Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise today in vigorous opposition, and with very deep concern, to an amendment offered by the Senator from Oklahoma that would prohibit Urban Areas Security Initiative, or UASI, funds from being used to be able to pay local public safety employees overtime and backfill pay.

I share the Senator's commitment to ensuring that homeland security funds are spent wisely. I believe his efforts are in good faith, and I am eager to work with him toward this goal. However, as the threat from al-Qaida has metastasized to the Arabian Peninsula and elsewhere, there are still terrorists whose objective is to inflict wide-scale harm to Americans on our homeland.

New York City remains the No. 1 target for terrorists around the world who want to do us harm. Therefore, we must remain vigilant and continue to provide local law enforcement with all the tools necessary to keep us safe. So as well-intentioned as this amendment may be, law enforcement organizations across the country have been loud and clear: This is simply the wrong prescription at the wrong time.

This amendment is opposed by a range of law enforcement and first responder organizations, including the International Association of Fire Chiefs, the International Association of Firefighters, Major Cities Chiefs Association, Major County Sheriffs' Association, the National Fusion Center Association, the National Homeland Security Coalition, and the U.S. Conference of Mayors.

In fact, I have a letter from our Commissioner Kelly that I ask unanimous consent be printed in the Record, along with another letter.

Under the leadership of New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, 16 publicly known terrorist attacks on our city have been thwarted since 9/11. Our local law enforcement must continue to have every tool available to them to remain one step ahead of terrorists at every single turn. Even at a time of fiscal restraint in Washington, protecting our families from the unimaginable should not be a place where we make cuts.

According to Police Commissioner Kelly, this amendment would ``jeopardize our collective efforts to safeguard New York City . . . '' and that ``without a doubt, the overtime and backfill funding that the NYPD uses to support investigations, training and deployments is essential to the NYPD's layered approach to security.''

I ask my colleagues to stand with local law enforcement officials, to stand with the American public who have given us the duty to protect them. I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment because, if passed, this amendment will put the training and security deployments needed to keep us safe in jeopardy. These are not esoteric programs. We are talking about programs that include counterterrorism training, region-wide planning exercises designed to prepare emergency responses to large and catastrophic events, and boots-on-the-ground security measures, including heavy weapons training and intelligence sharing.

These overtime funds actually reduce costs. If the NYPD needed to hire full-time officers or assign current full-time efforts to the specialized patrol and intelligence duties described, they could not afford to do so.

So while I commend my colleagues for attempting to be good stewards of the taxpayers' money, these are cuts that our families cannot afford. We have a solemn duty to protect the American people. That should be our first priority in this body. I ask each and every Member of this body to ask themselves how history will judge them if we fail to live up to that duty.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent for 2 minutes of debate.

Madam President, so many good things about Caitlin Halligan have already been said. She is a woman of great intellect, has a history of laudable achievements, a record of outstanding public service, and she deserves the full support of the Senate today.

Caitlin has had an exceptional career as an attorney, and I am confident she will make an excellent judge. She is currently the general counsel at the New York City District Attorney's Office, an office that investigates and prosecutes 100,000 criminal cases annually in Manhattan.

She served as our Solicitor General. She was awarded ``Best United States Supreme Court Brief'' while she served there.

She has overwhelming support from law enforcement, from the New York Association of Chiefs of Police, the New York State Sheriffs Association, the National District Attorneys Association, the New York Women in Law Enforcement, along with the support of community leaders, such as the Women's Bar Association of the District of Columbia, the National Conference of Women's Bar Associations, and the U.S. Women's Chamber of Commerce.

The bottom line is, she is a well-qualified judge who would do great service for the United States. Even New York City police commissioner Ray Kelly said Caitlin has the ``three

qualities important for a judicial nominee: intelligence, a judicial temperament, and personal integrity.'' She has a strong record.

As to the debate we have heard on national security, Caitlin lives in the heart of New York City. She saw the Twin Towers fall. In the years that followed, she worked as pro bono counsel to the board of directors of the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation that oversees the rebuilding of Lower Manhattan--helping our city to grow stronger every single day.

Lastly, today, women make up roughly 30 percent of the Federal bench. For the first time in history, that holds true in trial courts, courts of appeals, and the highest court in the land, the Supreme Court.

It is true we have come a long way, but we still have a long way to go on this journey for full equality. I think she is a superbly qualified nominee, and I urge my colleagues to vote in support of her.

