Floor Statements

Mr. President, there has been a lot of conversation among many of us here in the Senate and last week in the Veterans' Affairs Committee about the circumstances we find ourselves in at the Department of Veterans Affairs and its ability to provide the necessary care and benefits for our military men and women who have become and are becoming veterans.

What we heard last week at the Veterans' Affairs Committee was very disturbing to me because it still appears that the Department of Veterans Affairs has no plan to solve circumstances our veterans find themselves in. Who in this country would we expect to have access in the most timely fashion to the highest quality of care other than those who served our country and who were promised that? A commitment was made to them to make certain that those benefits would be made available. They were told that would be the case.

I went home this weekend. Part of our job is to help people. Every week at the end of the week I get what is called a weekly State report. I and other members of the Senate have staff who spend significant amounts of time trying to solve people's problems with government. We call it case work.

Every week I get a report of people who called my office to tell me something they want me to know, people who contacted me asking for help with a variety of federal agencies. But it struck me as so evident in reading my report from my State staff about the circumstances that our veterans find themselves in. So every week there is a report that I read generally at the end of the week, on the weekend. It is really page after page of things that have happened involving me and my staff and our relationship with Kansans who have a story to tell, who have a concern to raise, who have a request for how I vote. This week's staff report I thought I would highlight for my colleagues. My guess is that the circumstances that Kansan veterans find themselves in is probably no different for me than it is for my other colleagues here in the Senate.

These are just reports from Kansans who called or stopped by my office or wrote to us this week at home looking for help, asking me to help them solve their problem and telling a story about their relationship with the Department of Veterans Affairs.

A veteran from Hutchinson, KS, called to tell us that he filed a claim with the VA. It has been filed for 6 months, and he is still awaiting a decision. Unfortunately, that is all too common. A veteran from Norton, KS, filed a claim for service due to Agent Orange. He has been diagnosed with cancer and is seeking treatment through the VA. He has been informed that it could take 7 to 8 months before the VA will examine his claim, and while his cancer is not curable, it is treatable. And yet he has a 7- to 8-

month waiting period before he can receive benefits.

A veteran from Salina, KS, in the central part of our State indicates that he received double vaccinations before he was deployed to Desert Storm due to the fact that his predeployment package had been lost. He indicates he now suffers from several health conditions as a result and has been informed that the VA denies his benefits.

A veteran from Hutchinson, north of Wichita, indicated he has been fighting with the VA for 7 years on appeal. He has something pending with VA. They provided him an answer that was unsatisfactory, and he is appealing that decision. He claims the VA has continued dragging out his appeal process, and he has difficulty finding updates on his appeal when he contacts the VA. That is an example of someone who called the office and asked for help.

A veteran from Wichita said his doctors discovered a mass on his brain, and it will require an MRI to determine what the mass is. The earliest appointment available for him is on June 30. He, of course, as all of us would be, is concerned over that long wait. This is a veteran who has been diagnosed with a mass on his brain, doesn't know what it is, needs an MRI--exactly what a doctor would order to get additional diagnostic information--and cannot get the MRI until June 30.

A veteran from Junction City--which is a community that is adjacent to Fort Riley where a significant number of veterans and military retirees reside--indicates that he is living in a nursing home. He is 100-percent service connected with a disability and the VA is currently paying for his nursing home services. He has recently been informed that his physical therapy will no longer be covered by the VA and they are discontinuing payment but offer no explanation as to why. He filed an appeal late last year and has not received a response or status update from the VA since that request.

A veteran from Lawrence has had an appeal pending with the VA for over 1\1/2\ years and wants our help because he has received no communication from the VA in more than a year.

A veteran from Overland Park, KS--a suburb of Kansas City--is the primary caregiver for his wife who suffers from Alzheimer's. He has had tremendous difficulty in working with the VA to schedule appointments when he can be away from her to receive his treatments from the VA.

A daughter of a veteran from Wichita who passed away in the Wichita VA is concerned about the events that took place while he was in the care of the VA.

A veteran who lives north of Bird City, KS, is a category 1 disabled marine veteran due to a service-connected disability. He indicates that he has had two heart attacks and is now paying for stress tests and his own medical bills out of pocket because the VA has denied him fee basis. What that means is if you are a veteran in Bird City, KS, which is the very northwest corner of our State, access to a VA hospital is a long way away, and that fee basis allows the veteran to receive care and treatment from a doctor and hospital closer to their hometown or neighborhood.

My point is that the people who are most deserving of care and attention are not receiving the care and attention they need. The Department of Veterans Affairs is supposed to provide the services and benefits earned and promised to those veterans. This is not anything that is out of the ordinary.

This report is something I read every week, and the reports that I convey to my colleagues here on the floor of the Senate are not unusual. I suppose what is unusual is that the number is increasing. What used to be a shorter list of problems with the VA has grown over time to be a longer and longer list.

I have been asking for a plan by the Department of Veterans Affairs from its top leadership, Secretary Shinseki, to explain to me, the Senate, the American people, and veterans what the Department of Veterans Affairs is going to do to meet the needs of these and other veterans across our country.

As I have indicated on the Senate floor before on this topic, if we are incapable of caring for our veterans today, how are we going to be capable of taking care of veterans in the future as more and more military men and women return from our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? The physical and mental circumstances those veterans will find themselves in will be even more difficult and challenging.

We have an aging veteran population from World War II and now Vietnam veterans will most likely be needing more care and treatment from the Department of Veterans Affairs. What we need is the leadership that is necessary to meet the needs of these veterans and a commitment that the status quo is unacceptable and that the bureaucratic culture at the Department of Veterans Affairs is not something that is going to remain. There is going to be a concerted effort to make certain that the Department meets the needs of those who served and sacrificed for our country.

Again, who, other than those who served our country, would we expect to be at the top of the list to receive the most timely and highest quality of care than those who served our Nation? It seems to me that as these issues are raised, we have a Department of Veterans Affairs that is doing damage control. What we need is a Department of Veterans Affairs that reduces the damage being done to the veterans--the men and women who served our country--in Kansas and across our Nation.

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

I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Madam President, I am here this afternoon to pay tribute to an exceptional woman in my hometown. She is retiring from a career of aiding victims of domestic violence across Northwest Kansas. Charlotte Linsner in Hays, KS, is concluding more than 25 years of service to Options Domestic and Sexual Violence Services with half of her time in the role as its executive director.

Back home, especially in the rural parts of our State where doors are left unlocked and most people know everyone else, we often think that domestic violence doesn't occur on our streets or in our homes or to people in families that we know. Unfortunately, that is not the reality, and the evidence clearly indicates that is not the case.

Since Options opened its doors 30 years ago under the name of Northwest Kansas Sexual and Domestic Violence Services, 18,000 Kansans in 18 northwest counties have been assisted in seeking a safe environment. There are locations in Hays and Colby, and in addition to providing direct assistance, Options has been instrumental in raising awareness of domestic and sexual violence in our corner of the State.

