Floor Statements

Mr. President, there is a resolution at the desk, and I ask unanimous consent for its immediate consideration.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that there be no intervening action or debate on this matter.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in recess until 9:30 a.m. tomorrow, Friday, April 18; that following the prayer and the pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, and that there then be a period for the transaction of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

As previously announced, there will be no votes tomorrow or Monday because of the Passover holiday.

Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous that it stand in recess under the previous order.

Mr. President, following my remarks and those of Senator McConnell, if he chooses to make any this morning, there will be a period of morning business for 1 hour, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each, with the time equally divided and controlled by the two leaders or their designees. The majority will control the first half, and the Republicans will control the second half.

Following morning business, the Senate will resume consideration of the highway corrections bill. There will be no rollcall votes between 10 and 11 because the Pope is at the White House. I have spoken to staff, and I think we should be on a pathway of finishing this bill today. I hope so. I hope it is not necessary to file cloture on the bill. If that is necessary, I will file cloture this afternoon, and a vote will occur on Friday morning.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I send a cloture motion on the Boxer substitute amendment to the desk.

Mr. President, I send a second cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call required by those motions be waived.

Mr. President, as I have indicated to the Chairman, and, of course, I have not had the opportunity to speak to the ranking member, but we have explained to the minority that I am filing these cloture motions--I have done so with the hope and anticipation that we need not have a cloture vote on this bill. We should finish this bill today. I hope we can do that. If not, of course, with these being filed, we will have the cloture vote Friday morning. But I hope that is not necessary. There is not a reason in the world we should not finish this bill today and go on to something else.

Welcoming Pope Benedict XVI

Mr. President, this morning I was honored to help welcome Pope Benedict XVI to the United States for his first papal visit to America.

In his brief remarks this morning on the south lawn of the White House, he spoke of his admiration and respect for America, our country.

His lifetime of righteousness in faith and deeds is an inspiration, not just to the more than 1 billion Catholics worldwide but to those of every faith.

As Pope Benedict XVI said shortly after his election 3 years ago:

I place my ministry in the service of reconciliation and

harmony between peoples.

During my entire life, I have known the Catholic Church to be a deep well of comfort and aid to those in need and a pillar of strength in times of uncertainty.

I had a wonderful conversation this morning with Cardinal Mahony of Los Angeles. He indicated: Can we please do something on immigration? I said: We are trying. And he has been so helpful to us on this issue. I hope we can fulfill the wishes and prayers of Cardinal Mahony and do something about immigration. Certainly, it is something that needs to be done. Comprehensive immigration reform is what we need, which he supports.

On behalf of the Senate, I certainly wish to extend my welcome to the Pope. We welcome him to America with open arms.

One Year Anniversary of Virginia Tech Shooting

One year ago today, on a campus not far from here, southwest of where we stand, the Virginia Tech community suffered a tragedy that continues to defy our comprehension. This great university, academically sound, athletically, in many instances superior, suffered a great loss. Thirty-two lives were taken by the hand of a young man with a deeply disturbed mind and some guns.

One year from that day, we pause to honor memory of these 32 young men and women and to grieve for their friends, family, and loved ones. I would, in passing, indicate that there were others than just students killed. Our thoughts go out to those unfortunate individuals whose lives were snuffed out for no reason.

I also grieve for our country, for these bright young men and women taken from all of us before their limitless potential could be fulfilled. As we mark this sad anniversary, the terrible images of chaos, panic, and heartbreak remain woven in the fabric of that community and our common memory.

But we remember also the amazing strength of Virginia Tech's community in those days and weeks that followed, how they lifted themselves from the deepest depths of despair to find a brotherhood and sisterhood of solace, peace, and even hope. President Steger and the entire Virginia Tech family demonstrated grace and steely resolve.

I want to take particular note at this time and extend my admiration and appreciation to Governor Kaine, who has led that State with such integrity and political brilliance but with an example of all things good during the time of this tragedy. To this day, he has done a wonderful job of reaching out to the community, everyone in the State of Virginia, meeting with people, and giving them confidence that the future will be better.

Now, as then, there is little we can offer but the broad shoulders of our Nation to lean upon and help carry the heavy burden of their pain.

