Floor Statements

Madam President, as the chairwoman of the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, I know we will sorely miss the expertise and dedication of Joe Richardson as we work this year to write the next farm bill. Since 1971, Joe has shared his expertise on a wide range of issues with Members of the House and Senate. He has an incredible understanding of social policy programs, and knows their history inside and out. He seems to know everything about everything. His expertise has been absolutely invaluable to my staff over the years.

In his four decades of service, Joe has played a key role in writing seven farm bills in 1977, 1981, 1985, 1990, 1996, 2002, and 2008. His understanding of Federal nutrition programs, which represent a significant majority of the farm bill, has helped the committee address the issues of hunger in America and has helped keep millions of Americans out of poverty.

While Joe is leaving us to spend time closer to his family in California, his work will continue to guide and inform us as we begin work on the 2012 farm bill. He is a wonderful example of a great public servant, and I wish him well in his retirement.

It is my great pleasure and honor to be here with my friends and colleagues who have all fought so long and hard to make sure that women's voices and experiences are represented in the decisions we make here in the Senate and in Washington on behalf of all of the families we represent.

I have to say that people in Michigan, my family, friends, everybody across Michigan, are shaking their heads right now trying to figure out what the heck is going on. All of this is a diversion from what we want to be talking about and doing something about; that is, jobs, putting people back to work, making sure people have money in their pockets to be able to

pay their bills, and that they can tackle their house that very well may be under water right now, and how they are going to pay for gas with prices going through the roof, and how they are going to be able to take care of their kids and make sure they can have the opportunities to go to college that they want for them. All of the things we all want for our families, that is what families want us to be talking about right now.

I also have to say the people in my State are finding that the dollars they earn right now are hard to come by. These dollars are precious, and we need to be holding every program accountable, we need to get results for every dollar is spent, and make decisions that if something does not work, we need to stop doing it. We need to focus on things that do.

We know the whole deficit discussion is very critical for us, and that we need to be smart about the way we do things. That is not what this debate is about at the moment, certainly not only women's health care. But we understand that we need to be serious about this. Certainly in my role as chairing the Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee, we take that very seriously, and we will be doing that in the context of our responsibilities moving forward.

But I also know, and the people of Michigan understand more than I think anybody else across the country, that we will never get out of debt with more than 15 million people out of work, which is why we want to focus on jobs. They also know that women of all ages, seniors, middle-class families, did not cause the deficit hole we are in, and they should not be responsible for the sacrifice and burdens on their backs only in order to move us out of deficit.

We certainly are not going to allow a thinly veiled threat to women in general to become part of a debate about how we balance the budget and eliminate the deficit, which is a very real issue. The fact is, in order to get the budget completed for this year, women--women's health care--was held hostage. We were able to separate that, because the women came together in the Senate and said, there is no way we are going to allow this whole debate to become some political debate about whether women should get breast cancer screenings or cervical cancer screenings or blood pressure checks. So we separated that now from the agreement for the rest of the year. I am proud to have stood with women from all over this country to say no, we are not going to let you play politics with the women of this country and our health care. But now we have in front of us two different votes. This was the price we had to pay. And we are willing to stand here and make the case for why people need to vote no. But it is also deeply concerning that we have to be in a situation to debate whether women should get breast cancer screenings and cervical cancer screenings, and whether we should have access to health care as a part of the price to be able to come together on a budget agreement. That is exactly where we are.

The majority of the funds from what is called title IX for preventive care goes to health departments. By the way, I helped be able to support, when I was a county commissioner years ago, the Ingham County Health Department, setting up their preventive care center for women, health care screenings for women.

All across Michigan, 70 percent of the funds under something called title X go to health departments. There is a small amount that goes to Planned Parenthood. That is being very politicized now, because of the other side's wish to politicize women's health care. But in 2009, those centers provided 55,000 cancer screenings. We had almost 4,000 women-- 3,800 women--who got back an abnormal result on a cancer screening. Because they had a chance to get that screening, they then had the opportunity to do something about it, and lives were saved. Moms are alive today to be able to care for their children, and watch them grow up because they found out they had breast cancer early. Grandmas are alive and well today to be able to play with their grandkids and their great-grandkids because they found out early they had breast cancer or cervical cancer or some other health care challenge. I think we ought to celebrate that as the best of who we are and our values in this country.

The other piece we have in front of us will be to defund health care in general. We know, first of all, that women are health care consumers. Usually in families they are making the decisions about health insurance, if you are able to have health insurance, or how to purchase it or what will be covered and certainly caring about our families. We usually are the last ones to take care of ourselves. I certainly can speak to that myself as maybe other colleagues can, that we tend to make the decisions first for our children, our families, and not take care of ourselves as we should.

