Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise today to join the New Hampshire chapter of the Military Officers Association of America, MOAA, in recognizing the critical work of Veterans Count, a New Hampshire organization that has proven a critical ally in ongoing efforts to support servicemembers, veterans, and their families. On January 25, 2014, Veterans Count will receive the Granite State Warriors Award, given by the MOAA to New Hampshire organizations making the most significant contributions to the Armed Forces of the United States. A program of Easter Seals, Veterans Count helps servicemembers and their families throughout the deployment cycle and beyond.

The hallmark of Veterans Count's approach to providing support is their partnership with the Deployment Cycle Support Program, DCSP, which has assisted thousands of servicemembers and their families since its inception in 2007. The program was built on the understanding that the strains of a military deployment are shared and can both precede and outlast the deployment itself. Thanks to the work and collaboration of New Hampshire groups like Veterans Count, the DCSP has provided extraordinary support to veterans and their families.

Veterans Count also deserves recognition for their work addressing mental health and suicide awareness. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan wounded our warriors in ways that were not previously well understood and although mental health and suicide prevention efforts are ongoing, we must do more to help those soldiers and veterans in need. Veterans Count is at the forefront of these efforts and, in 2012 alone, the group intervened successfully in 29 suicide risk situations. Moreover, since the program's inception, none of its participants have committed suicide. Veterans Count's success in suicide prevention is due in large part to their work helping veterans secure permanent employment and easy access to mental health care.

I look forward to hearing more success stories as a result of Veterans Count's determined efforts, and I am pleased to congratulate them on a well-deserved award from the Military Officers Association of America.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I have come to the floor today, like so many of our colleagues, to talk about the urgent need to pass legislation to extend unemployment insurance. I was encouraged, as I know many of us were, that the Senate voted on Monday to move to this legislation. I really hope that we are able to build on that progress and to pass this critical assistance this week.

Emergency unemployment insurance has always had bipartisan support. Congress has acted eight times since 1958, under congressional leadership and Presidents from both parties, to establish extended benefit programs when the unemployment rate is too high. In fact, as I think a number of my colleagues have said, the program we are currently looking to extend was actually passed when George W. Bush was President, with strong bipartisan support.

It is important that we do not turn our backs on Americans who are struggling to find work right now. We cannot afford the economic consequences of inaction. Failing to renew unemployment benefits will cost us jobs, it will hurt economic growth, it will eliminate a critical lifeline for families who are struggling to make ends meet.

While New Hampshire's unemployment rate is below the national average, if you are out of work, your household is 100 percent unemployed. There are too many families in New Hampshire who have already been hurt by the expiration of these benefits. According to New Hampshire's Governor Maggie Hassan and our State's Employment Security Commissioner George Copadis, the lapse in this critical program has abruptly cut off vital support for about 1,350 individuals in New Hampshire. For each week that extended benefits are not available, an additional 500 to 600 New Hampshire citizens will exhaust regular unemployment insurance coverage.

In total, more than 8,500 citizens of New Hampshire could be hurt over the course of the next year. That would result in a potential loss to our economy of as much as $14 million, according to the State of New Hampshire, and it is a particular issue in certain pockets in the State. There are counties where the unemployment rate is higher, where we have more long-term unemployed who are going to find particular concern about trying to find a job if they do not have any help while they are looking.

I would ask unanimous consent that the letters from New Hampshire's Governor Hassan and from our Commissioner of Employment Security be printed in the Record.

As these letters show, the impact of a failure to extend unemployment benefits is very real for thousands of working families in New Hampshire. Of course, that is true, we know, across the country. Failing to pass this legislation will hurt our economic recovery in New Hampshire. It will hurt the Nation's economic recovery.

The Economic Policy Institute estimates that the expiration of unemployment insurance will cost the economy 310,000 jobs, which is roughly the equivalent of a single month of job growth. We know from economists from the Congressional Budget Office that each dollar we spend on extending unemployment insurance generates about $1.50 in economic growth. It is one of the best places we can spend public dollars to try to stimulate this economy, to create jobs that can ultimately put people who are unemployed back to work.