Mr. President, I say for those of us who suffer this time of year with allergies, being outside on the south lawn for an hour today, as indicated by my inability to stop coughing, makes me reflect on how great it is to live in the desert with no rose petals, flower petals, and pollen around. In the desert, we do not worry about that kind of stuff. But we also do not have much hay fever.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, following my remarks and those of Senator McConnell, the Senate will be in a period of morning business for 1 hour, with Senators allowed to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each, with the time equally divided between the two leaders or their designees.

Order of Procedure

I ask unanimous consent that the first 30 minutes be given to the Republicans and the final 30 minutes to the majority.

Mr. President, following that time, the Senate will resume consideration of H.R. 1195.

I ask unanimous consent that the Senate recess from 12:30 until 2:15 p.m. today to allow for the weekly caucus luncheons.

I thank the Chair.

Mr. President, tomorrow the President has invited a number of people to the White House to greet the Pope on the south lawn. That will be at 10 o'clock in the morning. We are going to be in session and have a regular session tomorrow. We will make sure there are no votes between 10 and 11.

On Thursday, for the Mass, for those Members of the Catholic faith, and others who wish to attend the Mass at the baseball stadium, we are not going to come in until 12:45. That will allow people to go to the Mass and give them time to come to the Capitol. We will start legislating at 12:45 on Thursday. Hopefully, we will complete some legislation at that time. Hopefully, we will be on the technical corrections bill or another piece of legislation.

Mr. President, I extend my appreciation to my good friend, the senior Senator from the State of Illinois.

Today is April 15. It is a big, red-letter day for people because it is the last day to file your income tax returns. As we send in our taxes--and some, as will happen tonight, will wait in line to file their tax returns--it is a good time to give thought to the economic state of our families and our economy, generally.

Since President Bush took office, the cost of gasoline has gone up more than 100 percent, more than doubled. The cost of home heating has skyrocketed. The price we pay for groceries has never been higher.

The head of the World Bank said, 3 days ago, that 31 countries will be in desperate need of food within a matter of months, and there could be riots in those countries. We are very fortunate in America, we don't have a shortage of food. But people are having trouble paying for the food they would like to eat. The same is true for health care, for prescription drugs--for college tuition. At the University of Nevada, we have a new law school. I was happy to see in the latest rankings it came out ranked 78th--a new law school ranked 78th in the Nation. That is remarkable. They have done such a good job.

But they also announced they are going to double the tuition at that new small law school--double the tuition. The cost of going to State institutions is going up. Why? Because the economies of our States are so desperately bad. In the State of Nevada, because of the downturn in the economy, the Governor, with the State legislature, has had to cut almost $1 billion in programs that are there in the State--road construction, new buildings, new programs--and cutting some of the old programs. Of course, they have a program to let prisoners out of our prisons more quickly, not because it is good for the people of the State of Nevada but because they are desperate for money.

We are paying record prices for nearly everything. Yet the average household income has dropped. American families are earning less and paying more. The Republican answer, for 7 years, has been to slash taxes for the ultrawealthy, to side with big business, oil companies, utility companies, and let the little guy fend for himself.

We have worked hard, as the Democratic Party--first in the minority, now in the majority--to cut taxes for the middle class, to end the dependence on oil that keeps our gas and heating bills sky high, to make health care and college tuition more affordable for families. We have now tried for days to quickly pass a highway bill that takes care of some of the problems we had in the massive bill we had before. There are corrections we would like to make on that. Last Thursday evening, the distinguished assistant leader was on the floor, as was the assistant leader for the Republicans. We talked about: Why are we having another filibuster on this? My friend, the junior Senator from Arizona, said: Oh, there will be no filibuster on this, everything is going fine--words to that effect. We had to vote last night to invoke cloture, and rather than being able to legislate on the bill, we are talking on the bill, stalling, wasting time.

We could have started on this legislation Thursday night. We could have legislated all day yesterday and all day today. But, no, we are not going to be able to do that. We are going to use the full 30 hours.

This is a number--it is probably higher than this, but let's assume this is right. The last time we came out and said there were 70-plus filibusters, they came out and said: Oh, no, not that many, not that many. So say 65, for purposes of this discussion.

