Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 21, 2009 at 9:30 a.m.

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 Thursday, May 21, 2009.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate to conduct a business meeting on Thursday, May 21, 2009 at 10:30 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate office building.

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 Thursday, May 21, 2009 at 10 a.m., in room 406 of the Dirksen Senate office building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 21, 2009 at 10 a.m., in room 215 of the Dirksen Senate office building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``The U.S.-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 21, 2009, at 10 a.m. to hold a hearing entitled ``A New Strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 21, 2009, at 2 p.m. to conduct a hearing entitled ``Where Were the Watchdogs? Financial Regulatory Lessons from Abroad.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Indian Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 21, 2009, at 2:15 p.m. in room 628 of the Dirksen Senate office building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate to conduct an executive business meeting on Thursday, May 21,

2009, at 10 a.m. in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate office building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 21, 2009, at 10 a.m. to conduct a hearing entitled, ``The Role of Small Business in Recovery Act Contracting.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 21, 2009, at 9:30 a.m. to conduct a markup on pending legislation. The Committee will meet in room 418 of the Russell Senate office building beginning at 9:30 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 May 21, 2009, at 2:30 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Consumer Protection, Product Safety, and Insurance of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 21, 2009, at 10:30 a.m., in room 253 of the Russell Senate office building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Science and Space of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 21, 2009, at 2:30 p.m., in room 253 of the Russell Senate office building.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment for purposes of calling up an amendment.

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 1179.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to modify the amendment, and I send the modification to the desk.

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

Mr. President, I am grateful to the chairman and ranking member for their work on this critical bill.

I am happy to be joined by Senators Lugar and Reed in introducing an amendment to ensure that civilians deployed to Afghanistan receive training that cultivates greater civilian-military unity of mission and emphasizes the importance of counterinsurgency and stability operations.

Last month, I had the distinct privilege of traveling with Senator Reed to Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq to visit our troops and assess regional developments and challenges.

During the trip, it was abundantly clear that we must build greater unity of mission between civilians and military in order to meet our growing needs in the region.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, we are engaged in a four-stage process of fighting insurgency by shaping the environment, clearing insurgents with military power, holding the area with effective security forces and police, and building through a combination of governance and economic development.

As we increase our military commitment and civilian capacity in Afghanistan, we must ensure that all U.S. personnel have the tools they need to succeed in this increasingly difficult mission.

In addition to sending 21,000 additional troops and trainers to Afghanistan, President Obama recently announced that we will send hundreds of civilians from the State Department, USAID, and other agencies to partner with the Afghan people and government in promoting economic development and governance.

These civilians will continue to work in tandem with the military in stabilizing Afghanistan and should therefore train in tandem to prepare for their deployment.

When surveyed, civilians serving in Afghanistan have confirmed that joint training with the military was the single most effective preparation. This sentiment underscores the urgency of this amendment, and highlights the critical need for increased joint training so we can meet current and future needs in Afghanistan.

Integrated training, specifically for military and nonmilitary personnel participating in provincial reconstruction teams, PRTs, is ongoing, and the next course will be held later this month at Camp Atterbury in Indiana.

Still, this training will include only about 25 nonmilitary personnel from State and USAID, and it is not scheduled to recommence for 9 months, after many of our brave men and women have already left for the region.

Especially given the increased need, this 9-month training cycle is woefully inadequate. We do not have 9 months to wait and we should not risk sending civilians to Afghanistan without the training they need to be safe, secure, and effective.

We must therefore increase the frequency of training programs, such as the one at Camp Atterbury and we also must ensure this training includes a greater focus on counterinsurgency and stability operations.

The military challenges we are facing today are unlike conventional wars of the past. I strongly agree with the assessment of leading defense experts that we must better prepare to win the wars we are in, as opposed to those we may wish to be in.

According to Secretary Gates, this will require ``. . . a holistic assessment of capabilities, requirements, risks, and needs'' which will entail, among other things, a rebalancing of our defense budget.

This also includes changing the way we prepare U.S. personnel for their mission, as reflected by the creation of the Counterinsurgency Academy in Kabul, where more civilians should train in greater numbers with the military once they are in Afghanistan.

An increased focus on counter- insurgency reflects the fact that we must undergo a military rebalancing to be better prepared to face an asymmetric threat.

Thanks to the leadership, vision, and integrity of Secretary Gates, General Petraeus, and others, we have moved in that direction, and we must continue along this path.

That is why I strongly support this supplemental, which contains increased funding for mine resistant ambush protected vehicles, or MRAPS, and other equipment to counter unconventional threats like improvised explosive devices. Such equipment is critical to advancing our security goals in Afghanistan and Iraq.

But most importantly, it provides needed defenses for our troops, so that we can keep our brave men and women out of harm's way in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It is in this same vein that we must also take every opportunity to prepare our civilians better. Increased civilian-military training focused on counter- insurgency and stability operations is essential to meeting this goal, and that is why I urge my colleagues to join Senators Lugar, Reed, and me in supporting this amendment.

Mr. President I appreciate the chairman and ranking member's assistance on this amendment, as well as the guidance I have received from Senator Leahy.

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

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak in morning business.

Madam President, I am pleased to cosponsor the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act, which would overhaul our defense procurement system and improve mechanisms for identifying and eliminating waste. I thank Senators Levin and McCain for introducing this critical piece of legislation and recognize them for their effort moving it through the Armed Services Committee.

This bill is an essential step toward eliminating wasteful inadequacies that have permeated the weapons procurement system. I am sure my colleagues share my deep concern about the Government Accountability Office's conclusion last year that ``. . . DOD [acquisition] programs continue to be suboptimal'' resulting in ``. . . lost buying power and [lost] opportunities to recapitalize the force.''

This is unconscionable and unacceptable for the world's strongest military power, especially as we continue to have troops in harm's way.

Today, Senators Levin and McCain will discuss some of the most egregious examples of a lack of oversight in the acquisition process and cost discrepancies that surfaced over time. This is why this bill requires the Secretary of Defense to implement mechanisms that guarantee consideration of the tradeoffs between major weapon systems cost, schedule, and performance at each phase of the procurement process.

This bill would give the Department of Defense the tools it needs to improve the acquisition process to avoid ``suboptimal'' results, reduce waste, and ensure that the cost of developing specific weapon systems is commensurate with our defense needs.