Although the unemployment rate has gone down and our economy has shown signs of recovery, we still have a lot more to do. We have to get more people back to work. There is so much on the line, for jobs, for hard-working Americans, and for our economy as a whole. We should pass this legislation on behalf of workers and families in New Hampshire and across this country.

I also want to point out that I have filed an amendment to this unemployment insurance bill. I hope we will have a chance to vote on this amendment. It is identical to a bill I have authored that has 19 cosponsors, including the Presiding Officer, the Military Retirement Restoration Act. This legislation would replace the military retiree and benefit cuts that have been included in the recent budget agreement. It would do that by closing a tax loophole that some corporations use to avoid paying their share of taxes. This provision is designed to address corporations that set up shell entities in tax havens to avoid being considered an American company and paying at the tax rate in the United States. They do that even though these companies are controlled and operated on American soil. It would ensure that those companies pay American tax rates. I think most people would agree that this kind of tax avoidance is unfair, that we should close this tax loophole, and we should do that rather than reducing military retiree benefits.

In addition to the 20 cosponsors of the legislation in the Senate, there is a similar bill in the House that has 46 cosponsors. My idea of how to pay for the military retirement benefit is just one idea. I know there are other bills that have been introduced. I am open to those other solutions. But I hope we can work in a bipartisanship way to replace these cuts before they go into effect in 2 years. It is important that we address this issue for the men and women who have served this country so well, who have put their lives on the line for us. I hope we can do that as part of this legislation when we vote on it. If we are not able to do that, I certainly hope we are going to be able to address this in the near future.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today I wish to honor the life and service of U.S. Marine Sgt. Daniel Vasselian, who was killed in the line of duty on December 23, 2013 while conducting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Sergeant Vasselian was assigned to 1st Battalion, 9th Marine Regiment, 2nd Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Lejune, N.C., and was serving his third tour of duty when he was killed at the young age of 27.

``Danny'', as he was known by family and friends, was a proud son of the small Massachusetts town of Abington, where he was known as a kind, courageous and fun-loving young man. Danny graduated from Abington High School in 2004, and was fortunate to have already met the love of his life, Erin, whom he went on to marry. Erin and Danny celebrated their fourth wedding anniversary in December. A tribute to his standing in Abington, thousands of people lined the town's streets to escort Sergeant Vasselian's casket to the funeral service.

In 2006, Sergeant Vasselian enlisted with the Marines and was assigned to 2/3 Echo Company Infantry, eventually deploying to tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. The heroism and professionalism of Sergeant Vasselian and his Marine Corps units merited numerous awards, including a Purple Heart Award, a Combat Action Ribbon, a Presidential Unit Citation and a Navy Unit Commendation. Sergeant Vasselian's love for his Marine brothers was infallible, and ultimately led him to volunteer for the mission that cost him his life.

Sergeant Vasselian's outsized personality and good heartedness will not

soon be forgotten by those who were lucky enough to have known him. It is my hope that during this extremely difficult time, his family and friends will find comfort in knowing that Americans everywhere appreciate deeply his vow to defend our country so that the rest of us may continue to live in peace and freedom.

Along with his parents Mark and Karen, as well as his step-mother Alice, Danny is survived by his wife Erin (Doyle) Vasselian; his siblings Jeannine, Julianne and Joseph; his grandmother Jeanne Vasselian; his grandfather Thomas P. Connor; his mother and father-in- law David and Patricia Doyle; his nephew and niece Cayleb and Shaelyn Barrio; also aunts, uncles, cousins and friends. This patriot will be missed by all.

I ask my colleagues and all Americans to join me in honoring the life and service of this brave young American, Daniel Vasselian.

Madam President, today I wish to recognize the women of the U.S. Cadet Nurse Corps. Approximately 125,000 American women served as Corps members during World War II, providing comfort and care at hospitals across the country, including in New Hampshire. Most of the former Corps members are now in their eighties, and it is incumbent upon us to ensure that the lessons of their service are remembered for the benefit of future generations.

In March of 1943, Congresswoman Frances P. Bolton of Ohio, a strong believer in the power of nurses in the healing process, introduced legislation to ensure that the supply of nurses in the United States would be large enough to meet the increasing demands of the war effort, especially as large numbers of experienced nurses left the country to serve overseas. The Bolton Act promised a free nursing education in exchange for a commitment to serve in the Cadet Nurse Corps for the duration of the war.

