Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise today with a heavy heart to honor the life of SGT Dale Russel Griffin from Terre Haute, IN. Dale was 29 years old when he lost his life on October 27, from injuries sustained during a roadside bomb attack in Arghandab Valley, Afghanistan. He was a member of the 1st Battalion, 17th Infantry Regiment, 2nd Infantry Division, Fort Lewis WA. Dale was serving as part of operation Enduring Freedom.

Today, I join Dale's family and friends in mourning his death. Dale will forever be remembered as a loving son, and friend to many. Dale is survived by his parents, Dona and Gene, and a host of other friends and relatives.

Prior to entering the service, Dale graduated from Terre Haute South Vigo High School in 1999 where he was an accomplished wrestler gaining All-State recognition. He would later lead the Virginia Military Institute to a fourth place finish in the All-Academy Wrestling Championships in 2000, in which he was named the Tournament's Outstanding Wrestler.

While we struggle to express our sorrow over this loss, we can take pride in the example Dale set as both a soldier and son. Today and always, he will be remembered by family, friends and fellow Hoosiers as a true American hero, and we cherish the legacy of his service and his life.

As I search for words to do justice to this valiant fallen soldier, I recall President Abraham Lincoln's words as he addressed the families of soldiers who died at Gettysburg: ``We cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here.'' This statement is just as true today as it was nearly 150 years ago, as we can take some measure of solace in knowing that Dale's heroism and memory will outlive the record of the words here spoken.

It is my sad duty to enter the name of Dale R. Griffin in the official record of the U.S. Senate for his service to this country and for his profound commitment to freedom, democracy and peace. I pray that Dale's family can find comfort in the words of the prophet Isaiah who said, ``He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces.''

May God grant strength and peace to those who mourn, and may God be with all of you, as I know He is with Dale.

Madam President, I rise today to honor the life of Army SPC Jacob William Sexton. A member of Company A, 2nd Battalion 151st Infantry of the Indiana National Guard, Jacob was only 21 years old when his life came to a tragic end on October 12, 2009, while on leave from active deployment in Afghanistan.

Today, I join Jacob's family and friends in mourning his untimely death. Jacob will be remembered as a loving brother, son and friend to many. He is survived by his parents, Jeffery and Barbara; his three brothers, Joshua, Jeremiah and Jared; his paternal grandparents; maternal grandmother; and a community of friends and family members. Like two of his brothers, Jacob followed in the footsteps of his father, an Army veteran. His brother described Jacob as his father's best friend.

A native of Farmland, IN, Jacob enlisted in the National Guard after graduating from Monroe Central High School in 2006. He served his first tour in Iraq with the Winchester guard unit as a humvee driver. Upon returning home, he continued to serve his country by training other military humvee drivers and keeping charge of weapons and ammunition at Camp Atterbury. More recently, he was deployed near Kabul, Afghanistan, where he was described by his superiors as a model soldier with good morale and an excellent sense of humor.

While we struggle to express our sorrow over the loss of Jacob, we can take pride in the example he set as a soldier, a son, a grandson, and a brother. Today and always, he will be remembered by family, friends, and fellow Hoosiers as a true American hero, and we cherish the legacy of his service and his life.

It is my sad duty to enter the name of Jacob William Sexton in the record of the Senate for his service to this country and for his profound commitment to freedom, democracy and peace.

I pray that the Sexton family can find comfort in the words of the prophet Isaiah who said, ``He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces.''

Mr. President, I rise today with a heavy heart to honor the life of SPC Paul E. Andersen from South Bend, IN. Paul was 49 years old when he lost his life on October 1, 2009, due to injuries sustained from indirect fire in Baghdad, Iraq. He was a member of the 855th Quartermaster Company, U.S. Army Reserve, South Bend.

Today, I join Paul's family and friends in mourning his death. He will forever be remembered as a loving husband, father, and friend to many. Paul is survived by his wife Linda, children, grandchildren, and extended family.

Paul joined the Army in 1984. In November of 2008, he began his second tour in Iraq. Paul was a Michiana native who grew up in Elkhart and graduated from Buchanan High School in 1979. For the past 8 years he was living and working in South Bend. He loved his wife Linda deeply and returned home on leave this past August to celebrate their fifth wedding anniversary. Family members say he lived to be in the service and loved military life. Though he was scheduled to return from Iraq in early November, Paul had expressed a strong desire to stay in Iraq for another year. Just prior to his death, he had reenlisted for the next 6 years. His family takes comfort in the idea that he died doing what he loved most.

While we struggle to express our sorrow over this loss, we can take pride in

the example Paul set as a soldier, father, and grandfather. Today and always, he will be remembered by family, friends and fellow Hoosiers as a true American hero, and we cherish the legacy of his service and his life.

It is my sad duty to enter the name of Paul E. Andersen in the official Record of the U.S. Senate for his service to this country and for his profound commitment to freedom, democracy, and peace. I pray that Paul's family can find comfort in the words of the prophet Isaiah, who said, ``He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces.''

May God grant strength and peace to those who mourn, and may God be with all of you, as I know He is with Paul.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to call up my amendment No. 1767.

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

Madam President, I wish to begin by thanking my colleague from Connecticut and my friend, Joe Lieberman. We have worked together on so many issues and so well that I find this to be an odd set of circumstances today where we have a difference of opinion on this issue. But even here, we have worked collegially to call up our respective amendments in a timely manner.