But we made a very strong statement, and I think a valued statement, in health care reform, to say that we want to make sure women have access to health care and that they can afford to get it, and that they are not penalized, we are not penalized as women, and that we are not going to have to pay more.

Right now, prior to health care reform, any woman purchasing health insurance on her own was paying more, sometimes up to 50 percent more, or more, for the same health insurance as a man, or even less health insurance, because she was a woman, because she may be of childbearing years, because of whatever the reason.

Women have traditionally paid more for the same insurance. That is no longer the case. Now, for the same coverage, the same medical circumstances, women cannot be discriminated against. That is a good thing. I think that is something we should be proud of that we have been able to do, to make sure insurance companies cannot charge women more just because they are women.

We have also made clear that preventive care is an essential part of basic health care. I will always remember the debate I had as a member of the Finance Committee with a colleague on the other side of the aisle over whether maternity care is a basic part of health insurance and health care.

Of course, I think it is hard for people in Michigan to understand why we would even have to have that debate, because prenatal care, maternity care, certainly is a basic, not just for the women involved but for the baby, for the family. But we stood together and we said, we are going to make sure that maternity care is part of the definition of basic health care.

So there were a number of things that we did together, the women of this Senate, to make sure that over half the population, the women of this country, have access to quality, affordable health care for themselves so they can continue to care for their families and be a very important part of who we are in contributing to America.

We are here because tomorrow the question will be, should women's preventive health care services be allowed to continue as part of our framework in terms of health care funding, both broadly in health care reform, and narrowly under title X and family planning for the country?

We will say no to efforts to defund women's health care.

I hope going forward, as we tackle huge issues for the country around bringing down the debt and balancing the budget and growing the economy and creating jobs and looking to the future, that we will not see, once again, something as important as women's health care put on the chopping block as part of the debate. That is the message all of us have and the message we will be sending tomorrow, that women across the country need to know they are valued, that we want them to be healthy, that we want them to be able to afford health insurance, that we want them to get cancer screenings, that we value their lives. We don't believe folks should continue to play politics with their health care.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, first, I ask unanimous consent that at 4 p.m. the majority leader be recognized.

Mr. President, I agree with my colleague and friend from Texas about the fact that people are scratching their heads. People in Michigan are wondering what in the world is going on right now. We are still trying to recover from a recession and we have a long way to go for most Americans--even though the unemployment rate has come down substantially in Michigan. At one point, we were at 15.7 percent, and that is just what you count, in terms of unemployment. Now it is 10.7 percent and going down. Still, it is way too high. Families are under water, their houses are under water, and they are trying to recover in terms of their incomes and hold it together and look for new work or job training. And what about the kids in college and all that comes with that? Some in the middle class may be struggling to stay in the middle class, or just get into the middle class.

Small businesses are wondering what the heck is going on around here when they are trying to, hopefully--folks who held on through the recession and trying to come back, trying to invest, keep the doors open, hire more people--they are wondering what in the world is going on here.

We are in a situation where these negotiations have now just become so political and the discussion so unrelated to what the budget is about and, most importantly, to what people care about. The political piece of this now, about pulling in issues around women's health care, is distracting us from getting a 6-month budget done, which is distracting us from what we ought to be talking about, which is jobs and the economy and putting people back to work and supporting small businesses to get the capital they need to grow. We are in a situation now where the whole process has been politicized to the point where it is extremely disappointing to me and extremely concerning.

What the bottom line ends up being is that middle-class families, veterans concerned about their disability claims, or seniors concerned about their Social Security or Medicare claims, or small businesses that are putting together loan applications or somebody trying to close on their house with FHA is being held hostage to politics that have nothing to do with the budget.

This latest distraction over breast cancer screenings and cervical cancer screenings for women and girls is just another in a long list of distractions from the budget crisis and, most importantly, from the focus that we need to have on creating jobs.

We have all agreed that Washington, just like every family, has to change the way it does business, has to focus on cutting the items that are not important, to focus on what is important. Every dollar that is being paid, every taxpayer giving a dollar has found it is a lot harder to earn that dollar than to give that dollar. We better be taking care of that dollar, stretching it as far as possible and focusing it on the things that are most important because those dollars are hard to come by these days. That is the reality.

We have come together. It has been a long time in coming, but we have come together. We have agreed on significant spending cuts, changes, while keeping a focus on education, innovation, and growth of the future. Now, at the eleventh hour, all of a sudden what was agreed to in terms of significant spending cuts to allow us to bring the budget together and focus on deficit reduction, somehow that is gone and we are now talking about whether women's health care will be funded in this country, whether women are going to be able to receive blood pressure checks, cancer screenings, and other preventive care efforts.