Driven by the immediate need for more nurses, Corps members worked overtime to finish their studies within a compressed study schedule and began to perform nursing duties even before they had formally graduated. This on-the-job training ensured that civilians and recovering servicemembers continued to receive necessary medical care even as much of the medical community was focused on the war front.

Members of the U.S. Cadet Nurse Corps took an oath to dedicate themselves to the triumph of life over death at a time when this perpetual struggle took on previously unseen dimensions. Like many of the American soldiers fighting overseas, these women were predominantly young, recent high school graduates who, when confronted with the call to serve their country,

answered unhesitatingly and in large numbers.

I ask my colleagues in the Senate to join me in thanking all former Cadet Nurse Corps members for their service to the country and for their the selfless commitment to the nursing profession.

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

Unfortunately, I was not here to vote for Janet Yellen, the head of the Federal Reserve. Had I been here to vote, I would have voted to support her in that position.

My flight was delayed, and so I did not get back in time for the vote. I want to make sure that the Record shows that I support her as the new chairman of the Fed.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I am really pleased to be here on the floor today with, as the Senator from Ohio put it so well, my partner Senator Portman in developing this energy efficiency legislation--the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act, also known as Shaheen-Portman. It is a long name, but as the Senator from Ohio pointed out, it really goes a long way to address some of the energy challenges we face in this country. It is a win-win-win.

We heard a discussion earlier today about the importance of renewable energy as a way to create jobs. This is one of the most important things about our legislation. It does promote job creation. As the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy said, 136,000 new jobs will be created by 2025 if we pass this legislation. By 2030, it would net an annual savings of almost $14 billion--$13.7 billion for consumers--and it would lower CO2 emissions and other air pollutants by the equivalent of taking 22 million cars off the road.

So as Senator Portman said so well, this is a win for job creation, it is a win for the environment, it is a win for national security, and it is a win for saving costs.

Senator Portman talked about the importance of continuing bipartisan efforts as we saw this week with passing a budget. As did Senator Portman, I supported that budget as well, despite some of the misgivings I had about it, but I think it was important to work together to move forward on addressing the issues we face in this country. That is exactly what the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act would do. It is a bill that will create jobs, lower pollution, and save taxpayer money.

We had a great opportunity to pass this legislation back in September. Unfortunately, we saw some people come to the floor and object because of nonrelevant amendments. But we have an opportunity to come back to it in the new year to try to pass it again. I am hoping we can do that.

One reason we are on the floor today is to talk about that second opportunity we are going to have. Senator Portman and I have been working on some of the bipartisan amendments offered for the bill, and we are hopeful some of our colleagues who support those bipartisan amendments, who have authored them, will come on board with this legislation and help us get this passed in the new year.

As Senator Portman said, to date, this legislation has more than 260 endorsements from groups that include business, the environment, think tanks, and trade associations. Supporters include everybody from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades. I think any time we can get the Sierra Club and the American Chemistry Council supporting a piece of legislation, we know we have a good bill that can attract a lot of support. That is where we are in this legislation.

As we know, passage of the bill was delayed by a small group of Senators back in September. But I think there still remains a real interest in debating energy efficiency policy on the floor of the Senate. We have also heard from the House that both Representatives Fred Upton, chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and Ed Whitfield, chair of the relevant subcommittee with jurisdiction over energy efficiency, have expressed interest in Shaheen-Portman and have said they will move energy efficiency legislation if the Senate passes a bill.

Since the bill was taken off the floor, Senator Portman and I have continued to work with Chairman Wyden. He was here a few minutes ago and plans to come back, hopefully, to speak to the legislation. We have been working with Ranking Member Murkowski to incorporate some of those relevant bipartisan amendments that have been cleared by the committee, which I talked about a few minutes ago. If we can do that--if we can include those amendments--it would make the legislation even better, and it would secure additional support necessary to ensure passage. It would allow us, I hope, assuming the leadership agrees, to bring this bill back to the floor.

