Floor Statements

Mr. President, I wish to honor a remarkable man from Michigan, Wally Bronner, who passed away on April 1, 2008, at the age of 81. As the founder of BRONNER'S CHRISTmas WONDERLAND in Frankenmuth, he embodied the spirit of Christmas.

I had the privilege of visiting Wally at his store and it was an amazing experience. His enthusiasm and passion were contagious. He was truly an ambassador for the community of Frankenmuth and the State of Michigan, throughout our country and the world. It is hard to think of Christmas without thinking about Wally Bronner. BRONNER'S CHRISTmas WONDERLAND is truly one of a kind and provides visitors with the opportunity to experience different cultures and Christmas traditions from around the world.

Wally Bronner was born and raised in Frankenmuth, MI. He started a sign painting business while in high school and then decorated window displays for a local hardware store. Several merchants approached him about providing them with Christmas decorations and that was the beginning of what has now become BRONNER'S CHRISTmas WONDERLAND, which sits on 45 acres of land with a shipping department that is the size of 5\1/2\ football fields and a chapel.

Wally had a deep faith in God and was passionate about giving back to the community. His generosity has been felt in Frankenmuth and beyond. The Walter and Irene Bronner and Family Foundation, which he founded, has made many special things happen for the community, including a new auditorium at Frankenmuth High School and ``Operation Sparkle'' that provided the equipment needed to clean up Saginaw.

BRONNER'S CHRISTmas WONDERLAND will continue to delight people of all ages across the world, but Wally's presence will surely be missed. I want to express my deepest sympathies to his wife Irene Bronner and his children Carla Spletzer, Maria Sutorik and Wayne Bronner. Frankenmuth, the State of Michigan and Christmas lovers everywhere are forever indebted to Wally Bronner.

Madam President, there is an objection on behalf of the majority leader. I object.

Madam President, I first give thanks to my colleague and friend from Ohio. We have been working together on this issue. Michigan and Ohio are part of the epicenter as we have seen the downturn in the economy since 2000. We have seen 3 million manufacturing jobs--middle-class jobs that created the standard of living in this country--that have been lost.

This amendment addresses those companies that have done the right thing, that have paid good wages, provided health insurance, provided pensions, that now find themselves in a challenging time but that we want to continue to support so they can continue to keep great American jobs in this country.

I am so pleased we are joined by others in a truly bipartisan effort. We have four Democrats and four Republicans cosponsoring the amendment. We have Senators Hatch, Rockefeller, Cantwell, Vitter, Levin, and Smith coming together from all parts of the country, representing important American industries that are asking to be recognized and to basically allow them to use the AMT and R&D credits they have already accumulated. They have made investments and we want them to make more, and we want to create a mechanism that allows them to benefit from the mechanisms we are putting into place to support industries that need assistance in this difficult time and need to be ready to come out of this economic downturn as quickly as possible.

There is no question that we are in a housing and economic crisis in America. Few States have been hurt worse than Michigan and Ohio. In Michigan alone, right now, we rank No. 6 in the number of foreclosures. Last year, 87,000 households were foreclosed upon; 87,000 families faced the loss of their homes and their piece of the American dream.

Last year, Michigan lost 62,000 good-paying jobs. Unfortunately, we are not alone. In February, the manufacturing sector lost 52,000 jobs. Over the last 7 years, manufacturing has lost more than 3.6 million jobs. Again, these are middle-class jobs and these companies have stepped forward to do the right thing and pay health care, pensions, and provide a standard of living that has been unsurpassed in the world.

Yet the Labor Department announced that the number of new people signing up for unemployment benefits last week shot up to the highest levels in more than 2 years, from a seasonal adjusted 38,000 people to 407,000 people.

In Michigan alone, right now, our unemployment rate is 7.2 percent. American families are in a state of crisis. They are losing their homes, their jobs and, of course, we cannot ignore this situation. We need to do everything possible to be able to support families, workers, and businesses that are being affected.

The Voinovich-Stabenow amendment would help save many of these important middle-class jobs and keep families out of foreclosure. From manufacturing States such as Michigan, families are not losing their homes because of a housing bubble, they are losing their homes because they lost their jobs, their livelihood. They have exhausted their unemployment benefits and they have spent all of their savings, probably dipped into the equity in their houses, and they cannot afford to pay the mortgages anymore. This is a daily reality for the families I represent in Michigan.

The bonus depreciation provision we passed in the stimulus package earlier this year gave manufacturers a strong incentive to increase their capital investments in an effort to stimulate the economy. Unfortunately, that did nothing for manufacturers that are struggling the most right now, the ones that are not profitable, that are being forced to shut down plants and lay off workers.

Our amendment would also give these struggling manufacturers an incentive to be here in America and invest in American jobs. By utilizing the AMT and R&D credit provision, manufacturers in this loss position that have built up AMT and research and development tax credits will now be able to use their credits, stimulate the economy, and create new jobs. These manufacturers will be able to recover their accumulated credits--in other words, they have invested and developed credits. They just cannot use them because they are currently not making a profit. This will allow them to recover those credits after they have made new investments, which will help them to fully realize the intended benefits of the bonus depreciation provision and put them on equal ground with profitable companies.

This amendment will not only allow these manufacturers to stay afloat in this time of economic uncertainty, but will help them invest, expand, and create more American jobs. It will allow them to avoid laying off more workers, many of whom are the most vulnerable when it comes to the issue of foreclosure, losing their home.

Adopting this amendment is an important first step in addressing the crisis facing our Nation. It cannot wait for another day. We would very much appreciate strong bipartisan support for this amendment that is a very important piece of addressing what is happening to so many millions of American families across this country.

I urge colleagues to join us in this bipartisan amendment.

I am pleased to join with my good friend, Senator Kent Conrad, in introducing the Medicare Telehealth Improvement Act, which improves access for many Medicare beneficiaries by expanding telehealth services.

As Senator Conrad has noted, this legislation makes a number of technical corrections to promote telehealth. First, this bill would expand the number of sites that provide telehealth services under Medicare to include nursing homes, dialysis facilities, and community mental health centers. Also, it would expand the list of providers to include physical therapists, occupational therapists, speech-language pathologists, and other providers determined appropriate by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Lastly, this bill would require the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to update the list of covered telehealth services, along with the creation of a permanent advisory committee made up of physicians and non-physicians to provide recommendations to the Secretary and continue expansions of telehealth services forward.

Michigan providers have been very innovative in using telehealth, often out of necessity because of geographic isolation. Telehealth allows providers to collaborate across great distances and share, rather than duplicate, services. This helps save money and improve patient access. One innovation is the use of tele-mental health services. Many Michigan community mental health centers have made tremendous strides in their ability to monitor patients and provide clinical consultations long distance.

I am very pleased that both the Michigan Association of Community Mental Health Boards and the National Council on Community Behavioral Healthcare support this legislation.

I believe that the Medicare Telehealth Improvement Act will build upon already successful initiatives happening in my home State of Michigan and across the country. I urge my colleagues to join with me and Senator Conrad in expanding upon this promising technology.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a letter of support be printed in the Record.

I am pleased to join with my good friend, Senator Kent Conrad, in introducing the Medicare Telehealth Improvement Act, which improves access for many Medicare beneficiaries by expanding telehealth services.

As Senator Conrad has noted, this legislation makes a number of technical corrections to promote telehealth. First, this bill would expand the number of sites that provide telehealth services under Medicare to include nursing homes, dialysis facilities, and community mental health centers. Also, it would expand the list of providers to include physical therapists, occupational therapists, speech-language pathologists, and other providers determined appropriate by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Lastly, this bill would require the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to update the list of covered telehealth services, along with the creation of a permanent advisory committee made up of physicians and non-physicians to provide recommendations to the Secretary and continue expansions of telehealth services forward.

Michigan providers have been very innovative in using telehealth, often out of necessity because of geographic isolation. Telehealth allows providers to collaborate across great distances and share, rather than duplicate, services. This helps save money and improve patient access. One innovation is the use of tele-mental health services. Many Michigan community mental health centers have made tremendous strides in their ability to monitor patients and provide clinical consultations long distance.

I am very pleased that both the Michigan Association of Community Mental Health Boards and the National Council on Community Behavioral Healthcare support this legislation.

I believe that the Medicare Telehealth Improvement Act will build upon already successful initiatives happening in my home State of Michigan and across the country. I urge my colleagues to join with me and Senator Conrad in expanding upon this promising technology.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a letter of support be printed in the Record.

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

Mr. President, I come to the floor today to talk about what is happening in the housing crisis, which I know we are all extremely concerned about, and to talk about what is happening to families across the country. We are in a crisis in America.

Few States are being hurt as much as my State of Michigan, which currently rates sixth in the Nation in mortgage foreclosures. Families are seeing their life's dream--their home--being lost as a result of the crisis. Last year, over 87,000 households were in foreclosure-- 87,000 families faced with the loss of their piece of the American dream.