Cloture Motion

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise to talk about an issue that every mother in America is thinking about. Every parent in America who saw what happened in Connecticut bleeds for this issue. We have to do something in our country about senseless gun crime. We have to do something about making sure criminals do not have easy access to weapons to shoot down our children and loved ones in the areas that should be the safest places for them. We have seen these mass deaths, whether at a school, whether at a university, whether in a movie theater, whether in a community center; these crimes are happening over and over again.

I can tell you that from when I was first appointed to the Senate in 2009, I have realized our State of New York suffers from grave gun crime all across our State. We have gang violence. We have gun trafficking. We have straw purchasing. Networks of weapons flow into our State. Eighty-five percent of the weapons used in crimes in my State come from out of State and 90 percent of those weapons are illegal.

I had to look into the eyes of parents who had just lost their daughter because of a stray bullet from a gang member. Nyasia's parents deserve an answer. The parents of the children in Connecticut deserve an answer.

I have good news today because the Senate is working on a bipartisan bill that is introduced today by the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Chairman Leahy, to begin to solve this problem. This bill has wide bipartisan support. It started out with Senator Mark Kirk and I working together. He has a real tough problem in Illinois with gang violence that he wanted to address and crack down on. That bipartisan work began to address other bipartisan work. The ranking member, Senator Grassley, was very interested in this bill and has been working with us to shape the bill, make it stronger. Susan Collins, who has been a leader on this issue, began to work with us to shape this bill and make it better. Senator Leahy and Senator Durbin have been working on the issue separately. We all joined forces to begin to write a bill that can tackle this problem, to make it a stronger solution, a better solution.

We now have cosponsors. We have the Presiding Officer right now, Senator Joe Donnelly. We have both Senators from Connecticut who must answer the parents of their State, that they are doing something about these senseless deaths. Senator Blumenthal, a former attorney general, knows what law enforcement needs to take on these criminals. Senator Murphy, Senator Klobuchar--also a previous attorney general--know what it takes to crack down on these kinds of crime and this senseless death. Senator King, an Independent, also signs on to this bill because he knows it can do something to crack down on gun violence in this country.

Of all the laws on the books in this country today, not one Federal law says you cannot buy a truckload of guns, bring them to another State, and sell them to a criminal network. It is not even prohibited. You would not believe it. How could that be true in a country such as ours, where the Federal Government's No. 1 job is to protect our families? That is what this bill does. It makes it a Federal crime to traffic, to be a straw purchaser, to sell these guns to criminal networks with the intent of breaking the law.

The law enforcement agencies--whether it is ATF, NYPD, FBI--will now have the tools they need on the Federal level to begin to tackle this crisis.

I urge my colleagues on both side of the aisle, if they want to do something about the senseless gun deaths in this country, this is a bill they can support. For all the law-abiding gun owners in this country who support the second amendment, as I do, they can look at this bill and say: That is a bill we are supporting; that bill should pass because it goes after the criminals and the illegal weapons that are the scourge of this country. Thirty people get killed a day because of gun violence--30 deaths. One is too many. When I look at Nyasia's parents, one is too many.

Enough is enough. I am certain that when this bill passes this Chamber and when law enforcement begins to have the tools, we will save lives.

I thank my colleagues again for all the hard work they have done. I thank Senator Mark Kirk for his courage for being the first Republican to stand up to do a gun bill, the first bipartisan gun bill introduced in this Chamber.

Mr. President, I rise to talk about an issue that every mother in America is thinking about. Every parent in America who saw what happened in Connecticut bleeds for this issue. We have to do something in our country about senseless gun crime. We have to do something about making sure criminals do not have easy access to weapons to shoot down our children and loved ones in the areas that should be the safest places for them. We have seen these mass deaths, whether at a school, whether at a university, whether in a movie theater, whether in a community center; these crimes are happening over and over again.

I can tell you that from when I was first appointed to the Senate in 2009, I have realized our State of New York suffers from grave gun crime all across our State. We have gang violence. We have gun trafficking. We have straw purchasing. Networks of weapons flow into our State. Eighty-five percent of the weapons used in crimes in my State come from out of State and 90 percent of those weapons are illegal.

I had to look into the eyes of parents who had just lost their daughter because of a stray bullet from a gang member. Nyasia's parents deserve an answer. The parents of the children in Connecticut deserve an answer.