I regret the order of offering the amendments was changed because I know the Senator had speakers on his approach to this issue, as I had. I wish their voices could be heard. I am grateful Senator Levin will be speaking shortly in support of my approach. I think the fact he is chairman of the Armed Services Committee lends some credence to our approach. I thank the Senator for his cooperation and courtesy. I so much enjoy, as with Senator McCain as well, our working together on so many different issues. I thank Senator McCain for his courtesy in trying to respect the time of the various Members who planned their schedules and planned to speak here. I thank Senator Lieberman for all that. We do, however, have a difference of opinion on this important issue.

This amendment will restore funding for Marine Corps helicopters and the Joint Strike Fighter management service reserves. Let me repeat for my colleagues who are concerned about funding for the Marine Corps helicopters or the number of Joint Strike Fighters which will be purchased, my amendment deals with those concerns. So many of the very appropriate comments Senator Lieberman was making about the Marine Corps, about the helicopters, about the testimony of the services in favor of those helicopters, those are no longer relevant. Under my amendment, the helicopters are provided for, so many of his comments about the need for Joint Strike Fighters and the number of tails, the number of planes, those comments are no longer relevant. We have full funding for the number of Joint Strike Fighters.

I know this debate has proceeded rapidly, it has changed rapidly, but all of that commentary about helicopters and the number of Joint Strike Fighters has been taken care of by my amendment and is no longer relevant to the consideration of the underlying issue, which is the importance of competition and how best to go about saving money and procuring engines for this vitally important program.

I should also say that a number of statements were read about the President and his points of view. I think it is important for my colleagues who care about the comments from the President's staff about a recommendation of a veto to point out that in those comments, they were speaking directly to the number of planes, which has now been taken care of. That has now been addressed. They were not referring to the underlying opinion of the GAO and the whole fiscal aspect of this, which is a legitimate debate, but those comments and concerns were not raised as legitimate grounds for a veto threat by the President of the United States. So that has been taken care of as well.

What is on the table is preserving competition in the Joint Strike Fighter Engine Program. My friend and colleague's amendment No. 1627 strikes funding for this commonsense program. I wish to set the record straight by preserving this competition.

The Joint strike Fighter is a massive acquisition program. By 2030, this fighter will make up the vast majority of our tactical air fleet. Investing now to ensure competition over the life of the JSF is good government and sound management practice. Understanding

this, my colleagues in the Armed Services Committee prudently included $439 million to continue development of the competitive engine.

As most of our colleagues know, I am very concerned with our Nation's growing deficit. I have consistently opposed bills that spend too much, including the omnibus spending bill and the recent budget. I have supported amendments to strike wasteful spending.

I understand the importance of restraint, and I would not be here today if I did not truly believe this competitive engine strategy will save the taxpayers money.

I am not alone in this view. In 1996, Congress initiated the F-136 competitive engine program because we knew then, as we still know now, competition results in lower cost, improved performance, increased reliability, and greater contractor responsiveness. Since then, Congress has maintained unwavering support for this program for 13 consecutive years.

I want to be clear that there was never a competition for the GSF engine development. I heard the word ``competition'' used repeatedly by my friend and colleague. I hold in my hand copies of the contracts, the contracts for the engine that has just been alleged to have been let competitively. The first contract was on January 23, 1997, to Pratt & Whitney, in the sum of $804 million. It sets in bold print ``this contract was not competitively procured.''

Let me repeat that in plain English. This contract for the engine program about which it was just stated repeatedly that there was a competition, was, in fact, not competitively let. It is in plain English. A Federal Government document refutes that contention.

The second contract, dated October 26, 2001, once again to Pratt & Whitney, in the sum of $4,830,000--this contract was not competitively procured. There was no competition for the engine program. It is a matter of public record in plain black and white. If you care about competition, you will support my approach to dealing with this issue.

This is an engine program whose total cost will top $100 billion. There is simply no justification for awarding a sole-source noncompetitive contract in this area. The General Accounting Office has consistently supported funding a second engine as a fiscally responsible approach that would yield long-term cost savings for taxpayers.

On May 20 of this year, the GAO reaffirmed this view when discussing the cost to complete the second engine and stated:

A competitive strategy has the potential for savings equal

to or exceeding the amount across the life cycle of the

engine. Prior experience indicates it is reasonable to assume

that competition on the GSF engine program could yield

savings of at least as much. As a result, we remain confident

the competitive pressures could yield enough savings to

offset the costs for competition over the GFS program's life.

GAO went on to elaborate on the nonfinancial benefits of procuring a second amendment:

Our prior work, along with studies by the Department of

Defense and others, indicate there are a number of

nonfinancial benefits that may result from competition,

including better performance, increased reliability, and

improved contractor responsiveness.

The long history in the Department of Defense is that when you award sole-sourced, noncompetitive contracts to a single provider, costs go up, responsiveness goes down, the taxpayers suffer. That is what my amendment will avoid.

Further, in light of the increased investment Secretary Gates and the administration have chosen to make in the GSF program, limiting the Department of Defense to a single source has implications for our readiness and strategic posture. If we have problems with the primary engine, we will have no alternative. There will be no second supplier with any ability to produce a comparable engine. Production delays or engine failures could prove catastrophic for an already thin tactical air fleet.

Anybody who thinks that a large contract to a single vendor without competition--again I reiterate, as the contracts specifically indicate, they were not competitively bid--anyone who thinks that is a good way for the government to do business should support the Lieberman amendment.