Every day we delay passing legislation, thousands more families lose their homes and are stripped of their American dream, their home. I thank Senator Reid, our leader, and Senator McConnell, the Republican leader, for coming together for the leadership of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to forge an agreement, because it is absolutely critical that we come together and take action as soon as possible.

I know that right now we are seeing the final stages of putting together a substitute amendment. I know it is our majority leader's position to move this legislation as quickly as possible.

This year alone, over 20,000 households, 20,000 families, are in foreclosure in Michigan. This crisis is only going to get worse, which is why we have to act now. We are hearing about the broader ramifications--first starting with subprime loans, and then to larger home loans, and now to the larger financial markets, where there is no certainty, and capital is drying up so that entrepreneurs who want to start a small business may not be able to do so.

The young person getting ready to go to college who is looking to get a student loan might not be able to do so. There are broad implications because the way the financial markets are intertwined right now has created a situation where it is imperative we act. We have to go to the heart, to the central piece that has started all of this, which is to address what is happening as it relates to home ownership and financing.

It has become clear, unfortunately, because of many hearings that have been held and criminal investigations that have been launched on the issue of subprime lending that we have seen manipulative practices and tactics as a part of this problem--not the whole problem but certainly a very important part of it.

It has become clear a considerable number of mortgage brokers targeted subprime loan products to minority borrowers, folks who are out doing a sales job, making something sound a whole lot better than it is, such a good deal, when maybe you have a senior who needs a home repair, a roof done, a new furnace, or a young family trying to get into that first home and they were told things that were not true and, in some cases, were sold a bill of goods.

On top of that, many of these borrowers, many of these families, would have qualified for a prime mortgage with better terms.

We are only beginning to see the effects of this crisis and the results of this kind of targeting. Foreclosures have already led to the loss of property values throughout entire communities in Michigan. It may be that only one home in a neighborhood has a foreclosure sign in front of it, but what happens to the values of the houses on either side, the house across the street, the house in the next block? This is impacting whole communities. The result is a credit crisis that is making safe, affordable mortgages less available for aspiring homeowners, putting the American dream further at risk.

Families across Michigan are struggling. Families across the Nation are struggling. We know that for most people, it is getting that home. It is going from a renter to a homeowner, to tucking away that equity in the home that brings someone the opportunity to be a part of middle- class America. We know that home equity has paid for young people to be able to go to college and for future dreams of those families. That equity, that value of that home, in too many cases is slipping away.

That is why I am proud to be part of a majority in Congress that has already acted on a couple of key points. Last December, we acted to pass my legislation that would make sure at least, as people are filling out their taxes before April 15 of this year, they would not be penalized with additional taxes if they lost their home or had to lose money on a refinancing. We passed together--and I am very appreciative of the fact that we were able to do this--and President Bush signed the bill that would basically indicate, as an example, if you have a $100,000 mortgage and you are in a situation where you have to sell for $80,000 or there is a foreclosure and a resale of $80,000, that you do not pay taxes on that $20,000 difference that is forgiven by the bank, for instance. That does not count as income toward you. What we have done is eliminate the added insult to injury. You lose your home and then you get another tax bill. We acted last December to make sure that would not happen, and I am very pleased to have led that effort.

We also passed provisions in the economic stimulus package, as well as increasing FHA's ability to help families facing foreclosure. We know we are in the very final steps of having a conference committee report done, and this is a very important part of what needs to happen.

We also know that is not enough. There is much more to be done, not only to directly help families and communities, but to create certainty within the marketplace so that lenders who are operating under the rules are regulated, so our traditional lenders feel confident to once again lend to others, to each other, to be able to continue our economy moving forward. That is why I am very proud of, again, Senator Reid, our leadership, Senator Dodd, Senator Baucus, and others who put together the Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008 to help over 1 million people stay in their homes and accomplish three important goals that I hope will be included as we come to a larger agreement with colleagues across the aisle so we have an approach that can pass with strong bipartisan support.

We have brought to the floor of the Senate and have asked for action--we asked 3 weeks ago for action and we are now back hopefully to the point where we can get action on issues such as keeping families in their homes by increasing the preforeclosure counseling funds so people can get help figuring out the maze. Because of the financial structuring, you can get a mortgage and you can go back and those folks don't own the mortgage. In fact, they are packaged together, securitized, sold in the marketplace, maybe even divided up. Maybe you don't have one entity that owns your mortgage but maybe two or three. It is an extremely complicated question. So being able to help people get through that situation with preforeclosure counseling is very important.

Allowing State housing agencies to issue $10 billion more in refinancing bonds has been a part of our package and I hope will be in the final package; also, allowing homeowners in bankruptcy to modify their mortgages. We also include in our plan the ability to help communities harmed by foreclosures by allowing them to use community development block grant funds, very important funds to support local communities to purchase and rehabilitate foreclosed properties therefore, enabling struggling communities to focus on their properties.

We also have focused on businesses--homebuilders and others--that at this point need assistance through the Tax Code to apply excess net operating losses to prior years that were profitable to allow them to manage the excess in inventory and be able to move forward and be profitable.

Our plan also includes help for families to avoid foreclosures in the future by requiring mortgage documents be simplified.

These are important steps that will help millions of hard-working Americans and address the most important issue causing our economic problems, which is the issue related to housing and financing.

I urge colleagues to come together to act as quickly as possible as final plans for a bipartisan bill are being put forward.

I would be remiss if I did not also speak to one other piece of this, particularly for a State such as Michigan. For us, it has not been the high values on homes or even the financial mechanism of adjustable rate mortgage arms and so on. For us in Michigan, our main cause of this problem relates to the fact that people are losing their jobs. It is unemployment, people losing their jobs or finding themselves in a situation where their income is cut in half from $28 an hour now at $14 an hour. The mortgage has not changed. The cost of food has not changed. In fact, it has gone up. Gasoline costs have gone up. Everything is going up, but wages are going down if they exist at all.

In Michigan, these are not families who were flipping their houses or speculating on real estate. These are hard-working men and women who played by the rules all their life, patriotic Americans who have been devastated by the current economic downturn, devastated by policies that have allowed us to export jobs rather than products, which is what we need to be doing.

In Michigan, we have been in recession for quite some time now. Middle-class families are losing everything in terms of jobs, homes, so on. Although I have to say, we are tough in Michigan and resilient and working hard to bring new opportunities and new industries to Michigan, but it has been very challenging for us at a time when since 2001, since this administration came into power, we have lost over 3 million manufacturing jobs in this country. It is hard to believe. These are the jobs that created middle-class America, good wage, good health care, good pensions, good way of life, good standard of living. We have been at the forefront, unfortunately, in a global economy where we are not enforcing our trade laws adequately, where we are not addressing health care costs in a way that makes sure everyone is covered but does not cause us to have health care costs going through the roof.

By not addressing those issues--even though I have to say I am very proud to be part of a caucus that has tried at every effort, tried in every form we can to address those issues, but despite that, we have not seen what needs to be done in this country to create a level playing field, to create a race to the top so other countries are coming to us. Instead, we see pressure for a race to the bottom.

In Michigan, families are seeing, unfortunately, their American dream turn into an American nightmare because of lack of action on those issues that relate to fighting for middle-class America in this country and to keep middle-class America in this country.

I do not want to lose sight of these families. The housing bills in front of us are very important to help families, but I hope that in the not too distant future we will do something else that is incredibly important to help these families keep making the mortgage payments, and that is to extend unemployment benefits. In every other time of economic downturn, a recession, this Congress has responded, whether it be a Democratic President or Republican President, to extend the benefits to those hard-working Americans who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own so they can continue to put food on the table, to pay the mortgage, keep a roof over their head while they work very hard to find another job.

No one gets rich on unemployment compensation. People are getting on average 40 cents on every dollar earned. Nobody is operating without an extreme struggle even on unemployment compensation. But we know it is the right thing to do, the moral thing to do for families.

We have been told that one of the two things that have the most economic stimulus is extending unemployment compensation. Why? Because if you are unemployed, you are not deciding: Gosh, do I save that money coming in or do I spend it? You have to spend it. You have to spend it to keep a flow for your family. So we know it has a tremendous economic stimulus effect.

The other point that is so critical--and I want to give tremendous credit to our Presiding Officer, the great Senator from Iowa, the chairman of the Agriculture Committee, for his incredible commitment to extending and strengthening the food programs in this country--food stamps, nutrition, school nutrition. But as he has said so eloquently on so many occasions, increasing the dollars for food stamps immediately goes into economic stimulus because when you receive that help, you are going right to the grocery store and you are buying the food your family needs. There is something wrong in this country when the best we can do at the moment is $1 per person per meal. I thank the Presiding Officer for his efforts. This is one of the key things we can do to help families.

In Michigan right now, we not only have an unemployment rate that is the highest in the Nation, 7.2 percent, but we also have one out of eight people on food stamps. These are folks who never thought in their life they would need help, never dreamed they would need help and now find themselves in a situation.