In the history of this country previously--and I am going to use leader time, not morning business time, Mr. President, during my presentation.

Mr. President, in the entire history of the country, no matter what has been going on in this country--and we have been through some difficult times--the most filibusters we ever had were 61 or 62 during a 2-year period of time, during an entire Congress. But now, in the first year of this Congress, they broke that record--stalling, slowing things down so we cannot legislate the people's business. That is because they are protecting the status quo.

Can you imagine filibustering a bill that is correcting technical mistakes made by the two Houses in passing this legislation previously? They are filibustering that--commas, semicolons, dotting an ``i,'' crossing a ``t,'' that is what we are doing, that is what this legislation is all about, technical corrections--supported by the ranking member, Senator Inhofe, and the chairman, Senator Boxer. They are filibustering this, making us use all the time.

Some may ask why they are doing this. The main reason is they are protecting the status quo. Time after time, Republicans seemed intent on obstruction only for obstruction's sake. They pursued this course on legislative matters large and small. It doesn't have to be, as they have done many times, stopping us from moving forward on matters relating to Iraq--many times. Let's consider that a big issue. But let's consider what we are doing today a small issue--technical corrections on a bill.

Look what is going on in the country today. Look what is going on in the world today. We listen to the news or find it in the newspaper. Today in Iraq--scores of people killed in Iraq. Bombs here, bombs there, two American soldiers killed in Iraq yesterday. We have learned 2.7 million people are displaced in Iraq. That is Iraqis. The population is only 25 million people to begin with and 2.7 million of them are wandering around trying to find a place to live in Iraq. About 3 million have left the country. They have blocked us from doing anything about that.

We had General Petraeus talk about what is going on in Iraq. He didn't answer the question: Are we any safer now than we were before this Iraq war started, before the surge started? No answer to that. When are we going to get our troops home? No answer to that. They have even gone forward on tactics delaying matters on legislation they ultimately came to support--stalling for time.

The most unfortunate aspect of Republican strategy is real people suffer because of it. Why do I say that? There are a lot of things we need to do as a country. We have, now, a big merger that took place making big business even bigger. Delta Airlines has joined with Northwest. They will have 75,000 or 80,000 employees. Now there is talk of United joining with other companies. We have heard Southwest Airlines--they were flying airplanes that were in bad shape, but they did it anyway.

We have learned in recent weeks the Federal Aviation Agency is protecting the airlines and not the consumer. We have a bill we need to do, FAA reauthorization. We need to do that bill. We would like to bring up that bill, but we cannot because we are being stalled on a technical corrections bill--only stalling for time.

Veterans health care--Senator Akaka has asked for months: Why

can't I bring up my bill? Every time, I say to him: Senator Akaka, we are doing our best, but they stalled us on this and they stalled us on that. That is something we want to do this work period, as we do the FAA legislation.

There is an important piece of legislation--genetic nondiscrimination. A lot of things are happening in medicine. We have the ability to look at people and find out what their genes are going to forecast for the future. But we don't want, as a result of advances in medical care and treatment in this regard, to have someone who may be prone to getting some disease 10 or 15 years from now be discriminated against in the workplace. This is an important piece of legislation, and it is being held up; we can't get to that.

Flood insurance--we want to be able to do this. It is important to the American people. We hear a lot about the Federal Emergency Management Agency. What they deal with more than anything else--more than earthquakes, tornadoes, fires--is floods. Flooding is the most devastating natural disaster we have every year in America, and we want to do something to have the flood insurance program in this country mean something. We saw the never-ending litigation in Louisiana and Mississippi and Alabama as a result of Katrina. One of the reasons for that litigation is the legislation was not clear. It was not good legislation. We need to change that.

Food safety? My friend from Illinois has been working for a long time to do something about food safety--what can we do to make it better, so that when you go to a fast-food restaurant, you don't get salmonella; if you get a steak, it is OK. Has it been inspected? We have not been able to legislate in that regard.

It is disheartening to recognize and realize what we are not able to do, as a result of the Republicans wanting to maintain the status quo. Why can't we go through this piece of legislation, let Senator Boxer move forward on completing it, and then go to one of the other matters. There are a lot of other matters we need go to. I have only mentioned a few of them.

