Floor Statements

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I appreciate Senator Inouye and Senator Dorgan's leadership on promoting tourism to the United States. Thanks to their commitment, the Senate is on the verge of passing legislation that is critical to our economy. Although it provides almost 8 million American jobs, travel and tourism have not received the prioritization in our government that they merit. I am pleased that we are creating an Office of Travel Promotion and hope in the future we will take a step further and elevate the role of tourism promotion at the Department of Commerce. Other governments around the world have tourism departments headed by Cabinet-level officials. This stature gives them the clout to advocate for pro-tourism, pro-economy policies, and cut through the redtape to implement those policies.

Tourism is vitally important to New Hampshire. Last year, tourism in New Hampshire supported approximately 67,000 direct full-time and part- time jobs. I know from my own experience that having a high-level travel promotion authority produces results. When I was Governor, I elevated our State's Office of Travel and Tourism within our State government because I recognized the importance of promoting the travel industry and ensuring that we have a strong advocate for traveler- friendly policies in our State government.

Under the guidance of this high-level division, the travel economy in New Hampshire has increased substantially since 2001. Despite a nationwide lull in tourism, spending by travelers to New Hampshire has increased over 33 percent, creating over a billion dollars more in economic growth. State revenues from travel have increased by over $100 million, providing an important boost to our budget.

I believe we should replicate New Hampshire's success in promoting tourism at the national level. This is why I support the creation of an Under Secretary for Travel Promotion.

My friend from Hawaii makes an excellent point. Although the bill does not include an Under Secretary, I believe it is important for the Secretaries of Departments of Commerce, State, and Homeland Security to ensure that the United States is represented internationally to discuss travel and tourism policy issues. In particular, these Departments should work to remove barriers to travel, expand market access for tourism industries, and promote tourism to the U.S. Does my colleague agree with me on this point?

I thank again Senators Inouye and Bingaman.

Mr. President, I wish to express my sympathy over the loss of Newton, NH, Deputy Fire Chief David A. Baker. Following more than five decades of distinguished public service, Deputy Baker lost his battle with cancer.

Deputy Baker exemplified a life lived for others. His devotion to the greater Newton community could be seen following the crippling ice storm of December 2008. Despite suffering from severe pain caused by his yet to be discovered cancer, Deputy Baker was instrumental in coordinating efforts to help his community respond and recover from this major natural disaster.

Deputy Baker's service can be neither overstated nor limited to his work with the Newton Fire Department. During the summer, Deputy Baker, who also owned a successful tree service business, would close his business to help fight wildfires across the United States and Canada in his capacity as a western wildland firefighter. Additionally, he served his State and country as a member of the National Guard in his younger days.

Deputy Baker was always eager to share his loves of fire service and forestry with others. He would often sacrifice his own time for the benefit of others. You could often find him helping students study for an exam or teaching a class on fire attack. Deputy Baker's role as a mentor was something he held in high esteem, and by the number of firefighters and uniformed personnel who attended his funeral, it is clear that others also had a great deal of respect for what he accomplished.

New Hampshire is proud of citizens such as Deputy Chief David Baker, and his countless actions are worthy of this distinction. He will be missed dearly by all those who knew him, and his generosity will be missed by all.

I ask my colleagues to join me and all Americans in honoring Newton, NH, Deputy Fire Chief David A. Baker.

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

Mr. President, I am delighted to be here to join the senior Senator from Minnesota, Ms. Klobuchar, and to speak also after the senior Senator from Vermont, my neighbor, Senator Leahy, in support of Sonia Sotomayor.

This week, we have the opportunity to make history by confirming the first Hispanic and only the third woman to the U.S. Supreme Court. Senator Klobuchar spoke eloquently about the challenges women have faced, and I am pleased to say I had the honor as Governor of appointing the first woman to the New Hampshire Supreme Court.

I come to the floor to speak in support of Sonia Sotomayor's nomination; however, not because of the historic nature of that nomination but because she is more than qualified to sit on the Supreme Court. I am somewhat perplexed by why the vote on her nomination will not be unanimous.

Judge Sotomayor is immensely qualified. The nonpartisan American Bar Association Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, which has evaluated the professional qualifications of nominees to the Federal bench since 1948, unanimously--unanimously--rated Judge Sotomayor as ``well qualified'' to be a Supreme Court Justice after carefully considering her integrity, professional competence, and judicial temperament.

Her decisions as a member of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals are well within the judicial mainstream of our country. A Congressional Research Service analysis on her opinions concluded she eludes easy ideological categorization and demonstrates an adherence to judicial precedent, an emphasis on facts to a case, and an avoidance of overstepping the circuit court's judicial role. Described as a political centrist by the nonpartisan American Bar Association Journal, she has been nominated to the Federal courts by Presidents of both political parties.