I have good news today because the Senate is working on a bipartisan bill that is introduced today by the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Chairman Leahy, to begin to solve this problem. This bill has wide bipartisan support. It started out with Senator Mark Kirk and I working together. He has a real tough problem in Illinois with gang violence that he wanted to address and crack down on. That bipartisan work began to address other bipartisan work. The ranking member, Senator Grassley, was very interested in this bill and has been working with us to shape the bill, make it stronger. Susan Collins, who has been a leader on this issue, began to work with us to shape this bill and make it better. Senator Leahy and Senator Durbin have been working on the issue separately. We all joined forces to begin to write a bill that can tackle this problem, to make it a stronger solution, a better solution.

We now have cosponsors. We have the Presiding Officer right now, Senator Joe Donnelly. We have both Senators from Connecticut who must answer the parents of their State, that they are doing something about these senseless deaths. Senator Blumenthal, a former attorney general, knows what law enforcement needs to take on these criminals. Senator Murphy, Senator Klobuchar--also a previous attorney general--know what it takes to crack down on these kinds of crime and this senseless death. Senator King, an Independent, also signs on to this bill because he knows it can do something to crack down on gun violence in this country.

Of all the laws on the books in this country today, not one Federal law says you cannot buy a truckload of guns, bring them to another State, and sell them to a criminal network. It is not even prohibited. You would not believe it. How could that be true in a country such as ours, where the Federal Government's No. 1 job is to protect our families? That is what this bill does. It makes it a Federal crime to traffic, to be a straw purchaser, to sell these guns to criminal networks with the intent of breaking the law.

The law enforcement agencies--whether it is ATF, NYPD, FBI--will now have the tools they need on the Federal level to begin to tackle this crisis.

I urge my colleagues on both side of the aisle, if they want to do something about the senseless gun deaths in this country, this is a bill they can support. For all the law-abiding gun owners in this country who support the second amendment, as I do, they can look at this bill and say: That is a bill we are supporting; that bill should pass because it goes after the criminals and the illegal weapons that are the scourge of this country. Thirty people get killed a day because of gun violence--30 deaths. One is too many. When I look at Nyasia's parents, one is too many.

Enough is enough. I am certain that when this bill passes this Chamber and when law enforcement begins to have the tools, we will save lives.

I thank my colleagues again for all the hard work they have done. I thank Senator Mark Kirk for his courage for being the first Republican to stand up to do a gun bill, the first bipartisan gun bill introduced in this Chamber.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the period of morning business be extended until 3 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise today on behalf of the millions of Americans who are saying: Enough is enough. They have seen too much senseless deadly gun violence and are demanding commonsense solutions out of Congress.

One solution I have been focused on for a long time is ending gun trafficking. This is a critically important public safety issue where I believe Members of both sides of the aisle can come together and agree. We can and should agree that it is time to crack down on the black market of illegal guns that criminals rely upon to obtain weapons that are later used in violent crimes.

Almost 1 month ago, the NYPD suffered one of its bloodiest nights in history when three officers suffered gunshot wounds in two separate crimes an hour apart. According to news reports, one of the handguns recovered from the scene was imported by traffickers from Philadelphia, and one came from North Carolina. Thankfully, these heroes are on their way toward recovery.

Just 1 year ago, New York police officer Peter Figoski, the father of four beautiful girls, was tragically killed on the beat with an illegal weapon purchased on the black market in Virginia.

I will never forget the faces of slain 17-year-old honor student Nyasia Pryear-Yard's parents whom I met just weeks after being sworn into the Senate. Nyasia was also killed by an illegal gun one terrible night when she was doing nothing more than enjoying an evening with friends.

According to the New York City's mayor's office, 85 percent of the guns used in crimes in New York City come from out of State, and 90 percent of those guns are bought through the illegal black market run by traffickers. The sad fact is more than 30 people die every single day due to gun violence. These senseless killings must stop.

We have an obligation to act and prevent tomorrow's senseless deaths by ensuring that guns stay out of the hands of criminals, and the dangerously mentally ill, and to strengthen our laws so that law enforcement has the ability to go after the gunrunners and take down these illegal markets.

The truth is that supporting the second amendment and reducing gun violence are compatible and consistent. Responsible gun owners vehemently oppose the kind of gun violence that struck Newtown, Aurora, Oak Creek, and to thousands of families across America every single year who suffer. We should be able to find reasonable and commonsense reforms that can preserve our rights but also protect our families.

Keeping our children safe from the scourge of gun violence is not a Democratic or Republican principle, it is not pro-gun or anti-gun. This is an issue that all Americans can support. There is no political ideology that finds this cruel loss of life acceptable. I was incredibly pleased to see President Obama include as part of his comprehensive plan to prevent gun violence a bill that I first introduced in 2009 with Mayor Bloomberg and Commissioner Kelly, called the Gun Trafficking Prevention Act, which would be the first Federal law to define gun trafficking as a Federal crime and prevent scores of illegal guns from being moved into the hands of criminals.