Some may very well argue that my amendment constitutes business as usual or is, in fact, wasteful, but many of these individuals have, in fact, supported this approach as good public policy in the past. They were right then. I am right today.

We need to keep the primary contractors honest and the only way to do that is through competition. There was no competition in the award of these contracts. We now maintain that competition through the adoption of this amendment.

There were several other Senators who were intending to speak on behalf of this amendment. Because of the change in schedule, they may not be able to be with us. We will have to wait and see about that, but again I thank Senator McCain for his courtesy in attempting to ensure that they could speak. I know there were some in opposition to my approach who wanted to speak as well. Senator Kennedy cosponsors my amendment and is fully supportive. Because of health care concerns he could not be here today. I do wish to share with our colleagues and for the record a statement he issued on June 24, as a part of the Armed Services Committee markup on this issue, in support of my approach.

Senator Kennedy, a longstanding member of the Armed Services Committee:

For the fourth year in a row, the Department of Defense

continues to ignore the will of the Congress on the

production of an alternate Joint Strike Fighter engine in

order to reduce risk to our forces, protect against any cost

overruns, preserve the U.S. industrial base and support our

international partners.

That is what our amendment is designed to accomplish and that is why Senator Kennedy supports it. He goes on to say:

I remember well the ``Great Engine Wars'' of the 1980s, and

the development of an acquisition strategy, considered

controversial at the time, that ultimately delivered stronger

and more cost-effective fighter aircraft to the nation. That

issue began a decade earlier, when the decision to sole-

source the F-15's F100 engine resulted in rushed development

to meet program timelines, inadequate responses to program

shortfalls, and mounting frustration over our inability to

address these discrepancies without additional resources.

Ultimately, the Air Force, the Navy and Congress agreed that

the short-term and long-term benefits of industrial

competition would meet these challenges and deliver results.

That experience is as relevant today as it was then,

because we face a similar challenge. The Joint Strike Fighter

is one of the largest military aircraft programs in history,

with $100 billion allocated for engines alone. In light of

recent defense acquisition challenges and the growing

``fighter gap'' in our air forces, these decisions could not

be more important, or their results more far-reaching.

Critics emphasize the short-term cost savings of the sole-

source procurement strategy and cite reports showing

different timelines to re-coup program costs. But dramatic

long-term opportunity costs are missing from this debate, and

are conspicuous in their absence.

That is what the GAO was referring to in the study I cited before.

Competition for the Joint Strike Fighter engine has

compelling advantages and avoids past pitfalls. Dual-sourcing

will build vital operational redundancy into the fleet,

avoiding a single point of failure for the engine

malfunctions and spare parts shortages experienced in the

past with other fleet-wide groundings. Competition delivers

an inherent incentive for manufacturers to absorb and contain

cost growth, even as it encourages responsiveness by

contractors, continuous product improvement, and innovation.

All of these factors are less evident in sole-source

contracts.

The alternate engine program appropriately diversifies

capability and capacity across the U.S. industrial base and

ensures that sustained production, maintenance, and

availability of critical components are not concentrated in a

single provider. In addition, the F136 alternate engine

program considers the sustained participation of key

international partners and stakeholders, especially the

United Kingdom, and Australia, Canada, Denmark, Italy, the

Netherlands, Norway, and Turkey as well. Their commitment is

important to the future of the Joint Strike Fighter program

and our basic security relationships.

For these reasons, I strongly support the addition of $438

million in the FY 2010 National Defense Authorization Act to

sustain the F136 alternate Joint Strike Fighter engine

program.

Those are the words of Senator Kennedy.

In conclusion and by way of summary, the Marine Corps helicopter issue has been taken care of. That is no longer an issue. We fully provide for that.

Allegations about the number of procurements for the Joint Strike Fighters has been taken care of. That is no longer an issue.

Statements by the President's staff with regard to a possible Presidential

veto related to the potential reduction in the number of fighters, that issue has been taken care of.

As I mentioned, the contracts for the engines themselves, in black and white, given to Pratt & Whitney on the dates in these legal documents, say very clearly, and I quote once again: ``This contract was not competitively procured.''

That is a matter of public record. This debate is about competition, the benefits of competition. I support them. That is why I urge my colleagues to support our amendment.

I yield the floor.

How much time remains on our side, Madam President?

Madam President, perhaps I should quit while I am ahead following those very generous remarks by my friend and colleague from Arizona. I am compelled, however, to save a few minutes of my time for Senator Levin, who is the chairman of the Armed Services Committee and is supportive of our amendment, for him to offer a few additional observations. I do want to close with a few closing remarks.

First, I thank Senator Kennedy, who could not be with us today but who is a strong supporter of our amendment, and Senators Kerry, Voinovich, Brown, and Senator Levin I have mentioned, who spoke in support of this amendment. I thank them.

I do want to address a couple of points that have been raised, first with regard to the issue of the Marine Corps helicopters. Again, for those who care about the helicopters, for those who care about supporting the Marine Corps, we have taken care of that issue. The Marine helicopters will be fully funded. So that is off the table. For the assertions made in the reduction of the number of Joint Strike Fighters to be procured, we fully funded the administration's request, and there will be no reduction because of my amendment. We have taken care of that issue. That is no longer relevant.

The President's staff recommending a veto was premised on the presumption that there would be a reduction in the number of planes purchased. Since that has been taken care of, the veto threat is no longer relevant. It has been taken care of.