When President George H.W. Bush, in 1992, nominated Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, this Senate approved her nomination by unanimous consent. When President Clinton, in 1998, nominated her to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, this Senate voted 67 to 29 to confirm her on an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote.

Her now-familiar personal story is no less impressive. The confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the highest

Court of our country will inspire girls and young women everywhere to work hard and to set their dreams high.

Americans look to lawmakers to work together to make the country stronger. They expect us to put partisanship aside to advance the interests of the American people. If there is one issue we should be able to come together on, to put aside our differences on, it is the confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court.

I look forward to having the opportunity to vote in support of her confirmation with the majority of my colleagues.

I thank Senator Klobuchar. I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that will establish a Forest Carbon Incentives Program to help America's family forest owners slow climate change by increasing carbon sequestration and storage on private forestland. This will be critical for our national climate change response, and will create important economic opportunities for landowners across America. I want to thank my colleagues, Senators Snowe, Collins, Sanders, Merkley, Wyden, Leahy and Schumer, with whom I have worked closely to draft this bill. I also want to acknowledge Senator Stabenow, who has long provided leadership on this issue of carbon sequestration.

This legislation is driven by a simple fact: we cannot achieve our greenhouse gas reduction goals without comprehensive and effective utilization of U.S. forests for carbon sequestration. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates that U.S. forests currently sequester a remarkable 10 percent of our annual U.S. carbon emissions. Even more remarkably, the EPA estimates that we could double this sequestration capacity to 20 percent of emissions with the right management and conservation.

Unlike some of our emerging energy technologies, forest carbon sequestration is a climate strategy that is ready to go to work right now on meeting our emissions reduction goals. We can immediately put forest owners to work on their lands undertaking activities to help move us to that 20 percent sequestration goal, and create new revenue streams for those small and family landowners to help them navigate through these troubled economic times.

One important pathway to achieve these forest carbon sequestration goals will be through carbon offset markets. For those able to participate, carbon offset programs will provide important financial incentives for projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions while, at the same time, helping to keep the costs of a climate program low. The opportunity to earn offset credits will create a financial incentive for large forest landowners to undertake activities that increase carbon sequestration and storage on their lands and that can be measured and verified with the precision necessary to meet rigorous environmental integrity requirements.

However, offset markets will not be easily accessible to the many family forest owners and other smaller landowners who do not have the necessary economies of scale to effectively participate in offset markets. Offset projects come with many upfront and ongoing transactional expenses that will undermine financial gains and constrain the flexibility that family forest owners and other smaller scale landowners will require to participate.

Furthermore, there are some important types of carbon sequestration and storage activities, such as permanent conservation easements, that produce real carbon gains over the long term but are hard to quantify with the precision necessary for offset markets.

We also need to engage the full range of carbon strategies to meet our carbon sequestration goals, even if they cannot conform to the requirements of offsets.

Engaging family forest owners in sequestration is no small piece of the forest carbon equation--America's family forest owners control more than half of all U.S. private forestland, with 119 million acres in ownerships of 100 acres or less. We must create new tools to engage these individuals in efforts to sequester carbon and provide economic opportunities to gain financial incentives for doing that work.

In my home State of New Hampshire, our forests embody this diverse ownership pattern and the unique opportunity to address climate change through forest carbon incentives. New Hampshire is the second most forested state in the nation, and more than 80 percent of that forestland is in private hands. We do have some large private ownerships, including large blocks of working forestland. But most of our privately owned forestland is in small ownerships--averaging 37.5 acres. According to the U.S. Forest Service, 49 percent of New Hampshire's forestland, 2,358,000 acres, is in family ownership, with 124,000 family forest owners in the Granite State.

If these landowners could aggregate their capacity to store carbon on the 2 million acres they own, they could make a significant contribution to needed reductions in the presence of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere. Each year New Hampshire forests already take up by photosynthesis 25 percent of the total CO2 emitted by the State from man-made sources.

But we can capture even more carbon in our Nation's forests with the right incentives like those in our proposed program. Creating incentives for forest carbon would represent a win-win for New Hampshire and a win-win in every State in the Nation that has privately owned forested landscapes.

Simply, the Forest Carbon Incentives Program will provide financial incentives for small private forest owners to engage in carbon sequestration activities and help our country meet its desired carbon reduction goals. The Forest Carbon Incentives Program will be run through the U.S. Forest Service and State forestry agencies. These experienced forest professionals will work with interested private forest owners to develop a ``climate mitigation contract'' for undertaking forest management activities that will increase carbon absorption and storage. Incentives will be awarded on a straightforward ``practices per acre'' basis, giving landowners a clear and simple agreement and reliable incentive payments. Carbon reductions achieved through these practices are not required to be permanently stored, so landowners will retain more flexibility with future management decisions. This simple and efficient program structure will enable landowners at any scale to participate, especially family forest owners holding smaller parcels that are unlikely to participate in carbon offset markets.

