special.

Mr. Frey returned to the United States and began receiving full-time care through St. Louis-area Veterans Administration, VA, hospitals, where he gained the respect and admiration of the hospital staff for his resilience, problem-solving approach, and positivity even as he faced almost unthinkable limitations. On December 7, 1984, 15 years after his spine was shattered in Vietnam, more than double the time individuals with his type of injuries are projected to survive, Mr. Frey moved out of the Spinal Cord Injury facility at Jefferson Barracks Veterans Hospital and into his own home--a remarkable accomplishment for a person with complete tetraplegia.

Since then, Mr. Frey has lived on his own for over 25 years, and he is still going strong. Today he actively manages his daily care with the help of a team of care specialists, and he continues to take full charge of his health through preventative care and regular collaboration with VA doctors. He has the benefit of a strong social network and a self-confidence that has allowed him to bounce back from setbacks. He also remains an avid St. Louis Cardinals fan and regularly attends games. In fact, Mr. Frey developed a special friendship with the late, great St. Louis Cardinals broadcaster Jack Buck, who befriended Mr. Frey in the 1970s and encouraged him along the way.

Having survived over 40 years since his injury, Mr. Frey is one of the longest living tetraplegics in the VA system. I honor him today for his wonderful example in coping with his disability. His spirited approach to life is emblematic of the courage, honor, and strength of this country's veterans who fight for our freedom. His partnership with the many great professionals in the VA healthcare system in St. Louis, who at once serve him and revere him, is uplifting and embodies how our VA system can work best. I join the people of Missouri, and all Americans, in saluting Mr. Frey's courage and to humbly thank him for all that he has done, and for all that he endured, for this country. Mr. Michael Frey is a true American hero.

Mr. President, I wish to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the birth of Mr. Eero Saarinen.

Mr. Saarinen was born in Finland on August 20, 1910, immigrated with his family to the United States in 1923, and became an American citizen in 1940. A master of American 20th century architecture, Mr. Saarinen passed away on September 1, 1961.

In 1948, Mr. Saarinen won the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial Competition with his design for the Saint Louis Gateway Arch, creating a monument which, in his words, ``would

have lasting significance and would be a landmark for our time.'' One of our Nation's most iconic monuments, the Gateway Arch symbolizes Saint Louis' role as the ``Gateway to the West'' and celebrates our Nation's westward expansion. Famed architect Cesar Pelli commented that the Arch is ``a perfect combination of a free gesture with a romantic view of modern technology.'' Today, the Arch remains Mr. Saarinen's most widely recognized work.

Mr. Saarinen also designed several well known structures including the Trans World Airlines Flight Center at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport and the main terminal at Washington Dulles International Airport, which is renowned for its gracefully curving roof, suggestive of flight. Missouri is fortunate to also host the Firestone Baars Chapel. Designed by Mr. Saarinen, the chapel features a unique four-foyer design, and is located on the campus of Stephens College in Columbia.

In addition to his accomplishments in the field of architecture, Mr. Saarinen was also a groundbreaking designer of furniture. In 1956, he created the tulip chair, featured on the original Star Trek television series and considered a classic of industrial design.

In recognition of his many achievements, Mr. Saarinen was elected, in 1954, a member of the American Academy of Arts and Letters, considered the highest formal recognition of artistic merit in the United States. In 1962, Mr. Saarinen was posthumously awarded the Gold Medal from the American Institute of Architects. The highest honor bestowed by the organization, it is conferred in recognition of a ``significant body of work of lasting influence on the theory and practice of architecture.''

On behalf of me and the people of Missouri, it is my sincere pleasure to honor the life, achievements, and enduring contributions of Mr. Eero Saarinen to Missouri and the Nation.

Mr. President, I rise today to speak on the extension of the Federal Aviation Administration authorization, which includes a number of critical policy reforms that will make our skies safer for millions of Americans and their families.

On the evening of February 12, 2009, Continental flight 3407, operated by Colgan Air, departed from Newark International Airport for Buffalo, NY. The 45 passengers and five crewmembers were just miles from the Buffalo airport when a series of events resulted in the death of all aboard as well as a father on the ground whose home was the unfortunate final resting place of flight 3407.

Over this last year and a half, I have gotten to know many of the families of the victims. They are a constant presence here in Washington, DC, working to improve safety conditions so that others are spared the same loss they have had to endure.