When I go home, people ask: Why aren't you getting more done? I tell them the Republicans are stalling, they want the status quo. Here is a perfect illustration, I say to my friends who have asked that question. Why are we being asked to waste valuable Senate time--that is all we have is time--valuable Senate time on something that is so unnecessary. We are waiting here. We came in at 10. The Republicans say we can't go to the bill; they want to go to their caucus and discuss what they want to do on the technical corrections bill.

I hope that my friends on the other side of the aisle, the Republicans, would let us start legislating. After we passed the stimulus bill for housing, I thought we could enter into a program where we would start doing that. I do not know what they could talk about in their caucus about how difficult this particular technical corrections bill is. I said we are not going to fill the tree, which means they can offer amendments. Let them offer amendments. We invite them to offer amendments. But let's move forward on this legislation.

The Republican filibusters of this Congress, 65, is recordbreaking. They should be proud of that. We invoked cloture on more than 65 of those issues. We are still counting. Today is one of those counts that continue. I am very disappointed that we are being stalled again on something as insignificant as a technical corrections bill on highways.

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

Mr. President, here we are. It is 2:15, 2:20. The caucus has ended for the Republicans, and there is still no decision on the momentous decision on whether we can legislate on a technical corrections bill. It is too bad that we cannot move forward; we have so much to do in this body to meet the needs of the American people. We need to do something about the reauthorization of the Federal Aviation Agency. We have an equal pay issue we have to deal with. We have a veterans health matter we have to deal with. We have to deal with a long list of legislation, and we are being stopped from doing that today. We were stopped from doing it yesterday. We were stopped from doing it on Thursday.

I want to be spread on the record that this obstructionism of the Republicans has been carried to a fine art. They are doing a great job. They are basically obstructing everything, stalling for time to maintain the status quo. We have had 7-plus years of this administration which has brought this country down, not up. We have an economy that is staggering. We have a housing crisis like we have rarely seen--maybe during the Great Depression but not since then. We have a war that is costing us $5,000 a second, and the Republicans want to maintain the status quo.

The only thing they talk about is let's have the Bush tax cuts go on a little bit longer. Let's do tort reform. It is no longer a serious debate on legislation. It is a serious debate on how to keep attention away from the failed Presidency of George Bush.

We can have a vote at 11:30 tonight, approximately. It takes a majority vote. That is all it takes to move forward on this legislation. Until then we can do nothing. We cannot legislate until the 30 hours is used. In the 65 or 70 filibusters they have conducted in the Senate--my math is not good enough instantaneously to tell you how many hours we have eaten up on days like this just doing nothing, just letting the statutory 30 hours run out--but during that period of time we really can't do anything. They know that. But I believe the American people will recognize in November what has happened in the Senate.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, the record has been made clear today. We wish we had been doing some legislating. We have not been. I have had a number of conversations with my distinguished counterpart, Senator McConnell.

Senator McConnell, following the caucus he had with his Senators, as I have with mine every Tuesday, my understanding is a concern was raised in the caucus about the number of judges who have been or not been approved by the Senate in these last few months.

As you know, one day last week we approved five judges, one circuit court judge and four district court judges. We thought that was a step in the right direction. What are we going to do the rest of this year? You know, there is a Thurmond doctrine that says: After June, we will have to take a real close look at judges in a Presidential election year.

June is fast approaching. I believe that is the time set forth in the Thurmond doctrine. So today Senator McConnell and I in our conversations talked about all of the various judges who could be brought up, should be brought up, may be brought up, and we went over the different circuits and talked in some detail.

Following my first conversation with Senator McConnell, I called the Judiciary Chairman, Senator Leahy. He

and I have a wonderful relationship. He defends me on the floor, I defend him on the floor. Our wives are friends. He is a good person. I think the world of him. So I called him so there would be no misunderstanding. He came over to my office following the telephone conversation. And after the telephone conversation I called Senator McConnell. Senator Leahy came to my office and we visited again about the judges. We believe we need to make more progress on judges.