Almost from the very beginning Charlotte was there working to help those in need. She has offered compassion and strength and hope to those who walked through Options' doors or called the hotline. Her coworkers use words to describe her such as ``passion'' and ``spunkiness'' and ``one of the nicest people.'' From my time living in Hays and visiting Options, I can attest to those attributes. These characteristics are what make Charlotte so very effective in her job. Those who come to Options are bruised physically and emotionally, and they find among the staff at Options understanding and expertise. Effective leadership has made this an effective organization.

Last year our State's attorney general presented Options with the Outstanding Victims Service Organization for 2013, an award at its 16th Annual Crimes Victims' Rights Conference. Mindful that domestic and sexual violence is a scourge not just throughout Northwest Kansas but throughout our State and society, Charlotte told the audience:

Options accepts this award in honor of all advocates and

domestic/sexual programs across the State. Advocates go to

work each day to find safety for victims.

Charlotte would be the first to say that great things cannot happen through one person's work alone. So I also wish to commend all who staff Options, who sit on its board of directors, who raise money, and the outside groups and individuals who tirelessly work to protect the vulnerable in our communities. I also want to acknowledge her husband Larry and her four children, who have supported her as she has devoted so much of her life and so much of her time to helping other families.

Charlotte is retiring but not until July 1, and for as long as she is on the job she is hard at work to solidify her agency's mission. She will lead a capital campaign with the goal of $250,000, and once the day comes, she will mentor the new executive director. Not only that but she plans to still work once a month at the shelter house as an advocate, which is how she started her career.

Charlotte leaves huge shoes to fill for the next executive director, but with the foundation that Charlotte and others have laid throughout the community in community partnerships and generous benefactors, Options will be helping those in need--our neighbors, our friends, sometimes even our relatives--for years to come.

Thank you, Charlotte. Best wishes. I am glad you live your life in a way that is committed to helping others.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I spoke yesterday on the Senate floor about my concerns with the nature of the way the Department of Veterans Affairs is being operated. Much of my concern occurred as a result of conversations I have had with veterans back home in Kansas and their experiences both on the benefit and medical side--some real concerns with individual examples of what has happened in some of our VA facilities in our State, and this growing sense that the Department of Veterans Affairs has become unable, unwilling, to provide the necessary services in a cost-effective, efficient, timely manner that our veterans so deserve.

As I indicated yesterday, there is no group of people I hold in higher regard than those who have served our country and believe that the benefits that were promised our veterans must be provided to them, and I am concerned that is no longer the case.

I also indicated yesterday that I have served on the House and Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee for now 18 years. I was the chairman of the health care subcommittee. I have worked with nine secretaries of the Department of Veterans Affairs. During that time I always had the sense, until the last few years, that things were always getting better for our veterans. Today, the frustration that I bring to share with my colleagues is the belief that many veterans no longer have hope that the

Department of Veterans Affairs is there to meet their needs and to care for them.

In preparing for those remarks yesterday--but really in studying this issue over the last several years--there is a real shocking development, which is the number of times we hear stories, incidents, facts about what is going on with our veterans at the Department of Veterans Affairs and the services being provided. Just to highlight to my colleagues, based upon inspector general reports that are then, in part, based upon press reports, are some things we have seen and heard about the Department of Veterans Affairs and their efforts to care for America's veterans.

The one that is in the news at the moment--there is an additional IG report that is being anticipated--the Phoenix Veterans Affairs Hospital administration apparently developed a secret waiting list of up to 1,600 sick veterans who were forced to wait months to see a doctor. It is believed that at least 40 U.S. veterans died waiting for their appointment as a result of being placed on the secret waiting list. Again, this is being investigated, a report is expected, and we will see what that report says. But, clearly, this is one of huge concern, resulting in potentially the death of veterans.

There is a wait time cover-up. According to the GAO--the Government Accountability Office--last year, quoting them:

It's unclear how long an appointment has been delayed

because no one can really give you accurate information . . .

It is so bad that [GAO staff] have found evidence that VA

hospitals tried to cover up wait times, fudged numbers, and

backdated delayed appointments in an effort to make things

appear better than they are. In addition, the GAO states that

``nothing has been implemented that we know of at this

point'' despite the fact that the GAO and the VA Inspector

General ``reported similar findings for over a decade.''

Reports of falsifying records were stored in the VA clinic at Fort Collins, CO, where the VA's Office of Medical Inspector found that ``clerks were instructed on how to falsify appointment records so it appeared the small staff of doctors was seeing patients within the agency's goal of 14 days.'' In fact, the investigation determined that clerical staff at the Colorado clinic were punished if they allowed records to reflect that a veteran waited longer than 14 days. Let me say that again. In fact, the investigators determined that clinical staff at the Colorado clinic were punished if they allowed records to reflect that a veteran waited longer than 14 days.

No oversight in quality of care. In December, the GAO reported on VA hospitals finding that patients were not being protected from doctors who have historically provided substandard treatment. None of the hospitals examined by the GAO in Dallas, Nashville, Seattle, and Augusta, ME, adhered to all of the requirements to review and adequately identify providers who are able to deliver safe, quality patient care.

In Los Angeles in 2012, more than 40,000 requests for diagnoses were ``administratively closed'' and essentially purged from the books so reported wait times would be dropped. In Dallas in 2012 another 13,000 appointments were canceled. According to the Washington Examiner, the VA canceled more than 1.5 million medical orders with no guarantee that the patients actually received the treatment or that the tests that were required by those orders were given.

By the VA's own admission in an April of 2014 fact sheet, cancer screening delays accounted for the deaths of at least 23 patients in VA facilities nationwide, and another 53 patients suffered from some type of harm due to improper care. Reports have also linked poor patient care, maintenance issues, and unsanitary practices to at least six preventable deaths in Columbia, SC, five in Pittsburgh, four in Atlanta, and three each in Memphis and Augusta, GA.

Other reports:

More than 1,800 veteran patients in the St. Louis VA Medical Center may have been exposed to HIV and hepatitis as a result of unsanitary dental equipment. The facility has remained under fire for patient deaths, persistent patient safety issues, and critical reports. Despite the problems at the medical center, the facilities director from 2000 to 2013 received nearly $25,000 in bonuses during her tenure there.

CNN reported that after they obtained VA internal documents that deal with patients diagnosed with cancer in 2010 and 2011, at least 19 veterans died because of delays in simple medical screenings such as colonoscopies or endoscopies at various VA hospitals or clinics. Let me say that again. In 2010 and 2011, 19 veterans died because of delays in getting simple medical screenings related to cancer. The veterans were part of 82 vets who have died or are dying or have suffered serious injuries as a result of delayed diagnosis or treatment.