The program will create additional incentive opportunities for interested landowners to protect carbon gains achieved through a climate mitigation contract. Landowners can gain ``bonus'' incentive payments for also undertaking management that addresses pests, fire, and other threats that could damage forests and release the carbon that has been stored there. Landowners can also be paid for a permanent conservation easement that will assure that their lands in the program will never be developed, thereby protecting the carbon in those forests.

This legislation already enjoys support from a broad spectrum of national organizations that care about America's forests, such as the American Forest Foundation, the National Association of State Foresters, The Trust for Public Land, the National Wildlife Federation, and The Nature Conservancy among many others. Of equal importance, it has earned broad support from local, state, and regional interest groups, including the Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests, New Hampshire Timberland Owners Association, Northland Forest Products, Appalachian Mountain Club, and a host of other leading forest organizations in my home state.

America must use every tool available to address climate change, and should especially favor strategies that are ready to go now and that create new economic opportunities. This legislation will provide both a meaningful climate mitigation strategy and create real jobs in the woods. I encourage my fellow Senators to consider it carefully.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that will establish a Forest Carbon Incentives Program to help America's family forest owners slow climate change by increasing carbon sequestration and storage on private forestland. This will be critical for our national climate change response, and will create important economic opportunities for landowners across America. I want to thank my colleagues, Senators Snowe, Collins, Sanders, Merkley, Wyden, Leahy and Schumer, with whom I have worked closely to draft this bill. I also want to acknowledge Senator Stabenow, who has long provided leadership on this issue of carbon sequestration.

This legislation is driven by a simple fact: we cannot achieve our greenhouse gas reduction goals without comprehensive and effective utilization of U.S. forests for carbon sequestration. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates that U.S. forests currently sequester a remarkable 10 percent of our annual U.S. carbon emissions. Even more remarkably, the EPA estimates that we could double this sequestration capacity to 20 percent of emissions with the right management and conservation.

Unlike some of our emerging energy technologies, forest carbon sequestration is a climate strategy that is ready to go to work right now on meeting our emissions reduction goals. We can immediately put forest owners to work on their lands undertaking activities to help move us to that 20 percent sequestration goal, and create new revenue streams for those small and family landowners to help them navigate through these troubled economic times.

One important pathway to achieve these forest carbon sequestration goals will be through carbon offset markets. For those able to participate, carbon offset programs will provide important financial incentives for projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions while, at the same time, helping to keep the costs of a climate program low. The opportunity to earn offset credits will create a financial incentive for large forest landowners to undertake activities that increase carbon sequestration and storage on their lands and that can be measured and verified with the precision necessary to meet rigorous environmental integrity requirements.

However, offset markets will not be easily accessible to the many family forest owners and other smaller landowners who do not have the necessary economies of scale to effectively participate in offset markets. Offset projects come with many upfront and ongoing transactional expenses that will undermine financial gains and constrain the flexibility that family forest owners and other smaller scale landowners will require to participate.

Furthermore, there are some important types of carbon sequestration and storage activities, such as permanent conservation easements, that produce real carbon gains over the long term but are hard to quantify with the precision necessary for offset markets.

We also need to engage the full range of carbon strategies to meet our carbon sequestration goals, even if they cannot conform to the requirements of offsets.

Engaging family forest owners in sequestration is no small piece of the forest carbon equation--America's family forest owners control more than half of all U.S. private forestland, with 119 million acres in ownerships of 100 acres or less. We must create new tools to engage these individuals in efforts to sequester carbon and provide economic opportunities to gain financial incentives for doing that work.

In my home State of New Hampshire, our forests embody this diverse ownership pattern and the unique opportunity to address climate change through forest carbon incentives. New Hampshire is the second most forested state in the nation, and more than 80 percent of that forestland is in private hands. We do have some large private ownerships, including large blocks of working forestland. But most of our privately owned forestland is in small ownerships--averaging 37.5 acres. According to the U.S. Forest Service, 49 percent of New Hampshire's forestland, 2,358,000 acres, is in family ownership, with 124,000 family forest owners in the Granite State.

If these landowners could aggregate their capacity to store carbon on the 2 million acres they own, they could make a significant contribution to needed reductions in the presence of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere. Each year New Hampshire forests already take up by photosynthesis 25 percent of the total CO2 emitted by the State from man-made sources.

But we can capture even more carbon in our Nation's forests with the right incentives like those in our proposed program. Creating incentives for forest carbon would represent a win-win for New Hampshire and a win-win in every State in the Nation that has privately owned forested landscapes.