Sitting in my office last spring, as the NTSB began to release information on the crash, I discussed with the families the tremendous value of their advocacy. For decades the system has been slow to change and in the mean time innocent lives have been lost. We discussed the possibility of seizing on this very legislation as a vehicle for change--to bring accountability and transparency to the system--to strengthen the training requirements and push forward to achieving--not just ``one level of safety''--but a ``higher level of safety.''

As I speak to you today many of those family members are with us here in Washington. It is because of their tireless efforts--their unwavering pursuit for justice--that we are in a position today to take some of the most significant steps in improving the safety of the nation's aviation system in years.

The measures we are considering in this extension are the result of bipartisan efforts in both the Senate and the House yielding a number of provisions that I have worked to advance--and that aim to bring increased oversight and accountability to the system that force the FAA to respond to the growing concerns over crewmember fatigue and commuting--that strengthen the training requirements for our commercial pilots to ensure that those who are trusted with the lives of so many have the critical experience needed to safely operate an aircraft and respond accordingly in the event of an emergency.

I want to recognize my colleagues, Chairman Dorgan and Chairman Rockefeller, who have been working around the clock on trying to bring the FAA reauthorization bill to the floor. We still have work to do, and I look forward to joining them after the summer work period to see the larger legislative package, which is long overdue, sent to President's desk.

It is my sincere hope, that these good people who have suffered such sorrow at the loss of mothers and fathers, sisters and brothers, sons and daughters, husbands, wives that they can return home, their heads held high, knowing that they turned their loss into action, and that their efforts might spare others the same pain that they themselves have endured.

I thank the families for their strength. I thank them for their steadfast advocacy. The American people owe them a debt of gratitude for the work they have done over these many months.

Mr. President, I wish to announce that the Impeachment Trial Committee on the Articles Against Judge G. Thomas Porteous, Jr. will meet on Wednesday, August 4, 2010, at 1 p.m., to conduct a hearing.

For futher information regarding this meeting, please contact Erin Johnson at 202-228-4133.

Mr. President, I ask the Senate to join me in recognizing Devon Alexander ``The Great'' of Saint Louis, MO. It is an honor to celebrate and pay tribute to Devon's undefeated boxing career and commitment to giving back to his community.

Devon was born on February 10, 1987, in North Saint Louis. Seven years later, he began his boxing career after discovering a gym run by St. Louis police officer Kevin Cunningham. The gym was housed in the basement of a former St. Louis City Police Station in the neighborhood of Hyde Park, which had one of the highest crime rates in the city of St. Louis at the time.

Devon continued to improve in the sport of boxing, eventually joining the ranks of the most recognized amateur boxers in the United States. His long list of accomplishments stands as a testament to his love of the sport and personal dedication to success.

As an amateur, Devon participated in almost 300 fights and won every title possible in St. Louis and many at the national level. The titles included four-time Silver Gloves national champion from age 10 to 14; three-time Police Athletic League national champion; 2001 Junior Golden Gloves national champion and Junior Olympic national champion before moving on to win the World Junior Olympics, where he was also named Best Boxer; 2003 U.S. National Champion for those 19 and under; the U.S. National Championship in 2004 in the 141-pound junior welterweight division; and was invited to join the U.S. National Team.

On May 20, 2004, at the age of 17, Devon made the decision to become a professional boxer. He continued to win and amassed a professional record that stands at 20 wins and zero losses. As a professional boxer, Devon faced and received praise from some of boxing's most recognized names.

On August 7, 2010, Devon Alexander ``The Great'' marks his return to St. Louis to defend his undefeated title. He is a strong example of what hard work and perseverance can accomplish. Devon's journey from adversity to success is an inspiration to countless others and it is truly commendable.

Devon will use all proceeds from the ``Devon Alexander Hometown Hero Celebration'' that will be held on August 1, 2010, at St. Louis City Hall, to benefit nonprofit boxing organizations in the St. Louis amateur boxing community.

Devon Alexander ``The Great'' has made the city of St. Louis and the State of Missouri proud.

I ask that the Senate join me in honoring Devon Alexander ``The Great'' for his personal success and service to the Saint Louis community and to our country. I am proud to recognize this extraordinary Missourian and wish him many more healthy, happy, and successful years to come.

