Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise to honor a fellow Montanan today as he retires from a long and distinguished career in the water utility business after 41 years. Arvid ``Butch'' Hiller retires from the Mountain Water Company in Missoula, where he is the general manager.

Butch Hiller was raised in Missoula. He spent 10 years supplying water to his community through Montana Power and 32 years when it became the Mountain Water Company. In other words, Mountain Water has never run a day without Butch Hiller contributing to its mission. His distinguished career at Mountain Water included recognition by his profession, including the Distinguished Public Service Award from the American Water Works Association in 2005. His contributions to the Missoula community and the State of Montana are numerous, including service on the Missoula Rotary Club, the Missoula and the Montana Chambers of Commerce, the Montana Power Business Information Panel, and the Montana Ambassadors.

Butch has said one of the keys to his success has been to hire people who were better and smarter to help him do what he alone could not do. He also said he tried to give people the freedom to achieve success and to learn from their mistakes.

Mr. President, water is our most basic resource. Butch Hiller spent a career as a caretaker of that precious resource. As he and his wife Lynn begin their retirement and continue to enjoy their four children and five grandchildren, I would like to join with other Montana residents and thank Butch for his stewardship of our Montana water and the many contributions he has made to our community.

Madam President, I wish to pay tribute to Vincent J. Vacca, a veteran of the first Gulf War. Vince, on behalf of all Montanans and all Americans, I stand to say thank you for your service to this nation. It is my honor to share the story of Vince Vacca's service in Operation Desert Storm, because no story of heroism should ever fall through the cracks.

Vince was born in New York but grew up in Libby, MT. When he was just a junior in high school, Vince decided to join the Navy headed to boot camp right after he graduated. On his first deployment, he was stationed on the U.S.S. Sylvania as an electricians mate.

Vince served in Operation Desert Storm from 1990 to 1991. He separated from the Navy in May of 1992 but re-enlisted in the Armed Services, this time in the U.S. Army in December of 1992.

In the Army, Vince graduated third in his class as a fire direction specialist in field artillery. Vince served in the Army until 1999. After his service, Vincent Vacca never received the medals he earned from either the Army or the Navy. Vince recently received his Army medals but couldn't get his Navy medals.

Earlier this month, in the presence of his family, it was my honor to finally present to Vince: the Navy Good Conduct Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, Southwest Asia Service Medal with two bronze stars, and the Navy Unit Commendation Ribbon. I also had the honor of presenting to Vince, the Kuwait Liberation Medal, based in Kuwait, the Sea Service Deployment Ribbon with one bronze star, and the Kuwait Liberation Medal, based in Saudi Arabia.

These seven decorations are small tokens, but they are powerful symbols of true heroism, sacrifice, and dedication to service.

These medals are presented on behalf of a grateful Nation.

Mr. President, I rise this evening in support of the DISCLOSE Act, legislation to shine some sunlight onto our elections, to restore transparency and accountability into this Nation's political campaigns.

The DISCLOSE Act is a responsible step toward making sure that people decide the course of our future; that people make their own choices based on good information; that people always have the ability to hold this government accountable through transparency.

Right now, that's not the case.

On January 21 of 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court made a decision that gave power to corporations to spend unlimited money on political campaigns--with no transparency whatsoever.

That includes foreign corporations, by the way. So, for example, it would be pretty easy for a Chinese company to start spending a lot of money to influence American elections, again, with no transparency whatsoever.

The Citizens United decision has already dealt a blow to our democracy. It is allowing a handful of billionaires, corporations and secretive groups that represent special interests to try and buy votes.

That already happened in Montana once. And the people of Montana put a stop to it one hundred years ago.

At the turn of last century, one of the world's wealthiest men literally bought himself a seat in the U.S. Senate. His name was William Clark. He was one of the mining barons of the Gilded Age. Mr. Clark left his mark across this Nation. In fact, Clark County, Nevada, is named for him.

Back then, Montana's legislature got to choose who served in the U.S. Senate. So William Clark paid as many legislators as he could to send him to Washington.

In fact, he spent a staggering $431,000 buying his Senate seat in 1899. That's equivalent to about $11 million today.