We have heard a lot over the last months from the administration that things are not as bad as we think, that the underlying economics are fine, although that has changed in the last 3 weeks. But we keep hearing that there is not enough evidence to show that we need to increase unemployment compensation or help people put food on their tables. But we also know that every economic indicator says exactly the opposite. And we are now hearing from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Goldman Sachs that by the beginning of next year, which is coming faster than we would like, in January of

next year, the national unemployment average will be 6\1/2\ percent.

Families expect us to act and do something when this kind of evidence is available in terms of the economy. We took action in 2002 across the aisle in extending unemployment benefits, and yet I don't understand why that is not at the top of the list right now. Over 41,000 people in Michigan lost their unemployment insurance benefits in the first 3 months of this year, and millions more across the country will lose that help for their family by the end of the year. Something has to be done.

We are talking about people who were working, the middle class of this country who have lost their jobs, probably related in some way to this economy and what is happening. The job may have gone overseas, it may not, but they are in a situation where they are losing their jobs. We can not turn our backs on them.

The housing package in front of us is a critically important step, and I want to congratulate again everyone involved in coming to this point. I hope we have something we will be able to move quickly on, with a very strong bipartisan vote. Then I hope we are going to move just as quickly to those areas we know are desperately needed for families and that will have an immediate economic stimulus effect; to be able to do those things that will support the dignity of work.

The majority of Americans are not looking for a handout from anybody. They are looking for an opportunity to care for their own family and to work hard and to be able to have the American dream. They are looking to us to understand what is going on not only in Michigan but across the country and to act to support them.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. President, if I may, since we are on the resolution, I yield time----

Mr. President, in a moment I am going to yield to Senator

Whitehouse, but I do want to respond for a moment because what my friend from Texas is talking about, frankly, in terms of focusing on middle-class families, is exactly what this budget does. It will be enhanced by the Baucus amendment, that takes surplus dollars that are in the budget and targets them right back to middle-class families, putting dollars into their pockets in terms of extending the middle- class tax cuts that we all support.

But we also do more than that. We focus on jobs. We focus on health care, investing in education and opportunity for the future. We are not more of the same. This budget resolution is not more of the same of what has been occurring since 2001, in the last 8 years, particularly 6 years of that when we have seen our colleagues on the other side of the aisle and the White House basically controlling all of the agenda in terms of the priorities in the budget and spending and so on.

We create a budget that offers a change, a set of priorities based on the values that are important to the American people, American families, American jobs here, investing here. Let me first say, overall, we have a situation where basically we have seen, under this President, more debt, more tax cuts for the wealthy, more spending in Iraq, less investment in America. That is what we have seen.

In listening to the outline of what I understand will be a Republican budget alternative that will be presented this week, it is more of the same. It is more of the same. We want to reduce that and balance the budget by 2012, focus tax cuts on middle-income workers, hard-working Americans who have not seen tax relief or investments in their future and in their children's future.

We want to refocus. Instead of talking about the spending in Iraq, we want to be focused on spending at home. We have somewhere near $12 billion to $15 billion a month being spent right now in Iraq. Even though we know the Iraqi Government is receiving dollars in oil revenues, we continue to be the ones investing in rebuilding their communities and their jobs, their infrastructure.

Our budget invests in America--American jobs, American families, American communities. I am hopeful we will see a strong vote for the budget resolution we are presenting.

I now yield up to 30 minutes to my friend and colleague from Rhode Island, Senator Whitehouse.

Mr. President, rather than do that----

Mr. President, I know we are waiting for other colleagues to come to the floor, but let me summarize our priorities for a moment in terms of this budget resolution.

There are a number of things we are doing that are very important, such as restoring the cuts the President made overall in health care and the fact he wanted to eliminate the COPS Program that puts thousands of police officers on the streets in our communities. We have restored those and other essential dollars for homeland security, firefighters, and so on.

We have also picked three priorities, as we did last year, to focus on in terms of new investments, given what is happening to middle-class families across the country and given the fact that middle-class families feel squeezed on all sides. Gas prices are up. In fact, I saw today they are inching toward $4 a gallon. According to the Detroit News, a paper in Michigan, the chances that gas prices will hit $4 a gallon in the summer are growing with every uptick in the price of oil. We are hearing all about what is happening to families in terms of the price of gas, the price of health care, the price of college and on and on and on. People are being squeezed on all sides.

We also know the best economic stimulus is a good-paying American job. So to address that, we have focused on three priorities in this budget. It is very simple: jobs, jobs, jobs. What do I mean by that? We are focusing on three areas, one that also addresses our dependence on foreign oil. It addresses the critical issue of global warming and where we need to go as we look to the future for our families. But it also creates jobs. There is a green-collar jobs initiative to invest in those new technologies, the new energy efficiency jobs, weatherization jobs, innovation for the future, green-collar jobs. We know we can create thousands and thousands of jobs by focusing in this area, and we do that.

The second area is jobs for rebuilding America. We know for every $1 billion we put into rebuilding our roads and bridges and schools and water and sewer, we create 47,500 new good-paying American jobs. You can't outsource those jobs. Those are jobs here in America, and that is what we need to do.

Then, finally, there is a focus on education and job training. We know that for the future, for ourselves, and for our children and grandchildren, it is opportunity, it is education, it is fully funding the law that was passed called Leave No Child Behind and creating job- training opportunities. People in my State have lost their jobs because of trade, so we have something called trade adjustment assistance that has been consistently underfunded. Yet we have individuals, through no fault of their own, who have seen their jobs go overseas. They are middle-class families trying to care for their families, trying to pay that mortgage we are all talking about right now with the housing crisis and trying to have the American dream for their families. Yet TAA, which was set up to help them go back to school, get training, help cover their health care costs for 2 years while they are doing the training, has been consistently underfunded. We have legislation to fully fund and expand the support for families under TAA.

So we wish to make sure job training and education are also a part of this. This is jobs, jobs, jobs.

I wish to focus for a moment on one of those areas because it directly relates to what I said a moment ago as it relates to gas prices inching up toward $4 a gallon. We have to change this scenario. I know our Presiding Officer understands this and has spoken about this. We have to get off foreign oil, invest in the new alternative energies that create jobs, that create alternatives in terms of being independent of foreign oil, and address gas prices directly, which are hitting people right between the eyes right now in terms of what is happening.

Our green-collar jobs initiative focuses on energy efficiency and conservation, investment in battery technologies, retooling older plants so we are keeping our jobs here in America, and biofuels production and access. We have to have the pump available. You can grow the fuel, you can make the vehicle, but the pumps, if they are not available, we are not going to achieve the goal.

Finally, there is a green-collar job initiative. These are five areas we have focused on in terms of investing in the future of our country. That is what we are all about. For us, this is all about focusing on America, about focusing on folks who every day get up, play by the rules, work hard every day, and want to know America is going to work for

them and that they are going to be able to keep their home and be able to send their kids to college and have the health care they need and have that job which is going to allow them to be able to keep their standard of living and, in fact, live the American dream. That is what our budget resolution is all about: jobs, jobs, jobs. I am very pleased we have, in fact, put together something that makes sense for American families.

I see my colleague from Maryland is here and who is a distinguished member of the Budget Committee. He was a distinguished leader in the House of Representatives before coming to us. So I yield now to the Senator from Maryland for whatever time he wishes to consume.

Madam President, as my friend from Iowa is leaving the floor, I thank him for his incredible leadership on children's health insurance and the bipartisan way we came together around that measure. We hope to be able to do it again because we have millions of children and families who are still waiting for children to be able to receive health insurance.

I wish to speak, though, as a cosponsor of the Baucus amendment, to the middle-class tax relief amendment, which is so significant. I find it interesting: my friend from Iowa was referring to a chart that related to the payment limitation issue, with 73 percent of the benefits going to 10 percent of the farmers, where you could cross that out and put President Bush's tax cuts at the top, and you could have the very same kind of ratio or even more of a difference. You could take estate tax repeal and put that up there and have the very same kind of ratio. So I hope when we get to a debate of a permanent extension--which I understand is coming--of the President's tax cuts, that we will see that same kind of concern about where tax benefits are going in America. I have middle-class families, working families who are still waiting, frankly, to receive the benefits they have heard so much about.

That is what this amendment, the Baucus amendment, is all about: focusing on the extension and addition of tax cuts for middle-class families and for our brave men and women who are serving in harm's way right now around the globe, particularly in Iraq and Afghanistan, and their families. This is a very important amendment.

Let me start by saying what we want to address is the situation that is now occurring. We want to change what is now occurring as it relates to tax policy. Last year, in 2007, those who were earning more than $1 million a year received a tax cut of $119,557. So, roughly, it is fair to say $120,000 in average tax cuts for somebody earning over $1 million a year. That is more than twice what the average hard-working person in Michigan is earning, the paycheck that they are earning every single year.