As we have said before, we do not want the minority to be treated the way we were treated during the Clinton years. We have done a pretty good job. At this time we have probably approved 90 percent of President Bush's judges, lots and lots of judges, well over 100 judges we have approved.

The Republican leader asked me: What can you do before our Memorial Day recess? What I have told him is we are going to do our utmost, we are not going to talk about district court judges, we are going to approve district court judges, the exact number of which I do not know, and Senator Leahy and I are going to do everything we can to approve three circuit court judges by Memorial Day.

I would like to be able to guarantee that. I cannot guarantee it. A lot of things happen in the Senate. But I am going to do my very best. I want to live up to what I am saying here on the floor right now. Senator Leahy knows I am here speaking before the American people today and to Senator McConnell. So we are going to do our very best to approve three circuit court judges by Memorial Day. That is about the best I can do. Which ones, I have told Senator McConnell. There are a number of alternatives we can have. He knows some by name, I know them by name. I do not want and I do not choose to go over them name by name at this time. But we have a number to choose from to get to those three. I will do the best I can, working with Senator Leahy and the Judiciary Committee. And when I say ``bring to the floor,'' that means confirm the judges.

Mr. President, we have a number of places from which the Judiciary Committee can move matters to the floor. We have North Carolina, South Carolina, Rhode Island, Maryland. We have Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania situation, we have a Democrat and a Republican there. As I recall the judge's name, the nominee there is a man by the name of Pratter. We have someone from Virginia. We have, as of today, two from Maryland. We have a wide range to choose from. I say to my friend from Kentucky, no, it should not be because you have two from the same party from one State and they are not our party, that should not cause them not to have their nominee approved. As I indicated last week when we got into a discussion about this, we should measure the quality of the nominees, not the quantity. We are today talking about the quantity of nominees. But we also have to be concerned about the quality of these nominees. We should confirm capable, mainstream nominees who are the product of bipartisan cooperation. With this committee, to get something out of the committee, it has to be bipartisan. I guess it doesn't have to be, but that is the way we would like it.

So we have done a pretty good job. Last year, we had a very controversial judge. One of the Senators on the Judiciary Committee decided she would vote with the minority. As a result of that, a controversial judge was reported to the floor and ultimately approved. So we are working very hard to arrive at three judges by the time of our break, which is 5 weeks from now, I believe. I said when I got this job, that if the nominations of judges are important to my friend, the Republican leader, they are important to me. I have some knowledge of difficulties with judges on the floor, having survived, as the Democratic leader, the so-called nuclear option. So I understand how people feel strongly about judges. Democrats feel strongly about them. Republicans feel strongly about them. When Senator Lott was majority leader, he said words to the effect: Why should we worry about them in the Senate? People don't care about judges. This is something that is just within the Senate.

I, personally, don't feel that way. I feel these men and women who have lifetime appointments are extremely important and that we should-- even though Senator Lott might be right, maybe people outside Washington don't care about judges, I care about judges. The Republican leader cares about judges. I will try my best to get three judges approved by the Senate before the Memorial Day recess.

Mr. President, first of all, Chairman Leahy understands. If there is an emergency in a circuit, he understands the importance of doing something about that. He has expressed that publicly and privately. Also, in this overall process, let's make sure we understand, there are vacancies out there in the circuit courts that we have no nominees for. We are waiting for them. I say to my friend, as I have said before, I am going to do everything to work with the Judiciary Committee. Senator Leahy said he would do that too. I think we can say we would work very hard to make sure there are no holdovers. That is, if somebody is reported out, we will do our very best to make sure they don't waste that week on that. I am going to do what I can to fulfill what I have said. I will do everything within my power to get three judges approved to our circuits before the Memorial Day recess.

Who knows, we may even get lucky and get more than that. We have a number of people from whom to choose. Maybe the President can send us down a few more names on some of those vacancies that are there now. I don't know what more I can say than to say what I have said. I have to work with the committee, within the rules they have, and do the best I can.

Mr. President, I hope the record will reflect the smile on my face because the fact is, we had, for years, two Democratic Senators from a State and those nominees of President Clinton weren't even given a hearing. More than 60 weren't even given a hearing. They were pocket vetoed, for lack of a better description. So, yes, I think if you have two Senators from the same party, they should not be discriminated against. I mentioned their names. Their names are Matthews and Conrad. I have spoken to Senator Leahy. The first time I talked to him was today. Of course, we will take a look at those.