There have been comments made about the C-130 procurement. I, too, support the C-130 procurement. We have fully funded--fully funded--the administration's request. It was passed in the supplemental. The money is there, in recognition of that. That is why the House of Representatives fully eliminated the account we are using to fund the second engine.

For those who care about the C-130, as do I--and I thought Senator McCain's comments were very appropriate about the need for that important plane--that has been fully funded. In fact, what has been proposed in our authorization is a duplicate funding, a double funding. So for those of us who care about duplication, this, in fact, would save the taxpayers money, which I understand is one of the premises underlying the Lieberman amendment. Accepting their premise, this is a fully appropriate funding source.

Finally, I would like to address this issue of competition once again. It has been asserted and alleged over and over that there was a competition, that the competition was run by Pratt & Whitney, that there was competition, competition, competition. I hold in my hands copies of the contracts given to Pratt & Whitney. I hold them right here. Cover page, January 23, 1997, Pratt & Whitney, $804 million, et cetera, in bold type:

This contract was not competitively procured.

Let me repeat that:

This contract was not competitively procured.

The second contract is for the engine dated October 26, 2001, Pratt & Whitney, in this case $4.8 billion. Once again, in bold type--bold type--so people can read it and understand:

This contract was not competitively procured.

It could not be any plainer than that for those of us who can read these documents. There was not a competition with regard to this engine. It is a sole-source contract.

Therein lies the issue. It is not about helicopters. It is not about the number of planes that are procured. It is not about the C-130. All of those things have been taken care of. It is about your belief that competition is in the best interest of the taxpayers--and quality. If you believe that, you support this amendment. If you believe single- source, noncompetitively bid contracts, such as these, are in the best interests of quality and protecting the taxpayers, then you will support Senator Lieberman's amendment. That is what this is all about.

Since I don't have much time--how much time do I have, Madam President?

Madam President, I don't want to exhaust it all. I quoted at length in my previous comments from the General Accounting Office, and there are a variety of studies. It is asserted that GAO did not offer much reasoning for their comments. I point out once again that they state very clearly the savings from this competition; the second engine has the potential to be equal to or exceeding its cost. Prior experience, they indicate, points to this and that they are confident competitive pressures could yield these kinds of savings. The GAO is well on record. I understand there is a dispute from other entities and other studies, but that is the GAO's opinion.

This all comes down to competition, whether my colleagues embrace it, in which case they support our amendment, or if they do not--and I suppose there may be legitimate arguments in favor of noncompetitive bidding--they will support the other amendment.

I yield the floor.

Absolutely.

Madam President, unless my friend and colleague from Arizona has something new and shocking to say, I am going to yield back the remainder of my time.

First, I thank both of my colleagues for the tenor of the debate. We have some honest differences of opinion. I find myself much more comfortable working with my colleague, Senator Lieberman, in a variety of capacities. Senator McCain and I are one of a hearty band of a few who come to the floor in agreement to oppose wasteful measures. I look forward to resuming that partnership in the future even though we have a respectful difference of opinion today. I only wish all our debates could be as focused and collegial as this has been.

Having said that, I thank my colleagues. Unless Chairman Levin has anything additional to say, I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. President, I rise today with a heavy heart to honor the life of Army SPC Chancellor Arsenio Keesling, from Indianapolis, IN. Chancellor was 25 years old when he lost his life on June 19, 2009, in Baghdad, Iraq. He was a member of the 961st Engineer Company of the U.S. Army Reserve, based in Sharonville, OH.

Today, I join Chancellor's family and friends in mourning his death. Chancellor, who was known to his friends and family as Chancy, will forever be remembered as a loving brother, son and friend to many. He is survived by his parents Gregg and Jannett Keesling; his brother O'Neil; his sister Tiana; his grandparents Gary and Gwen Keesling and Terrence and Barbara Fowle; and a host of other friends and family members.

Chancellor, a graduate of Lawrence North High School in Indianapolis, enlisted in the Army following his graduation in 2003. He served his first tour of duty in Iraq as a combat engineer assigned to a company based at Fort Sill in Lawton, OK. He was redeployed to Iraq in May 2009 with the 961st Engineer Company for a second tour of duty.

Chancellor had been home just a few weeks ago to celebrate his 25th birthday with family and friends. A native of Jamaica, where he lived until he was 12 years old, he had a particular passion for soccer and reggae music. He planned on going into the construction business once his military career was complete.

While we struggle to express our sorrow over this loss, we can take pride in the example Chancellor set as a soldier and patriot. Today and always, he will be remembered by family and friends as a true American hero, and we cherish the legacy of his service and his life.

As I search for words to do justice to this valiant fallen soldier, I recall President Abraham Lincoln's words as he addressed the families of soldiers who died at Gettysburg: ``We cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here.'' This statement is just as true today as it was nearly 150 years ago, as we can take some measure of solace in knowing that Chancellor's heroism and memory will outlive the record of the words here spoken.

It is my sad duty to enter the name of Army SPC Chancellor Arsenio Keesling in the Record of the U.S. Senate for his service to this country and for his profound commitment to freedom, democracy and peace. I pray that Chancellor's family can find comfort in the words of the prophet Isaiah who said, ``He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces.''

May God grant strength and peace to those who mourn, and may God be with all of you, as I know He is with Chancellor.