Loopholes in VA performance. An Iraq and Afghanistan combat vet, who is also a former mental health administrator at the VA Medical Center in Manchester, NH, said in April 2012 that VA hospital managers across the country regularly sought loopholes to get around meeting performance requirements. He explained that ``meeting a performance target, rather than meeting the needs of the veteran, becomes the overriding priority in providing care.'' He went on to say that ``offering bonuses to managers to make sure they met performance requirements creates a perverse administrative incentive to find and exploit loopholes . . . that will allow the facility to meet its numbers without actually providing the services or meeting the expectation the measure dictates.''

Finally, this one. It is not from the inspector general's report. But in a hearing before the House Veterans' Affairs Committee on April 9-- about a month ago--the deputy for the VA inspector general for health care inspections stated:

I believe that the VA has lost its focus on the importance

of providing quality medical care as its primary mission. . .

. There is no good explanation for these events. They are not

consistent with good medical practice, they're not consistent

with common sense and they're not consistent with VA policies

that exist.

It is amazing to me--it is so troubling to me--we have these reports over a long period of time across the country--not isolated incidents. It is even more troubling to me--despite these reports, these inspections, these criticisms of the VA--it is hard to find any evidence the VA is doing anything to improve its record, its performance, or to better care for the veterans of our country. We should demand more, and we need leadership at the Department of Veterans Affairs that will do so.

As I indicated yesterday, I do not believe this is a matter of money. There has been a 60-percent increase in VA spending since 2009--normal increases of 2, 3, or 4 percent each year over the last several years. As I indicated yesterday, the President himself talked about how successful the administration has been in providing the necessary resources for the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Our veterans deserve better care and treatment. These are the folks we ought to honor and esteem. These are the people who we must live up to with our commitments to provide the benefits and health care they deserve and have earned.

If these were isolated instances, they would be a terrible thing. But because they are so pervasive, because they are so widespread, and because there appears to be no effort to correct the problems, it is important--it is critical--that Congress and the American people demand better service, care, and treatment for our Nation's heroes.

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

Mr. President, there is no group of Americans whom I hold in higher regard than our Nation's veterans. Their service and sacrifice have allowed us to live in the strongest, freest, greatest country in the world.

American veterans have fought tyrants and terrorists to keep our country safe and secure. Yet even after they return from war, veterans today continue to fight tough battles here at home. Many veterans find themselves struggling to find a job, they face difficulties accessing quality health care services--especially in rural areas such as mine at home in Kansas--and all too many veterans must wait long periods of time for benefit claims to be processed by the VA.

As of April 2014 the backlog stood at 596,061 outstanding claims, and 53 percent of those have been waiting longer than 125 days for an answer from the VA. It takes approximately 266 days for most new claims to receive an answer.

If a veteran is unhappy with the outcome of their claim, they can file an appeal. The backlog for appeals is more than 272,000--in backlogs alone. Some have waited more than 1,500 days--more than 4 years--to get a response on their appeal.

These numbers represent real people. They are not just statistics. They are not just average, everyday Americans. They are our veterans whom we claim we hold in the highest regard and esteem.

Americans who served our country are waiting to receive the benefits they earned. At a time when more and more troops are transitioning out of the military--and the needs are clear for our aging veterans--I am especially concerned that we are not keeping our promise to those who served our country.

As I travel across Kansas and meet veterans in their communities across our State, I hear the stories about their VA claims process-- from systemic issues with the back-and-forth of how the claims are handled, to absurd waiting times in Washington. I hear from veterans organizations that come from Kansas--the American Legion, Disabled Veterans of America, Concerned Veterans of America, and Veterans of Foreign Wars--and they bring their stories of other veterans to me, outlining the problems the veterans back home are facing. The reality is that our veterans are losing hope that the VA will care for them.

Americans recently heard the story about a whistleblower in Phoenix, AZ, at the VA in which there was a secret waiting list of veterans who had waited more than 7 months to see a doctor in order to avoid VA policies on reporting extended delays. The VA hospital figured out how to hide those claims for 7 months so that they weren't reported.

Incidents of mismanagement and even death caused by the failures of the VA are far more numerous than we see in the news. Reports continue to pop up across the country, from Atlanta to Memphis, from St. Louis to Florida. The claims backlog, medical malpractice, mismanagement of cases, lack of oversight, and unethical environment all contribute to the VA's failure.

It has become abundantly clear that the dysfunction within the VA extends from the top to the bottom--at the highest headquarters and at each VISN and down to the local level in some medical facilities. Community-based outpatient clinics and regional benefit offices are part of the problem. The VA suffers from a culture that accepts mediocrity, leaving too many veterans without the care they need. Our veterans deserve better, and they deserve the best our Nation knows how to offer.

I highlight today the broken VA system and challenge the Department of Veterans Affairs to change. We need accountability and transformation within the VA system and its culture, top to bottom, all across the country. We must break the cycle of dysfunction today and take the steps necessary to make certain our veterans are no longer victims of their own government's bureaucracy.

Here are some examples from across our State:

Jack Cobos, a Kansan who sought medical attention at the Topeka VA hospital emergency room, is told his chest pains are related to muscles around his heart. He is sent home. A week later he returns and is transported to another emergency room. Ultimately, Jack dies of a heart attack--he never recovers--and we now pay tribute to that veteran who failed to receive the care he needed in a timely fashion.

One year later the same Topeka emergency room closed its doors to

veterans seeking emergency treatment. And I am still waiting on a response from the VA to explain the closure of an emergency room at the VA hospital in Topeka, KS.

An outpatient clinic in Liberal has been without a primary care provider for more than 3 years. While others try to fill in the gap, there is nothing to date that the VA has done to solve the underlying problems. There is still no primary care provider.

I recently spoke about claims backlogs with a Kansas veteran involved in the American Legion named Dave Thomas from Leavenworth. He has waited since he filed his claim in 1970 and only this past year received an answer. He received a 90-percent disability rating from the VA, but it took 44 years for him to receive that answer.

A veteran with Parkinson's disease was told recently--he filed his claim in March of last year. He was told this past week that it will now be processed only because his claim is now over a year old. You have to wait a year before you are in line in order for you to receive the process of your claim that you deserved more than 1 year ago. How can the VA establish a wait time benchmark of 1 year for veterans' claims to get the attention they deserve?

It is so disappointing to hear these stories. I know it is unacceptable. Whether a veteran served in 1941, 1951, 1971, 1991, 2001, 2011, or is currently serving, we owe the Nation's veterans our absolute best after their military service is complete. Unfortunately, the VA system continues on a glidepath of dysfunction and is only, at best, playing defense.

The VA's failure is not a matter of resources. That is always the easy answer: more money. But just last week President Obama himself said:

We've resourced the Veterans Affairs office more in terms

of increases than any other department or agency in my

government.

VA funding levels have increased well more than 60 percent since 2009. Each year there have been incremental increases of 3, 4, or 5 percent, and this year the request from the President's budget is for a 6.5-percent increase over last year's spending. Yet our veterans continue to struggle and are not getting the treatment they earned and deserve, and they are not getting their benefits.