Is that really what this is about? Are we really going to hold middle-class families, small businesses, and veterans hostage over blood pressure checks for women and cancer screenings for women? Really? Is that what this is about? Stunning. This is absolutely stunning.

In the great State of Michigan, women's health clinics that at this point are proposed for elimination provided 55,000 cancer screenings last year, and there were 3,800 abnormal results. Women who found out those results early were able to detect their cancers early and get the treatment they needed to save their lives. It could be your mom, your grandmother, your daughter, your friend, your neighbor, somebody at church.

Is this really about telling women in communities across Michigan--in Marquette, Muskegon, Burton, Owosso, Three Rivers--that they cannot get their breast cancer screenings; telling women in Flint, Grand Rapids, Ypsilanti, and Sturgis that they cannot get their cervical cancer screenings; telling women in Warren, Brighton, Big Rapids, and Battle Creek that they cannot get their blood pressure checked or their cholesterol tested? Are Republicans really planning to shut down the government and hold middle-class families and veterans hostage in order to stop breast cancer screenings and cholesterol checks? Unbelievable. I think it is shameful.

It is time to come together and get this budget done. As I understand it, there was an agreement last night on the level of spending cuts. We need to get this done and move on to the real focus and debate we need to be having about how we grow the economy and compete in a global economy.

There could be a lesson learned from what people in my State have gone through and done in the last couple of years. We did not give up on the American automobile industry. With the support and help of our President and Members here, despite some incredibly tough times and difficulties in terms of cutting back that had to take place, we did not give up. Workers sacrificed cutting starting pay in half; retirees, the companies, the shareholders, communities, everybody got together and said: We know there is a big problem, and we are going to get this fixed, and we are going to sacrifice together.

Then we did an important thing with the support of people here, and I am very grateful for it. We said: We are going to invest like crazy in innovation. Because we did that, that combination of resetting the budget and the finances for the auto industry and then investing in innovation with the great help of our wonderful engineers and skilled labor force and a whole lot of smart people who came together with battery investments and retooling loans and are bringing jobs back from Mexico now and investments in new advanced manufacturing, we are not only growing and for the first time since 1999 the American companies are making a profit, but we are winning the awards. We are winning all the awards for top quality, the great vehicles of the future.

I suggest that would be a good model for us: Come together on what we need to do, push the reset button, come together and get our arms around spending, balance the budget, tackle the deficit, and then invest like crazy in the future, in innovation and education and rebuilding America.

Where we are today is extremely concerning to me because instead of talking about how we compete in a global economy, instead of talking about the United States vs. China, which is what we should be talking about, or Germany, India, or Korea, we are at a place where we are talking about whether the Federal budget and middle-class families will be held hostage in order to stop cancer screenings and research for women in this country.

I urge we come together.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the period for morning business for debate only be extended until 10:30 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each, with the majority leader to be recognized at 10:30 p.m.

Mr. President, I commend the Senator from Texas on her bill of which I am very proud to be a cosponsor, to make sure our men and women in harm's way continue to receive their compensation and support for their families if, in fact, there is a government shutdown. I am certainly going to continue to do everything I can to keep that from happening. I am unwilling to give up, and I know others are as well.

I commend the Senator, but I think this is very important. We need to send that message. We need to get this done and get the bill done.

Mr. President, I could not agree more that we need to do this. I think it is important that the Senate take the lead as we did on another piece of legislation that our friend from California brought forward, and which was passed unanimously by the Senate, to set down a very important principle; that is, if we, those making decisions, cannot come together, then it should be Members of Congress not getting a paycheck. Our troops should be getting paid, but Members of Congress should see their paychecks stopped.

Unfortunately, under law right now Members of Congress would be the only ones whose paychecks don't stop. That is something we have passed in the Senate, to change that. Frankly, I found that to be pretty embarrassing. Then it became outrageous when we found out that the troops' paychecks might stop.

So it is important we send two messages: people who are responsible for making this decision take responsibility and their paychecks stop if it doesn't get done, but also we have to make sure the men and women in harm's way continue to have our support verbally and that we show it in our priorities as well.

I hope we are not going to see this happen. There is no reason for this to happen. We are talking about a shutdown that would not only affect many people around this country--families, small businesses--it would affect also the markets, our international standing. This is a very serious issue. People of good will can solve this.

We all know we have to be smart. We have to change the way Washington operates and cut the things that are not working and invest in the things that do. There is no question about that. We have to do that. In fact, we have agreed to major changes in that direction, but it is a challenge.

I just wanted to take a second because I think the toughest job in town today is the Speaker's. It is very clear that he has a very difficult job when people are giving a standing ovation for him when he is talking about preparing for a shutdown. We do not need this. That is not what we need.