Mr. President, I rise today with a heavy heart to honor the life of Major Matthew Philip Houseal, from Amarillo, TX. Matthew was 54 years old when he lost his life on May 11, 2009, from injuries sustained from a noncombat related incident in Baghdad, Iraq. He was a member of the 55th Medical Company, U.S. Army Reserve, Indianapolis,

Madam President, on May 17, 2009, the President of the United States, the Honorable Barack Obama, delivered the commencement address at the University of Notre Dame, in South Bend, IN, the State I have the honor of representing in the U.S. Senate where I for a time served with then-Senator Obama.

Although I was not able myself to be present at this ceremony, my friend and former colleague, Dr. John Brademas, who for 22 years served as the U.S. Representative from the district centered in South Bend, was at Notre Dame for this occasion and has told me what a brilliant address President Obama offered.

Here I note that since 1981, John Brademas has been president or president emeritus of New York University where, as he did while a Member of Congress, he continues to give outstanding leadership to the field of education in our country.

President Obama was awarded the honorary degree of doctor of laws on this occasion by the Reverend John I. Jenkins, C.S.C., president of the University of Notre Dame, and was greeted as well by the Reverend Theodore M. Hesburgh, C.S.C., president emeritus of Notre Dame.

Because I believe my colleagues in Congress--and others--will be interested in reading President Obama's remarks at Notre Dame, I ask unanimous consent to have the address printed in the Record.

Mr. President, today I wish to honor my fellow Hoosier, Kathleen L. ``Katie'' Wolf. Today we recognize the many accomplishments of Katie, a distinguished public servant and a model citizen who over the years

has contributed much to her community in Monticello and to the Hoosier State.

A native of Princeton Township, IN, Katie Wolf has long been a pillar of her community. In 1967, she served as the secretary on the founding board of the White County United Fund, now known as the United Way of White County.

In 1968, Katie ran and was elected to the position of clerk of the White County Circuit Court, a role she filled for over a decade before being nominated to the Judiciary Committee for the Democratic National Committee. In 1984, Katie became the first woman to run for and win a position in her district in the Indiana House of Representatives, and during her first term she was elected Outstanding Freshman Legislator. In 1986, Katie was appointed senator for District Seven in the Indiana State Senate.

Throughout her career, Katie has been the recipient of numerous awards and designations, a testament to her stature as a model Hoosier and as a leader in public life in Indiana. She has received the Director's Award from the National Federation of Independent Businesses, the Director's Award from the Purdue University Cooperative Extension, and Legislator of the Year from the Indiana Trial Lawyers Association. Former Indiana Governor Frank O'Bannon presented Katie with the Sagamore of the Wabash Award, which is the highest honor that the Governor of Indiana can bestow. It is an award reserved for those who have made outstanding contributions to the Hoosier State. Last month, she received an honorary doctor of laws from Saint Joseph's College in Rensselaer.

Next week, Katie will receive an award from the local chapter of Women Giving Together, an organization committed to strengthening the communities of White County. I am proud to have this opportunity to recognize her for the remarkable service she has rendered on behalf of the people of Indiana and congratulate her on receiving another well- deserved distinction.

Mr. President, I rise today with a heavy heart to honor the life of SA Ashton L. M. Goodman, from Indianapolis, IN. Ashton was 21 years old when she lost her life on May 26, 2009, from injuries sustained from a bomb attack near Bagram Air Field, Afghanistan. She was a member of the 43rd Logistics Readiness Squadron, Pope Air Force Base, NC.

Today, I join Ashton's family and friends in mourning her death. Ashton will forever be remembered as a loving daughter, sister, and friend to many. She is survived by her mother, Vicki Goodman; father and stepmother, Mark and Chasity Goodman; brother, Levi Goodman; grandmother, Lois Kammers; aunt, Yvonne Chapman; stepsisters, Amber and Michelle Jefferies; half-sisters, Brianna and Courtney Goodman; and a host of other friends and relatives.

Ashton joined the Air Force in 2006, following her graduation from Indianapolis's Warren Central High School. She served as a driver for the Air Force in Afghanistan, working with the Panshir Provincial Reconstruction Team, a unit that rebuilds roads and schools in Afghanistan. Ashton, who loved animals, was training to be a biologist. In high school, she worked at a local pet store and was active in the Zoo Teen Club, a student group that volunteers at the Indianapolis Zoo. She was also a member of the Japan Club.

While we struggle to express our sorrow over this loss, we can take pride in the example Ashton set as a soldier. Today and always, she will be remembered by family and friends as a true American hero, and we cherish the legacy of her service and her life.

As I search for words to do justice to this valiant fallen soldier, I recall President Abraham Lincoln's words as he addressed the families of soldiers who died at Gettysburg: ``We cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here.'' This statement is just as true today as it was nearly 150 years ago, as we can take some measure of solace in knowing that Ashton's heroism and memory will outlive the record of the words here spoken.

It is my sad duty to enter the name of Ashton L. M. Goodman in the official Record of the U.S. Senate for her service to this country and for her profound commitment to freedom, democracy, and peace. I pray that Ashton's family can find comfort in the words of the prophet Isaiah who said, ``He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces.''

May God grant strength and peace to those who mourn, and may God be with all of you, as I know He is with Ashton.

Mr. President, I rise today to honor Mr. Thomas O. Sugar, who has served as one of my most valued and trusted aides in the U.S. Senate and in the Indiana Governor's office. I am proud to have this opportunity to recognize Tom for the remarkable service he has rendered on behalf of the people of Indiana.