Mr. President, I wish to announce that the Impeachment Trial Committee on the Articles Against Judge G. Thomas Porteous, Jr., will meet on Wednesday, August 4, 2010, at 9 a.m., to conduct a hearing.

For further information regarding this meeting, please contact Erin Johnson at 202-228-4133.

Mr. President, on April 13, 2010, the Impeachment Trial Committee on the Articles of Impeachment Against Judge G. Thomas Porteous, Jr., adopted two rules to govern aspects of its pretrial proceedings. On July 14, 2010, the committee adopted two additional rules.

The first rule, adopted pursuant to rule 26.7(a)(1) of the Standing Rules of the Senate, establishes seven members as the committee quorum. In the interest of fairness and continuity, and consistent with prior impeachment trials, the committee adopted this rule and established a ``natural'' quorum of at least seven of its members to receive evidence and conduct the business of the committee.

The second rule delegates the authority of the committee to the chairman

and vice chairman to conduct the daily operations of the committee. This includes, but is not limited to, hiring staff, issuing administrative orders, ensuring compliance with those orders, communicating with counsel for the parties, determining a course of proceeding, and for any other purposes necessary for the committee to discharge its responsibilities and address any other administrative or procedural matters.

The third rule delegates to the chairman, in consultation with the vice chairman, the committee's authority to issue subpoenas for witnesses called to testify or produce documents during all committee proceedings. Senate impeachment rule XI grants to the Impeachment Trial Committee the power granted by Senate impeachment rule VI to the Senate ``to compel the attendance of witnesses.''

The fourth rule, adopted pursuant to rule 26.7(a)(2) of the Standing Rules of the Senate, reduces to one member the committee quorum for taking sworn pretrial testimony. Judge Porteous has asked to examine certain witnesses in advance of the committee's evidentiary hearings, which will begin on September 13, 2010. Although the pretrial examination of witnesses in a Senate impeachment trial remains rare, the committee has concluded that it should, in the circumstances of the present impeachment, permit a limited number of them. The rule implements the committee's determination that pretrial examinations may proceed before a quorum of one member. As with prior impeachment proceedings, and pursuant to the rules of this committee, the evidentiary hearings will take place in the presence of a natural quorum of at least 7 of its 12 members.

I ask unanimous consent to have those rules printed in the Record.

Mr. President, today I congratulate Mr. Jeff Theerman, executive director of the Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District, MSD, on his election as the new president of the National Association of Clean Water Agencies, NACWA.

Mr. Theerman is an accomplished leader and committed environmental steward. He has dedicated his career to the improvement of the environment and public health in Missouri, and throughout the Nation. Without a doubt, he is ideally suited for this national leadership position with NACWA.

Mr. Theerman has served Missouri through his work at MSD for over 25 years. In October of 2003 he was named MSD's executive director, willingly and ably accepting accountability for all aspects of the utility's operations.

As MSD's executive director, Mr. Theerman leads one of the Nation's largest wastewater and stormwater management utilities, providing services to approximately 1.4 million people in the city of St. Louis and St. Louis County. Under his leadership, the MSD currently operates seven wastewater treatment facilities, treating an average of 330 million gallons of water per day and maintaining 9,649 miles of sewers.

Since joining others in founding NACWA 40 years ago, the Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District has benefitted from its active engagement with the organization. A member of NACWA's board of directors since 2004, Mr. Theerman has served as the organization's secretary, treasurer, and vice president. It is fitting that his election as president coincides with the 40th anniversary of NACWA's advocacy on behalf of the Nation's clean water agencies--and the environment we all value so much.

Mr. Theerman is a great example of accountable and responsible leadership in my State. Under his able leadership, NACWA looks forward to proactively and effectively addressing the complex 21st century water quality challenges we face as a Nation.

On behalf of myself and the people of Missouri, it is my sincere pleasure to congratulate Jeff Theerman on his election as president of NACWA. I am certain his actions will ensure continued water quality progress for St. Louis, MO, and the Nation.

Mr. President, I wish to announce that the Impeachment Trial Committee on the Articles Against Judge G. Thomas Porteous, Jr., will meet on Tuesday, July 13, 2010, at 2:30 p.m. or such other time as may be convenient, to conduct an executive business meeting.

For further information regarding this meeting, please contact Erin Johnson at 202-228-4133.