Simply, the Forest Carbon Incentives Program will provide financial incentives for small private forest owners to engage in carbon sequestration activities and help our country meet its desired carbon reduction goals. The Forest Carbon Incentives Program will be run through the U.S. Forest Service and State forestry agencies. These experienced forest professionals will work with interested private forest owners to develop a ``climate mitigation contract'' for undertaking forest management activities that will increase carbon absorption and storage. Incentives will be awarded on a straightforward ``practices per acre'' basis, giving landowners a clear and simple agreement and reliable incentive payments. Carbon reductions achieved through these practices are not required to be permanently stored, so landowners will retain more flexibility with future management decisions. This simple and efficient program structure will enable landowners at any scale to participate, especially family forest owners holding smaller parcels that are unlikely to participate in carbon offset markets.

The program will create additional incentive opportunities for interested landowners to protect carbon gains achieved through a climate mitigation contract. Landowners can gain ``bonus'' incentive payments for also undertaking management that addresses pests, fire, and other threats that could damage forests and release the carbon that has been stored there. Landowners can also be paid for a permanent conservation easement that will assure that their lands in the program will never be developed, thereby protecting the carbon in those forests.

This legislation already enjoys support from a broad spectrum of national organizations that care about America's forests, such as the American Forest Foundation, the National Association of State Foresters, The Trust for Public Land, the National Wildlife Federation, and The Nature Conservancy among many others. Of equal importance, it has earned broad support from local, state, and regional interest groups, including the Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests, New Hampshire Timberland Owners Association, Northland Forest Products, Appalachian Mountain Club, and a host of other leading forest organizations in my home state.

America must use every tool available to address climate change, and should especially favor strategies that are ready to go now and that create new economic opportunities. This legislation will provide both a meaningful climate mitigation strategy and create real jobs in the woods. I encourage my fellow Senators to consider it carefully.

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

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 10 minutes as in morning business.

Mr. President, time and time again, we have heard that our health care system is not working. Costs are too high, outcomes are too poor, and access is too limited. I agree with so many of my colleagues who have spoken out over the last several weeks that the status quo is not sustainable. We must take action. We must all work together to ensure that every American has access to quality and affordable health care.

Everyone deserves stable health care coverage that they can count on, regardless of the job they hold or the curveballs that life may throw. All Americans should be able to count on insurance premiums and deductibles that will not continue to rise and eat away more and more of their paychecks. All Americans deserve stable health care that lets them keep their doctor and their health care plan, especially if they trust their doctor and their plan and they have built a relationship with both.

Let me be clear. Health care costs are too high. Every day, in New Hampshire and across our country, families are struggling. The crushing costs of health care threaten their financial stability, threaten leaving them exposed to higher premiums and deductibles, and put them at risk for possible loss of health insurance coverage and, too often, even bankruptcy. Studies have shown that medical problems contribute to over 40 percent of the personal bankruptcies in the United States today.

Unfortunately, too many of us are just one heart attack away from a potential personal financial disaster due to the cost of health care and inadequate coverage.

In 2007, our Nation spent $2.2 trillion, or 16.2 percent of the gross domestic product, on health care. This is twice the average of other developed nations. As a country, the quality of care we receive is no better. We still lag behind other countries when it comes to efficiency, access, patient safety, and adoption of information technology.

I have one proposal that I think will help with our current health care situation and, along with Senator Susan Collins, we have introduced a bipartisan piece of legislation that we are calling the Medicare Transitional Care Act of 2009. It would help address our health care crisis.

The Medicare Transitional Care Act would improve quality of care while saving money. This bill aims to reduce costly hospital readmission and improves the care patients receive while cutting Medicare costs. The legislation will help keep seniors who are discharged from the hospital from having to go back. Simply put, it provides transition planning for seniors on Medicare who are leaving the hospital and, in doing so, it will improve the health care we offer our seniors, while saving money; savings that experts estimate to be $5,000 per Medicare beneficiary.

According to a report from the New England Journal of Medicine, almost one third of Medicare beneficiaries discharged from the hospital were rehospitalized within 90 days. One-half of the individuals rehospitalized had not visited a physician since their discharge, indicating a real lack of followup care.

The study also estimated that, in 2004, Medicare spent $17.4 billion on these unplanned rehospitalizations. This problem is costly for our government and troublesome for our seniors. The good news is, it is avoidable.

Research shows the transition from the hospital to the patient's next place of care--whether that is home, a nursing facility or a rehabilitation center--can be complicated and risky. This is especially true for older individuals with multiple chronic illnesses. These patients talk about difficulty in remembering instructions for medications, confusion over the correct use of medications, and general uncertainty about their own condition. Seniors need support and assistance to manage their health during the vulnerable time after discharge from a hospital to ensure they are not rehospitalized. This legislation provides that support. This is the type of commonsense legislation that needs to be included in our health reform. It saves money and it improves quality.

I am proud that in New Hampshire we have two exciting health reform initiatives underway to address health care costs and improve quality. We have a medical home pilot project with close to 40,000 patients across the State. The medical home pilot is changing the way health care is delivered and the way we think about health care, making it much more patient centered. It is encouraging doctors to collaborate with other providers to create health care plans for each patient. They also utilize electronic medical records to reduce errors, improve quality, and contain costs. It is a new way of practicing medicine, and it is one that will deliver better care for less money.