I am confident we can pass this legislation if we can get it back to the floor. It has bipartisan, bicameral support. It is exactly the kind of smart, affordable energy and jobs bill Congress needs to pass and the President needs to sign in order to spur private sector growth, in order to save on costs of energy, and in order to address some of the environmental issues we are facing.

So I thank Senator Portman, as well as Chairman Wyden and Ranking Member Murkowski, for all of their help in working with us to promote this legislation and advance the bill. I really look forward to working with those 260 groups, which also include the Alliance to Save Energy-- and it is important to recognize them for their support--to be able to bring this bill back, to get it through, and for the first time since 2007 to get some energy policy done in the Senate.

So I thank the Chair. Thanks to my colleague, Senator Portman, we will be back after January.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise with a heavy heart to memorialize the promising life and service of U.S. Army SPC Daniel Eckstein, who died on December 10 at the young age of 22. Specialist Eckstein was a member of the 3rd Special Forces Group, serving as an unmanned aerial vehicle mechanic at Fort Bragg in North Carolina.

Daniel was born in Lowell, MA on January 5, 1991, to Hans and Sharon (Green) Eckstein, and spent the first 6 years of his life there. In 1997, Daniel moved to Nashua, NH, where he remained for his formative years until his graduation from Nashua High School North as a member of the class of 2009. During high school, Daniel eagerly competed as a member of the Nashua North Titans baseball team. He was also a passionate New England Patriots and Boston sports fan.

Daniel enlisted in the Army in 2011, and following basic training he went on to successfully complete both Army Airborne School and the Warrior Leader Course. A testament to Daniel's drive for excellence as a soldier, he was awarded the Army Commendation Medal, the Army Achievement Medal, the Army Good Conduct Medal and the National Defense Service Medal.

Daniel loved his family, and was a proud father to his young son Brayden. It is my hope that during this extremely difficult time, Daniel's family and friends will find comfort in knowing that Americans everywhere appreciate deeply his vow to sacrifice his life in the defense of our country so that the rest of us may continue to live in peace and freedom.

Along with his parents Hans and Sharon, Daniel is survived by his wife, Kristina Eckstein, whom he married on January 9, 2011; his son, Brayden Daniel Eckstein; his sister, Amy Eckstein of North Carolina; his stepfather, Edward McLaughlin of Lowell, MA; his maternal grandmother, Barbara Green of Nashua; his grandparents, Peter and Elaine Beaton of Nashua; his father-in-law and mother-in-law, Michael and Darlene Burton and their daughter Summyr of Nashua; also aunts, uncles and cousins. This patriot will be missed by all.

I ask my colleagues and all Americans to join me in honoring the life and service of this brave young American, Daniel Eckstein.

Mr. President, this afternoon we will vote to pass a budget for the next 2 years. That sounds really good when we think about actually getting a budget for the next 2 years. I support this budget because I think it provides the certainty our businesses and our economy need and that our families need. It replaces some of the reckless across-the-board cuts known as sequestration, and ensures-- perhaps most importantly--that we won't have another government shutdown.

The alternative--allowing this budget to fail and setting up another government shutdown--is simply unacceptable. We saw the impact the government shutdown had on our economy, on the people who depend on vital services, as well as on our national defense and our military readiness.

So while this budget is not perfect--it is not something I would have written; I am sure it is not something Senator Murray would have written. But the budget deal struck by Senator Murray, the chairman of the Budget Committee in the Senate, and Congressman Paul Ryan, the chairman of the Budget Committee in the House, is a product of bipartisan compromise--something we need a whole lot more of in Washington these days. It represents a small but important step forward for our government and for our economy.

While the budget we are going to vote on today is not perfect, I do believe it is a step forward. It doesn't close a single corporate loophole. It doesn't extend unemployment insurance, which I would like to have seen for people who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own. That is probably going to cost our economy about 200,000 jobs. And there are provisions included in the bill that I think are misguided and need to be fixed. But the fact is, this is a step forward also in addressing sequestration in a way I think is absolutely critical to anybody who does business with the Federal Government or with companies and families who are dependent on services and on contracts with the Federal Government.