What we are seeing across the country are folks in the middle class being squeezed on all sides and actually seeing their incomes going down. Too many times we are seeing jobs being lost overseas. We are seeing people being asked to take less in terms of a paycheck. But gasoline now is projected to be inching up toward $4 a gallon, if my colleagues can believe it. Health care costs are going up. The cost of college is going up. Everything is going up, while wages, for most people, are either staying the same or going down.

So when we talk about where we want to focus tax cuts for this country, it ought to be the folks who are working hard every day, who love this country and want to have the American dream available for themselves and their families but have not seen the tax cuts that have been talked about so much by the administration. So that is what this amendment talks about. Instead of $120,000 a year for somebody earning over $1 million, let's focus on middle-class families.

The Baucus amendment would permanently extend the 10-percent income tax bracket. Everybody would get relief, but proportionately it would be relief for low- and moderate-income families. It would extend the refundable child tax credit. We want to make sure those families who have more than one child--two, three, four children or more--are able to benefit from the child tax credit. The marriage penalty--we want to make sure that is extended. Certainly, we ought not to be in America penalizing folks because they are married when it comes to their tax returns. This permanently extends marriage penalty tax relief.

We also permanently extend the tax credit for childcare expenses. No one who has a child in America today will speak about childcare expenses as a frill. It is a necessity. If we care about children, children's well-being, and families, we need to make sure we are recognizing that childcare expenses are a very important and expensive cost for families, and we need to address that by permanently extending the tax credit for childcare expenses.

We also permanently extend the increased adoption tax credit. We want to make sure families who are reaching out to children, who want to be able to adopt a child, have support and incentive to do that. Certainly, the biggest incentive is that beautiful baby, but we want to make sure the Tax Code will help them with their costs and expenses as well. Again, this is a pro-family, pro-children, pro-middle class amendment. I am hopeful it is one that we are all going to embrace.

We all want to bring certainty to the estate tax law. No one, I believe, wants to see in 2010 the old law take place. We don't want to have uncertainty for families, for family farms, and small businesses. This permanently extends the tax relief that has already been adopted, the tax cuts that have already been adopted.

Something else is very important for families right now as they are struggling to keep their homes. We are all very focused and have spent time on the floor talking about what we need to do. Senator Reid has put forward a very important proposal addressing what we can do to help with the home crisis and so many families losing their homes. This particular amendment includes a first of its kind standard deduction for property taxes for Americans who don't itemize on their Federal income tax returns but would allow them a tax deduction for their property taxes. This is a very important piece for supporting families who are working hard to be able to literally keep their home.

The other provision that is so significant is to focus on those things that are needed in the Tax Code to support our brave men and women who are serving us in Afghanistan, in Iraq, and around the globe. We have men and women now who are on third and fourth redeployments. They have made tremendous sacrifices, and their families are as well, and we need to be doing everything we can to support them. So this does a number of things. It has a permanent allowance for soldiers to count their nontaxable combat pay when they figure in the earned-income tax credit, so they can get the benefit of the earned-income tax credit for low-income working families. We provide a tax cut for small businesses that are paying some of the salary of the members of the National Guard and Reserve who are called to duty. Again, we have families now that are really at a point of desperation trying to figure out how to pay the mortgage, how to

keep going, and we have so many small businesses that are being supportive, and we want to recognize that and give them some support as well.

A permanent allowance for all veterans to use qualified mortgage bonds to purchase their homes, again, is another way to help people be able to purchase homes, to be able to do what we all want, which is to have a home, save through the equity of a home, and be able to live a good life in America.

We also have created the ability for Active-Duty troops to withdraw monies from retirement plans without penalty. This is very important, when people unfortunately now have dipped into savings. They may have a home equity loan going on and they find themselves in strapped situations and we ought to allow them to take their savings and retirement plans without penalty to be able to help them pay the bills.

We have an extension of a provision that gives retired veterans more time to claim a tax refund. Under certain disability benefit payments, the ability for families of reservists killed in the line of duty to be able to collect life insurance and other benefits provided by civilian employers and the ability for families of soldiers killed in the line of duty to contribute 100 percent of survivor benefits to retirement savings accounts or education savings accounts. This is a very important part of this amendment that pays tribute to those who have been asked to sacrifice the most, whether it be someone bravely serving right now in the war, someone who has come home disabled, or the family of someone who did not come home.

We are debating a budget resolution right now and talking about who receives benefits and where we have to make hard choices. The folks who have made the toughest choices are the folks who are serving us, serving our country in war halfway around the world. I have a lot of folks who are in this category of getting the more than $120,000 a year in tax cuts this last year who have said to me: I don't need it. I earn over $1 million a year. I don't need this. Give this to the men and women who are serving us. Help pay for the war so that we are not paying for it on a credit card or make sure our veterans have the health care they need when they come home or make sure we fund a GI bill that Senator Webb has introduced that would provide educational opportunities for the men and women who have come home from this war that so far has lasted 5 years.

So there are many wonderful people who love our country who are saying this kind of a tax system where those who make less than $100,000 a year get $674, but if you make $1 million a year or more you get $120,000 in a tax cut, just doesn't make sense. In my opinion, it doesn't represent the great values of America, our values and priorities, what we are all about in this country. We are not about having a system where a privileged few receive all of the benefits, while we are asking so many others to sacrifice and to be able to be required, unfortunately, on too many occasions now, to lay down their lives for their country.

So I hope the Baucus amendment is passed overwhelmingly. Then I hope we say no to what I believe will be an additional amendment, which would extend this tax policy. It would extend it out. With a war unpaid for, with the massive debt that we have in our country, the obligations to our veterans and their families when they come home, we do not need to extend a tax policy that has given so many of our precious resources to a blessed few people in our country, many of whom are asking us, in fact, not to do that.

So I thank our leader on the Budget Committee for all of his wonderful leadership, as well as the ranking member.

I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on March 11, 2008, at 10 a.m., in order to conduct a hearing entitled the ``Condition of Our Nation's Infrastructure and Proposals For Needed Improvements.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday March 11, 2008, at 10 a.m., room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building, in order to conduct a hearing.

At this hearing, the subcommittee will explore the importance of basic research to U.S. competitiveness. The hearing will examine research and development budgets at agencies in the Committee's jurisdiction, particularly the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the National Science Foundation, as well as interagency science programs addressing climate change, nanotechnology, and information technology.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 11, 2008, at 2:30 p.m., in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building, in order to conduct a hearing.

At this hearing, the Committee will conduct an oversight hearing on the Department of Transportation's current Cross-Border Truck Pilot Program. This pilot program, administered by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, provides temporary operating authority to a limited number of motor carriers domiciled in Mexico and the United States for cross-border commercial operation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 11, 2008, at 10 a.m. in room 406 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in order to hold a hearing entitled, ``Examining the President's Proposed Fiscal Year 2009 Budget for the Civil Works Program of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Implementation of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2007''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 11, 2008, at 10:15 a.m. in order to hold a hearing on U.S. policy options on the Horn of Africa.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 11, 2008, at 2:30 p.m. in order hold a hearing on NATO enlargement and effectiveness.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to meet, during the session of the Senate, in order to conduct a hearing entitled ``The Broken Pipeline: Losing Opportunities in the Life Sciences'' on Tuesday, March 11, 2008. The hearing will commence at 11 a.m. in room 430 of the Dirksen Senate office building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate Committee on the Judiciary be authorization to meet during the session of

the Senate, in order to conduct a hearing on pending executive nominations on Tuesday, March 11, 2008, at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Witness list

Grace C. Becker, of New York, to be Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, Department of Justice.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for the Committee on Veterans' Affairs to be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 11, 2008 in order to conduct an oversight hearing entitled ``VA and DoD Cooperation and Collaboration: Caring for the Families of Wounded Warriors.'' The Committee will meet in room 418 of the Russell Senate Office Building, at 10 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on March 11, 2008, at 2:30 p.m. in order to hold a closed hearing.

First, I thank our colleague from Vermont, who is passionate and cares very deeply about people in the country, about their future, and about the children. I could not agree more with him about what has been the underfunding of a very important investment, and that is special education.

The Federal Government was supposed to pay 40 percent of special education and has never, I believe, gotten over 18 or 19 percent. So I thank the Senator for the amendment he will offer later.

I thank the Budget Committee chairman also who is someone who does such an extraordinary job on a daily basis on such a wide range of issues. There is no one more committed to the long-term fiscal health of the country, no one more committed to getting our priorities right, no one who works more effectively across the aisle to bring people together to do the right thing. So I thank our distinguished colleague, the chairman of the Budget Committee, for all of his incredible leadership and pointing us in the right direction and creating a budget resolution that I am proud of.

Yes.

I thank the Senator. That means a lot.