Mr. President, the only thing I would say, my good friend asked the odds. I am from Las Vegas. I don't bet. I hope they are good odds. I am going to do everything I can to live up to what I have said this last 5 or 10 minutes.

Surely.

I say to my friend, I wish we had moved to this bill Thursday night, legislated yesterday and today. We haven't done that.

Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that all postcloture time be yielded back, the motion to proceed be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of H.R. 1195.

Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to one of America's finest, Clarence W. Dupnik, Sheriff of Pima County, AZ, who celebrates 50 years of law enforcement service to his community this year.

Clarence Dupnik is known as a man of action, integrity, and innovation. These skills have been invaluable to his 50 years of service to Arizona, and the Nation.

Sheriff Dupnik began his career in law enforcement in 1958 as a patrol officer with the city of Tucson Police Department, TPD. He held various positions within the Tucson Police Department, rising to major in charge of field operations by the time he retired from the TPD in January 1977. From there, he was appointed chief deputy sheriff of Pima County Sheriff's Department, and later appointed Pima County Sheriff in 1980.

Since 1980, Clarence Dupnik has been elected to seven consecutive terms of office as Pima County Sheriff, a position in which he remains today. Clarence Dupnik's many years of service to Pima County represent a remarkable achievement and a great responsibility.

During his tenure as sheriff, the population of Pima County has nearly doubled in size. Today it claims almost 400,000 residents, making it the second-highest populated county in Arizona. In addition, Pima County shares 123 miles of border with the nation of Mexico. These characteristics have brought on special challenges, which Sheriff Dupnik met head on, with an admirable commitment to crime reduction.

Over the last three decades, Sheriff Dupnik has been instrumental to the reduction of the per capita crime rate in Pima County. He has fought criminal enterprises, drug trafficking organizations, and gangs. He also worked with former U.S. Surgeon General Richard Carmona to improve law enforcement capabilities by integrating special weapons and tactics with emergency medical assistance. Additionally, he had the foresight to deploy 350 new mobile data computers in all Sheriff's patrol vehicles--both patrol and unmarked--before most other departments in Arizona. Sheriff Dupnik also participated in the Joint Terrorism Task Force and served on the Executive Committee of the FBI.

Using his many years of law enforcement experience and leadership skills, Clarence Dupnik has worked hard to improve and give back to his community in any way he can. He introduced Drug Abuse Resistance Education, DARE, and School Resource Officer programs in Pima County schools. In addition, Sheriff Dupnik instituted a countywide community policing program, created the Multi-agency Narcotic Investigations Unit, and established the Command Group of the Arizona Alliance Planning Committee. In addition, he founded and chairs a drug- prevention group called Arizona for a Drug-Free Workplace.

The dedication and service of Clarence Dupnik during his 50-year law enforcement career is truly commendable. I thank Sheriff Dupnik for his many years of service and wish him further success in the years to come. I know that these years of public service have sacrificed time from his family and I would like to take this moment to also thank and acknowledge his wife Susie and their family. With Sheriff Dupnik's great example in mind, I hope that we can all work together to reduce crime in our Nation.

Mr. President, I rise today to recognize Dr. James Hansen upon receiving the Desert Research Institute's Nevada Medal for 2008.

This award, which will be formally presented to Dr. Hansen in Reno tonight and in Las Vegas on April 17, was established 20 years ago by the Desert Research Institute, DRI, to recognize outstanding achievements in science and engineering. DRI is a world leader in the study of environmental sciences, and Dr. Hansen should be proud to receive such an honor.

Dr. Hansen directs the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, and is an adjunct professor of Earth sciences at Columbia University's Earth Institute. He received his bachelor's degree from the University of Iowa in 1963, followed by his master's in 1965, and his Ph.D. in 1967. He was elected to the National Academy of Sciences in 1995, and has received numerous awards throughout his illustrious career.