I was at BAE Systems in Nashua, NH, on Monday. I heard from the employees there through their leadership how important it was to have a budget for 2 years to provide some certainty for the company so that they knew what programs they were working on--they do defense contracting--and they could count on, that would provide certainty for them, which is very important. Because one of the comments we have heard on the defense side of the budget is that the cuts from sequestration were having a very detrimental impact on the readiness of our military, on our men and women who are serving, and on the men and women who work for the Department of Defense.

We have seen it in New Hampshire at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard where we saw furloughs of people at the shipyard. We saw the impact the uncertainty as a result of sequestration was having and has been having on the ability to know what they are going to be working on, and to be assured the work will be there in the future. We have seen it with our National Guard in New Hampshire, where the training they need to have to keep people current is being affected, where people were furloughed as a result of those sequestration cuts. This is legislation which will address that in a way that is critical to our national security and critical to the men and women who serve in our military.

There are provisions in the bill I think need to be fixed. I am very concerned, as so many other people in this body are, with the impact of the bill on military retirees. I am disappointed that Congressman Ryan was so committed to including this provision in the compromise bill. But one of the things I want to speak to this afternoon is an effort I am working on with a number of my colleagues here in the Senate to try and fix that provision--to try and address the negative impacts the bill might have on military retirees' benefits, because what the bill does is include an unnecessary reduction in benefits for military retirees under the age of 62. I think there are lots of other ways we can find budgetary savings rather than cutting those retirement benefits for the men and women who have served our Nation in uniform.

The good news is that this provision does not go into effect for another 2 years, so we have time to fix this. We have already heard from the chairman of the Armed Services Committee that he is interested in trying to address this provision as we take up the Defense authorization bill in the coming

year, but I am ready to get to work right now to address the provision.

Yesterday I introduced legislation, the Military Retirement Restoration Act, with 15 of my colleagues which would replace the military retiree benefit cuts by closing a tax loophole some corporations are using to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. These corporations set up shell companies in tax havens to avoid being considered an American company even though they are controlled and operated on American soil. I think most Americans would agree this kind of tax avoidance is unfair and that we should close this tax loophole rather than reducing military retiree benefits. This is just one idea. I am certainly open to other solutions. I hope we can continue the bipartisan work that began with Senator Murray and Congressman Ryan and that we saw again in the vote to end the filibuster on this bill--that we can continue to work in a bipartisan way to replace the cuts for military retirees' benefits and we can do it in a way that is smart, but that we can move forward to end the uncertainty, to get a budget in place for 2 years, and to make sure we address the devastating sequestration impacts we have seen since March, the automatic cuts and the impact they are having on the domestic side of the budget and on the defense side.

I see Senator McCain on the floor. I know earlier on the floor he talked about hearing from every single uniformed service leader of the four armed services, including the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, about the impact and further effects that sequestration would have on our national security. That is testimony itself of the need to move forward to get this budget deal done, and to come back and revisit the concerns we have about other provisions.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, the Department of Defense is the largest single consumer of facilities energy in the Nation and spends more than $4 billion a year to power military installations. Energy management is very important to DoD's mission, both as a matter of conservation and the proper stewardship of funds provided by Congress.

In recent years, the Department of Defense has made significant progress in reducing energy use on military installations. In fiscal year 2012, the Department achieved a 17.7 percent reduction in energy use from the fiscal year 2003 baseline established by law in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. In addition to direct investment, the Department's use of energy savings performance contracting and utility energy savings contracting has historically played an important role in the achievement of the Department's facility energy management objectives. Energy Savings Performance Contracts, commonly known as ESPCs, provide private sector financing for energy improvements at government facilities, with that investment paid back over time from the agency's utility bill savings. As part of a broad administration effort established in 2011 to improve Federal energy efficiency, the Department has committed to award $1.2 billion in performance-based contracts by the end of 2013.

I would pose a question to my colleague, the ranking member of the full committee and a manager of the bill, Senator Inhofe, who has long been a supporter of performance contracting, about this matter and whether he believes the Department can do more.

Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Oklahoma and I look forward to working with him to improve DoD's management practices in this area.

Mr. President, I would like to associate myself with the comments of the senior Senator from Washington and am pleased to know it is her intent that not-for-profit servicers, like the New Hampshire Higher Education Loan Corporation and the NHHEAF Network, will be able to continue their important work and that they will be able to compete in the future for additional accounts.