Mr. President, a few months ago we completed debate on one of the most significant reforms of American health care in decades. As a result of that work we will see over 30 million Americans who haven't had access to health insurance gain that access. The law that we passed helps all Americans, but especially the most vulnerable, gain access to quality, affordable health insurance. Today I rise to recognize an organization that for 10 years has been similarly working to provide care for our Nation's most vulnerable citizens.

The Association for Community Affiliated Plans, ACAP, is a national trade organization representing 51 community-based health plans in 25 States, together covering over 7 million people. Its nonprofit Safety Net Health Plan members provide health coverage through public insurance programs, primarily Medicaid, Medicare, and the Children's Health Insurance Program, CHIP, delivering desperately needed health services to low-income and vulnerable Americans who would otherwise be uninsured. Coordinating with State and local governments, community groups and health care providers, ACAP plans, by delivering the services made possible by Medicaid, Medicare and CHIP, serve as a safety net for those who fall through the gaps in a system that largely relies on employer-provided or privately purchased coverage.

In 2000, 17 safety net plans, often started by community health centers who were serving uninsured and Medicaid patients, came together to form ACAP. In the ensuing decade ACAP plans have grown from covering 1 million people in 2000 to 7 million today. These plans, like Children's Mercy Family Health Partners in my home State of Missouri, remain deeply rooted in their communities, serving those who need help the most. Over 55,000 of my constituents receive their insurance from Children's Mercy Family Health Partners as they provide a critical safety net that makes a difference in Missouri.

I commend the Association for Community Affiliated Plans and its members for their service to our Nation's underserved populations, as well as congratulate them on their 10th anniversary of supporting the Nation's nonprofit Safety Net Health Plans.

Mr. President, I rise today to recognize and pay tribute to our Korean war veterans and to express my strong support for and admiration of the Harry S. Truman Library Institute, the nonprofit partner of the Truman Library, that is leading our Nation's commemoration of the 60th anniversary of the start of the Korean war. On this important anniversary, we must not forget the lessons from this oft-forgotten war, nor the men and women who demonstrated legendary courage and valor in the face of unspeakable brutality.

Sixty years ago in Independence, MO, on June 25, 1950, President Harry S. Truman received word that the free people of South Korea had been invaded by some 135,000 communist troops from the North. America's 33rd President responded swiftly and decisively, for, in his words, ``In my generation, this was not the first occasion when the strong had attacked the weak.'' Today, the fateful crossing of the 38th parallel by communist forces stands as the opening paragraph of one of the most brutal chapters in our American history, the Korean war.

It is impossible to understand our world today--and to have an informed view on the conflict that continues to seethe on the Korean peninsula--without understanding the Korean war. And yet, the first conflict in the Cold War is sometimes called the ``Unknown War,'' or worse, the ``Forgotten War'' because it is not widely taught, studied or understood. That is why, on this important occasion, we must rise to honor the courage and sacrifice of our Korean war veterans--so we can never forget.

We cannot and will not forget that nearly 1.8 million Americans served in Korea, along with the forces of the Republic of Korea and 20 other members of the United Nations, to defend freedom and democracy. We will not forget that nearly 33,739 Americans died in battle during the war. We will not forget that nearly 92,100 troops were wounded in action during the conflict. We will not forget that more than 8,100 men and women never came home, and are still listed as missing in action or prisoners of war.

We have, as we recognize the 60th anniversary of the start of the Korean war, an important opportunity to examine the roots and legacy of the Korean war and to honor each individual who, in the defense of freedom, bravely faced aggression of devastating tyranny. I urge all Americans to observe the 60th anniversary of the Korean war and to take this opportunity to learn about the conflict and, most importantly, the men and women who participated in it. Their legacy is one of great honor. I want to recognize the Korean War Veterans Appreciation Ceremony--held on June 21, 2010, in the hometown of one of Nation's great leaders, President Harry S Truman, as a sterling symbol of our Nation's commitment to always remember, understand, and honor our brave Korean war heroes and the history of the Korean war.