Tom is a native of Kokomo, IN, an auto town in the heart of our proud manufacturing State. Tom never forgot where he came from, and he has been a faithful and passionate emissary of the hard-working, middle- class Hoosiers who inspired him to enter public service in the first place.

Tom's career in government and politics began when he served as a campaign field organizer for Jim Jontz, who represented Indiana's fifth Congressional District. Throughout his 7 years of service for Congressman Jontz, Tom held a variety of positions, culminating in his ascension to chief of staff in 1991.

I was fortunate to have Tom join my staff as director of communication and planning during my second term as Indiana Governor. Among his many achievements, Tom orchestrated a successful conference on promoting responsible fatherhood that brought together leaders of the most successful fatherhood programs in the country. He also helped plan the Governor's adoption initiative, heralding needed reforms in Indiana's adoption system.

Tom served as my campaign manager for my first Senate race in 1998 and then took over as my chief of staff, a position he has held for over a decade. Tom has carried out this demanding role with unceasing skill, diplomacy, and determination. His portfolio has been considerable. Tom has been a top adviser on a range of significant policy issues, helping to improve our Nation's educational system, supporting working families, strengthening national security, and expanding volunteer opportunities for Americans to serve their country.

In addition to playing a crucial role on policy issues, Tom has served as a leader and a mentor to members of my staff in both my Indiana and Washington offices. Tom had a knack for discovering new talent, and he helped hone the professional development of countless public servants.

Most importantly, Tom is a devoted father to his sons, Jackson and Carter, and a loving husband to his wife Nancy. Tom cares about the people he works with and treats his colleagues like extended family. Tom was always ready with a kind word during times of plenty and an understanding ear during periods of personal difficulty and loss.

This week, Tom leaves my office to pursue a new opportunity helping lower income students finish their college and postsecondary education. The newly formed National Consortium for College Completion is extraordinarily lucky to have Tom as a part of their organization. While I will deeply miss having Tom on my Senate staff, I look forward to hearing about the work he will do on behalf of students in need across our country.

Tom is a trusted aide, a dear friend, and a true-blue Hoosier whose contributions to the State of Indiana are immeasurable.

Mr. President, I am pleased to recognize Tom's extraordinary contributions to this body, and I wish him the best of luck in his future pursuits.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the next hour be for debate only.

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

Mr. President, I wish to call the attention of my colleagues to a most thoughtful address delivered in my State of Indiana recently by a fellow Hoosier, one who served as a Member of Congress from Indiana for 22 years, 1959 until 1981. I refer to Dr. John Brademas, who represented the district centered in South Bend.

A Democrat, John Brademas served throughout those years on the Committee on Education and Labor of the House of Representatives where he took part in writing most of the measures then enacted to support schools, colleges, and universities; the arts and the humanities; libraries and museums; Head Start; and education of children with disabilities as well as others.

In his last 4 years, John Brademas was majority whip of the House of Representatives, third-ranking member of the Leadership.

Seeking election in 1980 to a 12th term, John Brademas lost that race. He was shortly thereafter invited to become president of New York University, the Nation's largest private, or independent, university.

He served as president until 1992 when he became president emeritus, his present position. I believe it is recognized by those in the higher education world in the United States that John Brademas led the transformation of NYU, as it is known, to one of the most successful institutions of higher learning in our country.

A graduate of Harvard University where, as a Veterans National Scholar, he earned his B.A., magna cum laude, in 1949, he went on to Oxford University, England, where as a Rhodes Scholar, he earned a Ph.D. with a dissertation on the anarchist movement in Spain.

John Brademas is married to Dr. Mary Ellen Brademas, a physician in private practice, a dermatologist, affiliated with the NYU Medical Center.

On May 2, 2009, John Brademas delivered the keynote address, ``Rotary: Pathfinder to Peace,'' for a statewide conference in Indianapolis of members of Rotary Clubs from throughout Indiana.

I believe my colleagues will read with interest John Brademas' address on this occasion, and I ask unanimous consent to have the text of his remarks printed in the Record.

Mr. President, today I recognize a constituent and a dear friend, Dr. Myles David Brand, a man of uncommon integrity and vision whose leadership has restored an ethos of scholastic achievement to collegiate athletics in America.

Dr. Brand took over as the fourth chief executive officer of the National Collegiate Athletics Association, NCAA, in January 2003, and the intervening years have been marked by an unyielding focus on reorienting the NCAA's priorities in ways aimed to nurture and support the student athlete.

Dr. Brand delivered a watershed speech in 2001 at the National Press Club, in which he enunciated the mission statement that would come to define his tenure leading the NCAA: ``Academics must come first.''

Dr. Brand warned against the ``bleeding of the entertainment industry with intercollegiate athletics'' and cautioned that falling academic performance ``risks undermine the integrity of a system of higher education that is without question right now leading the world.''

``Athletic success,'' he said, ``cannot substitute for academic success. Universities must be seen, and understood, and judged by their achievements as

academic institutions, not sports franchises.''

As NCAA president, Dr. Brand spearheaded the most comprehensive package of academic reforms governing college athletics in our lifetime. Under his leadership, the NCAA raised eligibility standards for freshmen and toughened requirements that its 400,000 scholarship athletes make annual progress toward a degree to maintain their eligibility. Dr. Brand's reforms subjected teams with poor overall academic performance to unprecedented penalties, including bans on bowl games and postseason play.