New Hampshire is also the home for the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy, which is the leader in comparative effectiveness research. It helps empower patients to make vital health care decisions.

The research provided by the Dartmouth Atlas Project has provided critical analysis about the difference in the amounts of money we spend on health care in different regions of the country. The research also shows that these differences in spending have no impact on health outcomes. I want to repeat that because I think this goes to the crux of one of the problems we are having with our health care system. What the research at the Dartmouth Atlas Project and other places around the country has shown is that differences in spending have no impact on health outcomes.

It is amazing to me that regions that spend more money on health care do not necessarily produce better health

care results. We must address this inadequacy as we turn to health care reform, and we must empower patients to make them equal partners in their health care decisions. Research supports this point. In fact, it shows that up to 40 percent of the time, patients who participate in decisions related to their care will choose procedures that are less invasive and less costly. These choices produce better outcomes with higher rates of satisfaction. We must remember to keep patients at the center of this debate on health care reform.

Finally, people are struggling because of the high cost of health insurance. It is a burden to families in New Hampshire and across the country. In my State, there are nearly 150,000 people who have no health insurance, even more who are underinsured with policies that do not provide the coverage they need. For those who do have insurance, the costs are very high.

Over the past 9 years, premiums for employer-sponsored health insurance have more than doubled--a growth rate that is four times faster than cumulative wage increases. This has created a huge burden on middle-class families.

In my State of New Hampshire, from 2002 to 2006, there was a 41.6- percent increase in the premiums businesses paid for an individual plan for their workers. For our smallest businesses, those with fewer than 10 employees, the increase was almost double that, a 70.6-percent increase. That is staggering, and that disturbing increase in premiums caused what one would expect: Many small businesses dropped their coverages. That is unacceptable. Health care costs and insurance costs must be contained.

Chuck Engborg from Ashland, NH, talked about the high cost of insurance and the instability of the insurance market at a recent health care roundtable I attended in New Hampshire.

Almost 30 years ago, Chuck was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. He suffered a mild stroke, a heart attack, and he has had five bypass surgeries. He also developed a complication from his diabetes that required him to walk on crutches for 3 years. Despite all of that, Chuck has lived to tell his tale, but the turning point for him came 2 years ago when his wife Kathy was laid off from her job. They had to purchase COBRA health insurance and found that the cost of COBRA, plus high copays, amounted to 50 percent of their annual income. In the meantime, Kathy also suffered a heart attack that resulted in her own bypass surgery. They are two of the lucky ones because Kathy has found new employment and they have health insurance through her job. But that health insurance comes with a very high annual deductible.

I heard a similar situation from a woman named Laura Mick from Manchester who also struggles with high insurance costs. While she has not had surgery in 16 years, the insurance companies are able to target her and charge her outrageous rates under a preexisting condition loophole.

Laura was born with a cyst on her brain. Fortunately, it was recognized by doctors a few weeks after she was born, and at 1 month old she underwent surgery. A shunt was inserted into her brain to drain fluid and another surgery at 16 years old to relieve the pressure. She is currently an active young woman in her late twenties, and she works hard to maintain a healthy lifestyle. But she is not being rewarded for it. She has been denied from every insurance company in New Hampshire unless she accepts the high-premium, high-deductible plans.

We need to enact health care reform to help people like Chuck and Laura. We need to ensure that every American has access to affordable, quality health care they can count on when they need it. This is a basic principle on which many business groups, labor organizations, and medical professionals now agree. We must take steps as a nation to reduce the costs of health care while improving the quality of care Americans receive.

Health care reform is economic reform, and I believe that for our economy to truly recover and prosper, we must help middle-class families, businesses, and Federal, State, and local governments cope with the skyrocketing health care costs. The status quo is not working, and it is clearly not sustainable.

We need to act, and we need to act soon. I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to enact health reform that addresses the health care cost crisis and ensures quality, affordable health care for everyone in New Hampshire and across this country.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I wish to convey my sincere thanks and appreciation in recognizing Pat Russell, from Keene, NH, for her four decades of distinguished service to the State of New Hampshire. On August 1, Pat is retiring from her role as commissioner of the New Hampshire State Liquor Commission, and I am pleased to submit this statement to the Record.

Pat Russell has spent her life serving her community, her State, and her country. She was elected to six terms in the New Hampshire House of Representatives and two terms as mayor of Keene. She served with distinction on President Clinton's Council for Developmental Disabilities and for the past ten years she has served on the New Hampshire State Liquor Commission.

To each of these roles, Pat brought a willingness to roll up her sleeves and get to work for those she served. Her record of accomplishment and her wide circle of admirers speak to the qualities that defined her work: intelligence, persistence and devotion to the State of New Hampshire and her beloved city of Keene.