Republicans and Democrats have agreed on fully funding the VA to serve year after year, but this increase in spending results in no better service from the Department. To date, these increases have not in any way increased the service or support our veterans deserve and need. This is a problem with leadership and a lack of will to change.

I have been a member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee for 18 years, both in the House and Senate. I chaired the Health Subcommittee in the House. I have worked with nine VA Secretaries. This is an issue on which I always thought we were making progress. Today it is so disappointing to report to my colleagues in the Senate that this Department is dysfunctional, and the services get worse, not better.

We need accountability at the VA. The 44-year-old claims process of Dave Thomas and the untimely passing of Jack Cobos should not be forgotten, and the Department needs to make meaningful changes so that these cases and cases like these will never happen again.

While we continue to push legislative action, it is time to hold people accountable in order to enforce meaningful change. GAO reports, inspector general reports, and VA whistleblowers all call for action. A list I find now of eight press and IG reports--from CNN, to FOX News, to military.com, to our IG, to the Washington Examiner--all report what we would not believe could ever happen within the VA in the United States of America.

Veterans are waiting for action. Yet the VA continues to operate in the same old bureaucratic fashion, settling for mediocrity and continued disservice to our Nation's heroes.

It is clear that accountability at VA is absent. Oversight doesn't mean much. And I sincerely and seriously question whether the leadership of the VA is capable and willing to enforce change. There is a difference between wanting change and leading it to happen.

Today I am demanding accountability and true transformation within the VA system and its culture, from top to bottom, and all across the country. Secretary Shinseki seemingly is unwilling or unable to do so, and change must be made at the top. I ask the Secretary to submit his resignation, and I ask President Obama to accept that resignation.

We must never forget that our Nation has responsibility to its veterans. That means receiving the care and support they earned.

God bless our veterans and all those serving at home and abroad and all their families. We need a Department of Veterans Affairs that is worthy of your sacrifice.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, before I give my intended remarks, I want to add my voice to others who have paid tribute to Daryl Chappelle, who retires today after 42 years of working in the Senate. I have only been here for 3 years, but I can tell you, in the time that I have been here, I look forward to running into Daryl as I make my trips back and forth between the Russell Senate Office Building and the Senate floor. There are certain people in life who just brighten your day. Every occasion when I have encountered Daryl during the workday, it has just been that experience.

I pay tribute to an individual about whom I don't know a lot personally or of his background or his family. It is a sad thing about the nature of today's busy world in which we don't know people--as I certainly do at home and in hometowns across our country--but I will tell you that the opportunity to be with and experience the conversation and joy that Daryl adds to this place has been a real treat and a wonderful experience for me.

I wish him and his family best wishes in his retirement and thank him for his service to the Senate and to the people of our country.

Nomination of Nancy Moritz

I rise to tell my colleagues about a nomination we are considering, and I speak in support of Justice Nancy Moritz.

She is currently a supreme court justice on the Kansas Supreme Court, and she is before us today as a nominee to sit on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

I appreciate working with my colleague Senator Roberts and those in the White House as we came together to try to find an acceptable and honorable nominee, and I believe we did. I extend my appreciation to Justice Moritz for having agreed to answer the call to serve her country in a new capacity as a member of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals.

She comes today before the Senate and again on Monday as someone who is highly qualified, greatly prepared, and who has the necessary background. Certainly the educational requirements are there, but the experience that she has encountered in her distinguished legal career, both public and private, really adds a dimension to this person and something that I would look for in a member of the tenth circuit.

For the past 4 years she has been a justice on the Kansas Supreme Court. Prior to that she spent 15 years as an attorney in the U.S. attorney's office in our State in both Kansas City and Topeka. Prior to that she had 6 years of experience in private practice as well.

Justice Moritz was raised in a small neighboring town of mine. Her hometown is Tipton. It is in many ways a typical small Kansas town. I know folks in Tipton would tell me how exceptional they are--and I have seen many instances of how true that is--but I know the people of Tipton. I have witnessed their character, their integrity, their work ethic, their kindness, their care and genuine concern for others. That sense of community you attain when you grow up in a town of just a few hundred people is something I think has great benefit in becoming who we are.

I, in some ways, admire the justice for that background and know what that kind of experience means in molding her character as well as her work ethic and how she conducts herself.

She also served for a period of time as a law clerk to Judge Ed Larson. Ed Larson was a law partner of mine, and he remains a good friend. I called to visit with him about the nomination of Justice Moritz, and I trust his judgment. He not only was a law partner in practice with me--or really I was in practice with him--but he then went to the court of appeals and then was elevated to the Kansas Supreme Court.

Of all the people I have met in life, and certainly many of the attorneys I have met in life and the judges, if you were looking for someone whose opinion and judgment you would trust, Judge Ed Larson is certainly that person. He has made clear to me that Justice Moritz was one of the very best law clerks he ever had, and he believes her to be highly qualified. With his recommendation, my judgment about Justice Moritz was even more increased and enhanced.

Again, I am convinced that her background, growing up the way she did, her experience with Judge Larson and his stamp of approval upon her character and abilities, suggests we have a great person to join the tenth circuit.

I encourage my colleagues to review her qualifications, and I would hope and assume they would reach the same conclusion that I have, that the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals will be well served with this Kansan on it. I look forward to supporting her confirmation, and I ask my colleagues to do the same.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, I wish to speak for a few moments on the Senate floor. We are working our way through a number of confirmations relating to Federal district judges across the country. One of them is the potential Federal district judge for my State of Kansas. I rise to speak in support of one of those individuals who will be considered by the Senate this week, Daniel Crabtree. He was nominated by the President to be a U.S. district court judge for the District of Kansas.

I want to attest to my colleagues my view that he is a gentleman who should be confirmed by the Senate. He was reported out of the Judiciary Committee without opposition and is rated unanimously ``well qualified'' by the American Bar Association, which, in part, confirms my view that he would make an outstanding Federal judge.

I actually have known this individual for more than 30 years, dating back to our days at the University of Kansas School of Law, where he was 1 year ahead of me in law school. I have followed his personal and professional development since that time. We have remained acquainted, we have been friends, and for a short period of time we practiced law at the same firm in downtown Kansas City. He is worthy of our support today, but he is also someone who has my respect and admiration.

After graduating from the University of Kansas School of Law, Dan Crabtree became an associate and ultimately became a partner at the downtown Kansas City law firm then called Stinson, Mag & Fizzell. He became a partner in 1988. The firm merged into a firm called Stinson Morrison Hecker in 2002.

He is a litigator with extensive experience in the Federal and State courts, and he received recognition by the publication ``Best Lawyers'' in Kansas City as the Antitrust Lawyer of the Year in 2013. In 2014 he was the Kansas City Banking and Finance Litigation Lawyer of the Year. Again, this is outside confirmation of his qualifications and capabilities.

Dan is a lifelong resident of our State. He grew up in Kansas City, KS, the suburbs of Kansas City, MO, on the Kansas side of the line. He and his wife Maureen and their teenager daughter continue to live in Kansas City, KS, today.