Dr. Hansen has spent decades researching climate change, and his work has broadened public knowledge about accelerating changes in the climate due to global warming. He has linked human-produced emissions to an overall increase in global temperature and called for international cooperation to address the issue. Dr. Hansen highlights the dangerous path we tread if we fail to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. At the same time, he has outlined the steps that need to be taken in order to reverse the course of global warming and stabilize our climate.

I am proud to honor Dr. James Hansen and his many achievements. The contributions that he has made to the scientific community are truly invaluable. I applaud his efforts and wish him the best in his future endeavors.

Mr. President, following my remarks and the remarks of Senator McConnell, if he chooses to make some, there will be a period of morning business until 3 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each. At 3 p.m., the Senate will resume the motion to proceed to H.R. 1195, the highway technical corrections bill. At 5:30, the Senate will proceed to a cloture vote on the motion to proceed to the highway bill.

Mr. President, amidst a great war that threatened to tear apart the fabric of our Nation, Abraham Lincoln gazed upon a battlefield and was moved to say:

My dream is of a place and a time where America will once

again be seen as the last best hope on earth.

Mr. President, on Monday, April 7, U.S. Army SGT Timothy Smith gave his life in pursuit of that dream. Sergeant Smith was 25 years old.

While serving in Iraq with the 4th Brigade Special Troops Battalion, 10th Mountain Division, Sergeant Smith was killed when an improvised explosive device detonated near the armored vehicle in which he was riding with SGT Brandon Lords.

Sergeant Smith and Sergeant Lords were brothers in arms, and they had made a pact that if one was lost in combat, the other would escort his body home. Sergeant Lords will honor that promise by accompanying his fallen comrade's body to South Lake Tahoe, where he will be received by his beloved family and friends before he is laid to rest.

Both Sergeant Smith and Sergeant Lords were emblematic of the courageous young men and women who serve in the U.S. military. My words are certainly insufficient to fully express our gratitude for their valor. Our hearts and prayers are with Tim's family.

Thursday night, at about 7 o'clock Washington time, I called and spoke to Michael, Tim's father. We had a very nice visit. I expressed my sympathy, and I said to Michael: You know, I have four boys, and I cannot comprehend what you are going through at this time. We talked for quite a long time, and he said, ``Before you hang up, would you talk to Timmy's brother Tommy?'' I said that I would be happy to. He was right there. So I talked to him for quite a long time. I told Tommy that I could appreciate what he was going through because I was one of four brothers. My brother Dale died unexpectedly in his midforties. I expressed to Tommy how, even today--on that Thursday night--I would like to be able to talk to my brother Dale, even though it has been more than two decades ago that he died. I can see in one of my boys my brother Dale's smile and the way he walks. So I could empathize much better with Tommy than I could with his dad.

We talked for quite a long time and he said, ``Would you talk to Jackie?'' That is their sister. We had a wonderful visit, talking about how sorry they

felt, how they will miss their brother. When I was getting ready to end the conversation with Jackie, she said, ``Will you call Mom?'' Her mother was visiting with Tim's wife in North or South Carolina--I forget which. So I called her when I hung up. We had another nice visit.

I told Michael, when I first called--and these calls are really hard to make. I have made a few of them, and they are difficult to make. This call was no easier than the others. It was sure a nice visit we had, in effect, crying on each other's shoulder. I think that is what these times are for, to be able to reflect on our loved and lost. So I indicated to each of those four to make sure they expressed to Tim's wife Shayna and their son Riley how our thoughts and prayers go out to her and the little boy.

Tim graduated in 2001 from South Tahoe High School. He joined the Army in April 2004--about 4 years ago. He is remembered by all as having a special sense of humor, for making people laugh, and really for his warmth. He was opinionated and strong, even from a young age. He was determined, courageous, and caring.

Tim married Shayna on the Fourth of July 2007. Their son Riley must now grow up to be a man without a father but with the gift of knowing his father was a real live American hero who gave his life for his country.

Honoring SGT Timothy Smith on the floor of the Senate is no more than a modest tribute to his great sacrifice. I hope it is some small comfort to those his life and courage touched that the Senate and the American people share the pain of their grief and the burden of their sacrifice.

In SGT Timothy Smith's memory, as I told his parents and brother and sister, we pray that every man and woman serving in Iraq will come home safely and soon.