The result: Today, NCAA graduation rates exceed those of the general student population in every demographic category. Last year, the NCAA's overall graduation rate for its student athletes stood at 79 percent. The graduation rate of female student athletes outpaced nonathletes by 8 percent, while the graduation rate for African-American male student athletes was 10 percent higher than their nonathletic peers.

For redefining what is scholastically possible in such a short time span, Dr. Brand will forever be known as the NCAA's ``Education President.''

It should be noted that despite Dr. Brand's unrelenting focus on helping students make the grade, he has never lost sight of the joy of making the shot. ``Anyone who thinks that college is only about the library, the lecture hall, and the laboratory really doesn't understand what happens in college,'' he once told a journalist.

I can personally attest that Myles Brand harbors an unsurpassed love for the game played on the field and a belief in the power of the NCAA to be a dreammaker for young people.

Yet he has remained true to his pledge that ``academics must come first.'' In 2003, Dr. Brand became the first university president ever chosen to lead the NCAA. A philosopher by training and inclination, Dr. Brand has earned admiration as a level-headed leader interested in critical examination and reform. USA Today called him ``the strongest, most vocal and influential leader college sports has had in . . . decades.''

Prior to taking over the NCAA, the people of the great State of Indiana enjoyed a front-row seat to his many accomplishments in academia. From 1994 to 2002, he served as the 16th president of my alma mater, Indiana University. Dr. Brand led IU through a period of remarkable growth, attracting record enrollments, doubling research funding, and establishing the university as a national leader in the life sciences and information technology. He increased the school's endowment by a factor of four and tripled the number of endowed chairs. Under Dr. Brand's leadership, IU created a nationally renowned School of Informatics and developed the Central Indiana Life Sciences Initiatives. His trailblazing leadership was recognized in 2001 when Time Magazine named Indiana University its ``College of the Year.''

When Dr. Brand left IU to assume the NCAA presidency, he did not have to go far--traveling 40 miles up State Road 37 from Bloomington to Indianapolis, where the NCAA is headquartered.

The NCAA has been a model corporate constituent under Dr. Brand's management, employing more than 410 Hoosiers with well-paying jobs while maintaining a strong community presence. It has helped hundreds of charities, schools and local organizations throughout Indiana, such as United Way and the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation. After Hurricane Katrina ravaged the Gulf Coast, the NCAA dispatched teams of student athletes and considerable financial resources to the region to rebuild family homes.

Dr. Myles David Brand is a loving and devoted husband to his wife, Peg; a wonderful father and grandfather; and a special leader who I am proud to recognize today for his contributions to college sports, the State of Indiana, and the country as a whole.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, as you may have observed in our time together in the Senate, I do not come to the floor of the Senate to speak very often. I try to reserve my comments for matters of particular importance and urgency, matters where I think we can make a real difference and where the debate will matter. We are debating one such issue today, when it comes to the important need, the critical need to rein in the abusive practices of credit card companies that are harming thousands of middle-class families across my State and millions of middle-class families across America.

Just this last weekend I received more than 500 letters and e-mails from my constituents, middle-class people across Indiana who are outraged because they rightly believe they have been abused by the predatory practices of credit card companies. These are decent hard- working people who ask nothing more than for a fair shake in life and, too often, they are not getting it because of the these abusive practices.

I wish to take the opportunity to share with you a couple of these stories. Many of them are heartfelt. I will give an example. This one is from a single mother. She writes me:

Dear Senator Bayh, I am a single mother of a teenage boy,

and I work 50 hours per week--

She is not some deadbeat, she is a hard-working, middle American--

at a job I've had for 14 years. My ex-husband quit his job

out of the blue a couple of years ago and did not pay any

child support for over a year.

Unfortunately, I had to turn to using my credit cards for

things like groceries, gas and other bills just to keep up.

If you are even 1 or 2 days late in paying your bill, these

credit card companies increase your percentage rate to

astronomically high amounts. Because I was struggling and a

few days--not months, just a few days--late on some of my

credit card payments, the percentage rates on my credit cards

are now between 28 and 32 percent. I will never pay off these

bills with interest rates like this!

So many people out there, including myself, are at the

mercy of these unscrupulous credit card companies that can do

whatever they please. There needs to be laws regulating how

much these companies can charge. Americans are mired in

credit cards debt that will never be paid off, no matter how

hard they work and no matter how hard they try if the current

practices do not change.

My economic situation will be so much better if it were not

for my credit card bills. I owe probably $15,000 now on all

of my credit card bills combined, but it will take me a

lifetime to pay those off because of the practices to which I

have been subjected. Please fight for hard working people

everywhere who just want a chance to get out from under their

debt and better their financial circumstances.

I also heard from a woman in Carmel, IN, just north of Indianapolis, a few weeks ago. She had an $8,000 balance on a closed--a closed credit card account. She was not buying anything. She had always paid her bill on time. And out of the blue one day--she had done nothing wrong--her credit card company doubled her minimum payment. She is a woman of modest means and she could not make the higher payment. She called the bank and they would not work with her, even though she had never missed a payment or been late, not once.

Soon the credit company started adding late fees and compounding her interest. Over the course of 2 years, her balance tripled from $8,000 to $24,000, without making a single purchase. She had bought nothing. She had done nothing wrong. And she is getting gouged like this. This is the kind of thing that has to stop.

I heard from another constituent from Middlebury, IN, another basic middle-class middle American, who received an offer from her credit card company to consolidate her balance on all of her credit cards at 4 percent.