I have often spoken on the Senate floor about the special way of life we have in our State, and Dan Crabtree, in his hometown of Kansas City, KS, exemplifies what I so often admire, respect, and speak of on the Senate floor about his humility, his devotion to others, his relationship with his community, and how important it is to him to be an active member in trying to make life better for other people, those who are his neighbors and those who surround him in Kansas City and Kansas, our State. He has those characteristics of a Kansan.

I have often known people who have been very successful in their professional lives, who have succeeded, for example, in law school, gone on to a large prestigious firm, and in many instances it seems as if they forgot where they came from. Dan continues to live in his hometown and continues to work to make certain that good things happen in that community. He does that with a great sense of humility. While he has the attributes that could cause him to be superior in his attitude toward others, Dan is humble, caring, and compassionate. His pride in where he comes from is evidenced by a devotion to many community activities--the Community Foundation of Wyandotte County and the Greater Kansas City Community Foundation. He sits on the board of directors for the Kansas City Sports Commission, and he is responsible in part for bringing 14 NCAA championships to Kansas City over the past few years.

All of this encompasses who Dan is. He is a husband, a father, a lawyer, and a community leader. He is exemplary in fulfilling each of those roles. Mostly, I want to say that his character, integrity, and professional achievements are worthy of being a member of the Federal bench. In fact, I can think of few others whom I have met in my time as a Senator but also my time as a practicing attorney in Kansas City who would fulfill the solemn duties of this position better than Dan Crabtree.

I thank the President for nominating Dan Crabtree, and I ask my colleagues to join me in swiftly confirming him as a judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas.

I yield the floor.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to address the Senate as in the morning hour.

I thank the Chair.

Madam President, nearly every minute someone in America develops Alzheimer's disease. More than 5 million Americans suffer from this disease and more than 35 million individuals worldwide. If trends continue, the number of individuals diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease after the age of 65 is expected to double every 5 years, while the number of people 85 years and older with this disease will triple by 2050.

Alzheimer's is the sixth leading cause of death in the United States, and there is currently no cure, no diagnostic test, and no treatment for this terrible disease.

As a nation, we must remain committed to defeating one of the greatest health threats to the health and well-being of all Americans. Caring for those with Alzheimer's and other dementia is expected to cost $214 billion this year--$214 billion this year alone, with $150 billion covered by the Federal Government through Medicare and Medicaid.

A recent study outlined that the cost of care for those struggling with dementia is projected to double over the next 30 years, surpassing health care expenses for both heart disease and cancer. Without a way to prevent, cure, or effectively treat Alzheimer's, costs will only continue to climb.

Alzheimer's has become a disease to define our generation. But if we focus and prioritize our research capabilities, it need not remain an inevitable part of aging. There is reason for newfound hope. Over the last 5 years, significant strides have been made in understanding how Alzheimer's disease affects the brain and body. This new understanding has the potential to lead to new research opportunities and to better management of the disease.

In February, the Senate Appropriations health subcommittee held a hearing on the impact of Alzheimer's--both economic and personal--and the state of these current research initiatives. I am the ranking member of that subcommittee. Chairman Harkin and I held this hearing to raise awareness of the threat to America's health, the impact on the financial well-being of our country, and to highlight the groundbreaking research initiatives currently taking place.

For example, until 2009, only one genetic variant was known to increase the risk of late-onset Alzheimer's disease. However, through advances in genome studies and other technologies, the list of known gene risk factors has grown substantially. Now researchers have identified 11 genetic risk factors.

The National Institutes of Health is supporting research that has established methods and standards for testing for biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease. Changes in these biomarkers may precede the onset of the disease and could be a key to unlocking the causes and progression of the disease.

NIH has also made significant progress over the last several years and we continue to support them moving more aggressively toward developing new treatments for Alzheimer's and related dementia. Several innovative studies, ranging from research on the most basic underpinnings of the disease to early-stage clinical trial of promising agents, are now underway.

A sustained Federal commitment to research for Alzheimer's will improve health outcomes for people living with the disease both today and in the future, and it will also lower health care costs. I have been and remain committed to prioritizing the funding for Alzheimer's research.

Recently, I and other members of the Appropriations Committee worked to include a $1 billion funding increase for the National Institutes of Health in the 2014 Omnibus appropriations bill. This amount includes a $100 million increase in funding for the National Institutes of Aging within NIH, as well as the initial year of funding for the new BRAIN initiative to map the human brain. These research investments are critically important because they will increase our understanding of the underlying causes of Alzheimer's, help unlock the mysteries of the brain, help bring us closer to an effective treatment and one day a cure.

Alzheimer's is a defining challenge of our generation. We must together commit to defeat this devastating disease by supporting the critical research carried out by scientists and researchers across our Nation. The health and financial future of our Nation are at stake, and the United States cannot afford to ignore such a threat. Together, we can make a sustained commitment to Alzheimer's research that will benefit our Nation and bring hope to future generation of Americans. The challenge is ours and the moment for us to act is now.

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

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak to the Senate as if in morning business.

Mr. President, in Kansas there is a company called Koch Industries that is an important component of our State, its economy, and many, several thousand Kansans work there. Unfortunately, in the political discourse of our country, Koch Industries and its owners are often subject to attacks.

I happened to be reading the Wall Street Journal this morning, and I noticed a column, an opinion piece written by the chairman of the board of Koch Industries, Charles G. Koch, and I wish to share that with my colleagues today.

It seems to me the things that are outlined in Mr. Koch's opinion piece, while not everyone would agree, they are certainly within the wide mainstream of American thought and certainly reflect opinions that are worthy of debate and discussion in our country and on the Senate floor.

We all bring diversity, a different set of values, opinions, beliefs of political philosophy to the debate on the Senate floor, and I wanted to share one of Koch Industries owner's beliefs about those values and his philosophy and how it affects Americans today.

This is an opinion piece from today's Wall Street Journal written by a Kansan, Charles Koch. Mr. Koch says:

I have devoted most of my life to understanding the

principles that enable people to improve their lives. It is

those principles--the principles of a free society--that have

shaped my life, my family, our company and America itself.

Unfortunately, the fundamental concepts of dignity,

respect, equality before law and personal freedom are under

attack by the nation's own government. That's why, if we want

to restore a free society and create greater well-being and

opportunity for all Americans, we have no choice but to fight

for those principles. I have been doing so for more than 50

years, primarily through educational efforts. It was only in

the past decade that I realized the need to also engage in

the political process.

Again, Mr. Koch speaking:

More than 200 years ago, Thomas Jefferson warned that this

could happen. ``The natural progress of things,'' Jefferson

wrote, ``is for liberty to yield and government to gain

ground.'' He knew that no government could possibly run

citizens' lives for the better. The more government tries to

control, the greater the disaster, as shown by the current

health-care debacle. Collectivists (those who stand for

government control of the means of production and how people

live their lives) promise heaven but deliver hell. For them,

the promised end justifies the means. A truly free society is

based upon a vision of respect for people and what they

value. In a truly free society, any business that disrespects

its customers will fail, and deserves to do so. The same

should be true of any government that disrespects its

citizens. The central belief and fatal conceit of the current

administration is that you are incapable of running your own

life, but those in power are capable of running it for you.