According to Secretary Gates, this will require ``. . . a holistic assessment of capabilities, requirements, risks and needs'' which will entail, among other things, ``. . . a fundamental overhaul of our approach to procurement, acquisition and contracting.''

Both President Obama and Secretary Gates have indicated their strong support for this legislation because they want to do everything in their power to protect our troops, advance national security goals, and keep America safe.

Unfortunately, we will not get a refund from the mistakes of the past, but we can make better decisions today that will lay the foundation for more pragmatic decisionmaking in the future.

The military challenges we are facing today are unlike conventional wars of the past. Let me repeat. The military challenges we face today are unlike wars of the past and, therefore, require a reconfiguration of defense spending. I agree with the assessment of leading defense experts that we must better prepare to win the wars we are in, as opposed to those we may wish to be in.

Last month, I had the privilege of traveling with Senator Jack Reed to Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq, where it was abundantly clear that we must focus future spending on our growing counterinsurgency needs.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, we are engaged in a four-stage process of shaping the environment, clearing the insurgents with military power, holding the area with effective security forces and police, and building through a combination of governance and economic development.

The four stages, again, are shaping the environment, clearing the insurgents, holding the area, and building through a combination of governance and economic development.

In order to be successful in this complex process, we must ensure that our commanders have the necessary tools to effectively engage in counterinsurgency operations, and this requires a fundamental rebalancing of our defense priorities.

As we shift resources from Iraq to Afghanistan, we hear over and over, we are facing potential shortages of some of the high-demand equipment and ``critical enablers,'' such as UAV operators, engineers, air traffic controllers, and road-clearing units.

The allocation of these scarce resources forces our military leadership to make difficult decisions as it balances competing needs in Afghanistan and Iraq. These shortages underscore--underscore--why we must eliminate waste and reshape our defense priorities.

It is in this regard that I wish to highlight section 105 of this bill which directs the Joint Requirements Oversight Council to seek and consider input from combatant commanders prior to identifying joint military requirements.

This provision is essential because it incorporates the views of our commanders on the ground to ensure they have the tools they need to better protect our troops, defeat militants, and succeed in our missions overseas.

As Secretary Gates wrote in ``Foreign Affairs'' earlier this year, we must

build innovative thinking and flexibility into the procurement process, and ``the key is to make sure that the strategy and risk assessment drive the procurement, rather than the other way around.''

This is why we must institutionalize these changes into the procurement process which must be flexible enough to respond to developments on the ground and better equip our troops to engage in counterinsurgency.

I wish we had the procurement system set up under this bill years ago, but it is never too late to institute needed change. I thank the authors, Senator Levin and Senator McCain, of this important initiative and encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill.

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

Mr. President, I wish to say it is an honor serving with Senator Nelson. I also commend him for his tribute to Senator Glenn and the astronauts. As usual, he is right on point. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business for 25 minutes.

Mr. President, today marks the beginning of Public Service Recognition Week. This is a time to recognize the hard-working and devoted men and women who serve in our Federal, State, county, and municipal governments.

I wish to make particular mention of the several programs taking place throughout the week in celebration of our civil servants and their contributions. I know the Partnership for Public Service, an organization with a mission to highlight our finest Government workers and promote public service, will be marking the week by awarding their annual Service to America medals. I congratulate the medal finalists and thank them for their excellence in service to our Nation.

This is an appropriate occasion to address the subject which is so relevant to the way we face the challenges before us as a nation. These challenges have shaken the public's confidence in our financial markets, in our economy, and in our Government. We must work to restore the public's confidence.

So many of the solutions being presented from the rising cost of health care to the multiple threats from overseas, to the mortgage crisis, rely primarily on the work of dedicated and dependable civil servants. The Federal employees who work day in and day out to better our country, often at great private sacrifice, deserve our public's confidence, and that is what this speech will be all about.

In the post-9/11 era of insecurity and following years of political indecision

and divisive partisanship, we are left with an abundance of problems. Our honored veterans complain of diminishing benefits, while the young decry the increases in the cost of education. America's health care system is outdated and leaves millions uninsured. We remain painfully addicted to foreign oil, and auto manufacturers require more public funds to stay afloat. Some of our challenges rise to a level unseen in decades.

Of course, whenever Americans face difficulty, we display that greatest trait of our nature. Service to the common good has been our answer to every hardship since even before the birth of our Republic. One would be hard-pressed to find any public figure of note who does not highly invoke the praise of community service and voluntarism.

Indeed, in every neighborhood in all 50 States, one can find our citizens extending their hands in help to their fellow Americans and to the unfortunate throughout the world. Likewise, no one can refrain from honoring the service and sacrifice of our brave men and women in uniform. Their dedication and diligence ensure our safe borders and sustain our liberty. The hard work of our servicemembers is rightly congratulated.

But, Mr. President, there are those who give so much of themselves and often so many years of their lives, yet receive hardly any share of recognition. In the recent past, the disparagement of our Federal employees--the greatest civil servants in the history of our republican government--has become sadly commonplace. Diminishing their contribution to this Nation is an all-too-frequent exercise.

Federal employees deserve praise for the vital roles they play each day enforcing the laws we pass in this very Chamber. They care for our veterans. They toil in laboratories to create new energy technologies. Our Federal workers safely manage the complex networks of flights crossing our skies day and night. They deliver our mail, regulate fair housing practices, and conduct our diplomacy abroad. They serve in all three branches of Government.

They are, in many ways, silent sentinels of our Nation's well-being.

Indeed, Federal employees have become indispensable to our national life. With a generation of Federal employees nearing retirement, we need to attract our most talented citizens back to public service. Good, honest, responsible government requires the best civil servants.

Throughout our history, great men and women answered the call to serve in the Federal Government--citizens from all walks of life and from every corner of America. There are those who dedicate their entire careers to public service, but there are also so many Americans who enter Federal employment for just a short period. Even the novelist William Faulkner worked part-time as a postmaster when he was a young man.

The nature of our Federal workers today is the same as it was when the French philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville visited in the early 19th century. He observed that:

Public officers in the United States are commingled with a

crowd of citizens; they have neither palaces nor guards, nor

ceremonial costumes. This simple exterior of the persons in

authority is connected not only with the peculiarities of the

American character, but with the fundamental principles of

that society.