This bold bribery was a national scandal back then. And it shaped Montana forever. Because of what William Clark did, Montana passed a law in 1912

limiting the influence of wealthy corporations over our elections.

And just as important, the scandal showed us that as Montanans, transparency prevents corruption. Transparency allows for accountability.

Mr. President, transparency in government is a fundamental value in Montana.

A few weeks ago, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Montana's important 1912 law to guarantee transparency and accountability in our elections.

Citing its own Citizens United decision--and the idea that corporations somehow have the same rights as individual people--the U.S. Supreme Court tossed out Montana's century-old law.

Now the secretive special interests are taking full advantage of this uneven playing field. They are buying up millions of dollars of time on the airwaves, blanketing Montana with lies and distortions in order to influence voters. And Montanans are getting sick of it.

Like 100 years ago, a few millionaires and billionaires are bankrolling secretive campaign spending.

And they are steamrolling our democracy, because they are doing it in secret, with no accountability and transparency.

I support undoing the Citizens United decision by amending the U.S. Constitution. That's a heavy lift. But it's one I, along with many of my colleagues, support. And in the meantime, let's make our elections more transparent. I join most Montanans when I say that any money spent influencing voters ought to be transparent, no matter where it comes from.

That is exactly what this DISCLOSE Act does.

Mr. President, I don't think anyone here has heard complaints about too much transparency when it comes to political TV ads.

The DISCLOSE Act requires any organization or individual who spends $10,000 or more on a political campaign to report that expenditure within 24 hours.

No organization or type of organization is exempt. It applies to superpacs, unions, and so-called ``issue advocacy'' organizations.

That is not stifling free speech. That is responsibility. It is accountability.

The DISCLOSE Act strengthens our freedom to make' informed decisions about our democracy.

And for folks in Montana, it's a chance for us to put our priorities back ahead of special interests, for Montanans to make their own choices free from the influence of unlimited spending by multinational corporations.

It's what the people of this Nation deserve. I urge all of my colleagues to vote for that transparency.

A vote against the DISCLOSE Act is a vote to allow secretive special interests to buy something that should never, ever be for sale--our democracy and the power to make our own decisions, with good information, full transparency, and full accountability.

Well, anytime transparency and accountability is an intimidation, that means there is a different agenda behind that money. I say that I think the DISCLOSE Act is a well-crafted, smart bill that allows transparency and accountability in our election process. When accountability and transparency become a bad thing, we are in big trouble in this country.

I thank the Senator for the question.

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

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

Mr. President, I rise today to make sure that Congress is aware of what is happening across the American West. Some 32,000 people were just evacuated from their homes in Colorado. In Utah and New Mexico, hundreds of homes have been destroyed or are under threat. In my State of Montana, five counties are in states of emergency as seven major fires rage across the State. We have evacuated over 200 homes in Helena alone, with plumes of smoke billowing behind the State capitol. The Signal Peak coal mine in eastern Montana has been evacuated and fires that threaten it have burned nearly 60,000 acres in less than a day. Experts on the ground are saying they have never seen conditions like these so early in the fire season, with wildfires burning through beetle-killed areas with increasing speed. These beetle-killed areas are areas that are dead due to pine bark beetle infestations. The trees are dead and dry and they explode when they catch on fire.

Yesterday, wind gusted up to 55 miles per hour, grounding aircraft and preventing them from attacking the fires early. But the conditions for these wildfires did not happen overnight. The problem is the dry climate, the lack of preparation, and lack of resources available to contain these fires.

I first want to express my sincerest appreciation to the brave firefighters battling these blazes. On behalf of Montanans and folks across the West, I want to thank you for all you do. Firefighters risk their lives every day for folks they have never met. We owe you our respect and our gratitude, and my thoughts and prayers are with you.

We also owe them the resources they need to efficiently fight these fires and we owe them the policies that will best benefit the landscape they are working so hard to protect. Forest Service fire officials say there are three parts to preventing and controlling wildfires. The first is reducing hazardous fuels, especially in the wildland-urban interface. The second is protecting towns with community wildfire plans and implementing defensible space around structures. And the third is we must provide and be ready with the resources to fight fires once they have started.