What we need is to continue to have people of good will coming together, as we have just been talking about, in support of our troops and saying: We can complete this year's budget. We are halfway through the year. Let's just get it done.

What happens if it does not get done? It is not about us. It is not about us. We will be all right. It is not about us. It is about the people who are affected. We know, but let's just go through what happened back in 1995.

In 1995, there were 400,000 veterans who saw their disability benefits and pensions claims delayed--our veterans.

Again, we are talking about our troops. But in the last shutdown, 400,000 veterans had delays in their disability benefits and pensions. That ought to be a motivator for all of us to get this done. It would be outrageous if that were to happen again. There was approximately $3 billion in U.S. exports that were delayed because they could not get the export licenses. That is jobs for us.

As we look at a time when we want to export our products, not our jobs, around the world, delaying that affects our jobs. We know hundreds of thousands of Medicare and Social Security requests were delayed the last time this happened.

For the first time in history, six States ran out of Federal unemployment insurance at the time, and small business loans, we know, could be stopped or delayed, as well as tax refunds for people who have been waiting for hard-earned dollars, stretching every penny to make ends meet.

So it makes no sense. It makes no sense to the economy, it makes no sense for families, for seniors, for veterans. We need to come together and get this done. We also need to make sure that whatever is done and what we have been fighting for, the majority has been fighting for, is that we not

one more time ask middle-class families and small businesses to be the ones who have to sacrifice.

In my State, our families, middle-class families, people trying desperately to stay in the middle class or to get in the middle class have been the ones hurt over and over--their jobs, losing their jobs or losing their incomes, with their houses underwater, trying to make ends meet, not sure right now if they are going to be able to have the kids continue to go to college. With gas prices going up like crazy, are they going to be able to even just get back and forth to work? Those are not the folks who should be, one more time, sacrificing, carrying the load. The same with people sending their children, grandchildren to war. Our middle-class families should not be the ones continuing to be the only ones sacrificing in order to deal with what is a national debt and the need to balance the budget and change the way we fund Washington, reduce spending, change the priorities.

What I am concerned about is that middle-class families and small businesses not continue to be the ones who get the brunt over and over. I think about this struggle the last couple of years in Michigan and what we have had to go through with our automobile industry and how proud I am of where we are now, but also the sacrifice that it took to get there.

We are making the best automobiles. We are winning all the awards. Our people are smart and skilled. We have the best engineers and the best skilled workforce, but a couple of years ago we had a horrible crisis. It took sacrifice from everybody to turn that around and some smart thinking.

Workers had to sacrifice--beginning pay cut in half; retirees, the company, shareholders, communities--everybody had to sacrifice in order to turn this around. But we did something else. We then said: While you are cutting back, we are going to invest in the future. We are going to invest in innovation. We are going to invest in those things that are going to allow us to grow and create more jobs and be successful.

After 2 years of a tremendous amount of hard work and everybody sacrificing, with some smart decisions and investments, we are turning it around, making a profit for the first time--each of our companies-- since 1999. We are turning things around because people were willing to be in it together. That is what I am fighting for, because we know we have to change the way we do business and we have to cut the things that do not work and invest in the things that do. But everybody has to be in on this--everybody--not just some people who are being asked to give over and over, not just small businesses that did not cause what happened on Wall Street but cannot get the loans because of what happened with the crisis, holding on, trying to make it, trying to get the capital they need to keep the doors open or to expand. They did not cause this, and yet we seem to find the same people over and over having to make the sacrifices. That does not make sense. I do not think it is American.

So what we are seeing now as we close in on the final decisions, people coming together, is a question of whether we are going to have everybody be a part of the solution or one more time asking the middle class and small businesses. We can come together and get this done if people want to do that. There is no question about it, that people of good will can get it done. I think that it is in everybody's best interests to do that on every single level.

But there is no question as well that we have very different priorities that are being debated today in our country. We saw that this last week in very stark terms, which goes to the whole question of, again, how do we solve our problems and is everybody in? Is every American going to be part of turning the ship around? That goes to the budget proposal this week that has added, in my opinion, insult to injury, which relates to the proposal coming from the House Budget chair to change Medicare as we know it; to change Medicare from an insurance plan for our retirees and people with disabilities to something that would be a voucher for insurance companies.

It is stunning to me, actually, in looking at this proposal, and extremely concerning to me, the ramifications of what is being proposed. Then what adds insult to injury is that the proposal is being made to unravel Medicare, do away with Medicare as we know it, raise the costs, the premiums, and the medical costs for almost every senior in the country--according to the Congressional Budget Office.