I, too, was a Federal employee when I worked for 22 years with then- Senator Joe Biden, and I can attest as much as anyone that to serve entails responsibility and dedication. During my years in Government work, including 13 years as a member of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, I met so many hardworking, well-qualified, and devoted public servants, most of whom will not be recognized individually by the public for their important contributions.

The American people collectively put their faith in all who work in Government, from those elected to the highest offices, to those, like Faulkner, working part-time for an hourly wage. Our esteemed predecessor in this House, Henry Clay of Kentucky, once declared:

Government is a trust, and the officers of the government

are trustees; and both the trust and the trustees are created

for the benefit of the people.

Senator Clay could not have been more correct. Those who serve the Republic carry the heavy responsibility of not working for the benefit of themselves alone but for the good of all.

What should be a source of pride to those who enter employment in the Federal Government has become, all too often, a thankless job. Serving in the Federal Government can be an enriching experience, and we need to do more to promote civil service among young people. I am encouraged that there is a growing desire now, unlike in the past several years, among our best and brightest students to seek Federal jobs.

For so long, the allure of easy wealth on Wall Street and scorn for Government work led our young graduates to overlook positions in civil service. But it should not take a recession and a popular new administration to attract this talent. Our young people are eager to take on responsibility, to prove themselves worthy of others' trust. They want to have a part in what President Obama has called ``repairing the world.'' With more recognition of our Federal workforce and praise for its important contribution, there is no reason we cannot convince these young, idealistic Americans to seek in Government what they so desire--a role in history, a chance to shape their world.

The recent decision by Kal Penn, the young Hollywood star, to accept a position working in the administration advances this effort significantly. Despite a lucrative career in film and on television, Penn--a second-generation American whose parents are immigrants from Mumbai--announced he would take a couple of years off from acting to serve his country in the Federal Government. When asked about his motives, he said:

It's probably because of the value system my grandparents

instilled in me. There's not a lot of financial reward in

these jobs. But, obviously, the opportunity to serve in a

capacity like this is an incredible honor.

Mr. President, when I was young, it used to be that this honor which Penn speaks of drew young people by the thousands to careers in our civil service. A job in Government was a mark of distinction. It was a privilege to be able to work for the betterment of the American people. However, in recent years, that honor has been eroded by the misconception that our civil service is growing beyond measure and consists of those in Washington who are out of touch with ordinary Americans. But I say this characterization is completely untrue.

The number of Federal employees today has not grown significantly larger than its size in the 1960s. In fact, 85 percent of all Federal employees live and work outside of Washington. They are ordinary Americans, yet they perform extraordinary work.

As De Tocqueville observed more than 150 years ago, the qualities embodied by our civil servants reflect the greatest values we hold dear as Americans. Federal employees display exemplary citizenship, choosing of their own accord to pursue careers that not only provide for their families but benefit the Nation as a whole. This is despite the advantages to private sector employment. Our civil servants are industrious. They work hard, tackle difficult problems affecting millions of their fellow citizens, and do so with grace and humility.

They often need to take risks, not only to make new discoveries in science and engineering or to represent us in unsafe corners of the world, but also to expose unnecessary waste and corruption where it may arise. The history of our civil service is filled with those who choose to uphold the public trust even when at a danger to their own lives and careers. Their work requires great perseverance, and results may take longer than their tenure in office. It requires great care and attention to detail. When the public's faith is bestowed upon you, there can be no halfhearted effort. Most of all, employees in our Federal Government display an unbelievable level of modesty.

You may wonder why I go on about the virtues of our public servants when there are so many pressing matters to be considered by this body. I return, however, to my first point--that no matter what programs we launch to get America back on the right path, they will be carried out by our Federal workers.

Exemplary cases abound, but I want to highlight a few individuals in particular who embody these values and

reflect the excellence of our civil service as a whole. They have each been selected by a blue ribbon panel which includes Senator Susan Collins, in concert with Partnership for Public Service, to receive a Service to America medal.

When she began her job as Director of the Office of Public Housing Programs in 2002, Nicole Faison inherited a HUD rental system program rated for 13 years as a ``high risk'' program by the Government Accountability Office due to rampant waste, fraud, and abuse. Today, it is recognized for helping more low-income families receive housing assistance without wasting resources. Under Nicole's guidance, the program eliminated over $2 billion in fraudulent payments and earned praise for its streamlined operations.

Since 9/11, there has been much attention on the security of cargo containers entering our country from overseas. Leading the charge to secure our ports, Tracy Mustin serves as Director of the Department of Energy's office of Second Line of Defense. Under Tracy's leadership, her office has installed monitoring devices at more than 100 airports, seaports, and border crossings in over 40 countries which help detect and prevent the trafficking of nuclear or radiological substances. She also oversees the Megaports Initiative, which screens and monitors cargo entering major seaports around the world. In addition to her responsibilities as a civil servant, Tracy is commissioned as a captain in the Navy Reserve.

While Tracy and her team have been fortifying our Nation's second line of defense against terrorism, brave men and women in the Armed Forces remain overseas fighting on the first line of defense. When our wounded warriors return home, they can thank the dedicated civilian employees of our Defense Department for significant advancements in the treatment and care they will receive for their injuries.

Dave Carballeyra, the Air Force's Director of Stereolithography, introduced a new 3-D technology for bone and tissue imaging which has improved treatment and rehabilitation care for wounded veterans. In particular, his work has helped soldiers suffering from severe burns from bombings in Iraq and Afghanistan and those requiring surgery to attach prosthetic devices. These advances have significantly improved their quality of life. Believe it or not, Dave is only 25 years of age.

Another public servant whom I very much want to mention is Dr. Rajiv Jain. Each year it is estimated that 2 million patients develop infections while in U.S. hospitals for routine procedures. One hundred thousand of these patients die as a result, and the elderly and newborn are particularly susceptible. Rajiv and his team at the Veterans Affairs Hospital in Pittsburgh are at the forefront of an effort to reduce these infections. The infection rate at their VA facility has already dropped 60 percent, and the strategy developed by Rajiv to prevent infections has now been adopted by all 153 VA hospitals.

When asked about his work, he commonly explains that ``one infection is too many.''