Yet Congress has consistently reduced the resources set aside for the Forest Service to proactively reduce the risk presented by fires. Hazardous fuels reduction funding has declined over the past few years, and this year the administration proposed to continue reducing these funds. The House of Representatives is also failing to give the Forest Service the tools it needs to address this growing problem by playing politics that will prevent solutions that will improve the health of the exact forests where these fires are raging in Montana and Colorado.

For 4 years I have worked to pass a forest management bill that would reduce these trees that are providing

dangerous fuel for two of these fires in Montana. Additionally, the Senate created the FLAME wildfire account to specifically put money aside for this exact kind of emergency situation. Yet this year the President's budget reduces the FLAME account by nearly $\1/2\ billion.

We have been robbing this account to keep the Forest Service afloat, but the Forest Service has still lost nearly 40 percent of its purchasing power over the last 20 years as the number, cost, and frequency of these fires increased. Back in 2000, not that long ago, there were more than 40 forest firefighting planes. Today there are 10, and 9 of them are from a fleet of planes used during the Korean war.

This spring I asked the Chief of the Forest Service if we were ready in case of a bad fire season this year. He admitted that the Forest Service did not have the resources to deal with an above-average fire year.

This issue will not go away when the fire season comes to an end. With large parts of the West getting hotter and drier over the past few decades, our efforts to improve forest health and give the firefighters the resources they need cannot stop when the weather gets cold. We need to commit to providing proper resources to the firefighters who are protecting our communities, and we also need to provide the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management with the tools and resources they need to prevent catastrophic wildfires in the first place.

Some of us have been talking about hazardous fuel reduction in western forests before today, but it has fallen on deaf ears. Now I ask you to heed the call on you to provide the necessary resources. Montanans and folks all across the West are evacuating their homes. Firefighters are risking their lives. We need to step up and help them today and we need to responsibly invest in resources and land management policies that will make a difference in the future.

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

Mr. President, I rise in support of a bill we will take up soon to reauthorize the Flood Insurance Program. Nine months ago the Senate Banking Committee passed long-term flood insurance reauthorization with overwhelming bipartisan support. Five months ago Senator Vitter and I, along with 39 Members of this body, wrote our leadership urging that the bill be brought to the floor, but today, this week, we will finally consider this much needed piece of legislation, and I thank Senator Reid for his willingness to bring it to the Senate floor.

I want to first and foremost thank Chairman Johnson and Ranking Member Shelby for their excellent work in drafting this bill. I commend them for their efforts to build consensus on this important piece of legislation.

I thank my colleague Senator Vitter for his leadership and partnership in working with me to help influence this bill in a way that reflects broad bipartisan support. Together we added a number of provisions to improve the initial draft. These provisions include one that addresses a critical issue in my State.

When this bill is passed, the Army Corps of Engineers and FEMA will finally have to work together to develop common standards that will allow existing Corps levee inspections to meet FEMA certification criteria.

We also lengthened the phase-in period for homeowners who must purchase flood insurance for the first time as a result of being mapped into a floodplain, so that as changes to the maps occur, folks are not forced immediately into high-priced premiums.

This bill takes important steps to more closely align risks with premiums. It makes changes to protect taxpayers, and it puts the program on a more solid financial ground.

The House and Senate have never produced two flood insurance bills as closely aligned as the bills we have before us, and I am not sure we have ever had the same strong broad support we have now from homeowners, realtors, insurers, state insurance regulators, and environmental groups. That is a real testament to my colleagues on the Banking Committee, and I look forward to finally sending a long-term reauthorization and reform bill to the President's desk for his signature.

Unfortunately, we have seen the consequences of reauthorizing this program on a short-term basis, and we have seen the consequences of letting this program lapse. We have been down that road before and have seen how unproductive and destructive lapses can be. Past lapses in the program created uncertainty for homeowners and created significant burdens for those participating in the Flood Insurance Program. When the program lapsed in 2010, about 1,400 home sales were canceled each day during those 53 days the program lapsed. At a time when the housing market is still fragile, this is something we cannot afford.