For over 50 years, the New Hampshire Higher Education Loan Corporation and the NHHEAF Network have provided critical college access, financial education, and default-prevention programs to students in New Hampshire and across the country. The New Hampshire Higher Education Loan Corporation's dedicated staff services a national portfolio over 250,000 borrowers, helping them to manage repayment of almost $5 billion in student loans. These professionals play a uniquely important role in helping students to succeed in postsecondary education, and I am pleased that it is the Senator from Washington's intent to allow them to continue their work.

Madam President, I appreciate the 3 minutes to be on the floor in support of the nomination of

Landya McCafferty to the Federal district court for the District of New Hampshire. If confirmed, Landya will be the first woman to serve on the Federal bench in New Hampshire. But it is not Landya's gender that matters; it is her professional experience and her personal qualities that make her stand out. She has widespread bipartisan support throughout the New Hampshire legal community and she will make an excellent addition to the Federal district court in New Hampshire.

She is currently the U.S. magistrate judge for the District of New Hampshire. Her Federal court experience includes clerking for two district court judges and at the First Circuit Court of Appeals. Landya has also prosecuted professional misconduct cases for the New Hampshire Supreme Court Attorney Discipline Office, served as an appellate and trial attorney in the highly regarded New Hampshire public defender program, and worked in private practice as a civil litigator.

Landya is an innovator. As a magistrate judge, she has become a nationally recognized expert and teacher on how to use technology to achieve a more efficient and paperless workflow in the Federal court system.

She was unanimously rated ``well qualified'' by the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary--their highest rating.

Landya is also active in the legal community outside the courtroom. For the past decade she has lectured at continuing legal education seminars on various topics, primarily on legal ethics, and has also presented guest lectures on legal ethics and civil procedure at the University of New Hampshire School of Law.

I am pleased that this morning, after several months, we are finally going to get a chance to vote on Landya McCafferty, who is a well- qualified, noncontroversial district court nominee. She has the support of Senator Ayotte, who also represents New Hampshire.

I have no doubt Landya McCafferty will be an outstanding Federal district court judge, and I urge my colleagues to support her nomination when the vote comes up this morning.

I thank the Chair and yield the floor.

Mr. President, I wish to recognize Lynn Kilchenstein, president of the New Hampshire Technical Institute, who will step down from her position at the end of the year. Dr. Kilchenstein has demonstrated exceptional leadership at NHTI for the last 10 years, and I thank her for her strong commitment to the students of New Hampshire. While I know she will be missed by the school

and the community, I join Dr. Kilchenstein's family, friends, and colleagues in acknowledging her many achievements and celebrating her service.

Dr. Kilchenstein's substantial contributions to NHTI began when she joined the faculty as an English professor 26 years ago. Prior to becoming president, she also served as head of the English Department, faculty forum president, and associate vice president of academic affairs. In each position Dr. Kilchenstein made an impact, from her direct instruction of students to the development of NHTI's Academic Success Council.

In 2003, Dr. Kilchenstein was named the president of NHTI, and under her leadership the campus has been transformed with numerous projects that have improved social and academic spaces. Dr. Kilchenstein has overseen the growth of NHTI's health programs, including the construction of the LEED-certified Beverly D. Grappone Hall and the renovation of MacRury Hall, both of which feature new facilities and equipment that allow students to learn in hands-on medical environments.

During Dr. Kilchenstein's tenure, NHTI expanded class offerings, created new liberal arts programs and teacher education classes, grew existing programs, and successfully completed the reaccreditation process.

In addition to her leadership role at NHTI, Dr. Kilchenstein is also an involved and dedicated member of the Concord community. She served for 8 years on the Greater Concord Chamber Board of Directors and currently sits on the Governor's Advanced Manufacturing and Education Advisory Council, the Capitol Center for the Arts Board, the Creative Concord Committee, and the Concord Housing Commission. To recognize her service, the Greater Concord Area Chamber of Commerce presented Dr. Kilchenstein with the Pinnacle Award for Business Leader of the Year in 2011.