This is the essence of big government and collectivism.

Instead of encouraging free and open debate, collectivists

strive to discredit and intimidate opponents. They engage in

character assassination. . . . This is the approach that

Albert Schopenhauer described in the 19th century, that Saul

Alinsky famously advocated in the 20th, and that so many

despots have infamously practiced. Such tactics are the

antithesis of what is required for a free society--and a

telltale sign that the collectivists do not have good

answers.

Rather than try to understand my vision for a free society

or accurately report the facts about Koch Industries, our

critics would have you believe we're ``un-American'' and

trying to ``rig the system,'' that we're against

``environmental protection'' or eager to ``end workplace

safety standards.''

These falsehoods remind Mr. Koch of the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan's observation, ``Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.''

Here are some facts about my philosophy and our company:

Koch companies employ 60,000 Americans; who make many

thousands of products that Americans want and need. According

to government figures, our employees and the 143,000

additional American jobs they support generate $11.7 billion

in compensation and benefits. About one-third of our U.S.-

based employees are union members.

Koch employees have earned well over 700 awards for

environmental, health and safety excellence since 2009, many

of them are from the Environmental Protection Agency and the

Occupational Safety and Health Administration. EPA officials

have commended us for our ``commitment to a cleaner

environment'' and called us ``a model for other companies.''

Our refineries have consistently ranked among the best in

the nation for low per-barrel emissions. In 2012, our Total

Case Incident Rate--

That is a safety measure--

was 67% better than a Bureau of Labor Statistics average for

peer industries. Even so, we have never rested on our

laurels. We believe there is always room for innovation and

improvement.

Far from trying to rig the system, I have spent decades

opposing cronyism and all political favors, including

mandates, subsidies, and protective tariffs--even when we

benefit from them. I believe that cronyism is nothing more

than welfare for the rich and powerful, and should be

abolished. Koch Industries was the only major producer in the

ethanol industry to argue for the demise of the ethanol tax

credit in 2011. That government handout . . . needlessly

drove up food and fuel prices as well as other costs for

consumers--many of whom were poor or otherwise disadvantaged.

Mr. Koch says:

Now the mandate needs to go, so that consumers and the

marketplace are the ones who decide the future of ethanol.

Instead of fostering a system that enables people to help

themselves, America is now saddled with a system that

destroys values, raises costs, hinders innovation and

relegates millions of citizens to a life of poverty,

dependency and hopelessness. This is what happens when

elected officials believe that people's lives are better run

by politicians and regulators than by the people themselves.

Those in power fail to see that more government means less

liberty, and liberty is the essence of what it means to be

American. Love of liberty is an American ideal. If more

businesses (and elected officials) were to embrace a vision

of creating real value for people in a principled way, our

nation would be far better off--not just today, but for

generations to come. I'm dedicated to fighting for that

vision. I'm convinced that most Americans believe it's worth

fighting for, too.

That is the opinion piece from the Wall Street Journal this morning, written by a Kansan, Charles Koch.

I commend that opinion piece and its thoughts to my colleagues in the Senate.

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

I ask unanimous consent to address the Senate as in morning business.

The story of Kansas is one that involves many people, many jobs, much ado about caring for others. Our State is a State of manufacturing workers, factory workers, teachers, farmers, and people who work hard every day to make a difference in their community and to make a difference in our State and Nation. Today I wish to pay tribute to one of those unsung heroes. In this case, it is a businessman, a volunteer, a husband, and a father who lived a full life before passing away in December of last year.

Alvin Brensing was born and raised on a farm outside of Hudson, a rural Central Kansas town with a population of 125. After high school, Brensing graduated with honors from Salt City Business College in Hutchison and in May 1937, at the age of 21, started working as a bookkeeper at the Stafford County Flour Mills.

As German immigrants, the Krug family realized that their American dream was going to be accomplished by establishing the flour mill more than a century ago. Alvin worked under William Krug and then Leonard Brim to help grow the company before being named its president in 1986. Under his leadership, Stafford County Flour Mills doubled its capacity and grew 2\1/2\ times its size. It was one of the last independent flour mills remaining in the United States, and the mill produces Hudson Cream Flour. Many of my colleagues and many Americans will have seen the bag of flour with the great symbol and emblem--Hudson Cream Flour. Hudson Cream Flour has a reputation around the Nation as a top- notch baking flour for its consistency and texture. It also serves as a tradition for this West Virginia family who wrote the company saying:

After using Hudson Cream Flour for all the years I have

cooked . . . and can remember even my grandmother and mother

using nothing else . . . I read for the first time the

``absolute satisfaction guarantee'' and really had a good

laugh! I thought, if those people in Kansas only knew the

absolute satisfaction my family has enjoyed from their

product. The things we pass down in our family are good

morals, good cooking, and Hudson Cream flour!

After Alvin's wife died in 1993, he came to miss the smell of fresh bread and soon began experimenting with ingredients. Alvin came up with three

recipes, including ``Al's Cinnamon Raisin Bread,'' which is included on the back of every Hudson Cream Flour bag.

Alvin always put farmers and customers first. Current Stafford County Flour Mills president Reuel Foote reflected that Alvin often said, ``Our word is our bond--if you agree to do something, you do it.''

While Alvin dedicated most of his life to ensuring the success and future of the mill, he was also a tireless volunteer in the Hudson community. Brensing took it upon himself to maintain Hudson's Trinity Cemetery, where his parents and his wife Zelda are buried. In fact, he upgraded a shed on the property into a building where loved ones can now comfortably look up the location of their loved ones' graves.

Alvin was also known as the local weatherman, collecting data for the National Weather Service from a local grain elevator. His daughters remember their dad turning the furnace on each Sunday morning to heat up the Trinity Community Church.

His legacy of leadership and volunteerism is what will live on as the Stafford County Flour Mills continue to support the community and educate youth, whether through the county 4-H Program or through the dozens of mill tours each year. The mill also continues Alvin's tradition of giving each schoolkid a 5-pound bag of flour after each tour to encourage them to experiment with recipes and baking.

Alvin taught through his actions that satisfaction in life comes from what you do for others rather than what you do for yourself. This is the legacy I want to pay tribute to today, and this is the legacy he lived and leaves behind for the next generation.

We want those who follow him and us to know they have their chance to return home, put down their roots, and raise their own families in places such as Hudson, KS. Our Nation faces so many challenges today, but we must remain committed to doing what it takes so that tomorrow and every day thereafter our children and grandchildren have the opportunity to enjoy that special way of life in places like Kansas and to pursue their own American dream.