For me this is an issue that hits home. The unprecedented flooding in the Missouri River basin last year, which affected folks throughout central and eastern Montana, particularly in Musselshell and Carbon Counties, clearly demonstrates the need for reauthorization and for reforms to ensure that levees are certified properly and efficiently.

I also care deeply about this program because in addition to protecting Montana homeowners, there are jobs tied directly to the Flood Insurance Program. In Kalispell, MT, two of the national servicing organizations employ over 500 people--jobs that could be put in jeopardy without a long-term agreement.

We must offer Americans certainty in the face of risk. Now, at long last, comprehensive, bipartisan, long-term reauthorization of the National Flood Insurance Program is within reach. Let's quickly act to provide security and piece of mind to the 6 million Americans who rely on the National Flood Insurance Program.

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

Mr. President, had there been a recorded vote on amendment No. 2457 I would have opposed it. This amendment creates new and unnecessary reporting requirements that will burden rural broadband companies and could slow down the growth of broadband expansion in states like Montana.

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 2429.

I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support the Baucus-Tester amendment No. 2429. The Baucus-Tester amendment fixes a problem in the livestock forage program to make sure that ranchers who suffer losses in their herds because of drought are able to get the help they need. If you are in grass-based agriculture, folks, for those ranchers the grass is the heartbeat of your operation. If you do not have it, you cannot survive. It was critical this last year when record droughts devastated the Southwest. Wild fires burned more than 2 million acres in Texas.

This program has moved into title I of the farm bill. This amendment fixes a problem we have seen in one of those programs. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

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

I ask that all time be yielded back.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I rise to talk about the farm bill and recognize the fine work the Senate Agriculture Committee did in bringing this bill forward.

I am disappointed, to say the least, that this bill is bogged down in legislative games. This bill is too important for folks to play politics. If we want to talk about a lack of predictability, this is a prime example. We should be passing a bill and instead games are being played.

Agriculture is the largest industry in Montana. Montana's farmers and ranchers produce the food that powers the Nation. Providing an effective safety net for those of us in production agriculture is important, and it is potentially very costly. It would have been easy for the Senate Agriculture Committee to write a bill that keeps spending at the levels of the last farm bill, but they did not.

This bill recognizes the fiscal challenges we face. It cuts more than $23 billion, more than double the amount proposed by the Simpson-Bowles Commission.

Due to the good work of the Senate Agriculture Committee, this bill produces meaningful savings and reduces the number of programs at the Department of Agriculture. At the same time the bill preserves a strong safety net for farmers, invests in conservation and nutrition and institutes much needed reforms.

I have offered amendments to address the issues that still face farmers and ranchers around the country. The first is my provision to ensure that farmers will be able to buy public varieties of seeds. My amendment will make sure the Department of Agriculture follows through on the government's commitment to public seed varieties. It ensures that the USDA will devote the resources necessary to support a strong public breeding program and develop public plant and animal varieties. For too long the Agriculture Department has failed to promote public seed varieties. The USDA must support diverse seed research that farmers can adapt to various growing conditions.

My amendment will not solve the problem, but it is a necessary first step to ensure that farmers have a choice of what kind of seeds to purchase.

I have also introduced an amendment that takes a proactive approach to protect our country's livestock producers. Back in 2009, Senator Barrasso and I wrote a new law to help livestock producers get compensation for losses related to wolves. Any producer will tell us they would rather prevent predation than get compensated for a loss, but losses do happen. A number of States receive some assistance from that program. That is why I have introduced an amendment to help producers protect their livestock from the threat of predation. It is a commonsense solution to support livestock producers who live near protected populations of predators.

Speaking of commonsense amendments, I am also offering what some have called the biggest package of sportsmen's bills in a generation. My sportsmen's act combines over 20 different sportsmen bills. It comes in response to the concerns I have heard as a chairman of the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus.

What I hear most often from sportsmen is the importance of access to public lands. That is why this bill dedicates funding to ensure sportsmen's access to some of the best places to hunt and fish in this country.

Some folks might ask why is this important, but hunting and fishing is a way of life in places such as Montana. In fact, one in three Montanans hunts big game and over 50 percent fish. For us, it is not just recreation, it is a critical part of our economy. It drives and sustains jobs.