I know that everyone at the New Hampshire Technical Institute and in the community of Concord joins me in thanking Dr. Kilchenstein for her service and wishes her well in all her future endeavors.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate be in a period of morning business until 7 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Certainly I do not have any objection to that.

Thank you, Madam President and Senator Alexander.

Madam President, I come to the floor this evening to talk about the importance of Congress doing its job and passing a budget. We need a budget that is going to provide certainty for our economy, that will eliminate reckless spending cuts, and that will foster job creation.

We hear this week that Senate Budget Committee Chair Patty Murray and House Budget Committee Chair Paul Ryan may be close to just such an agreement. I think that is very good news because we need a budget deal so we can put an end to the manufactured crises that have hurt too many families and businesses in New Hampshire and across this country.

I know I speak for so many of us here in the Senate when I say our primary focus really should be on continuing to put in place an environment that creates jobs, that lays a foundation for economic growth. And that is one of the things that getting a budget deal would help do.

We have recently seen some signs of progress in the economy. The jobs report on Friday was positive with over 200,000 private-sector jobs added in November, and we have now had 45 straight months of private- sector job growth. But we all know we are not out of the woods yet. We have a lot more work to do, and we need to build on the momentum that is there to get more people back to work.

When I travel around New Hampshire, my constituents tell me they are very frustrated with the gridlock in Washington, and what they want is for us to come together here in Congress, to agree on a budget, and to take action that supports economic growth.

Granite Staters are absolutely right. With a potential budget agreement, we have an opportunity to eliminate some of the uncertainty in our economy, to eliminate some of those harmful cuts that are part of sequestration--the automatic budget cuts--and to finally set some priorities that will help us create jobs.

Sadly, too much in the past few months has had the Congress moving from one manufactured crisis on the budget to another. It has cost the economy severely. It has hurt job creation. As economist Mark Zandi recently noted: ``As long as lawmakers stay deadlocked over the direction of the federal budget, the economic recovery will not gain momentum.''

So I am very hopeful we can reach a deal that will provide the Appropriations Committee with a roadmap for the rest of 2014 and 2015.

I have heard from a lot of small businesses in New Hampshire that one of the challenges they are currently facing post government shutdown-- and certainly for so many small businesses and families, they were hurt by that government shutdown, which cost the economy about $24 billion, and they are now looking at what the potential impact in the future will be from sequestration. Those spending cuts have halted Federal contracts, in many cases, for small businesses. They have caused uncertainty that is affecting job creation and hiring.

One of the New Hampshire business owners with whom I met recently said: ``You hear about how CEOs are hesitant to hire--this is why''-- this uncertainty around sequestration, around what we are going to do about a budget for the country.

These indiscriminate cuts from sequestration have not just hurt job creation. They have also affected programs that are critical to families in New Hampshire and across the country.

One of those programs I had a chance to visit last week is the Meals on Wheels Program. I helped deliver meals in Rockingham County. The Presiding Officer knows Rockingham County very well. It is just across the boarder from Massachusetts, which she represents. I had really ambivalent feelings about delivering those meals to seniors because on the one hand people were so appreciative and we got to help people who needed those hot meals, but on the other hand what I heard from those seniors was the effect that sequestration and spending cuts were having on the program. Those spending cuts have slashed $81,000 from Rockingham Nutrition's Meals on Wheels budget. According to Debra Perou, the agency's executive director, Rockingham Nutrition is delivering 17,000 fewer meals as a result of those cuts. She told me it was a very tough day when they had to try to figure out who was going to get cut from getting those meals on wheels.

The seniors with whom I met in Salem told me they were frustrated that nothing was happening to eliminate those reckless spending cuts.

I met a former engineer from Raytheon, Larry Somes and his wife Lillian. Lillian not only has dementia developing, but she has macular degeneration. It has made it difficult for her to cook. Larry's pension from Raytheon does not go as far as it did 25 years ago when he retired. He said: ``Congress isn't doing anything [to help].''

Well, Larry is not alone, sadly. In Salem, 25 percent of Meals on Wheels recipients are older than 85. For these seniors--who are unable to cook for themselves--Meals on Wheels makes it possible for them to keep their housing and independence.