At the same time this same budget document would give over $1.8 trillion in new tax cuts for special interests and the millionaires of the country--not the folks who have been working hard to try to make it, who have not gotten the big breaks, but one more round of big breaks for the people who have not felt this recession, the people who have gotten the special breaks, who somehow have not had to go through their house underwater, their income go down, worry about the kids, worry about the car, worry about the gas. The folks who earn over $1 million got the special tax breaks--those interests that are doing extremely well in this country.

That is not how I view shared sacrifice in order to be able to solve the country's problems and get us out of debt and grow the economy, cutting Medicare for seniors, dismantling it, at the same time giving one more round of tax breaks for millionaires and the major special interests of the country.

That is wrong in my judgment. It is the wrong set of priorities, and it is worth debating, and we will debate that. It is interesting; I remember when we were passing health care reform, and we were focused on the fact that we had to make sure Medicare was healthy for the future and make some tough decisions so that it would be strong and there for seniors.

We took a look at overpayments for for-profit insurance companies. There are major overpayments, and we decided to cut those back. It was actually causing the majority of beneficiaries, the majority of seniors, to see their premiums go up because of some overpayments to a few. We decided that we would cut back on those insurance company overpayments, and we would instead focus on quality in Medicare, making sure seniors could go to the doctor and get their cancer screenings, their wellness visits without out-of-pocket costs and bring down the cost of medicine; that we would focus on ways to streamline, focus on quality and streamlining the way that we cut costs.

According to the budget gurus, we were able to save, I believe, over 10 years, $500 billion. It did not cut any benefits for seniors, but the other side of the aisle said this was terrible. It was terrible because we were focused on cutting overpayments to insurance companies.

Now we see this proposal that would dismantle Medicare, and it would cut what is the average amount a senior spends on medical care in a year, which is about $15,000 a year. It would, instead, cut that amount down to $6,000 a year and give it in a voucher to an insurance company. That is OK. That is a different set of priorities than I have and I know that you have, Mr. President.

So these are debates we are going to have, and they are important debates for our country. How do we go forward? How do we solve the budget deficit? How do we grow the economy? How do we create jobs? How do we make sure what we are doing is fair for everybody and keeps what works while cutting what does not?

Medicare is a great American success story. Do we need to make sure it is there for the next generation? Absolutely. Do we need to look at ways to streamline and cut costs? We have done that, and we need to continue to do that. Absolutely. We need to do that. But it is a great American success story. It has allowed a whole generation of older Americans to live healthy lives, play with their grandkids.

Now that I have two beautiful grandchildren who, by the way, are the most beautiful grandchildren in the world, just for the record--but now as I have my 3-year-old and 1-year-old and I look at the fact that I want to be healthy for a long time so I can be there for them, and what a wonderful gift as Americans we have given to seniors, that gift of Medicaid and Social Security so that they can be healthy and live in dignified ways in their own homes and be able to live long lives for their grandchildren and their great-grandchildren, that is something we should be proud of.

So as we go through this time, we have two kinds of debates. We have to deal with what is happening immediately, complete this 6-month--not 6-year, 6-month CR; I am talking about a 6-month budget--in a commonsense way, make sure that troops get paid, make sure we do not have any veterans losing their opportunity for disability benefits or pension benefits, and small businesses are not being delayed from getting their loans. In my judgment, we need to put down a marker saying if we cannot come together, that we are the ones who do not get paid, not the troops. Then the next step is to debate the vision of this country and where we go, what is important and what is not.

Should some Americans be asked to sacrifice in order to solve our problems and be stronger and compete in a global economy or should everybody be asked to do their part? People want to do their part, and they are willing to do their part. But we need to make that clear, that we expect everybody to be a part of the solution.

What I find most concerning today is that when we are in a global economy and we ought to be talking about the United States competing against China, the United States competing with Germany or India or Korea, we are not doing that. We are standing here on the Senate floor on a Thursday night talking about whether people will come together to complete a 6-month budget and make sure our troops can get paid. That is not the debate we should be having. We have precious time available to us. The debate we should be having is about how as Americans we will compete in a global economy and win. That is what we need to be doing. That is the debate I am anxious to have.

I hope we are not going to give up. I will not give up on what we need to do right now, to come together, get this done, avoid a government shutdown, and get on to the real business of creating jobs and competing in a global economy.

I thank the Chair.

For years, I have consistently and repeatedly said that we need to have a balanced and comprehensive American energy policy.

We can't just impose regulations; we need smart incentives to create the technology for a clean energy economy.

The Stabenow-Brown amendment is based on the framework developed on a bipartisan basis for the past 2 years to develop a truly comprehensive policy that would allow us to phase in regulations.

This amendment would allow the EPA to do its work but would have the enforcement of that work be done in 2 years. We would build on the successful advanced energy manufacturing tax credit, known as 48C, which has created jobs at 183 businesses in 43 States.