Mr. President, I am going to take a few minutes because I expect to have multiple opportunities in which to participate and talk about various parts of the budget resolution that I believe reflect the values and priorities of the American people. That is what budgets are. That is what our own individual budgets are.

When we look at our checkbooks and where we spend our money, we hope it reflects the values we want to project. Sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't in my own budget, my own checkbook. But the reality is, that is our job in terms of the Federal budget and where we invest that makes sense for American families.

I have to say that listening to colleagues tonight, as I had the opportunity to preside--colleagues on the other side of the aisle--I heard more of the same, unfortunately, that we have seen for the last 8 years. Six of those eight years have been dominated by colleagues on the other side of the aisle, by a Republican President and a Republican Congress. Unfortunately, in my mind, when we talk about what they are going to propose, in totality what we see is more debt. We see more tax cuts for the wealthiest among us, more spending in Iraq and, at the same time, we see less investment in America. That is exactly the opposite of what we ought to be doing.

Our budget changes that. It focuses on balancing the budget by 2012 and 2013. It provides middle-class tax cuts so we can make sure the folks who are trying to hold things together--everybody talks about middle-class families and middle-class people being squeezed, seeing gas prices and health care and childcare costs go up. Yet the reality is, unfortunately, the budget put forward by the President doesn't help them at all. I am proud to say we have a budget that, in fact, invests in America. I want to speak to one piece of that.

Last year, we set up three main priorities for our budget, and I was very proud of those--one to fully fund veterans health care and make sure we are keeping the promises to the veterans of America. We did it last year, and we are doing it again this year. We will continue, as long as we are in the majority, to make sure that is the case. We want to make sure people have the opportunity to go to college. We passed the largest package since the GI bill after World War II. No. 3 was children's health insurance, which we passed on a bipartisan basis. It was an extraordinary effort. We actually had the votes to overturn a Presidential veto and could not do that in the House of Representatives. We added 10 million children to the Children's Health Insurance Program, which gives them the opportunity to make sure their children have health insurance.

This year, we continue those things, but we have three more items we have picked. Mr. President, just to be simple, what I would say is our priorities are jobs, jobs, jobs. I can tell you, coming from the great State of Michigan, that is certainly what we want our focus to be on. We are talking about middle-income families who are struggling. And the best stimulus that you can possibly give somebody is a good-paying job so they can pay their bills, take care of their family, send their kids to college, and be able to have the American dream. I am very proud of the fact that our budget focuses on three priorities: jobs, jobs, jobs. How?

We have three pieces in our budget. We focus on green-collar jobs. I am very proud of the fact that the initiative I put forward is incorporated. The Presiding Officer is passionate about pieces of this legislation as well. We know there is a new economy. We know that alternative energy and moving forward in ways that will address global warming and stop our dependence on foreign oil can create jobs as well. So we have a major new initiative in this bill for green-collar jobs.

Secondly, jobs rebuilding America--water projects, sewers, roads, bridges. We are at a point in our country where we have an aging infrastructure. A lot of we baby boomers are aging but at the same time so is the infrastructure around us. The great thing about investing and rebuilding America is that these are not jobs you can outsource to another country; these are jobs right

here in America--good-paying jobs. That is our second priority.

Our third priority is to continue our focus on education and job training. We know we need to refocus on job training and on those who lost jobs because of trade by fully funding trade adjustment assistance for people to go back to school and gain new opportunities.

Mr. President, we are saying jobs, jobs, jobs. I want to focus specifically on the piece in which I have been most involved. This is very exciting. We passed an energy bill last year with a number of programs in it that were not funded but that were great ideas. This year, we come back and say let's make those things a reality in this budget.

Energy efficiency and conservation: Providing over $1.1 billion for State and local communities to not only focus on energy efficiency and conservation but buildings and weatherization. There is a huge amount of energy savings to be had by focusing in this area. It also creates lots and lots of jobs. It will put people to work weatherizing buildings and focusing on energy efficiency.

Advanced batteries: For us to go where we want to go in terms of new alternative fuel vehicles, it involves focusing on advanced battery technology. We are doing that but not nearly as fast as other countries. In the American budget last year, there was $22 million. Yet you can look over to China, Japan, and South Korea where hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent. As a result of that, we see very tangible things happening. When Ford Motor Company came forward with the first Ford Escape hybrid, an American SUV hybrid, unfortunately, even though the brain power came from here and the engineering came from here, the battery came from Japan because we weren't making them here.

We don't want to change from dependence on foreign oil to a dependence on foreign technology. So investing in the future in battery technology is incredibly important, not only for vehicles but battery storage is critical for such things as winds turbines, solar, and other areas where we need to be able to move forward with alternative energy. Battery storage is critical. I am proud that we put forward for the first time an aggressive investment in innovation and production here at home.

Retooling older plants. As we have new standards for fuel efficiency coming into play, we want to make sure we are retooling our old plants to keep American jobs here, biofuel production and access, meaning infrastructure. I come from a State where we are growing the biofuels and making the automobiles. If you cannot drive up to the service station and fuel with E-85 or biofuel, it is not going to matter in the end.

So being able to have that infrastructure and investment in infrastructure is absolutely critical. Finally, a green job training program to refocus on those jobs we know are there for the future. Again, the Presiding Officer has been a passionate advocate, and I know he believes strongly that jobs and energy and focusing on global warming and jobs can go together, and that is what this does. This says we are going to take this first step to focus on the American people.

What I will say again, as we go forward, there are many items that are in this budget that are very important. But what I am very proud of is the fact that we have put forward a budget resolution with three very simple priorities: jobs, jobs, jobs. And that is right where the American people are. People want American jobs where they can care for their families, they can have the dignity of work, they can have good wages and be able to have an American dream. This budget resolution is laser-focused on that priority.

I thank the Chair.

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

Mr. President, in listening to my friend from Missouri who just spoke, I was surprised that this is all being debated now in the context of the fact that yesterday our Republican colleagues stopped us from proceeding to the very measure everyone is now talking about and wanting to make changes and improvements to. There are ideas my friend from Missouri talked about that I think are worthy of discussion and debate. Some we may very well support.

The reality is that we are here today because colleagues on the other side of the aisle stopped us from even proceeding to have a debate. So it seems to me it is a little disingenuous to say we want to be doing all these measures--and we agree there is an incredible sense of urgency about what is happening now to families--yet, at the same time, rather than proceeding to the bill and offering amendments, such as an amendment to remove a provision if there is concern on bankruptcy on which I happen to disagree--I think it is very difficult to explain to people why their vacation home, which I hope to have some day in beautiful northern Michigan, would be covered by bankruptcy provisions, but my home, my primary residence where my children grew up, where I raised my family, would not be protected. So I do not understand that difference. That is a debate worth having. If our colleagues had allowed us to go to the bill, we could have had that discussion, we could have had that debate about whether that provision should be in the bill.

I come to the floor today to urge colleagues--and Senator Reid has renewed his motion to go to the bill--we cannot begin to deal with an issue which colleagues are saying on both sides of the aisle is incredibly important, which has a great sense of urgency to it, if we are not allowed to go to the bill.

This reminds me of time after time in the Senate where we as a majority have brought forward urgent issues that affect American families and American communities and asked that they be considered, that we have an opportunity to debate and take action, and we have been blocked time and time again--in fact, a record 72 times now, which is more than the 2-year average of any Senate 2-year session. We now have 72 times that our Republican colleagues have blocked us from being able to proceed to do the American people's business on issues that are incredibly important.

I welcome colleagues to come to the floor next week, to support Senator Reid's motion to go to the debate, and to look at a variety of ideas that need to be addressed on this critical issue.

We all know that for a majority of Americans--Mr. President, I know in West Virginia as in Michigan--when folks want to get into the middle class, the first thing they do is go out and buy a home, to have that equity in a home, to be able to save equity in their home--no more renting; they are going to buy a house. I know in Michigan that is step 1 for people who are working very hard to get that home for their family, to be able to save for the future. That is the primary way that people, in fact, in this country do save for their future: build up that equity so they can use it to offset the cost of college for their children, to save for retirement, to use it in a medical emergency, which is happening way too often now in our country.

Equity in the home, knowing that you can invest and have your home, is a basic part of what we all call the American dream in this country, and that is in great jeopardy right now for too many families.

Mr. President, 87,000 people went into foreclosure in this last year just in Michigan, and we have one of the highest foreclosure rates in the country right now. That has happened for a variety of reasons. We talk a lot about the financial mortgage arrangements, ARMs--adjustable rate mortgages--that are coming due and interest rates going up. That is certainly part of it. We also have another piece that is very true in Michigan and my guess is around the country that relates to predatory lending practices.

I have a very large number of great Michiganians who are African American or from other minority communities who could be in a prime- rate mortgage right now but were sold a subprime mortgage. They were put into a much more fragile situation with less accountability.