So Senator Thune and I, as cochairs of the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus, have combined the best bills and ideas from Republicans and Democrats. In addition to preserving access to public lands, it reauthorizes several vital conservation programs and preserves our shooting heritage. That is why it has the support in a wide variety of sportsmen and conservation groups. Neither party has a monopoly on good ideas.

My sportsman's act takes the best from the House bill and the best from both sides of the aisle in the Senate to move the ball forward for sportsmen and sportswomen in Montana and the Nation. By adding this sportsmen's package to the farm bill, we will conserve some of our most productive habitat, passing on hunting and fishing traditions to future generations and entrusting them to those who care about them the most.

(The further remarks of Mr. Tester are printed in today's Record under ``Morning Business.'')

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

Mr. President, finally, let me shift gears to another topic I care deeply about; that is, taking care of our veterans. This weekend a group of World War II veterans from Montana will be visiting our Nation's capital. With a great deal of honor and respect, I extend a hearty Montana welcome to each and every one of them.

Together, they will visit the World War II Memorial and share stories about their service. This journey will no doubt bring about a lot of memories. I hope it will give them a deep sense of pride also.

What they achieved together almost 70 years ago was remarkable. That memorial is a testament to the fact that a grateful nation will never forget what they did nor what they sacrificed. To us, they were the greatest generation. They left the comforts of their family and their communities to confront evil from Iwo Jima to Bastogne. Together, they won the war in the Pacific by conquering an empire and liberated a continent by defeating Hitler and the Nazis.

To them, they were simply doing their jobs. They enlisted in unprecedented numbers to defend our freedoms and our values. They represented the very best of us and made us proud.

From a young age I remember playing the bugle at the memorial services of veterans of the first two world wars. It instilled in me a profound sense of respect I will never forget.

Honoring the service of every generation of American veterans is a Montana value. I deeply appreciate the work of the Big Sky Honor Flight, a nonprofit organization that made this trip possible.

To the World War II veterans making the trip this weekend, I salute you. We will always be grateful, and we will never forget your service or sacrifice.

Mr. President, water is the foundation for life. That is true in every community, but especially in American Indian Country. Water plays a particularly important role in Native American life--past and present--in history, culture and religion. That is why I am proud to introduce the Gros Ventre and Assiniboine Tribes of the Fort Belknap Indian Community Water Rights Settlement Act of 2012.

Not every issue relating to this important compact is resolved. I very much appreciate the perspective of those who say that changes are still needed. My goal in introducing this legislation is to get all interested parties to negotiate on the issues that must still be resolved. By introducing this bill today, the Ft. Belknap Indian community, surrounding counties and the State of Montana indicate to the United States that we are ready to negotiate in earnest. During that process, Montanans and I will work to gain support from the Department of the Interior, State of Montana, the Tribe, and local communities as we address individual concerns.

The current federal policy to determine Indian water rights is to negotiate, rather than litigate. Montana has had a similar policy since it created the Montana Reserved Water Rights Compact Commission in 1979. Both governments recognize that litigating every water right on Montana's vast Indian reservations is cost prohibitive and time consuming. Negotiated settlements are cheaper for everybody. They are much faster than litigation. They allow individuals to participate in the outcome. They provide a greater degree of certainty to everybody involved. Folks working on this settlement and I intend this legislation to fulfill the spirit of those policies.

Since the Supreme Court's 1908 decision in Winters, the United States has had a responsibility to provide water to the land it reserves for specific purposes, such as reservations for American Indian homelands. This legislation fulfills that responsibility. It will empower the Tribe to create jobs and stronger communities by improving critical infrastructure.

More importantly, it strikes the proper balance to achieve a fair, equitable, and final settlement of claims to water rights in the State of Montana between the State, the Tribe, and the United States for the benefit for the Tribe and allottees.

There is more work to do to ensure that all interested parties can support a final agreement. I understand that. However, hundreds of hours of deliberation over more than a decade have been put into shaping the terms of this Compact and Settlement. Although we have made good progress during that time, we still have a lot of work left. I look forward to working with my tribal, local, state and federal partners to get this done. It is the right thing to do for the United States, the Tribe and the State of Montana.