We have put the right incentives into place because we know when we do that we help businesses create good-paying jobs, and we can reduce carbon pollution at the same time.

Our amendment also follows what the EPA has indicated is its intention toward agriculture by giving our producers the certainty they need.

This amendment is a commonsense approach to addressing the issue of clean energy.

Mr. President, yesterday, because I had the flu, I was not able to attend rollcall vote No. 47, to confirm Jimmie V. Reyna, of Maryland, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Federal Circuit.

Mr. Reyna's nomination was given the highest possible rating by the American Bar Association, and his

nomination was reported out of the Judiciary Committee unanimously. With over 30 years of private practice experience, I believe he will be an excellent addition to the Federal circuit. If I had been present, I would have voted aye on this nomination.

Madam President, I rise today about an issue of grave concern to me. All of us agree that America must be vigilant to stop violent extremists and terrorists who want to attack our Nation. We must do everything possible to fight terrorism and keep our country safe and free.

But as we have seen, the House of Representatives recently held a hearing on the ``Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community's Response,'' targeting only Muslim Americans. This approach is the wrong way to fight terrorism.

History has shown us that terrorists can come from anywhere, from any country or from any faith. We sadly know this from the tragedy in Oklahoma City. Focusing only on one group is not only un-American, it also ignores real threats from homegrown terrorists. Unfortunately, there are extremists in every religion. We know that the terrorists who attacked us on September 11, 2001, had perverted the message of Islam just as people have perverted other faiths at times throughout history to justify violent acts.

America is home to millions of hard-working, patriotic Muslim Americans who stand with us in the fight against terrorism. Muslim Americans died in the attack on September 11, 2001, and Muslim-American firefighters and police officers, who rushed into the towers to save people while putting their own lives at risk, were rightly called heroes.

I am proud to represent the great State of Michigan where we benefit every day from the hard work and dedication of Muslim leaders in business, medicine, education, science and many other professions. America was founded on the premise that all of its citizens are free to practice their religion openly, without government interference. We are a country founded on the principles of equality and liberty.

I urge my colleagues to continue to forcefully fight terrorism while respecting the values that our country was built upon.

Madam President, I rise today on behalf of myself and Senator Levin to pay tribute to Stephen J. Gools, a tireless champion of causes important to senior citizens and an agent of positive social change throughout his long and distinguished career. Indeed, there are many across Michigan that have benefited greatly from his many efforts over the years.

Since March 2000, Steve has served as director of the AARP Michigan State Office in Lansing, leading a team of 11 staff and serving more than 1.4 million AARP members in the Great Lakes State. Under his leadership, AARP Michigan has been enormously successful in protecting consumers, championing the rights of those over the age of 50 in communities across our State and helping AARP members live their lives to the fullest. His innovative volunteer training and development conferences have served as the gold standard for State management within AARP.

Prior to joining AARP, Steve served as communications director for the Michigan Democratic Party and held senior management positions with Michigan candidates. Steve worked for me as my communications director and played an instrumental role in electing me to Congress. In addition, he worked for the bipartisan Northeast-Midwest Congressional Coalition and the U.S. House Budget Committee Task Force on Community and Natural Resources.

Throughout his professional career, Steve has been a role model and shining example of leadership, intellectual curiosity, courage and determination. He always met his responsibilities with warmth, humor, and infectious enthusiasm.

To honor his work and leadership, AARP has announced the establishment of the Stephen J. Gools Award for Social Change. The annual award will recognize a Michigan individual or organization that demonstrates outstanding achievement in improving the lives of the 50+ population in our State.

It is most fitting that the award will bear the name of a man who has championed the causes of justice, compassion, and equality throughout his life. The award will encourage and recognize those who seek to follow in his footsteps.

We are grateful to him, his wife Kimberly, and his family for the work he has done for the people of Michigan and our country. He has had a lasting impact on the lives of many, and we honor his dedicated service.

Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of the Small Business Innovation Research Act. I congratulate and thank our distinguished chair, the Senator from Louisiana, for her leadership and advocacy for small business. I was pleased to join with her as we worked very hard last fall to pass the Small Business Jobs Act to create more capital for small businesses to be able to grow and thrive and start a new business, expand their business. The eight different tax cuts that were in that proposal as well are beginning to take effect and help our small businesses.

This particular bill in front of us is one more opportunity for us to partner with small businesses that are on the cutting edge of innovation and new ideas. We just passed a patent change to update our patent laws last week. I am proud the one satellite patent office in the country is in Detroit because we are the heart of innovation and new technology. We need to make sure small businesses are able to compete successfully and have the partnership knowledge they need to create these innovations. That is what this legislation does.