The final person I will mention, who works for the Department of Energy, has proven wrong those who are convinced that Government can't do something right. At the end of the Cold War, when the former Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant near Denver was designated as a Superfund site, it was estimated that it would take 70 years and nearly $40 billion to clean it up. Many advocated a permanent quarantine of the site, arguing that its rehabilitation was not worth the cost. Frazer Lockhart took charge of the cleanup effort in 1995 and finished the job in 10 years, spending only $7 billion. Today, 95 percent of the original site has been delisted from the Superfund and been set aside as a 6,200-acre wildlife refuge. Frazer's sound management and perseverance led to the cleanup 60 years ahead of schedule and $30 billion under budget.

Mr. President, these stories are just a few of the countless many. Indeed, there are a great number of exceptional Federal employees, and I hope to continue sharing their stories before the Senate and honoring their service over the coming weeks and months, beginning with this group. I invite my fellow Senators to join me on those or other occasions in doing the same. These men and women daily carry out the work of developing new technologies, protecting our free markets, ensuring a cleaner environment, and advancing our interests around the world.

I believe the Founders foresaw the need for a vibrant and effective civil service and that they would be proud of the Federal employees serving today. When the first Congress convened in New York on March 4, 1789, its first matter of business was to fulfill an obligation set to it by the Constitution. Article VI declares that all public officers are to be bound by an oath or affirmation to support the Constitution, but the document leaves up to Congress to decide on the form.

The first piece of legislation ever to be passed by the United States Congress and signed into law by President Washington codified this simple but poignant oath:

I do solemnly swear or affirm that I will support the

Constitution of the United States.

In the years since, it has been expanded to the oath presently taken by all of us who serve in this Chamber and in the House of Representatives and by every Federal employee. But the underlying point remains unchanged from that original oath. What the Founders intended in their first act of Government, and what we now reaffirm with each taking of our modern oath, is that everyone who serves in our Government is not only obligated to support the Constitution but also entrusted with that responsibility. That trust--the same as was noted by Clay--is the foundation of our civil service. It is the guiding principle of our Federal workers and the reason they deserve the public's confidence.

Careers in Government, we know, frequently pay far less than comparable careers in the private sector, and many times our Federal employees are asked to move across the country or overseas to perform their duties. Many serve for 20 years or more, leaving a lasting impact on communities and on our national policies without special recognition. They never see bonuses like those paid on Wall Street or elsewhere in the private sector. However, after many years of service, when our civil servants retire, they can look back on their careers and know with certainty that when their country needed them, they gave of themselves. They gave to our Nation, and they know their contribution, even if little recognized, has been genuine and significant. This is their bonus, the satisfaction and the knowledge that they have answered the call to duty, that their lives have surely served a meaningful purpose.

Again, please let it be noted that the first week of May each year is Public Service Recognition Week, and it is with great pride that I honor the service and sacrifice of our Federal employees. I thank them, and I urge my colleagues to join me this week and in future weeks to thank them for their continued work in support of our recovery during this challenging time.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Monday, May 4, 2009, at 5:30 p.m.

The clerk will report the amendment.

Madam President, I want to say, the Senator from Pennsylvania is someone who, when I was growing up in Philadelphia, was the district attorney there and known to be a tough and good prosecutor. So having Senator Specter speak to this bill says a lot about the bill and about the underpinnings of it.

I want to make a few comments. This bill is important. The American people are upset and outraged with the abuses that have rocked the financial sector, and which has especially put so many Americans into dire financial straits.

It is a good bill, plain and simple. I wish to run through some of the reasons why I think this bill is important and why I think it is one of the easiest votes a Member will make in this session of the Congress.

First, this bill is a critical step to restoring investor confidence in the financial markets by assuring the public that criminal behavior by unscrupulous mortgage brokers and corrupt financiers will be prosecuted and punished.

When I travel around and talk to people, they feel no one is paying a price for this--except the hard-working people out around America who have been hit so hard by this financial crisis. They do not feel as though the people on Wall Street, the people who did this, the people involved and the mortgage brokers are paying a price. Therefore, very importantly, they do not feel it is time to get back into the markets. They are concerned the markets are not fair and the markets are not on the up and up.

So what we are going to do with this legislation is assure the public that criminal behavior by unscrupulous mortgage brokers and corrupt financiers will be prosecuted and punished.

Second, this bill is a deterrent. Prosecuting white-collar crime today sends a message to those who would be tempted to cheat and defraud again. I do not want to be a party to the fact that 5, 10, 15, 20 years from now people will be ready to make a financial deal and someone will say: This is breaking the law. We are doing something here that is against the law. And someone else will say: Well, they did that back in 2007, 2008, 2009, and no one ever was prosecuted for it. These are very complicated financial dealings. If we do this, we are going to be just fine because, remember, nobody went to jail for what happened. Frankly, if we do not add more FBI agents, more prosecutors, and more financial training, that is exactly what could happen.

Third, this bill rebalances law enforcement resources. If you go back to September 11, many Federal agents were rightly redeployed from criminal work to counterterrorism. Counterterrorism was the key thing. We had to do something about this. We had to find the people who perpetrated 9/11. We had to find the people who could think about doing us harm in the future. So, rightfully, we moved FBI agents away from financial fraud and on to counterterrorism. But the problem is, we never replaced those agents.

In 2008, we had less financial fraud cases brought than we had in 2001. It is incredible to believe that in this environment we had less criminal cases brought in 2008 than in 2001. So what we have to do is rebalance law enforcement resources. That is what this bill does. It allows us to get more Federal agents, more prosecutors, and more training back to where it was before.

We have about 240 FBI agents now working on financial fraud. At the height of the savings and loan crisis, we had over 1,000. So we want to get back to that level. We want to get the FBI agents back, get them the training they need, and get the prosecutors and the training they need. So this is a wonderful way to rebalance law enforcement resources.

Fourth, this bill helps ensure that sophisticated criminals cannot cover their tracks and escape liability. Unless we get more agents working on these cases soon, the trails may go cold.

I know many people in America watch ``Law & Order.'' They know if you do not catch a criminal usually within the first 24 hours, it is very difficult to ever catch them. I think in this case that is what is going on here. This is one of the reasons why we have to pass this bill, and pass this bill soon. Because when you have these complicated financial cases, the sooner you get to the case--before people can cover their tracks, before people can go back and clean up what they have done--the better. We need the FBI agents on the job gathering the data and gathering the information.