In 2001, as a member of the Montana legislature, I was happy to support

state ratification of the Fort Belknap Water Rights Compact. I look forward to assisting the parties in moving this Compact over the next hurdle--congressional authorization.

Mr. President, water is the foundation for life. That is true in every community, but especially in American Indian Country. Water plays a particularly important role in Native American life--past and present--in history, culture and religion. That is why I am proud to introduce the Gros Ventre and Assiniboine Tribes of the Fort Belknap Indian Community Water Rights Settlement Act of 2012.

Not every issue relating to this important compact is resolved. I very much appreciate the perspective of those who say that changes are still needed. My goal in introducing this legislation is to get all interested parties to negotiate on the issues that must still be resolved. By introducing this bill today, the Ft. Belknap Indian community, surrounding counties and the State of Montana indicate to the United States that we are ready to negotiate in earnest. During that process, Montanans and I will work to gain support from the Department of the Interior, State of Montana, the Tribe, and local communities as we address individual concerns.

The current federal policy to determine Indian water rights is to negotiate, rather than litigate. Montana has had a similar policy since it created the Montana Reserved Water Rights Compact Commission in 1979. Both governments recognize that litigating every water right on Montana's vast Indian reservations is cost prohibitive and time consuming. Negotiated settlements are cheaper for everybody. They are much faster than litigation. They allow individuals to participate in the outcome. They provide a greater degree of certainty to everybody involved. Folks working on this settlement and I intend this legislation to fulfill the spirit of those policies.

Since the Supreme Court's 1908 decision in Winters, the United States has had a responsibility to provide water to the land it reserves for specific purposes, such as reservations for American Indian homelands. This legislation fulfills that responsibility. It will empower the Tribe to create jobs and stronger communities by improving critical infrastructure.

More importantly, it strikes the proper balance to achieve a fair, equitable, and final settlement of claims to water rights in the State of Montana between the State, the Tribe, and the United States for the benefit for the Tribe and allottees.

There is more work to do to ensure that all interested parties can support a final agreement. I understand that. However, hundreds of hours of deliberation over more than a decade have been put into shaping the terms of this Compact and Settlement. Although we have made good progress during that time, we still have a lot of work left. I look forward to working with my tribal, local, state and federal partners to get this done. It is the right thing to do for the United States, the Tribe and the State of Montana.

In 2001, as a member of the Montana legislature, I was happy to support

state ratification of the Fort Belknap Water Rights Compact. I look forward to assisting the parties in moving this Compact over the next hurdle--congressional authorization.

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

Madam President, I rise to speak about an issue that affects everybody in my community. Although it is hard to imagine right now, some of the people we serve fear for their own lives, not because of a terrorist attack or a natural disaster; they are afraid that somebody who is supposed to love them or support them will hurt or even kill them. This is an upsetting issue, but one we need to face head on, and I am glad we are addressing it today.

Domestic violence and sexual assault are harsh realities. They know no class, race, or economic limitations. Although we have made good progress curbing domestic and sexual violence over the past decade, we still have a lot of work to do.

The legislation before us takes another step toward our goal of ending domestic and sexual violence. It might not go far enough for some, but it is progress, and I am proud to support it.

Over the years, the Violence Against Women Act has helped reduce the rates of domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking, but the numbers are still stunning. This bill gives us an opportunity to help victims get out of a dangerous situation. We have an obligation to pass this reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act.

Unfortunately, Montana is no different from the rest of the Nation. There were almost 5,000 cases of domestic violence or sexual assault in 2011, and 10 percent of them involve Montana's kids.

Federal funding is crucial for Montana shelters, crisis lines, mental health services, and victim advocates. The domestic and sexual violence programs in Montana rely heavily on Violence Against Women Act funding to keep women and children safe and to administer the important programs we have operating in Montana. It will also promote changes in the culture of law enforcement, pushing governments and courts to treat violence against women and children as a serious violation of criminal law and to hold the offenders accountable.