Well, that sounded like a pretty good rate, so she accepted the offer. She never missed a payment. She had paid off half her debt, when suddenly they raised the monthly minimum payment by 60 percent. So she is paying on time, she is paying down her debt, and her monthly minimum rate goes up by 60 percent without cause or any notice.

She called customer service to complain. They said they would lower her monthly minimum payment if she would agree to have her interest rate doubled. This woman from Middlebury is a mother. She is trying to keep her head above water, and her credit card company is making life more difficult with practices like that.

Those are the kinds of things we have to stop. And those are the kinds of things I hope we will stop yet this week here in the Senate.

Here is what she wrote:

I don't know that our government can do a thing about this,

but I just wanted to be heard.

Well, here is the place where her voice can be heard. Here is the place where thousands of middle-class families like hers can come for some relief. Here is the place where over 500 people who wrote about the abuses to which they have been subjected can come for some relief.

This recession has caused millions of middle-class families to resort to using their credit cards a little bit more, not because they wanted to but because they had to try to make ends meet. They are working hard, trying to get out from under this situation, and it does not make life any easier when they are running uphill because of these abusive practices.

You know, bills are sent out so late. They arrive in our mailbox and you have got 24 or 48 hours to pay the thing off or you are subjected to a late fee. That is not right. Then they start charging interest on the late fee. Interest rates can literally, because of the fine print in these bills--you know, back in the day, you applied for a credit card, it was about a one-page thing. Now it is 20 or 30 pages of fine print. And buried in there in the fine print are the provisions where companies can raise your interest rates any amount, anytime, for any reason, or for no reason whatsoever. Those are the kinds of things that need to be stopped.

Then, finally, when you are making your payments, they take the payment

you make, and rather than applying it to the most expensive part of your debt with the highest interest rate, they apply it to the lowest interest rate. Why? Because it is more profitable for them, even though it would be better to do it the other way around for you. Those are the kinds of things we have to correct.

You know me pretty well, Mr. President. I am a free enterprise person. I believe in the right of companies to make a profit, and credit card companies are no exception. But they ought to make it the legitimate, old-fashioned way, not on the backs of consumers through abusive practices. That is what we are talking about here.

This also goes to something else I am concerned about, and that is the deepening skepticism and cynicism about government in general, and about Washington, DC, in particular. They think we are all under the thumb of a bunch of special interests. Everybody sold out and nobody cares about the average person or the middle-class family anymore. This gives us an opportunity to show, to demonstrate that that is not true, to stand up for millions of ordinary people, to do what is right, to say that the free market should be allowed to operate, but you should not scam people, you should not bury fees in fine print, you should not do a bait and switch.

That is not the way you make a decent profit. That is something that ought to be against the rules. That is what this legislation would provide for. For the sake of middle-class families across States such as Indiana and New Mexico and elsewhere across America, for the sake of folks who are working hard trying to get out from under the consequences of this recession, for the sake of trying to restore some faith and trust in our system of self-government, it is important that we pass this credit card bill, to restrain these abusive practices, to stand up for middle-class families, to do right by our citizens, and to let people know that when their voices are heard, we will answer.

That is why I have risen today on this bill. I urge my colleagues to join with us in acting. I hope we will have an opportunity to do that before the week is out.

I thank you for your leadership, as well as my colleagues.

Seeing none of our colleagues present, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Merkley.) The clerk will call the roll.

The assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.

Mr. President, I rise today with a heavy heart to honor the life of SSG Gary Lee Woods, Jr., from Shepherdsville, KY. Gary was 24 years old when he lost his life on April 10, 2009, from injuries sustained from a truck bomb that detonated near his vehicle in Mosul, Iraq. He was a member of the 1st Battalion, 67th Armor Regiment, 4th Infantry Division of Fort Carson, CO.

Today, I join Gary's family and friends in mourning his death. Gary, who was known to family and friends by his middle name, Lee, will forever be remembered as a loving husband, son, and friend to many. He is survived by his devoted wife, Christie; his father and stepmother Gary and Debbie Woods; his mother and stepfather Becky and Pat Johnson; sisters Britteny and Heather Woods and Mandy Maraman; brothers Courtney and Troy Woods and Newman and Corey Johnson; grandparents Marilyn Waters and Nancy and Charlie Ratliff; in-laws Rick and Elaine Houston; and a host of other friends and relatives.

Gary, a member of the JROTC at Bullitt Central High School, joined the Army following his graduation from high school. A gifted musician, Gary sang and played the trombone, drums, piano and guitar. He was also an accomplished athlete and a member of Bullitt's football team.

While we struggle to express our sorrow over this loss, we can take pride in the example Gary set as a soldier. Today and always, he will be remembered by family and friends as a true American hero, and we cherish the legacy of his service and his life.

As I search for words to do justice to this valiant fallen soldier, I recall President Abraham Lincoln's words as he addressed the families of soldiers who died at Gettysburg:

We cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow

this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled

here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or

detract. The world will little note nor long remember what we

say here, but it can never forget what they did here.

This statement is just as true today as it was nearly 150 years ago, as we can take some measure of solace in

knowing that Gary's heroism and memory will outlive the record of the words here spoken.

It is my sad duty to enter the name of Gary Lee Woods, Jr. in the Record of the Senate for his service to this country and for his profound commitment to freedom, democracy and peace. I pray that Gary's family can find comfort in the words of the prophet Isaiah who said, ``He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces.''

May God grant strength and peace to those who mourn, and may God be with all of you, as I know He is with Gary.