As Governor of New Hampshire, I was looking for someone with these qualities to fill a coming vacancy on the State Liquor Commission. I offered the position to mayor Pat Russell of Keene, who graciously accepted. Since that day in 1999, Commissioner Russell has overseen what she refers to as ``a perfectly oiled machine with absolutely fantastic employees.'' Indeed, under Pat's leadership, the commission has thrived, contributing over $100 million each year to New Hampshire's general fund.

New Hampshire is proud and grateful for Pat's service and I know her absence will be felt by all who have relied on her leadership and strength. On a personal note, Pat has been a dear friend and mentor to me for over 30 years. I have admired not only her multifaceted professional abilities, but also her commitment to make a difference for the people of New Hampshire. I wish her well in a much-deserved retirement, but I also believe that Pat still has more she wants to do. I know that whatever she does, it will be in the service of others.

I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing our commissioner, the Honorable Pat Russell.

Mr. President, I wish to speak about an amendment that I have filed to the National Defense Authorization Act of 2010. The amendment is an attempt to improve our Nation's support system for our National Guard and Reserve members and their families. The amendment requires evaluating the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program, and identifying programs that will make the program truly comprehensive.

Today, our military and our country have come to rely heavily on the men and women of our National Guard and Reserves to protect our national security. More and more, these citizen-soldiers and their families have gone above and beyond the call of duty to serve our country's interests, engaging in multiple deployments in dangerous regions all over the world. Since 9/11, we have seen this increasing reliance on our Guard and Reserves in States throughout the country. New Hampshire is no exception. Thousands of Guardsmen and women have already deployed overseas into combat areas. And more than 1,100 members of the 197th Fires Brigade were recently notified that they will be deployed to the Middle East sometime in the next year. This will represent the single largest deployment in New Hampshire's history. Although our Guardsmen and Reservists show unwavering passion and courage no matter their assignment, these men and women and their families did not sign up for this high number of dangerous deployments. It is our responsibility to make sure servicemembers and their families receive the proper services before, during and after deployment so that they can return to their normal lives.

The Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program provides important support services to Guard and Reserve members through informational events and activities throughout the predeployment and deployment phases, as well as after 30, 60, and 90 days upon their return. However, these programs--often held in an impersonal group setting--are not enough.

The National Guard in New Hampshire came to realize that, despite their best efforts, many of those who deployed continued to fall through the cracks upon their return. They realized that they needed a more intensive, more personal, professional, and persistent program which catered to individual family needs. The New Hampshire National Guard developed a pilot program to provide each National Guard and Reservist a professional ``care coordinator'' who is responsible for the kind of personal attention and support that is required to identify and support those who are struggling.

Though the names have been changed, the real-life stories of the New Hampshire Guard who have participated in the program are moving and demonstrate a clear need for creating a seamless, nationwide program.

In his twenties and a self-employed mechanic by trade, Sergeant Joe served in Iraq from 2006 to 2007. Prior to his deployment, he set up his girlfriend and her children in a rental apartment and gave his savings to support her while he has in Iraq. When he

returned to New Hampshire, he suffered from ongoing back pain and PTSD that went undiagnosed; he found that his girlfriend had squandered his savings and defaulted on the rent; and that his business partner had closed up shop. Distraught but not defeated, he rented a room and tried to reestablish his business. Despite his best efforts, he has faced a series of jobs losses, bills he could not pay, increasingly severe PTSD, and, ultimately, eviction. The New Hampshire National Guard Chaplain eventually found out about Joe's circumstances and connected him immediately with a care coordinator. His personal care coordinator helped Joe turn his life around: she used emergency funds to provide a modest income and secure temporary housing; she connected him with medical and mental health services through the VA; and paired him with the Easter Seals job placement services that helped Joe get a less physically demanding, full-time job with benefits. Because of this safety net, Joe recently bought a home and is continuing treatment for his PTSD.

Because of the New Hampshire National Guard's unique partnership with the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services, Easter Seals in New Hampshire and 22 other civilian and veteran service organizations, Guard members and Reservists like Sergeant Joe are able to reenter civilian life.

However, there is a clear need to provide counseling and support services predeployment as well. As shown in the story of Staff Sergeant Mary, a single mother of two who is slated for deployment later this year, predeployment services create a foundation for parents and families to adjust to deployment while minimizing disruptions to their lives.

Mary, upon learning of her deployment, feared that she could not leave her children with her ex-husband and that she would be unable to fulfill her duty with the New Hampshire National Guard despite her desire to serve alongside her colleagues. Hesitant to take help from a stranger, she initially resisted meeting with her care coordinator. The coordinator persisted, slowly built a close bond with Mary, and designed a plan to address Mary's concerns. The care coordinator connected Mary to legal representation to negotiate how the children will be cared for while she is in Iraq--a necessary step to create a positive environment for Mary to leave her children. The coordinator also went to the children's school, met with the teachers and administration personally, and provided them with a direct link for communication and concerns while Mary is deployed. She also arranged counseling for the children so that they will have extra support while grappling with their mother's absence. Mary says that her care coordinator is a ``beacon of light'' who helps guide her through the challenges of being a single parent and deploying soldier. She finds comfort in knowing she has one person by her side throughout her deployment.