We know small businesses create two-thirds of all new jobs in America. Our top priority should be working with them to create an environment so small businesses can thrive and create jobs. I have to say, even in our wonderful automobile industry, which is roaring back, the majority of our jobs are in the small- and medium-size suppliers. It is very much about small business and medium-size businesses.

This particular program was first created by President Reagan in 1982, and it has helped literally tens of thousands of small businesses create jobs--new ideas, new innovations in our economy. We have led the way in a variety of military and communication and health care innovations. It has been extremely successful. In fact, small business tech firms have participated in SBIR producing 38 percent of our patents. Thirty-eight percent of America's patents have come from small businesses involved in the tech sector partnering with the Federal Government on new innovative opportunities--13 times more patents than coming from large businesses.

This is a big deal. This is very much about out-innovating in a global economy so we can compete globally and create jobs. Our small businesses in the tech sector employ about 40 percent of our scientists and engineers. They produced 25 percent of our Nation's crucial innovations over the last three decades. Unfortunately, this important partnership has been allowed to nearly lapse, and it had to be reauthorized 10 different times in the last 3 years--over and over again, for just a few months at a time. It is impossible for small businesses to plan for the future and be able to create those innovative investments and partnerships without a long-term view.

We have in front of us a bill that would reauthorize this important partnership for the next 8 years and give some opportunity to plan a little bit more long term, which I think is also critical.

We have many outstanding small businesses that are partnering right now with our universities and with our Federal agencies to create jobs and innovations. One of those outstanding entities is Cybernet Systems in Ann Arbor, a leader in research and development in the medical and defense fields. They are one of the largest small business innovative research contract winners. Because of their success they have now added up to 60 employees, and they have had 30 patents as a result of the SBIR Program.

Another important entity is Niowave in Lansing, MI, a high-tech business specializing in superconducting particle accelerators. They have been doubling their staff, and talking to them today, tripling their workforce because of new innovations they have created, they have now been nominated for the National SBIR business of the year.

Finally, an important part of our economy in Michigan--and nationally as we look to alternatives to bring down gas prices by having better competition for alternatives, alternative

energy through battery policy and electric vehicles--has been aided by the small business program in front of us today.

As an example, A123 Systems is a company that has received SBIR support. I was very pleased in September of last year to join with them when they opened the largest lithium ion battery manufacturing plant in North America, in Livonia, MI, and they are now creating 400 jobs.

I could go on and on. I will not in the interest of time. But focusing on small business, focusing on innovation, new technologies, will create jobs, allow us to out-compete in a global economy, and allow us to grow our economy. We in Michigan are very proud to be helping to lead the way.

Madam President, I will call up amendment No. 126. I understand it will be agreed to. I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendments be set aside and I call up amendment No. 126.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Madam President, I thank the distinguished chairman of the Judiciary Committee and our ranking member and those who are working very hard on a very important jobs bill today. On behalf of the people of Detroit, the people of Michigan and Senator Levin and myself, I thank very much the Members for their support of this amendment.

Madam President, just few months ago, we learned that Detroit, MI, will be home to the first-ever satellite office of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. This office is such great news for Michigan, where we have a proud tradition of innovation and invention.

Every day, we are looking to innovate and create ``the next big thing.'' The decision to locate this satellite office in Detroit shows just how much new invention is happening in Michigan. Thanks to some of the best research universities in the country, with an incredibly skilled workforce, we have become third in the nation in terms of clean energy patents. And we are getting new patents every single day.

In addition to clean energy, Michigan is home to groundbreaking research in fields such as agriculture, defense technology, medical technology and pharmaceuticals, advanced batteries, and, of course, automobiles.

This patent office will help us continue that tradition of innovation, while reducing the backlog of patent applications so those new products can get to the market faster.

It makes perfect sense to locate this new satellite office in Detroit.

Today I am offering, along with Senator Levin, amendment No. 126 to the America Invents Act to name this new facility after a great Michigan inventor, Elijah McCoy.

His life captures the spirit of Michigan ingenuity and entrepreneurship. His parents escaped slavery and fled across the border to Canada. After training as an apprentice in Scotland, he came to Ypsilanti, Michigan and set up a home-based invention shop.

Over the course of his brilliant life, Elijah McCoy secured more than 50 patents, but he is best known for his inventions that revolutionized how our heavy-duty machinery, including locomotives, function today. In July of 1872, he invented the automatic lubricator, a device that kept steam engines working properly so trains could run faster and longer without stopping for service.

His invention was incredibly effective and many tried to copy his idea,

but nobody could match McCoy's idea. Machinists started asking if the engines were using the ``real McCoy'' technology, and people still use that phrase today when they want the best quality product.

He did not have an easy journey. As an African American, he was kept out of many of the histories of the industrial revolution. Despite his brilliance, he was only ever allowed to work in menial jobs on the railroad tracks.