The Violence Against Women Act helped a constituent of mine in Billings rebuild her life after she was the victim of domestic violence. Maria Martin was beaten by her boyfriend. He threatened to kill her and her three daughters. Her cries for help were answered by the police who rescued her from a violent attack, but it is the programs supported by the Violence Against Women Act that helped Maria rebuild her life.

The Violence Against Women Act provides funding to strengthen law enforcement, prosecution, and victim services. Each community has flexibility to use these funds in ways that respond to folks most in need and take into account unique cultural and geographic factors. This is especially important for a rural State such as Montana.

I am proud of my work with the Judiciary Committee to ensure that the set-aside of funding for sexual assault services does not disadvantage service providers in Montana who often offer many services in one place. I wish to thank Chairman Leahy for his efforts to address this important issue.

For States and cities with specialized programs, this wasn't a big concern. In Montana and other rural States, we have county and regional service coalitions. That means funds must be flexible enough so that we can serve everyone who walks in. If rural areas had to carve out funds for each type of service, people wouldn't get what they need to regain their footing. The next closest facility might be 90 miles away. That is not a referral; it is not help; it is another obstacle for folks who are already facing a life-threatening situation.

Domestic violence crimes also take a heavy toll on those who survive the violence. The vast majority of survivors report lingering effects such as posttraumatic stress disorder, a serious injury directly from the abuse, missing school or work, higher frequencies of headaches, chronic pain, and poor physical and mental health.

And while domestic violence affects every community, every race, and every rung of the economic ladder, the problem is even more severe in Montana's Indian country. In fact, violence against Native women and children is at an epidemic level. As Montana's only member of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, I have had several hearings on domestic and sexual violence. American Indian women suffer from violent crime at a rate 3\1/2\ times greater than the national average. Nearly 40 percent of all Native American women will experience domestic violence. One in three will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime. Murder is the third leading cause of death among Indian women.

In response to our hearing, I was proud to join Chairman Akaka and many others on the committee in introducing the Stand Against Violence and Empower Native Women Act, or SAVE Native Women Act, which is now included in the bill before us today.

We owe it to the women and children of Montana to intervene--to provide resources to those programs which are on the ground, and to providers who are in the trenches. They offer safe havens, including support and educational services to help survivors of sexual or domestic violence break free of the cycle of violence. They help children who have lived with violence understand and make sense of what has happened so that they are less likely to get entangled in future abusive relationships. They help survivors gain the strength and the know-how to advocate for themselves in the legal system and in their relationships.

By passing this bill now, we will continue to make progress toward empowering communities to protect all citizens, particularly the most vulnerable--women and children. As I stated before, this is not just an opportunity; this is an obligation that we have to improve our communities, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

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

Madam President, I call up amendment No. 2032.

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

Madam President, this amendment is pretty simple. I thank Senator Pryor for joining me on it. It basically is an amendment that reduces compensation for the senior executives at the Postal Service. It limits the six most senior Postal Service employees to a base salary no more than we pay our Cabinet Secretary, which is just a skosh under $200,000. There are going to be some changes in the Postal Service. Some of these cuts are going to take place at the lower end, some in the middle management, some at the upper end.

To be fair, everybody needs to feel the pain and besides that, to be right fair, the Postmaster is an important job but so is the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, and others. I don't think we should be paying him more than what we do our Cabinet Secretaries. After all, the Postal Service is public service. I ask Senators' concurrence on the amendment.

Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 2056 and ask unanimous consent that it be modified with the changes at the desk.

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

Mr. President, amendment No. 2056 requires the Postal Service to take into consideration some pretty commonsense things, such as economic savings, before they urge the shutdown of a post office or mail processing center.

It also requires the Postal Service to take into account retail service standards. That means the Postal Service would not be able to leave a community without access to basic postal services when it closes down a post office.

If the Postal Service does not meet these criteria, the Postal Regulatory Commission can review and reject the Postal Service's proposal. This amendment adds much needed teeth to the amendment that Senator Moran and I offered when this bill was before the committee.

I am joined by a number of cosponsors, but in particular Senator Franken and Senator Levin. This is a commonsense amendment that allows a lot of the post offices that are going to be closed to have another set of eyes and have the Postal Regulatory Commission take another look.