Another point is, this bill modernizes several areas of Federal fraud law. Among other things, it updates the definition of ``financial institution'' to cover mortgage lending businesses that are not directly regulated or insured by the Federal Government.

Remember, much of the things that went on, much of our problem had to do with the mortgage lending business. The fact is, people went out and searched for and had people take out mortgages, many of whom were not qualified to have the mortgages; then they bundled up the mortgages and securitized them and then went off and sold them. In this area, there is enough anecdotal evidence to indicate there was some kind of fraud going on with this.

What this bill does is it makes financial fraud--it moves the mortgage lending businesses under the definition of ``financial institution'' so we can go after these folks.

Sixth, this bill is money well spent. Taxpayers have paid billions for bailouts. We should spend the millions it would take to find and prosecute all those who should be in jail. Again, taxpayers have paid billions in bailouts. No American whom I talk to--no American in my home State of Delaware--can understand why we would not spend the money we need to spend to prosecute these people for the crimes they have committed. It sends the wrong signal to the American people if, in fact, we do not get these folks

and if we do not take the money and prosecute all those who were involved in this financial fraud.

Next, this bill is an investment. This is easy. As I said, this is the easiest vote anyone will cast in this session of Congress. History tells us funds spent on fraud enforcement net money for the Government at a rate of $15 recovered for every dollar spent. I have heard from some people concerned about spending this money. I think I have gone through the points on why we should spend the money, but if you are fiscally and financially conservative and if you basically believe there is nothing the Federal Government should spend money on, there is one thing that even you will agree with, and that is spending $1 to get back $15. That is the most fiscally conservative program that has ever been invented in the history of the Federal Government. We have a program where we will have to spend some money, but we know we are going to get the money back but many times over.

Finally, and I think most importantly, this bill will make it clear to all Americans that we hold Wall Street to the same standards as Main Street. We have to have people believe--it is essential to our system-- that if you break the law, you will suffer the consequences. Keep in mind that many banks and mortgage brokers avoided the subprime market and acted responsibly. Respect for the rule of law demands that we identify, investigate, and punish those who self-dealt millions of dollars to line their own pockets while leaving investors in the dark. However, we have to be careful about whom we are trying and whom we are prosecuting. This is not a witch hunt. We are not out to get everybody and nail everybody in this business, but we need the FBI agents and the prosecutors to make sure we get the right people and that they are prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

I think the American people--I know the American people--are looking for swift action to restore faith in our financial markets and the rule of law. This bill is a great opportunity to do that.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business for 6 minutes for the purpose of introducing a bill.

I thank the Chair.

(The remarks of Mr. Kaufman pertaining to the introduction of S. 853 are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

Madam President, I note the absence of a quorum.

Will the Senator please yield so we have a chance to look at the amendments?

Object.

I would just like to----

Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I am joined by Senator Carper and Senator Casey in introducing a bill that would expand the designation of the White Clay Creek National Wild and Scenic River in Delaware and Pennsylvania to include two new sites: Lamborn Run in Delaware and the East Branch and Egypt Run in New Garden Township in Pennsylvania.

In 2000, the White Clay Creek watershed was designated Delaware's first and only National Wild and Scenic River. The watershed is home to a wide variety of plant and animal life, archeological sites dating back to prehistoric times, and a bi-State preserve and State park. It is also a source of drinking water for the region.

A National Park Service study released in 1994 details the watershed's diversity of natural, historic, cultural, and recreational resources, and its results led the way for its original designation.

The watershed covers approximately 107 square miles and drains over 69,000 acres in Delaware and Pennsylvania. Of those 69,000 acres, 5,000 acres are public lands owned by State and local governments and the rest is privately owned and maintained. There are no Federal lands within the watershed and no Federal dollars were used to purchase any of the land within its boundaries.

The watershed is centrally located between the densely urbanized regions of New York and Washington, DC. The legislation being introduced today will expand the designation by incorporating an additional 9 miles to White Clay's National Wild and Scenic River, bringing the total federally recognized miles within the watershed to 199.9 miles.

National Wild and Scenic designation brings recognition to the unique cultural, natural, scenic, and recreational values of the White Clay Creek watershed. It provides an added level of protection from overdevelopment, and it elevates the value of the watershed when applying for State, local, and Federal grants. Projects located within the White Clay Creek watershed have received almost $4 million in Federal funding since being designated in 2000.

While there are over 160 National wild and scenic rivers, the White Clay Creek can claim a few distinctions. First, it is Delaware's first and only wild and scenic river. It is one of only 12 rivers nationwide that is classified as a partnership river. That is a river that is managed on the local level with support from homeowners and communities and with the limited assistance of government on the local, State, and Federal level. It was the first to be studied and designated on a watershed basis, and it is the only wild and scenic

river that runs through a college or university.

Thirty years ago, I was privileged to be a part of the effort that eventually designated White Clay Creek as Delaware's first and only wild and scenic river. Today, I am proud to introduce legislation that will further expand and preserve this unique region.

I wish to thank everyone who has worked so hard and for so long to celebrate and preserve its natural beauty, so that 30 years from now our children and grandchildren can enjoy the same pristine landscape we appreciate today.

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

Mr. President, I am joined by Senator Carper and Senator Casey in introducing a bill that would expand the designation of the White Clay Creek National Wild and Scenic River in Delaware and Pennsylvania to include two new sites: Lamborn Run in Delaware and the East Branch and Egypt Run in New Garden Township in Pennsylvania.

In 2000, the White Clay Creek watershed was designated Delaware's first and only National Wild and Scenic River. The watershed is home to a wide variety of plant and animal life, archeological sites dating back to prehistoric times, and a bi-State preserve and State park. It is also a source of drinking water for the region.

A National Park Service study released in 1994 details the watershed's diversity of natural, historic, cultural, and recreational resources, and its results led the way for its original designation.

The watershed covers approximately 107 square miles and drains over 69,000 acres in Delaware and Pennsylvania. Of those 69,000 acres, 5,000 acres are public lands owned by State and local governments and the rest is privately owned and maintained. There are no Federal lands within the watershed and no Federal dollars were used to purchase any of the land within its boundaries.