But despite the racial prejudice, Elijah McCoy never gave up and continued inventing. In 1976, the city of Detroit celebrated Elijah McCoy day and dedicated his home as a historic site. In Detroit, Elijah McCoy Drive runs between Trumball and the Lodge, near Henry Ford Hospital. He is buried in Warren, MI.

It is a great honor for Michigan that the first-ever Patent and Trademark Satellite Office will be named for this great leader and great inspiration for Detroit.

It is a great honor for us to have this first-ever patent and trademark satellite office in Detroit and to have it named after a great leader who has provided great inspiration.

I thank my colleagues very much for supporting this amendment.

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

Mr. President, I come to the floor with the hardest speech I have ever made, to pay tribute to Sean Patrick McGee, a member of my staff who passed away suddenly over the weekend at the very young age of 26.

There really are no words to describe the tragedy of losing somebody so young, especially someone like Sean, who was so smart and so filled with promise. His death is painful for all of us who knew him, but the way he lived his life is really a source of hope and inspiration for us.

Every single day, Sean worked hard to help others. Before coming to my office, he was a congressional liaison at the American Legion Auxiliary, where he was an advocate for veterans, servicemembers, and their families. He joined my team in April of 2009, and quickly impressed everyone with his

work ethic and his dedication. It didn't take long before he was promoted and took on additional responsibilities, working on some of the most difficult and complex issues that in which we have been involved.

He was really the heart of my staff working on finance issues. He spent a lot of time with retirees who lost their pensions when our auto companies went through bankruptcy, and he talked with them all the time to keep them updated on what we were doing to help. He took the lead on housing issues, working with families whose dreams were shattered when their homes were lost to foreclosure. He spent his final days working on an amendment that I cosponsored to help retired pilots who lost their pensions when the airline they worked for went bankrupt. He was so proud that we were able to include that amendment in the Federal Aviation Administration bill.

During our work last year on the Small Business Jobs Act, Sean's help was absolutely invaluable. He put together information for small business owners letting them know how to take advantage of the new law. He grew up in Farmington Hills, MI, and he was a very important part of our team working on issues related to the automobile industry, so critical for Michigan's future and for our economy.

He took great pride in his work for our great State. Through hard work and service, he achieved the rank of Eagle Scout--the highest rank in scouting. When he applied for a job in our office he wrote, ``At a young age, I was volunteering to do community . . . service in Metro Detroit to better the community and that work shaped my desire to serve Michigan.'' And he served Michigan well.

In college, he secured a coveted internship in the office of the Governor, working in constituent services. After graduation, he worked on a congressional campaign and for Senator Levin's campaign, always willing to lend a hand and make a difference.

What really stands out about Sean is how good he was with people. On Capitol Hill, patience is sometimes a rare commodity, but Sean had more than enough to go around. When everyone was running a mile a minute, Sean was a beacon of calm. When his coworkers were stressed to the point of breaking, Sean could diffuse it with a wonderful one-liner that brought everything back into context.

He was also an amazing friend and had a quiet, charming sense of humor. His favorite day of the week was when the cafeteria served chicken wings. He would get a group together and go down to lunch on ``wing day''--he looked forward to that day all week long.

Sean McGee was a young man who brightened so many of our days, and he will be terribly missed.

I offer my sincerest condolences to his parents Tom and Sharon, to his brother Tom, and to his girlfriend of many years, Katie Kulpa, whom Sean loved so much. Sean was a gift to all of us, and we will always be thankful for the precious time we had with him.

Next Tuesday would have been Sean's 27th birthday. It is hard to believe we won't be able to celebrate with him. But we can honor him by living our lives as he did.

William Penn, one of the founders of our great Nation, said, ``I expect to pass through life but once. If therefore, there be any kindness I can show, or any good thing I can do to any fellow being, let me do it now, and not defer or neglect it, as I shall not pass this way again.''

That is how Sean lived his life, and that was the gift that he gave to all of us who knew him.

Mr. President, the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry has adopted rules governing its procedures for the 112th Congress. Pursuant to Rules XXVI, paragraph 2, of the Standing Rules of the Senate, on behalf of myself and Senator Roberts, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the committee rules be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, on the floor tonight we have three very distinguished individuals whom President Obama has nominated to be Federal judges. I commend the committee for bringing them forward and Senator Leahy for his tremendous ongoing leadership on the Judiciary Committee. I know, as my colleagues from Texas have indicated, these are extremely competent individuals. All three of them were reported out of the Judiciary Committee with unanimous approval. In light of the current judicial emergencies, I urge my colleagues to confirm them this evening.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time used during the quorum call be charged equally to both sides.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.