We know of situations where senior citizens have been followed home from church in Detroit, forming relationships with our seniors where they have been talked into totally refinancing their home. They paid for their house, had no mortgage payment, but were told that if they wanted to refinance, they could get that new furnace they needed, they could fix the roof, or they could pay for those medical bills, and they were placed in a situation through predatory practices that has now jeopardized their ability to even have their home.

Then we have another factor which I believe is the largest factor going on right now, which is the underlying fundamentals in the economy and the fact that too many people are losing their jobs or seeing their incomes go down. Certainly, for us in Michigan, it is different than these ARMs resetting. For us, it is about the fact that families are losing their jobs. Families are going from a middle-income job of $25 an hour to $14 an hour and trying to figure out how they are going to pay the bills and keep a roof over the heads of their family.

I happen to believe the best stimulus is a good-paying job, and that is something also of great urgency on which we need to be spending our time. I am very proud of the fact that as we move forward in the next 2 weeks in the discussion of our values and priorities through the budget for next year, they will be laser focused on jobs and what we can do to help people keep and get the American dream by working hard and having a job and creating opportunities for themselves and their families.

We have in front of us the opportunity to do something immediately to help people. We have a bill that includes a number of provisions. Some of them the President talked about in his State of the Union Address. That is a good idea; we incorporated it.

We are talking about adding to the number of preforeclosure counseling offices. We have heard from lenders, we have heard from families and communities that the most important thing is to help people before they lose their house, before they are 90 days behind, when someone thinks they might be having a problem, or they know in 6 months they are going to be faced with this situation of their payments going up--start now and work with lenders.

We also know that most people--not most but many--do not answer the phone when the lender calls. They are worried about what is going to happen and do not think they have any way out, so they just wait. By helping people with counseling, we can stop a lot of this on the front end and help people refinance. For people trying to do that, it is tougher now because we have this complicated situation going on where they go to a lender, they get their mortgage, and that loan is then sold, and they don't know who owns it. So who do you talk to when you are trying to figure out how to make some accommodation to refinance? So, having counselors will help.

We put money in the budget this year because it was a priority for our majority, adding $200 million to help people on the front end, so they could work their way out of this. That is very important. Also, we allow State housing agencies to issue $10 billion more in refinancing bonds so State and local communities can help refinance homes. That is incredibly important, and something that has been widely supported on both sides of the aisle.

We also have said that community development block grant money should be able to be used to purchase and rehab foreclosed properties, again, to help communities. We have to stop this. We have to stop this where it is. I think we can help create some certainty in the markets by helping families right now and creating also some confidence in the markets going forward. That can be done by using the CDBG dollars for communities to refinance and help families stay in their homes.

Also, in a balanced approach, we have addressed what is happening on the

business side for home builders. We agreed to include in our original package in the Senate--with the help of our distinguished Presiding Officer on the Finance Committee, one of our top leaders on the Finance Committee--a tax issue, net operating loss, to allow home builders to go back a couple of years to a better time and address some of their issues so there is not the pressure to sell their inventory, the unsold homes at the moment, and allow them a little breathing time. We have included that in this provision as well to support the industry itself. This is a very balanced package that took the input of the leadership on the Banking Committee and the Finance Committee which looked at proposals that were bipartisan--by the President, by a number of people--that had brought forward something that will help. We don't pretend it is a magic bullet. I wish there were one; I don't think there is. But it is a very reasonable approach that has been put forward.

So here we are. We have this situation where colleagues now on the other side of the aisle, the leader on the other side of the aisle, comes forward with a package and says, this is what we want to do; we need to be able to pass these measures. Yet he has blocked us from even getting to the housing issue, to the bill itself. He has blocked us from getting there.

I have to say, this reminds me of one other issue that is very related, and certainly is critical for me in Michigan, that has also been blocked time and time again, and which was a part of our original stimulus package we did in the Senate, of which I am very proud. I think it was a very good proposal, and I was proud of the work we did. In that proposal, we did something else that is very important right now for middle-class workers and families. We extended unemployment compensation benefits for families. It is viewed as one of the top two ways to stimulate the economy.

If you are unemployed, you are going to take every dollar that comes in the door to pay the mortgage, to keep the lights on, the heat on, pay for food, and do the things you need to do for your family. We know it is stimulative. We also know, from a moral standpoint, it is the right thing to do to help families. That has been blocked as well. I see them related because we now have people who have been unemployed for longer periods of time than they ever wanted to be and who are in these situations. Maybe to keep going they did a home equity loan, and now that is not working and they find themselves in a situation of foreclosure. One of the ways we can help on housing is to give people some stability in their income.

I heard colleagues, when we debated this on the other side of the aisle, saying, well, it is encouraging people not to work. I would love to have the President or the Secretary of the Treasury or colleagues come, if they have not talked to folks in their own State, to Michigan and talk to folks who want desperately to work, and are working at very minimal wage jobs right now to try to keep going.

Nationally, we know there are 7.7 million unemployed people today who are competing for 4 million jobs, which is why I say the best long-term stimulus is a good-paying job. I am glad our budget is going to focus on jobs, but the reality is we want to help stabilize families right now because there are hundreds of thousands of people--millions, actually--in a situation where extending unemployment benefits for 13 weeks, and an additional 13 weeks for high unemployment areas, is exactly what needs to happen. I hope we are going to address that as part of what we are doing here as well.

In 2002, there was an extension of unemployment benefits, and the national unemployment rate is roughly the same right now. It was 5 percent then, and it is nationally 4.9 now. We hear from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and from Goldman Sachs that by the beginning of next year the national rate is going to be 6\1/2\ percent--6\1/2\ percent nationally. I am in a unique situation because I will take that. Our rate right now is 7.6 percent in Michigan, so I would take 6\1/2\ percent. The reality is we are seeing a dramatic rise in unemployment, and more and more families are going to find themselves in a situation of not being able to pay the mortgage, not being able to do what they need to do for their families.

I think this is a fundamental issue for families--for middle-class families. We are talking about people who work and who find themselves in a situation, because of a multitude of issues--where the job is not there anymore--where they need help to continue to keep their family together, and keeping their house is incredibly important. I have 72,000 people in Michigan who are scheduled to lose their unemployment benefits by June. I have over 10,000 people a month who are losing their unemployment benefits, and we don't have the jobs for them. This is incredibly serious.

So I am, one more time, asking my Republican colleagues not to block that when it comes to the floor. It is a very important part of the economic picture for people, and it is time for us to get about the business of fixing the economy, of supporting efforts that are going on in the economy for businesses, for individuals, for families, and for communities. There is a great sense of urgency that we need to have, because that is what families feel every single day. I am hopeful that when Senator Reid brings the next motion in front of us to be able to go to a bill to deal with housing, colleagues will have that same sense of urgency and join us in being able to do that.

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

I will withhold my request for the distinguished Senator from New Jersey.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs' Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Friday, February 29, 2008, at 10 a.m. in order to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Governmentwide Intelligence Community Management Reforms: Ensuring Effective Congressional Oversight and the Role of the Government Accountability Office.''

Mr. President, I rise today to speak about what is currently happening on the floor of the Senate and what I am hopeful will happen.

Our leader, Senator Reid, has one more time brought us--and rightly so--to a point to debate and try to move forward on changing course in the war in Iraq. There have been 5 years of war, with the largest expenditure now of the Federal Government in terms of monthly expenditures, and certainly in terms of loss of life. It goes on every day, day after day. All you have to do is look at the newspaper and see that families continue to pay a huge price for this war.

I stood on the floor of this Senate 5 years ago and was one of 23 Members who voted ``no'' on going into this war. But I have spent every other moment, every other vote, doing everything I can to support our troops, to make sure I do everything I can to make sure we honor them through our efforts to equip them and make sure they have the resources, and that when they come home and put on the veteran's cap that we are, in fact, providing the health care and the resources they need. I am proud to be part of a caucus, a new majority that has placed veterans health insurance, health care as a top priority to make that happen.

But I often think back to the discussions before my vote, and discussions with my husband, who is a 14-year veteran of the Air Force and the Air National Guard, and him reminding me that the best way to support American troops, the best way to support our troops is to give them the right mission. The second thing is to make sure they have the resources they need. The third thing is to make sure there is a clear exit strategy for that mission.

I did not support that mission and believe there was not the evidence that was needed to carry on that mission. I have supported those resources, however, that they need.

Now it is important, it is critical, that we as a body, as a Congress, come together to support the exit strategy, the effort to change the mission that needs to occur in Iraq, to be able to bring our people home, to be able to stop the multiple deployments, redeployments that are going on, and that we refocus on those areas of the world and those groups such as al-Qaida that truly are a threat to us. That means Afghanistan, that means other kinds of strategies to be able to truly keep us safe. That is what we need to do.

The most important thing is to keep us safe as a country, to be smart about our strategy. That is what we are debating, here: whether we are going to be smart about our strategy to keep us safe, whether we are going to pay attention to the daily loss of life in Iraq, and whether we are going to pay attention to the almost $15 billion a month that is being spent on that war, which is now a civil war, that is not being invested back home in America.