I want to especially recognize the men and women at the Harry S Truman Library Institute who tirelessly labored to make the Appreciation Ceremony possible and a tremendous success. It is with great regret I will not be able to join many Missourians, many veterans, my esteemed colleague, Congressman Ike Skelton, who is a tremendous student of military history, and keynote speaker GEN David Petraeus, a modern-day American war hero, on June 21 in Independence to recognize this anniversary and celebrate Korean war veterans. However, I know this will be a momentous event on a momentous occasion. I stand with all of those at the event in remembering the Korean war, in honoring Korean war veterans, in paying

respect to the remaining POWs and MIAs and the fallen servicemembers, and in celebrating America's freedom, which has for so long been guaranteed by our fighting men and women.

Mr. President, today, we are going to be voting on a significant yet controversial resolution introduced by Senator Murkowski. This resolution, S.J. Res. 26, squarely confronts the issue of how the United States will address the issue of climate change and the regulation of greenhouse gases. The resolution speaks directly to whether or not the Environmental Protection Agency should be allowed to regulate sources of greenhouse gases. This is an important issue for the U.S. Senate to address.

In short, the Murkowski resolution disapproves of EPA's recent endangerment finding that greenhouse gases are a threat to public health. This rule is a result of a 2007 Supreme Court ruling directing EPA to make a determination as to whether or not greenhouse gases are a public endangerment. After 2 years of consideration of the scientific evidence, the EPA found that six greenhouse gases are a threat to public health. Senator Murkowski's resolution would nullify this decision.

While I am sympathetic to the concerns raised by Senator Murkowski, the impact of her resolution would be, among other things, to negate the significant progress the EPA has made in increasing fuel economy standards for vehicles. For that reason I am unable to support it.

Instead, I am working with my colleague, Senator Rockefeller, to pass his bill, S. 3072, of which I am a cosponsor, to preserve the EPA's ability to regulate emissions from vehicles but allow the Congress an additional 2 years to address the regulation of all other sources of greenhouse gases.

Like, Senator Murkowski, I believe that the best way to address climate change is to allow Congress time to pass comprehensive legislation, not rely on regulations handed down by the EPA. A legislative approach would allow us to mitigate what likely would result from EPA regulation of stationary sources: unfair cost increases that will be borne by millions of Americans who have no choice but to rely on energy produced from coal. This is my biggest concern, as eighty-five percent of the energy produced in Missouri comes from coal.

I have long stated that I cannot support an approach to greenhouse gases regulation that will unfairly impact Missourians or unduly harm Missouri's small businesses just because they happen to be in a state that is largely reliant on coal energy. Unfortunately, while the resolution offered by Senator Murkowski is an attempt to give Congress greater time to address these types of concerns in any climate regulation, it also negates a historic agreement between the EPA and the auto industry. This goes too far.

Last year, in an unprecedented announcement, the auto industry agreed to allow the federal government to set new standards for vehicle emissions and worked in concert with the government to set these new standards. This was a model of effective, reasonable negotiated rulemaking and should be embraced, not negated. These new standards will reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil by a projected 1.8 billion barrels, while providing real benefits for consumers. Compared with today's vehicles, a family purchasing a vehicle under the new standards will save, on average, more than $3,000 on fuel costs over the life of that vehicle. If the Congress passes Senator Murkowski's resolution, it will effectively eliminate these new standards. I believe it would be a mistake to jeopardize the progress we have made with the auto industry, lose the consumer benefits of increased fuel economy and lose the benefit to our national security of reducing our dependence on foreign oil.

This is why I am working with Senator Rockefeller to pass his alternative approach to delay EPA regulation of all other sources of greenhouse gases for 2 years. I believe this is a better option that will not unfairly penalize Missourians. I look forward to working with Senator Rockefeller, as well as Leaders Reid and McConnell to secure a vote on this very important legislation.

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

Madam President, today, once again, the Senate is going to consider the Sessions-McCaskill discretionary spending cap. I wish to take a couple of minutes and try to, once again, talk some common sense about Congress and our spending habits and about this very modest baby step we must take if we are ever going to do the right thing when it comes to spending in the U.S. Government.

What is this amendment about? Well, at its heart, this amendment is about trying to regain the trust of the American people. We have had to do big, bold things because of an economic crisis. No question this President inherited a mess, and that we had to do some big, bold things to try to get out of the ditch.

But in the process, we have also, I hope, begun to realize that there is a two-step here. One is, big, bold things we had to do to get the economy back on track, and the other is beginning to recognize, maybe for the first time in a long time, that the path we are on is unsustainable.