The watershed is centrally located between the densely urbanized regions of New York and Washington, DC. The legislation being introduced today will expand the designation by incorporating an additional 9 miles to White Clay's National Wild and Scenic River, bringing the total federally recognized miles within the watershed to 199.9 miles.

National Wild and Scenic designation brings recognition to the unique cultural, natural, scenic, and recreational values of the White Clay Creek watershed. It provides an added level of protection from overdevelopment, and it elevates the value of the watershed when applying for State, local, and Federal grants. Projects located within the White Clay Creek watershed have received almost $4 million in Federal funding since being designated in 2000.

While there are over 160 National wild and scenic rivers, the White Clay Creek can claim a few distinctions. First, it is Delaware's first and only wild and scenic river. It is one of only 12 rivers nationwide that is classified as a partnership river. That is a river that is managed on the local level with support from homeowners and communities and with the limited assistance of government on the local, State, and Federal level. It was the first to be studied and designated on a watershed basis, and it is the only wild and scenic

river that runs through a college or university.

Thirty years ago, I was privileged to be a part of the effort that eventually designated White Clay Creek as Delaware's first and only wild and scenic river. Today, I am proud to introduce legislation that will further expand and preserve this unique region.

I wish to thank everyone who has worked so hard and for so long to celebrate and preserve its natural beauty, so that 30 years from now our children and grandchildren can enjoy the same pristine landscape we appreciate today.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate to conduct a hearing on Wednesday, April 22, 2009, at 10 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate office building.

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 Wednesday, April 22, 2009, at 10 a.m. in room 406 of the Dirksen Senate office building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, April 22, 2009, at 9:30 a.m., to hold a hearing entitled ``Global Climate Change: U.S. Leadership for a New Global Agreement.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, April 22, 2009, at 2:30 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, April 22, 2009, at 10 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, April 22, 2009. The Committee will meet in room 418 of the Russell Senate office building beginning at 2:30 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services, and International Security be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, April 22, 2009 at 3 p.m., to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Eliminating Waste and Fraud in Medicare and Medicaid.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, April 22, 2009, at 10 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, April 22, 2009, at 9:30 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following my remarks, Senator Klobuchar be recognized and then Senator Inhofe.

I thank the Senator.

Mr. President, I am proud to join with Chairman Leahy and Senator Grassley in sponsoring the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act.

I applaud their leadership on this issue. I also want to note the significant contributions of Senators Schumer and Klobuchar, who have joined us on this bill and have improved it in important ways.

Today's economic crisis has many causes, from serious regulatory failures to recklessness and greed. While we are learning more each day about what happened, one thing is certain right now: financial fraud contributed mightily to this economic collapse.

It is the job of law enforcement to ferret out the behavior that was criminal as opposed to merely reckless or foolish or unethical.

Yet I am certain that in the complex web of systemic failures that have caused devastating harm to so many Americans, law enforcement will uncover a continuum of behavior and requisite blame. At one end will be those responsible bankers and mortgage brokers who never engaged in unduly risky behavior.

There will also be those on the continuum who were merely reckless and based their business plans on the false assumption that housing values would always increase.

But the continuum will be anchored on the other end by mortgage brokers who promoted fraud, and by bankers and financiers who deliberately ignored excessive risk in designing mortgage-related products, and then hid those risks from investors while self-dealing and lining their own pockets. Those people, in my view, should be targets of the FBI.

If we want to restore the public's faith in our financial markets and in the rule of law, then we must identify, prosecute, and send to prison those individuals who broke the law. Their fraudulent conduct has severely damaged our economy and harmed countless hard-working Americans.

The public needs to know that when mortgage brokers or credit raters or Wall Street bankers break the law, they will be treated like the criminals they are. We can't have one set of rules for people who rob banks and another set of rules for banks who rob people.

Unfortunately, our law enforcement agencies do not have the resources they need to do the job. Right after September 11, Federal law enforcement resources were shifted dramatically, and understandably, to counterterrorism. Regrettably, they have not been replaced.

As a result, our capacity to investigate and prosecute financial crimes has been severely depleted. At the height of the savings and loan crisis, as many as 1,000 FBI agents were investigating financial fraud. As of last month, there were fewer than 250. And no one doubts that the scope of the problem today is far greater than it was during the S & L crisis.

That is why the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act begins by providing the resources necessary to rebuild the Nation's white collar enforcement program. Building this capacity is doubly important today, given the substantial Federal funds being spent in connection with bailout and recovery programs.

We need the investigators and analysts in place as soon as possible, not only to uncover and prosecute crimes that have already occurred, but also to deter future crimes.

Prosecuting bad people won't put an end to bad behavior. But it will have an impact on those people in the mortgage industry, on the trading desks, and in the board rooms, who might be tempted to put greed ahead of the law.

The bill authorizes $165 million a year for hiring fraud investigators and prosecutors at the Department of Justice for fiscal years 2010 and 2011. That includes $75 million in 2010 and $65 million in 2011 for the FBI to add 190 agents and 200 professional staff and forensic analysts.

The bill also includes $50 million a year for U.S. Attorneys' Offices, where much of the financial crime prosecution takes place, and $40 million for the criminal, civil, and tax divisions at Main Justice, to provide special litigation and investigative support.

Finally, the bill authorizes $80 million a year over the next 2 years for investigators and analysts at the Postal Inspection Service, the Secret Service, and the inspector general at HUD, all to combat fraud.

This authorization, $490 million over the next 2 fiscal years, is actually quite modest, given the work that needs to be done. It is also an investment. History tells us that funds spent on fraud enforcement net money for the Government, at a rate of about $15 recovered for every $1 spent. In so many ways, this is an investment we can't afford not to make.

Beyond providing resources, this bill modernizes several critical areas of Federal fraud law, ensuring that prosecutors have the tools necessary to combat past and future financial fraud.

Chairman Leahy has spelled out these changes in some detail. I want to highlight a couple of points.

First, the bill updates the definition of ``financial institution'' in Federal fraud statutes to cover mortgage lending businesses that are not directly regulated or insured by the Federal Government. These are businesses that were responsible for close to half of the residential mortgage market before the economic collapse. Just last month, FBI Director Mueller stated that this single change would be ``tremendously helpful'' in the fight against mortgage fraud.