That is what I want to speak about for a moment, understanding that the most important thing is the loss of life and what is happening to our troops and their families.

As I said, I am extremely proud of the fact that we made a very top priority for us in the new majority coming in the full funding of veterans health care. We have done that. We have tackled the problems we have seen with Walter Reed and the inability for our troops, as they move between systems, to get the effective care they need by passing the Wounded Warriors legislation.

We have continued to bring forward other efforts to be able to address what I consider to be the abuse of our troops by continual redeployment without enough dwell time, rest time, for them to be here at home, as the Army Manual would require.

But we also have another very important piece of this which goes to what is happening when we have almost $15 billion a month that is being diverted from our economy, which from Michigan surely looks like a recession. I cannot speak to every other part of the country, but from our economy and our families and our communities, it is being spent on a war that a majority of Americans--not a majority of Democrats--a majority of Americans--Democrats, Republicans, and Independents--people of all persuasions in all States are saying: We no longer want to go in this direction. We want to change this mission. We want to bring our people home.

But we are now getting ready to do a budget. The distinguished Acting President pro tempore today is on the Budget Committee. He has served with distinction in the House and now in the Senate. Mr. President, you know as well as I do that we are now grappling with very tough decisions about how to address the needs here in America.

I think that on top of the issues of national policy and how to keep us safe, and the loss of life, and how to support our troops, we have to grapple with the fact that last year, for instance, when we passed, with overwhelming bipartisan support in the Senate, an effort to extend health care, health insurance to 10 million children of working families, the President vetoed it, saying it was too much money. Yet it was about half of the cost of 1 month of what we are spending in Iraq today.

Investing in children, healthy children in our country, of working families who unfortunately are working in jobs where they do not have health insurance and do not have enough of a wage to be able to afford the $1,000 a month premium or more that they would have to pay--do we focus on supporting those families and change this direction or do we continue down this road of saying no to our children?

We have the opportunity to create new jobs in the energy economy. In Michigan, we are moving full speed ahead on alternative energy, and not only in our vehicles. But windmills and

solar and biofuels and all of these things take partnerships and investments.

We have an energy tax provision--a measure for which we came one vote short of being able to override one of the multitude of filibusters that has gone on on this floor: a historic level of filibusters stopping us at every turn--we came one vote short. We are talking about having some resources to be able to put into tax incentives to be able to produce alternative energies and the infrastructures so the biofuels can actually get to the pump so you not only can buy a E-85 car but get E-85 at the pump. It takes some investments to be able to do that.

We have been told no on being able to put dollars into that area. Yet the amount of money we are talking about is less than 2 months of spending in Iraq.

Infrastructure, roads and bridges. We saw last year what happened in Minnesota in terms of a huge bridge collapse and what happened with human life and what happened to the community involved. We have roads and bridges across our country, water and sewer systems that are aging, that need a facelift, and we need to be able to get some additional dollars so we can bring ourselves into the modern age for much of our infrastructure. Yet we are told again: No, there are no resources to put money into our infrastructure. However, we are rebuilding roads in Iraq, we are rebuilding schools in Iraq.

In fact, one of the original items I will never forget was to put wireless technology into schools. That was in the budget, but it wasn't the American budget, it was the Iraqi reconstruction budget. I have been working for years to get technologies in our schools, new technology, because every single student is going to face, at a minimum, working with a computer, whether you work at a gas station or whether you work at a high-tech company. Yet we can't do that in America. We have been told by this administration and by those who had been in the majority for 6 years: No. But at the same time, it was in the budget for Iraq.

We now find ourselves in a situation with a tremendous housing crisis. In my State of Michigan, it has frankly masked a larger economic crisis, where people have been losing their jobs, they are losing their incomes, seeing all their costs go up, but they have had that equity in their home that was keeping them going. All of a sudden, all of the values go down, and we are seeing a collapse in the housing market which has rippled out way beyond housing now into our capital markets, into our entire economy. Yet when we come to the floor--and we are going to be asking shortly, after we vote to end this filibuster that is going on, on the change in the Iraq mission--we are going to be asking to come together around a housing proposal that, frankly, I think is pretty modest. It is important, it is good, it is the right thing to do, but it certainly is something within the realm of reasonableness. Yet I know it is going to be difficult to be able to get this passed. The cost of it, again, is about 2 weeks in Iraq, to be able to focus on one of the most devastating crises going on in America today.

Most middle-class families save through equity in their home. That is how most people are able to get into the middle class. We are talking about people who have worked hard, played by the rules, done all the right things, got a job, saved up the downpayment, were able to get a home, and then find themselves in a situation where they are looking around saying: Wait a minute. What is going on here? What about me? What is happening in our economy? I need some help. We are trying to do that. I hope we are going to be able to come together and do that. But if we hear one more time: No, we can't do that, we can't afford it--we are talking about less than 2 weeks of what is being spent in Iraq.

How many times have we heard all the comments about Leave No Child Behind, about the fact that we are not keeping our promises as it relates to education. We passed new high standards. We all support the high standards. What we promised was that with that would come resources to help children, help schools succeed. We have seen dramatic underfunding. Again, in this President's budget, he eliminates 48 different education programs, including efforts that focus on vocational education and other things that are important for the future--48 different programs. We will be told that if we try to invest in education, that it is too much. It is too much. We can't afford to keep the promise of Leave No Child Behind.

We passed, on a bipartisan basis, something called the America Competes Act. I wish to congratulate my colleagues. This was a great bipartisan effort. I know the Senator from Tennessee, Mr. Alexander, was a real champion of that. It focuses on math and science and technology and investments in the future. I wish we had seen those investments fully authorized, fully funded in the President's budget-- health research to save lives, science research, the National Science Foundation, those things that will make us competitive for the future. Every other country is racing to invest in science. We see China is racing, along with Japan and South Korea and other countries around the world, to get to that next technology, whether it is advanced battery technology research, whether it is biotechnology, whether it is new cures in health care. Yet we, the greatest country in the world, are seeing those things cut, but $15 billion a month is being spent in Iraq which is, by the way, not paid for and goes right on to the deficit for our children to pay for in the future. These priorities don't make sense. They make no sense when we look to the future.

I would like to ask the President: How about just 1 month for America? How about just 1 month? We will take 1 month of $15 billion invested to help us with jobs, keeping American jobs here, opportunity through education and innovation, helping our own families with health care, and people being able to keep their homes. How about just 1 month for America?

This debate we are having on the floor about Iraq is incredibly important on so many different levels, and that is why I appreciate Senator Reid bringing us to this point. There are other pieces of this that we are committed to addressing such as a modern GI bill. My father went to school on the GI bill after World War II. We ought to be doing the same thing for our returning veterans. It will cost some dollars. Are we going to hear once again: Well, we can't afford it. We can't afford to invest in our veterans. I hope not.

The reality is there is a great connection between what is happening now in terms of filibustering our effort to move forward, to change direction in Iraq--one more time, one more filibuster--and what we want to do next, which is focus on the incredibly serious housing crisis in America. There is a connection because we are saying that not only are we not doing the smartest thing to keep us safe from a strategic, from a national security standpoint, we are also using dollars--precious dollars, taxpayer dollars--in a way that is actually making us less safe at home by undercutting our ability to have a strong economy, strong families, to support those who are in the middle class, who are trying to work hard to get into the middle class, struggling to stay in the middle class. The majority of Americans find themselves in great jeopardy right now on a number of fronts. This is the time they look to their Government to play a role to help create opportunity, to be able to make strategic investments here at home that will make sure we can continue to have the American way of life of which we are so proud.

So this matters. This matters. I am looking forward to the time when we are going to change that direction in Iraq, and I hope it comes soon. I hope we are able to say to our men and women who are on their third or fourth redeployment now: Job well done. Thank you for your service. You can come home now. Hopefully, they will come home to a veterans system that works for them, that they will come home to a GI bill of rights that creates a way for them to have opportunity, that they will come home to an economy that works for them and their families. That is our goal. We are going to keep focusing on this issue until we create that change.

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

Madam President, first let me indicate that as my colleagues were speaking a moment ago, I think it is incredibly important to understand that, in fact, we are talking about a threat in 80 countries, and we do have a FISA law that, in fact, has worked, and no one is suggesting we do not have the need for strong intelligence and support for our intelligence operations. In fact, that is what all of us are willing to see happen. But what we are talking about in this resolution is whether we are going to continue to keep our focus on a country that is now in the middle of a civil war or whether we are going to redirect our efforts to address our real threats not only abroad but threats at home.

When we talk about the threats to our families, I would suggest that if we are now spending somewhere around $15 billion a month, some say, that when we look at what could be done here at home to address the very real threats of job loss, people losing their homes, children walking into schools that are crumbling, the lack of health care, those are also very important threats.