Unfortunately, the problems Adam and Mary faced are not unique. National Guard and Reservists nationwide face similar problems, and without programs like the New Hampshire National Guard pilot program they may fall between the cracks.

My amendment requires the Secretary of Defense to evaluate the nationwide Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program and to closely examine how states have filled gaps in the program to better serve our National Guard and Reserve members and their families. Furthermore, the amendment seeks to identify the best programs so that they can be replicated nationwide.

As we call on the National Guard and Reserve to protect the Nation at home and abroad, I call on my colleagues in the Senate to protect these brave men and women and their families to the best of our ability. We need to make sure our policies and programs are worthy of the great sacrifice of our citizen-soldiers.

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

Madam President, I rise in support of strengthening our Federal hate crimes clause to include crimes motivated by a victim's sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or whether the victim has a disability. By passing the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act, we will take a long-overdue step toward ensuring that our law enforcement officials have the resources they need to prevent and properly prosecute some of the most toxic and destructive violent crimes we face. I also thank my colleagues who have worked tirelessly to see this important legislation enacted into law. For the better part of the last decade, Senator Kennedy, along with Senators Leahy, Collins, and Snowe, have shown leadership on this issue, even when the odds of success were small. Their diligence is one of the reasons this legislation today enjoys the support of more than 300 law enforcement, civil rights, civic, and religious organizations. As a new Member of the Senate, I am proud to join them this year as an original cosponsor of the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act. I truly hope my colleagues will join me to pass this amendment.

In 1998, Matthew Shepard, a 21-year-old college student, was beaten and murdered just because he was gay.

The brutality of this crime captured the attention of the Nation. It was an attack not just on Matthew and his family but on an entire community. I had the opportunity a couple of years ago to meet Judy Shepard, Matthew's mother.

I applaud her willingness to try and make something positive out of such a terrible tragedy. She has been a tireless advocate to try and get hate crimes legislation passed and to point out the impact of these violent acts on families across this country.

The Matthew Shepard attack sent a message of hate and intolerance to LGBT youths and their families and instilled in countless young Americans a sense of fear simply because of their sexual orientation.

Despite this, Matthew's murderers were not charged with a hate crime because no such law exists in Wyoming or on the Federal level. It is impossible to know for certain the full effect of crimes motivated by hate on the communities they target. What is certain is that hate crimes rob the members of these communities of a sense of security, and the impact is real.

Among LGBT youth in this country, the suicide rate is four times higher than their straight peers, as many struggle to find their place in their families and their communities. While reducing bigotry and increasing tolerance will require a comprehensive effort, it is an effort that will take time. But addressing our outdated hate crimes law is one very important component.

As Governor, I was proud to sign legislation that expanded New Hampshire's hate crimes to include sexual orientation. Unfortunately, many States still lack such laws, which is why this bill is so critical.

By expanding the definition of hate crimes and by easing access to resources for local and Federal law enforcement officials to prosecute these crimes, we can hopefully help prevent these crimes and send a message that hate and bigotry in any form have no place in our society.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on July 15, 2009, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing on ``Regulating Hedge Funds and Other Private Investment Pools.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 15, 2009, at 10 a.m., in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 15, 2009, at 2:30 p.m., in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 15, 2009, at 10:30 a.m., in room 406 of the Dirksen Office Building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 15, 2009, at 9:30 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 15, 2009, at 2:30 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 15, 2009, at 9:30 a.m. in room 325 of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 15, 2009, at 10 a.m. to conduct a hearing entitled ``Identification Security: Reevaluating the REAL ID Act.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, on July 15, 2009, at 9:30 a.m. in room SH-216 of the Hart Senate Office Building, to continue the hearing on the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Rules and Administration be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 15, 2009, at 9:30 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on July 15, 2009, at 2:30 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on National Parks, be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 15, 2009, at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to speak about an amendment that I have filed to the National Defense Authorization Act of 2010. This amendment is to ensure that comprehensive suicide prevention services will be offered to our National Guard and Reservists as part of the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program.

Sadly, too often we hear about the death of an armed services member from an unnecessary and preventable suicide. Suicide has become an increasingly severe problem across the Armed Forces. For the first time in history, the number of battlefield suicides in early 2009 was higher than the number of combat deaths. I am pleased that the Defense Authorization Act we are considering supports increased efforts to prevent suicide among active duty personnel. However, there is currently no requirement that all National Guard members and communities have access to a comprehensive suicide prevention program.