The bill also amends Federal fraud law to protect funds expended under both the Troubled Asset Relief Program and the Economic Recovery Act. The Federal Government has provided extraordinary financial support to our banking system, and we need to protect those funds against fraud and abuse.

Finally, I note that the bill provides narrow but important fixes to ill-considered Supreme Court decisions in the areas of money laundering and the False Claims Act. Here, as in the rest of the bill, we have taken an approach that is both carefully considered and precisely targeted. We are not creating new crimes, or establishing entirely new paths to recovering ill-gotten gains. Instead, we have focused on making narrow changes that make sure lawbreakers don't slip through the gaps in existing law.

Complex and sophisticated crimes demand a broad-based and sophisticated response.

In terms of crimes already committed, we can't afford to let the trail get cold.

In terms of future crimes, we must provide both the legal tools and the law enforcement resources necessary to make would-be criminals think twice before allowing their greed to do such terrible damage.

This is not about vengeance or politics. In our haste to target wrongdoers, we should not paint the entire banking industry with a broad brush. Banks struggling to make loans during a deep recession are not bad actors. Indeed, those who avoided the subprime market, avoided securitized pools of subprime mortgages, and never traded in credit default swaps were, in hindsight, models of discipline and prudential management during an era when many lost their heads to greed. Those banks should be applauded and supported, as they continue to work their way through difficult times and a very challenging real estate market.

The wrongdoers will be known by their deeds and held accountable to the law by a jury, not by the need to scapegoat an entire industry or a few sacrificial lambs to satisfy popular anger.

There will be tell-tale signs for law enforcement to investigate: To find those who used inside information to bail out early while failing to disclose material information; to investigate traders who hid and distorted their trading books until they cashed out a huge bonus; to target mortgage brokers who repeatedly and fraudulently induced mortgage loans which they could quickly package and sell without any responsibility for the ticking time bombs that became weapons of mass financial destruction.

Frauds of the sort addressed by this bill attack the heart of our financial system. For our economy to work for every American, we must restore the public's faith that no one, from Main Street to Wall Street, is above the law.

Speaking of Main Street, the people I talk to are very patient as we work hard to get the financial system and the economy back on track. They understand this will be a long process and that we cannot expect immediate returns on the significant Federal investments made in recent months. At the same time, they rightly expect the Federal Government to spend the time and money necessary to bring to justice the criminals who helped create the crisis in the first place. The authorization of this bill--$490 million over the next 2 years--is very modest in light of the enormity of the crisis. The American public will not understand if we refuse to make this small investment in order to restore public confidence, both in the markets and in the rule of law.

I again thank Chairman Leahy and Senator Grassley for their leadership on this issue, and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I rise today in support of the nomination of Tony West to be Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division of the Department of Justice.

As we saw from his confirmation hearing in the Judiciary Committee, Tony West has the superb intellect, seasoned judgment, and wealth of experience necessary to be an outstanding head of the Civil Division.

Mr. West's academic credentials are extremely impressive. He earned his BA from Harvard, where he was the publisher of the Harvard Political Review. He received his JD from Stanford Law School, where he was president of the Stanford Law Review.

Following law school, Mr. West began a career in which he has demonstrated great devotion to public service. In 1993 and 1994, he served with distinction as a Special Assistant in the Department of Justice, where he was involved in the development of national crime policy, including the 1994 omnibus crime bill. He has also served as an assistant U.S. attorney for the Northern District of California, and as a California special assistant attorney general.

In private practice at one of the country's leading law firms, Mr. West has also excelled, representing a wide range of clients from indigent individuals in civil rights litigation to multinational corporations in complex commercial matters.

Outside of his practice, Mr. West has been a significant contributor to the legal community. He has served on the governing board of the Northern California Association of Business Trial Lawyers, as a Ninth Circuit lawyer representative, and as a member of the Litigation Section Executive Committee for the San Francisco Bar Association.

Just as important, while in private practice, Mr. West has directed his considerable talent and energy to important pro bono work and public service. By way of example, he has served as a judge in Oakland's McCullum Youth Court, a courtroom run by students that focuses on rehabilitation of first-time youth offenders.

The Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division has a set of responsibilities that are always important, never more so than right now.

As just one example, the Civil Division is integral to keeping Americans, and taxpayer dollars, safe from financial fraud. In the aftermath of the financial meltdown that has thrown the American economy into a serious recession, we must ensure that lawbreakers do not keep their ill-gotten gains. And for our economic recovery plans to work, we must ensure Americans' faith in our government's ability to exercise appropriate oversight in the use of the economic recovery funds Congress has appropriated.

The President has made an excellent choice in selecting Tony West to lead the Civil Division. He is a skilled and accomplished lawyer, a leader and a team player, and a person of unquestioned integrity. The Attorney General and the country need him in place as soon as possible.

Madam President, I rise today in support of the nomination Lanny Breuer to be Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice.

Lanny Breuer is a superb lawyer with unquestioned integrity. We are fortunate that the President has selected him to head the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice.

As we saw from his confirmation hearing in the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Breuer has the sharp intellect, wealth of experience, and superb judgment necessary to be an outstanding leader.

Early in his career, he served as a prosecutor in the Manhattan District Attorney's Office, working for the legendary Robert Morgenthau. While there, he not only gained an appreciation for the important work on the front lines of criminal prosecution, but he also demonstrated the sort of temperament and judgment that are critical to success in the position for which he has been nominated.

Mr. Breuer also served with distinction in the White House as Special Counsel to the President. From there, he moved to one of the country's great law firms, where he currently cochairs its white collar defense and investigations group. Taken together, this broad experience will serve him well as Assistant Attorney General.

Just as important, Mr. Breuer has a deep appreciation for the importance of public service. Since 2003, he has served as vice chair of his firm's Public Service Committee, which oversees the firm's pro bono programs.

His personal pro bono work has been impressive as well. One of the letters in support received by this committee details Mr. Breuer's application of his impressive legal skills and considerable

determination to rid a District of Columbia neighborhood of a powerful drug dealing organization that operated out of a local bar. Almost 20 years later, the neighbors he helped still remember and praise his important work on their behalf.

The Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division has a set of responsibilities that are always important, never more so than right now.