So we certainly want to make sure we are safe and address those threats abroad, but, more broadly, we have many threats affecting our families right now, and they expect us to use the very best judgment to keep them safe both from threats outside our country as well as from threats at home, including a huge economic cloud over many families.

Madam President, I rise today to lend my strong voice of support for the Feingold legislation to provide the safe redeployment of U.S. troops from Iraq, and to refocus us on, in fact, those things that are threats to our country and to the families of this country. Tonight, 591 members of the Michigan National Guard will bed down after a long day of working and fighting and facing danger at every turn in the harshest physical conditions imaginable. For every single one of these men and women, a family will go to sleep in Michigan tonight worried that their son or daughter, father or mother, sister or brother won't make it home.

The true cost of this war cannot be measured in dollars and cents. The real cost is measured in the sacrifices of our brave men and women and their families every day. This cost is more than just the possibility and the reality of physical danger. This cost includes the sacrifices that every single American family makes by being apart from each other time and time again. It isn't right what is happening; it isn't fair; it isn't safe. It isn't making us safer as a country, and we need to change this policy.

That is why I am so grateful that, once again, Senator Reid has made it a priority for us to focus on the war in Iraq and what is happening to troops and families and people here at home, and the cost of the lost opportunity by spending upwards of $15 billion a month now in Iraq.

Tonight 591 Guard members in Iraq, with 591 families at home, 591 will have missed birthdays, missed Father's Days and Mother's Days, missed high school graduations and children's first steps or anniversaries or family funerals or holidays; 591 will have missed paychecks, sidetracked careers, with small businesses and farms put in economic danger; 591 lives that will never be the same; 591 sets of missed opportunities that will never be replaced. And these members of the Michigan National Guard make up only a fraction of the 160,000 men and women in uniform currently serving bravely and honorably in Iraq, or the countless others who have served.

In too many cases, these men and women are back in Iraq for their second, third, or fourth redeployment. In addition to the 591 who are already deployed, there are about 1,000 members of the Michigan National Guard who have been mobilized and who will deploy this year. Many of them will be doing their second, third, or fourth deployment to a combat zone. This year alone, there will be a thousand more missed paychecks, a thousand more missed birthdays and holidays and special occasions, and a thousand more lives that will never be the same.

Our fighting men and women are the greatest single resource our military has, and this Government is abusing that resource. America puts our trust in our military to defend us. When our sons and daughters join the military, they are putting their trust in us to give them the tools, the resources they need, and to treat them with the respect they have earned. The current administration policies on redeployment have violated that trust. Those policies have let our troops down. Once again, I am proud to join with my colleague from Wisconsin in saying: Enough is enough when it comes to placing our armed services in harm's way by stretching them to the breaking point with redeployment after redeployment. Enough is enough when it comes to being in the middle of a civil war. And enough is enough when it comes to this administration taking its eye off the ball on the war on terror.

We are all aware of the worsening situation in Afghanistan. However, this administration continues to focus on a civil war in Iraq. Our Armed Forces have traveled a tough road since we invaded Iraq. They have shouldered a heavy burden with pride, with confidence, and with honor. We have asked extraordinary things from them at every turn, and at every turn they have delivered. They have done us all proud. They have faced tough situations and have done their duty. Now we need to do what is right for them. It is time to face the tough situations. It is time to make the hard choices, to make them proud of us, and it is time to remove them from the civil war in Iraq, to change course, and to refocus, as this bill does, and redistribute our resources to those areas that truly address the threats facing our families and our country.

America's soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines are always there when we call on them. The question is: Will we be there for them? What this legislation proposes is as simple as it is right. It requires our forces in Iraq to target

operations against al-Qaida and other international terrorist groups.

Why is this important? Because al-Qaida has declared war against us. We know that. The people in Iraq are in the middle of a civil war that is something they now have to address and come to terms with and bring their own resources to address. So while our troops are in Iraq, they should be targeting those who have said they wished to do harm to us.

Also, our troops in Iraq would be required to focus on providing security for U.S. personnel, of course, and that is extremely necessary in order to bring them home safely. I understand the Iraqi security forces are still developing, still learning, as I have met with them in traveling to Iraq. We have heard certainly of the continual need to train, the need for them to continue to develop, and we know we have a role in supporting that, and this bill recognizes that fact. It would allow our troops to continue to train Iraqi security forces, but only if our troops are training the Iraqis who have not been involved in the sectarian violence or attacks against our troops.

This bill will allow our troops to continue to train the Iraqi security forces, but only if that training does not result in our troops being in combat. Training, yes; but they need to step up at this point, after 5 years, and be the ones at the front line.

This bill also brings our troops home safely. It specifically allows our military to train and equip itself to ensure its safety. Most importantly, it requires that we begin to bring our troops home.

This administration said a surge was necessary; that the surge would give the Government of Iraq the time to reach the political solutions necessary to end their civil war and to end the violence. They said time was needed. Well, the Government has had time, and during this time our troops have continued to pay the price. Our troops have been caught in the middle of a civil war. They have been victims of IEDs. They have come home with post-traumatic stress disorder and other mental and physical ailments. The bottom line is, it is time for our troops to be placed first and to begin to bring them home.

That is all this bill does, and it does that while allowing our troops to continue to focus on who we all agree is the real enemy: Al- Qaida.

On October 11, 2002, I was proud to be 1 of 23 Members of this body who stood in this Chamber and said the war was the wrong choice. This administration, I believe, since that time has in fact failed our troops and the American people by committing our troops to a war without a clear reason or goal, and by squandering resources that are desperately needed here at home to rebuild America and to invest in American communities. This administration has failed our troops by not having a clear mission for our Armed Forces in Iraq, by not providing the proper equipment and body armor and logistical support for the troops, by poor planning on the invasion in Iraq and the lack of planning for how to secure the country and what would happen after the initial attack. I believe they have failed by sending our brave men and women back into harm's way over and over again without the proper rest between redeployments.

History will be a harsh judge of this administration, because I believe they have failed the American people. This administration failed because they took their eye off the ball. This legislation is about putting our eye back on the target of what we ought to be doing together.

In closing, let me reemphasize the fact that while the most important thing is to be supporting our troops, to be addressing the threats to them while they are in harm's way, to address the lives lost and the people who are coming home who will need help the rest of their lives, it is also important to look at this from the standpoint of the precious resources that have been lost at a time when so many American families are struggling. We always make decisions based on values and priorities, and it is shocking to me, as we have seen this war go forward, to see upwards of, some say $12 billion, some say now upwards of $15 billion a month--not part of the normal budget--going directly on the national deficit, the national debt, to be paid by our children and grandchildren. But let's say it is $15 billion a month. To see that continue month after month after month, and to see us work together on a bipartisan basis to pass a critically important piece of legislation to increase health care for 10 million children across this country, which costs only $7 billion a year, and yet that is vetoed--there is not a willingness to invest in American children to the tune of less than half of what it is costing per month in Iraq--these are the wrong values and wrong priorities.

We see schools being rebuilt in Iraq, and yet I can go in too many schools in Michigan where there is a bucket in the corner to catch the water dripping from the roof, or we don't have the kind of computer technology in the classroom every single child will need to know how to use in any job they get, from working at a gas station to working at a technology company. We know we have crumbling roads and bridges here in America. We know every time we invest in and rebuild in America, those are jobs that aren't going to be outsourced to another country. Those are American jobs--rebuilding American roads and American bridges and water and sewer systems in America. We are told we can't do that, that there are not the resources to invest in America, but we are spending $15 billion a month in Iraq.

We now have a whole new group of industries producing what are called green collar jobs, and I am very proud to have joined in working with many of my colleagues to focus on the new alternative energy technologies and other things we need to do--small investments with huge results for energy independence and creating more jobs and addressing global warming.

And yet we consistently hear there are not the resources for any new investments in America. There are so many areas where we are told there is no money: for doing the bold research we need to solve Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease and to aggressively move forward on other health research; the desire not to help those who lost their jobs because of trade, to be able to go back and get the training they need to be able to move on to new kinds of jobs so that we have a middle class in this country; and that families can pay their mortgage and electric bill and heating bill and know that they have the opportunity to keep their standard of living in our country.

There is a lot at stake. And this bill, while it focuses on what we need to do to change the mission, to refocus on ways to truly keep us safe, to begin to bring our troops home from Iraq, from a civil war where we need to leave and redirect our troops to those areas where, in fact, we will be focusing on the real threat to our country, that is, on the surface, what this legislation does.

I would suggest it does more than that because this is about who we are as Americans, what our priorities are: No. 1, how to make sure we are truly smart enough to be focused on what keeps us safe; and, No. 2, understanding that we have much to do in our country.

Our families are feeling squeezed on all sides. Communities need help, and we have an opportunity to not only redirect our troops and our focus but to redirect critical dollars to be able to make sure, in fact, we are finally putting the interests of America's families first.

I urge my colleagues to support this important bill.

I yield the floor.