I ask my colleagues to join me in paying tribute and remembering the life of a great Kansan, Alvin Brensing.

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

I ask unanimous consent that it may be in order for me to offer an amendment that has been designated No. 2911.

Madam President, we were here last evening on this topic for consideration by the Senate. The amendment I was offering that the Senator from Rhode Island has objected to in my view is one of the many amendments that could be considered in this legislation--certainly should be considered by this Senate. While I am certainly interested and willing to have a discussion about the extension of unemployment benefits, it seems to me that this Senate ought also to be looking at issues that would reduce the chances that individual Americans--workers across the country--need that extension. We ought to be doing the things we are not doing here in the Senate. In fact, in my view, this Senate and this President have done nothing to increase the opportunities for Americans to keep their jobs, to increase their employment opportunities, to get a higher wage, to expand their economic opportunity in this country.

The amendment I was offering, which has been objected to, is one of those many examples of legislation that, once again, gets ignored on the Senate floor. It is not considered by any committee and is not allowed to be made in order.

Again, the process in the Senate has broken down so that individual Senators who have good ideas, at least who believe they have good ideas about how we can make life better for Americans, are not being enabled the opportunity to offer those amendments for consideration by the Senate.

In fact, there have now been 70 amendments offered to this legislation. It appears that none of those 70 will be considered while we consider this issue of extension of unemployment benefits. The amendment would, in my view, increase the opportunity for every American to find a better job.

We know that if we are going to increase economic activity, create jobs in this country, the statistics show, the facts show, academic and real-life experiences demonstrate that entrepreneurs--individuals who have a dream to start a business, who work in their garage or their backyard or their barn, decide that they have something they can contribute to the consumer in this country and they pursue that dream-- have the best opportunity that we have in this country to create jobs for other Americans.

So the amendment I offered would be legislation called Startup Act 3.0. This is not just the Senator from Kansas or not just a Republican Senator in the Senate offering this amendment, it is a bipartisan amendment offered by me and one of my Democratic colleagues, but the underlying legislation actually has more Democratic sponsors than it has Republican sponsors. Again, it is the kind of thing that one would expect some consideration in the Senate.

Unfortunately, this legislation was offered 3 years ago, shortly after I came to the Senate. So my frustration is not that just this opportunity today is being denied me and my colleagues who support the concept of promoting entrepreneurship, but it has been denied for certainly more than 2 years, almost 3 years, when we have facts, academicians who tell us these are exactly the kind of things that would increase the chances that Americans are better off today and in the future.

This legislation deals with the regulatory environment, the Tax Code, access to capital, federally funded research put into the hands of the private sector more quickly, the opportunity for Americans to better compete in the battle for global talent, all things that are just common sense and my guess is would be agreed to. If we would ever have a vote on the Senate floor about this concept, I would not be surprised that overwhelmingly my colleagues would support this.

There is nothing in here that is a partisan issue. There is nothing in here that is significantly controversial. We can argue or debate the details, we can improve this legislation, but we are never given the chance to pursue that goal. It is certainly disappointing to me that once again legislation that would address the underlying problems we face in this country, the inability of Americans to keep jobs, improve their job circumstance, and create a brighter future for the next generation of Americans, is something this Senate, for the last 3 years, has determined does not

have merit for even consideration, either in a committee or on the Senate floor.

For those who are interested in the details of this legislation, I would refer them to my remarks on the Senate floor last evening.

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

Madam President, it is April Fools' Day, but it sure feels more like ``Groundhog Day'' because we are once again here considering an extension of unemployment benefits for the millions of Americans who have been out of work for months, and some of them even for years.

While assistance to those without work serves an important purpose in helping Americans transition, we are failing to address the underlying and more important issue: How do we grow the economy and create jobs for all of our citizens?

A growing economy creates new opportunities for Americans to find meaningful work, and with meaningful work comes an opportunity for Americans to improve their economic security and advance up that economic ladder.

It is one of the reasons Senator Wyden and I started the Economic Mobility Caucus. We wanted to study the facts and explore policy improvements that can make a difference to increase the likelihood that all Americans can do just that--improve their standard of living and move up that economic ladder to a better life.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, their monthly report indicates that 10.5 million Americans are unemployed; 7.2 million Americans are working part time because they cannot find full-time work; 2.4 million Americans want to work but have stopped searching. What a sad circumstance that is for those folks.

Our labor participation rate is hovering around its 35-year low at 63 percent. While those statistics and the lives these numbers represent are pretty discouraging, I want to talk about a piece of good news. We know we can create jobs and we can create a growing economy, and we know from the facts, from the studies, that entrepreneurship, starting a business, giving Americans a chance to pursue the American dream, is the key.

The Kauffman Foundation in Kansas City has studied entrepreneurship. They make clear that most new jobs come from young companies created by entrepreneurs. In fact, since 1980, nearly all of the net new jobs that have been created in our country have been created by companies less than 5 years old. It kind of makes sense. Big businesses often are looking for ways to

cut costs, reduce their workforce. New businesses wanting to succeed increase their workforce. In fact, these new businesses create, on average, 3 million jobs each year.

Unfortunately, the number of new business startups, those business formed each year, are around their lowest total since the Bureau of Labor Statistics began keeping track over 40 years ago. So while we know that startup companies have a great opportunity to create jobs, we are creating the fewest number of startup businesses in nearly 40 years.

A couple of authors, John Dearie and Courtney Geduldig--they are authors of a book called ``Where the Jobs Are''--point out in that book that ``the vital signs of America's job-creating entrepreneurial economy are flashing red alert.'' John and Courtney spent an entire summer traveling the United States. They met with more than 200 entrepreneurs in dozens of cities to learn about the challenges those entrepreneurs are facing.

What they found is no surprise to anybody in this Chamber. They are the same issues I hear when I am back in Kansas. Those who start a business struggle with access to money, to capital to start that business; a lack of skilled talent; a complex Tax Code; a regulatory burden; and, boy, a lot of uncertainty, most of it, much of it, resulting from the action or lack of action here in Washington, DC.

A few years back I set out with a bipartisan group of Senators to address the challenges entrepreneurs face. Together we developed legislation that is now called Startup Act 3.0 to help create a better environment for those whose dream it is to start a new business. The Senate majority leader is frequently talking about allowing votes on legislation that has bipartisan support. This bill, Startup 3.0, is such a bill.

I spent time working with Senator Warner and Senator Coons, Senator King and Senator Klobuchar, as well as Senator Blunt and Senator Rubio. We introduced what I would say is a very commonsense approach to addressing factors that influence an entrepreneur's chance of success: taxes, regulations, access to capital, access to talent.

This legislation has been introduced as an amendment to the unemployment insurance extension bill the Senate is now considering. Unfortunately, at least so far, we have been denied having a vote on what is clearly a job-creating measure. I have offered this as an amendment to other bills on the Senate floor, but if the past is any example of what will happen on this bill, the chances of us being able to offer the amendment, have it considered and voted on, do not look very probable.