Chairman Bernanke said it yesterday. It is unsustainable, the path we are on, in terms of spending in Washington, DC. What this amendment does is something that is very responsible and, frankly, modest. It is not a cut in spending. In this economy, I understand many economists would argue it is not the time to cut spending, but is it not time we capped growth?

Think about it for a minute. Everywhere in America, whether it is at a family's kitchen table or whether it is at a school board meeting or whether it is at a city council meeting or a county legislative body meeting or a State legislative budget hearing, everywhere in America they are having to trim their sails, cut their budgets, try to find a meaningful way to do more with less.

And what are we doing here? We cannot agree to cap growth? Are you kidding me? We cannot even say to the American people, we are not going to grow by as much over the next 3 years?

This does not even try to cut spending, it tries to cap growth. There are actually people in this body who think we cannot take this small modest step to say we are not going to grow as quickly or by as much over the next several years?

How on Earth can we do hard stuff? How on Earth can we live up to our responsibility as Members of the Senate, when it comes to fiscal policy? How can we ever in the future do what we are going to have to do to rein in this government if we cannot even cap spending at a time when everybody in America is cutting? Reining in growth should not be a hard vote. It should not be a hard vote.

There are people, and I understand this, I understand there are a lot of people in this body who have made it their work to appropriate, and that has been the committee everybody wants to get on. It has been the powerful committee. Everybody knows around here, if you spend the money, you have power. I understand this is like the Earth shifting a little bit, that all of a sudden people who appropriate around here are going to have to take a different view of what their job is.

It is inevitable that that happens. Whether it happens this year, next year, or the next decade, anybody knows we cannot sustain the course we are on. But what is frustrating to me is that some of the people who are so anxious to defeat this amendment are using such old- fashioned fear tactics it is almost insulting. There are talking points that are being circulated against this amendment that I think you ought to blush if you are responsible for. The notion is that we are going to make these cuts in our most important programs. There is a talking point going around that this would make us have to cut Border Patrol. Come on. That we are going to have to cut the priorities of this government right now. No, we are not. We may have to cut back on some of the earmarking? Yes, probably. And cut that money from the budget.

Would we have to maybe cut out some low-performing government programs? Yes, we would. In fact, the President announced that he wants everyone in the executive branch to identify 5 percent of their low- performing programs. Then the next step would be that he would cut half of that, 2\1/2\ percent. He is asking them to find cuts in government.

All this amendment is doing is saying, we are going to curb growth. So this amendment is not going as far as the President has asked his executive branch to do. The other thing about this is I keep getting pushed at, well, these are priorities, our domestic discretionary spending--and this is from a lot of my colleagues on this side of the aisle. But this amendment is not just about domestic discretionary spending. It is about defense discretionary spending. It exempts out $50 billion a year for our overseas contingency operations. It clearly exempts out emergencies, and there have always been more than 67 votes when we have appropriated for emergencies in this country. It is not as though 67 votes are hard to get after a Katrina, after some kind of emergency that demands we respond to it.

The notion that we have now for the first time gotten the kind of support this amendment has received from Republican Senators to freeze the growth on defense spending is huge. It is huge. Anybody who has spent any time looking around at contracting in the Department of Defense, which I have spent a lot of time on, or the way money is spent at the Pentagon, knows there are savings there. To curb the growth in spending, in discretionary spending in the Defense Department is a wonderful step forward. So it is not just domestic that is impacted by this amendment, it is both domestic spending and defense spending, and it is time. It is time.

I hope everyone who has voted against this amendment in the past does a gut check this time and thinks of themselves in front of a bunch of people they work for in their home State, explaining to them why they could not vote to curb growth in the Federal Government's budget. I am telling you what, that is one explanation I would not want to have to give

right now at home. I would not want to tell the people in Missouri that it was impossible for us to even put a lid on the growth of the Federal Government, right now at this time in this Nation's history, with all of the economic issues that are swirling around.

I think it would have a positive impact on our economy, to send this signal. I think it would have a positive effect on our markets. I think it would have a positive global effect as we look at what is going on in Europe, that the Federal Government is finally acknowledging we have got to begin to curb the growth of our expenditures.