As just one example, the Criminal Division is integral to keeping Americans safe not only from violent crime but also from financial fraud. In the aftermath of the financial meltdown that has thrown the American economy into a serious recession, we must ensure that lawbreakers will be identified and prosecuted for financial fraud.

Punishing complex financial crimes and deterring future fraud are vital to restoring confidence in our decimated financial markets. We need to get Lanny Breuer in place just as soon as we can, to make sure that the trail of any criminals who contributed to this meltdown does not grow cold.

Finally, I would like to add that Mr. Breuer is not just a brilliant legal mind, but he's also a person of great character. As Robert Morgenthau said in his letter of support:

Mr. Breuer consistently handled his responsibilities with

keen analytical ability, common sense, total integrity and an

exemplary sense of justice. . . . [H]e also understood that

the power and authority possessed by a prosecutor will be

best balanced by humility and discretion. He never wavered in

his pursuit of fairness and justice.

That is precisely the sort of person we need, right now, to head the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice.

Madam President, I rise today in support of the nomination of Christine Varney to be Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice.

In selecting Ms. Varney, the President has chosen wisely. She has the experience, the intellect, and the judgment necessary to be a superb leader of

the Antitrust Division. Just as important, she has the character and integrity to help the Attorney General restore the public faith in the Department of Justice.

Over the course of her impressive 23-year legal career, Ms. Varney has held a wide range of significant positions that make her uniquely qualified for this critical position. After starting her career in private practice, she served in the Clinton administration as an Assistant to the President and Secretary to the Cabinet. In October 1994, President Clinton nominated Ms. Varney to the Federal Trade Commission. After Senate confirmation, she held that position until 1997. As a Commissioner, she distinguished herself in several important ways. Most important to me, she demonstrated her commitment to the idea that antitrust enforcement must be both vigorous and fair.

At this decisive time for our Nation's economy, we need an approach to antitrust enforcement that promotes competition, drives innovation, and protects the consumer. Based on her time at the FTC, and in private practice, I have no doubt that Ms. Varney is the right person to lead the Antitrust Division. Ms. Varney should be confirmed without delay.

Mr. President, I believe the document we are now debating reflects two basic realities. First, it reflects the deep troubles that we have inherited from years of lax regulation, excessive risk, neglected oversight, even fraud and criminal behavior in our financial sector.

As President Obama said when he addressed the Joint Session of Congress, America's ``day of reckoning'' has arrived. The deficit spending of the past administration and the economic collapse that began last fall have created deep structural problems that this budget inherits.

Along with short-sighted budget policies that have put us deeper into debt, the collapse of our financial sector has brought down virtually every other sector of our economy. Those facts set the difficult context in which we do our work.

Delaware has not been spared from the waves of bad economic news that have swept over our Nation. We have seen the job losses in our manufacturing industries, layoffs in flagship companies like DuPont, and downsizing in our financial services industry.

Nationally, we just lost another three-quarters of a million jobs last month. In Delaware, our statewide unemployment rate has hit 7.4 percent, a level we have not seen in a generation.

As families in Delaware and around the country sit at their kitchen tables, they know that the world outside has changed. For those who have lost their jobs, for the husbands, the mothers, who have come home with that heartbreaking news--the process of sorting out mortgage payments, health insurance, groceries--even school books and lunch money--has taken on a sad urgency.

For the others, whose neighbors are out of work, whose neighborhood now has a foreclosure or two mixed in with the for sale signs, whose own jobs could be among the next to go--basic decisions about family priorities are growing tougher every day.

We must not forget those families as we do our work here on the Federal budget this week.

But this budget reflects another reality, as well. It reflects the fundamental strengths of our country--our faith in the future, our ability to pull together, the strengths of our national character.

And this budget reflects the change in direction, the change in priorities and values, the American people voted for last November.

To help with family finances, this budget provides tax cuts to middle-class families.

To begin the work of making our health care system more affordable, this budget makes health care more accessible for families and small businesses.

It makes a college education more accessible and more affordable, so our children can qualify for the jobs that will define our economic future.

This budget starts winding down our dependence on imported fossil fuels, by investments in clean and renewable energy we can provide right here--creating new processes, new products, and new jobs.

And it begins the process of restoring the balance to our Nation's finances--a balance we had achieved just eight years ago--indeed, a budget surplus that was squandered.

Just as the economic crisis has hit the paychecks of American workers, it has lowered the economic activity that funds the revenues we need to pay for our national priorities.

One key part of our response to this crisis must be to fill the hole left in our economy by the loss of 5 million jobs, the loss of so much economic activity. Our economic recovery package, passed earlier this year, is a part of that response.

So a key function of this budget will be to continue to fill that gap in our economy, to continue to provide families, businesses, and state and local governments with the resources they need to slow, stop, and reverse the decline in our economy.

But if we are to move beyond the current crisis, we must make the investments that will reshape our future.

This budget is a clear statement of new priorities: it lays down a new foundation for economic growth. These are the priorities, these are the commitments President Obama and Vice President Biden campaigned on. These are the priorities the American people voted for last November.

We must not lose sight of the lesson before us: under the previous administration we gave free rein--and huge financial rewards--to short- term risk-taking, to highly leveraged debt, to deals that many times were not worth the paper they were written on.

We now know that tens of billions, or maybe more, of those paper profits were created by criminal enterprises like the one run by Bernie Madoff. Others, while legal, tread on the very border of our outdated and poorly enforced rules and regulations.

At the same time, we failed to recognize and support average families in their struggles with rising health care costs, with the rising costs of a college education.

We wasted years when we could have invested in cleaner and more efficient domestic sources of energy, while our dependence on dirty, dangerous, uncertain sources of imported oil increased. Those wasted years made our country more vulnerable to those who control oil reserves.

The American people have rejected those failed policies and misplaced priorities. This budget replaces them with an agenda for rebuilding our economy and reasserting our values.

Budgets are statements of our priorities, here in Washington, at the kitchen tables of families in Delaware, in the homes of families around the country.

No budget is perfect. All budgets reflect difficult choices. In this economic crisis, our choices are more difficult, and our decisions carry more importance.

I believe this budget reflects the best balance of addressing our present crisis, building a foundation for the future, and putting our finances on a sustainable path.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting it.