One of the things the seniors did this fall was to do a campaign where the program asked all of the seniors who received Meals on Wheels if they would write a message about how they felt about the program on a paper plate and send it to their elected officials so we would know what they are thinking. So I brought some of those messages, and they are short so they will not take much time to read. But I think it is important to read some of these messages so all of us have a chance to hear how our seniors are feeling.

This one is not signed, but it says:

Seniors need Meals on Wheels to keep them in their homes

and healthy. Put yourself in their position. Do you like to

eat? Do you want to be in your home?

Thank you Meals on Wheels. I am crippled and walk with a

walker. I can't cook much anymore. I'm a diabetic so I have

to eat, eat right. Thanks to everyone who cooks and delivers.

God bless you.

Keep Meals on Wheels. The homebound people are in need and

look forward to getting a healthy meal and seeing someone

every day.

That is the other aspect that is so important about Meals on Wheels. It is not just about delivering that hot meal. It is about making sure someone is checking in on our older Americans who are living alone, who sometimes do not see people because they are housebound. These messages are telling about how important this program is.

As Maria and Bill say:

As this plate is empty, so will my wife's meals be. She has

a serious medical problem and needs these meals. Think of

this when you sit in your dining room tonight to have your

meal. Thank you for your help keeping these meals coming.

Then from Denise, she says:

Please don't take my food away. I need it.

That says it all.

The work Rockingham Christian and Meals On Wheels does is critical for seniors in that part of New Hampshire. They are joined by nine other Meals On Wheels Programs around New Hampshire. They serve thousands of people throughout the State. Last year alone Meals On Wheels delivered more than 1.2 million meals to 11,596 people in New Hampshire. The services are critical not only for improving the lives of seniors but also for reducing health care spending. The yearly cost of Meals On Wheels for a single senior is equivalent to the cost of 9 days in a nursing home or 1 or 2 days in the hospital. This is not a program that is important to seniors because it keeps them healthy and keeps them in their homes; this is a program that is cost-effective because if we are not able to keep seniors in their homes with something to eat, they are going to wind up in nursing homes and they are going to wind up in hospitals.

Programs such as Meals On Wheels are not where we should be cutting. We

should focus on wasteful and duplicative programs, not those with a proven track record of success. That is why a budget agreement is so critical. This year the Senate Appropriations Committee passed a bill that provided full funding for Meals On Wheels, but without a budget agreement, we have not been able to restore cuts to this very vital program.

We all know sequestration was designed to never go into effect. It was designed to be so harmful and reckless that we in Congress would find a better, smarter way to reduce our deficit. But because of sequestration, too many families and small businesses in New Hampshire have felt firsthand the dramatic effects of us failing to do our job. With the potential budget agreement coming from Senator Murray and Congressman Ryan, we will have an opportunity to reduce these impacts, to finally get to work replacing the harmful cuts from sequestration with a responsible plan that will grow our economy and create jobs.

Finally, it is my hope that a budget agreement will also include an extension of unemployment benefits for the millions of Americans who lost their jobs through no fault of their own. In New Hampshire, our unemployment rate is lower than the national average and has been consistently throughout this recession, but that does not help if you are in a household where the breadwinners are unemployed. That household has a 100-percent unemployment rate. So despite the significant progress for our economy since the recession, the unemployment rate remains unacceptably high. For millions of Americans, finding a job remains very difficult in this market. Unemployment benefits remain a vital lifeline while they seek new work. So if we do nothing before the end of this year, about 1.3 million Americans will lose their extended unemployment benefits starting in January. Millions more will exhaust their benefits over the course of 2014. In New Hampshire, an estimated 8,500 individuals will be affected.

Failing to extend these benefits will not only hurt these families, but it will also affect our economic recovery because failing to extend unemployment for these Americans would result in 240,000 fewer jobs created in 2014. To put that into perspective, the recent jobs report showed that our economy gained 200,000 jobs in the month of November. Failing to extend unemployment benefits would be the equivalent of sacrificing an entire month of job creation.

At this fragile point in our economic recovery, we should not be letting this critical program expire for these Americans. I hope we can reach an agreement. I hope that agreement will begin to roll back those cuts from sequestration, will extend unemployment benefits for those families who really need them, and that we can get this done in a timely fashion so that the government continues to operate.

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