These votes have been close. We got 56 the first time. We got 59, and then everybody got nervous because we got 59 votes. Then the next time we got 57. Three more votes. Three more votes, and we will send the right signal to the American people that we get it. I hope today is the day we send the signal to the American people that we know there are hard decisions ahead and we are beginning to take some modest steps to show we have the guts and the fortitude to make those decisions.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise to spend a few moments to talk about this amendment. We have voted on this amendment before, although we have made a couple of changes: exempting moneys that are being spent on contingency operations for our military overseas and lowering the vote threshold for emergencies where we need to go beyond the spending cap.

But this is the bottom line: On kitchen tables all across this country families are cutting their budgets. In county courthouses all over this country people are cutting budgets. In State legislatures all over this country people are cutting budgets. In city council chambers all over this country people are cutting budgets.

Then we get to Washington, and what we are trying to do here is not cut a budget. That is the amazing part about this. This does not cut a penny. All it does is curb the growth. Are we going to say to this country that we are unable to cap the growth of this government over the next 3 years?

This is a baby step. This is not a major assault on the spending of the Federal Government. This is a baby step.

I urge the adoption of the amendment.

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

Mr. President, I rise to spend a couple minutes talking about Judge Audrey G. Fleissig, one of the nominees we will hopefully be voting on within the hour. This is a woman I have known for many years who has an outstanding career in the legal community in Missouri. She was an assistant U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Missouri and went on to be the first woman to hold the position of U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Missouri. Currently, she serves as U.S. magistrate judge in the Eastern District.

I could go on about her background as a litigation attorney for 11 years in one of the most respected law firms in Kansas City. I could spend some time talking about how much she loves to teach and how she has been a trial advocacy teacher for a good deal of the last 20 years. She has taught pretrial practice, trial advocacy, and now evidence at the Washington University School of Law, one of the finest universities in the country. She was also a student intern to the Honorable Edward Filippine, who was a U.S. district judge in the Eastern District of Missouri 30 years ago. She has a J.D. degree, a Dean's Honor Scholar and an Order of the Coif from Washington University Law School and was magna cum laude from Carleton College for her undergrad years.

She has been one of the stars of the legal community in Missouri, but she has also been a mom. She has managed her career while she raised children, and her children are now in their twenties. I have such deep respect for someone who has done well with the demands of a legal career and a judicial career and also done very well on the family front.

She is somebody who believes very much that putting on a robe does not mean one exits the community. We have a lot of judges who take that particular attitude, especially on the Federal bench, that once they become a Federal judge, then they no longer participate in community activities that are so important to the health and vibrancy of our country, our States, and certainly of our metropolitan areas.

When she worked with her children as they were growing up, she was very active in their schools and tried to instill in them a love of reading. Now that her children are grown, she has for the last 10 years worked with Ready Readers, a charitable organization that works with low-income preschool children, ages 3 to 5, to inspire them to want to read. Think about that. She is a U.S. magistrate with a full-time job, with a prestigious black robe. With that kind of career, anyone could, frankly, take a deep breath and say: I am here. Instead, she has spent the last 10 years continuing to volunteer with a charitable organization that tries to inspire young children to love to read.

I have to tell the truth--this is the kind of person we need on the Federal bench. Will she be respectful to litigants? Of course. Will she understand the rules of evidence? She teaches them at one of the best law schools in the country. Does she understand the pressures of litigation? Yes. She has been one. But most importantly, does she understand there are other needs in the community outside of what goes on in the courtroom, and does that inform her as a judge? She will be fair. She will work extremely hard. She is known as one of the hardest workers in the Federal courthouse in St. Louis.

It was an honor to recommend her to the President. I am so pleased that she reaches this moment in her career where she can become a U.S. Federal district judge and provide the kind of atmosphere for justice that we hold so dear in this Nation. I know she will be impartial. I know she will never let politics dictate a decision. I know the law will be her master and that she will listen carefully to the evidence and never think she knows best--let the litigants try their cases and let the law reign supreme.

I am proud of her accomplishments. I am proud to support her. I have a feeling she will be confirmed by a very wide margin. Don't ask me why she

had to sit around on the calendar for 60 days. I won't go into one of my rants about secret holds. I will save that for another day. Today, I will say it is time that we take this vote, and I make a prediction it won't even be close because there is absolutely no reason this woman should not have been on the bench months ago. I look forward to her confirmation today.

I yield the floor, suggest the absence of a quorum, and ask unanimous consent that the time be charged equally to both sides.