Startup 3.0 makes changes to the Tax Code to encourage investment in startups and provides more capital for those who are ready to grow and hire. To address burdensome government regulations, this legislation, now this amendment, requires Federal agencies to determine whether the cost of new regulations outweighs the benefits, and it encourages Federal agencies to give special consideration of the impact proposed regulations would have on a startup business.

As any entrepreneur knows, a good idea is essential to starting a successful business. So Startup 3.0, an amendment now to this bill, improves the process by which information that is funded by Federal research, information that is garnered by Federal research, is more readily available to those who want to start a business, so that tax- funded innovations can be turned into companies that spur economic growth.

Finally, Startup 3.0 provides new opportunities for highly educated entrepreneurial immigrants to stay in the United States where their talent and new ideas can fuel economic growth and create jobs in America.

For more than 2 years, Startup Act 3.0 has earned praise from business owners, from chambers of commerce, from economic development officials, from entrepreneurs, from economists, and elected officials. Recently, the California State Senate passed a resolution calling on Congress to pass Startup Act 3.0. The President's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, when it was in existence, had voiced strong support for several of the bill's provisions.

Unfortunately, none of that support from across the country has progressed in the Halls of Congress to see this legislation seriously considered. I can tell you that the reason Congress has not been able to address our economic challenges is not for lack of good ideas. In my view, it is a lack of leadership in the Senate and within the administration, within Washington, DC, to address the challenges Americans face.

There are plenty of good ideas that can provide immediate relief to Americans, many ideas in addition to Startup 3.0. Some of those examples are a 40-hour workweek. The House is poised to pass legislation. Some of my colleagues are proposing amendments here in the Senate to change full-time employment from 30 hours, as outlined in the Affordable Care Act, back to 40 hours.

Small businesses, restaurants, school districts, and community colleges across Kansas and around the country are already cutting hours to comply with the employer mandate of the Affordable Care Act. By fixing this provision, we can make certain that hard-working Americans have the opportunity to work more hours, earn a bigger paycheck, or find full-time employment.

Many of us believe--in fact, a large majority of the Senate in a bipartisan way believes--that approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline will help us in two ways: reduce energy costs in the United States, a very important factor in new jobs and expanding the economy, as well as increasing employment during the construction of that pipeline.

A recent poll by Washington Post and ABC News shows that Americans support this 3 to 1. Again 80-some Senators voted in moving forward with the Keystone Pipeline. Yet it has not happened. The President has not made a decision in regard to Keystone Pipeline, has stalled this issue. Nothing in the Senate would suggest the leadership of the Senate is ready to move this ball forward.

The President talks about trade promotion authority, spoke about it in one of his State of the Union Addresses. Yet that is another issue that has not been considered by the Senate. The President apparently has backed off of this issue out of deference to politics. Yet we know--we certainly know this in Kansas--that the airplanes we make in south central Kansas, the wheat we grow in western Kansas, the cattle we grow in our State, that we raise in our State, clearly much of the economic activity that comes from those activities occurs because we are able to sell those agricultural commodities, those manufactured goods around the globe.

Millions of Americans can be better off if there is greater opportunity for what we manufacture, the agricultural products we grow, if they have a wider market. The President and this Congress, particularly the Senate--not this Congress, the Democratic majority here--have focused much of their attention on, for example, the bill we are on, extending the unemployment insurance timeframe, apparently in the near future increasing minimum wage.

Consider these facts. There are 3.6 million Americans at or below the minimum wage level. Minimum wage workers make up 2.5 percent of all workers, and 55 percent are 25 years old or younger. So it is a relatively small portion of the workforce and a young portion of the workforce. I am certainly willing, happy to have a debate about the need to increase the minimum wage, to extend unemployment benefits, in part because I want the Senate to operate.

One of my greatest complaints since my arrival in the Senate is the Senate no longer functions as it has historically, in which issues of importance to the country, whether they are Republican issues, Democratic issues, American issues, middle of the road--this place takes up those issues very rarely. I am willing to have a debate about what is proposed here.

But what I am thinking we are doing is we are missing the real issues if we only deal with those. The minimum wage and extension of unemployment benefits is a symptom of a larger problem. It is that Americans want and need jobs. In my view, this Senate and this President have done nothing to increase the chances that Americans have a better shot at finding a better job.

We have to grow the economy. By growing the economy--I think that

sounds like something that is far removed from the everyday lives of Americans. But growing the economy simply means we are creating greater opportunities for American men and women, for husbands and wives, for sons and daughters, for families to have the opportunity to pursue a career they feel comfortable in, that is satisfactory to their economic needs, and gives them the hope they can improve their lives financially.

So growing the economy is about creating a greater opportunity for every American to pursue what we all have grown up calling the American dream. Unfortunately, the facts, if you believe the Congressional Budget Office, indicate that raising the minimum wage will increase unemployment. In fact, the numbers I saw--this was not the CBO score, but a Texas university study indicated that raising the minimum wage to $10 an hour or more would reduce jobs in my home State by 27,300 jobs.

I doubt that voters care much about CBO reports or about a Texas university study, but they are acutely aware--they see it every day in their own lives--of the lack of opportunity, the dearth of jobs, the reduction in hours, the reduction in opportunity. These reports make clear they are happening because of failed policies and the refusal of the Senate and the President to address the broader issue of what can we do to create jobs for Americans.

I thought the message of the 2010 election, the election where I was brought to the Senate on behalf of Kansans--I thought the message that we all would have, should have received, the message of the election, was the desire for every American to have the chance to improve their lives through a job, through a better job, and through a secure job. In my view, it is time for us to focus on growing the opportunities for all workers everywhere.

With a willing Congress, including leaders who understand these challenges and are willing to address them, I am certain we can create greater opportunities for millions of Americans, including those who no longer or who currently have no meaningful work. The lack of a job is terrible. I think there is a certain moral component, a sense of well- being, a sense of who we are as human beings when we have a job that not only fulfills us financially but gives us a sense of purpose in our daily lives.

As the Senate considers a short-term extension of unemployment insurance, we must not lose sight of that longer term goal of creating an environment for job creation. Again, I would offer Startup Act 3.0, a bipartisan amendment, a bipartisan piece of legislation offered as an amendment, as an opportunity to do that, as part of the consideration of the extension of unemployment benefits. There is no better way to create jobs than to support entrepreneurs and to foster the development of new businesses.

Small business is, as we always say, the backbone of American jobs. So let's stop having this ``groundhog day'' moment every few months and let's start tackling the challenges that entrepreneurs across the country are telling us about, that Americans are telling us about, that we learned in the 2010 election mean so much to every American.

Unfortunately, this President and this Senate have done nothing to improve the chances that every American has a better job and a brighter future. Please, this is so important. There is so much we can do. Too many times we focus on what we are unable to agree upon. But there is so much we can agree upon, so many things we can do. The American dream depends upon us doing so and doing so now.

I yield the floor.