Even in the wake of suicides, Guard members are often called back to active duty and redeployed into dangerous and intense combat situations. Suicide devastates not only military families but also military communities and fellow soldiers. Currently, while active duty soldiers receive suicide prevention training programs, there are no established programs to train National Guardsmen and Reservists to prevent suicides when they return to their communities from deployment. And the families of Guardsmen and Reservists do not receive training under Yellow Ribbon to recognize the warning signs of suicide.

In Afghanistan and Iraq, we increasingly rely on our National Guard and Reservists. We see that first-hand in New Hampshire: Recently, more than 1,100 members of the 197th Fires Brigade, which includes units from Berlin, Franklin and Manchester, NH, received notice that they can expect to be deployed to the Middle East. Fortunately, when these soldiers return home from battle, they and their communities will have comprehensive suicide prevention training available to them. That is thanks to the initiative of New Hampshire's National Guard's pilot Program, the Connect Program, that has gone beyond the Yellow Ribbon Program.

To date, the Connect Program, which is administered by the National Alliance on Mental Illness in New Hampshire, has provided hundreds of officers, Chaplains and other Guardsmen with an interactive, community- based suicide prevention training. Through Connect, a Guard member who returns home from duty learns how to recognize the warning signs of suicidal behavior, how to respond to someone who shows those signs, and where to point that person to the services he or she needs.

But the program doesn't end with the Guard member. It also provides this training to the Guard member's community. The Guard member's commanding officers are trained to recognize suicidal tendencies in the soldiers who they command. Guard families, who often have no experience with mental illness and suicide, are also provided with that training. This is especially critical because, unlike active duty personnel, Guard members don't see their fellow soldiers every day when they come back from being deployed. Instead, they go back to their families and civilian communities, which simply aren't capable of recognizing the warning signs of suicidal behavior. The Connect Program fills a crucial gap because it uses interactive training to emphasize that mental health is a community responsibility.

The Connect Program also ensures that community members know how to cope with and respond to a suicide in the Guard community. People who know someone who has died by suicide are statistically at increased risk of taking their own life. The program helps communities reduce that risk and promote healing in response to a suicide, which is an essential element of any suicide prevention program. Thanks to their effective work in response to suicides, Connect has been designated as a National Best Practice Program in Suicide Prevention and its work with the National Guard was recently recognized as a model program by the Substance Abuse Mental Health Services Administration in the Department of Health and Human Services, HHS.

But not all State National Guards offer such comprehensive suicide prevention programs after deployment. In the Army National Guard alone, there have been 29 confirmed suicides this year among Army Guardsmen who were not on active duty. I rise today because we need to extend these critical services across the country before even more soldiers fall through the cracks.

The Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program has been a tremendously important and successful effort to transition our Guard members back to civilian life. However, these Guard and Reservist suicides have made clear that Yellow Ribbon is simply incomplete without an established, nationally implemented program that trains Guard members, communities and families to recognize the warning signs of suicide after deployment and to cope with the loss of a loved one.

Fortunately for us in New Hampshire, our National Guard identified that need early and went above and beyond Yellow Ribbon, creating a pilot program to ensure that the New Hampshire Guard community has the tools they need to prevent suicides when soldiers return from battle. Studies of the Connect Program have shown that people who receive this training feel particularly well-prepared to not only recognize the warning signs of suicide, but also to respond to suicides in their communities.

But others across the country may not be so fortunate. That is why this amendment would require the Office for Reintegration Programs to establish a program to provide these members, their families, and their communities with training in suicide prevention and community healing in response to suicide. The principals of the program would be modeled on the nationally recognized pilot program that has worked so well in New Hampshire.

I am pleased that the amendment is supported by the National Guard Association of the United States. Please join us in making these critical services a standard part of our outreach to National Guard members, families, and communities across the country.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the amendment be printed in the Record at this point.

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

Mr. President, I would like to congratulate and honor Mr. Kevin McEneaney of Dover, NH, for his faithful service to the New Hampshire Board of Land Surveyors. Mr. McEneaney served on the board from August 18, 1999, until July 11, 2009, and he led the board as chairman during the final 2 years of his term.

The New Hampshire Board of Land Surveyors' mission is to set the standards for licensing and regulating land surveyors. The board sets the technical and ethical standards for the profession and is committed to upholding the highest level of public safety.

For a decade, Mr. McEneaney demonstrated the utmost integrity and professionalism in his work on the board. His colleagues have recognized his diligence and his generosity of spirit. His contributions to the Board of Land Surveyors and to the people of New Hampshire are admirable. I commend Mr. McEneaney for his exemplary service to our State.

On a personal note, I have known Mr. McEneaney since he was a student in my class at Dover High School almost 40 years ago. I have seen firsthand his integrity, his work ethic, and his commitment to his community. I know he will succeed in whatever he does, and I wish him well in his future endeavors.