We have thousands of laws, but effectively none of them are directly focused on preventing someone from driving from one State to another State with a load of guns in the back of a truck that they can sell directly to criminals.

It is shocking to me as a mother. It is shocking to me as a lawmaker. But this is something that we can actually fix.

Over the past 3 fiscal years, more than 33,000 guns used in violent crimes showed telltale signs of black market trafficking, 420,000 firearms were stolen, and thousands of guns with obliterated serial numbers were recovered by law enforcement. While law enforcement is working overtime to track down illegal guns and apprehend those who traffic these weapons, current law restricts their ability to investigate and prosecute these crimes. We may all agree this simply makes no sense and leaves all our communities vulnerable.

I am very proud to have worked with my colleague and friend Senator Mark Kirk to introduce a bipartisan bill today, S. 179. This bill takes the problem of gun trafficking head on. Our bipartisan bill would empower local, State, and Federal law enforcement to investigate and prosecute gun traffickers, straw purchasers, and their entire criminal networks. Our bill does nothing to affect the constitutionally protected rights of responsible, law-abiding gun owners.

By cracking down on illegal trafficking and their vast criminal networks, we can stop the flow of these illegal guns that are coming into our city neighborhoods and reduce gun violence. Law enforcement officials across the country have said they need this legislation to be able to fight crime.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I urge passage of this commonsense, nonpartisan, bipartisan piece of legislation.

Mr. President, I rise today on behalf of the millions of Americans who are saying: Enough is enough. They have seen too much senseless deadly gun violence and are demanding commonsense solutions out of Congress.

One solution I have been focused on for a long time is ending gun trafficking. This is a critically important public safety issue where I believe Members of both sides of the aisle can come together and agree. We can and should agree that it is time to crack down on the black market of illegal guns that criminals rely upon to obtain weapons that are later used in violent crimes.

Almost 1 month ago, the NYPD suffered one of its bloodiest nights in history when three officers suffered gunshot wounds in two separate crimes an hour apart. According to news reports, one of the handguns recovered from the scene was imported by traffickers from Philadelphia, and one came from North Carolina. Thankfully, these heroes are on their way toward recovery.

Just 1 year ago, New York police officer Peter Figoski, the father of four beautiful girls, was tragically killed on the beat with an illegal weapon purchased on the black market in Virginia.

I will never forget the faces of slain 17-year-old honor student Nyasia Pryear-Yard's parents whom I met just weeks after being sworn into the Senate. Nyasia was also killed by an illegal gun one terrible night when she was doing nothing more than enjoying an evening with friends.

According to the New York City's mayor's office, 85 percent of the guns used in crimes in New York City come from out of State, and 90 percent of those guns are bought through the illegal black market run by traffickers. The sad fact is more than 30 people die every single day due to gun violence. These senseless killings must stop.

We have an obligation to act and prevent tomorrow's senseless deaths by ensuring that guns stay out of the hands of criminals, and the dangerously mentally ill, and to strengthen our laws so that law enforcement has the ability to go after the gunrunners and take down these illegal markets.

The truth is that supporting the second amendment and reducing gun violence are compatible and consistent. Responsible gun owners vehemently oppose the kind of gun violence that struck Newtown, Aurora, Oak Creek, and to thousands of families across America every single year who suffer. We should be able to find reasonable and commonsense reforms that can preserve our rights but also protect our families.

Keeping our children safe from the scourge of gun violence is not a Democratic or Republican principle, it is not pro-gun or anti-gun. This is an issue that all Americans can support. There is no political ideology that finds this cruel loss of life acceptable. I was incredibly pleased to see President Obama include as part of his comprehensive plan to prevent gun violence a bill that I first introduced in 2009 with Mayor Bloomberg and Commissioner Kelly, called the Gun Trafficking Prevention Act, which would be the first Federal law to define gun trafficking as a Federal crime and prevent scores of illegal guns from being moved into the hands of criminals.

We have thousands of laws, but effectively none of them are directly focused on preventing someone from driving from one State to another State with a load of guns in the back of a truck that they can sell directly to criminals.

It is shocking to me as a mother. It is shocking to me as a lawmaker. But this is something that we can actually fix.

Over the past 3 fiscal years, more than 33,000 guns used in violent crimes showed telltale signs of black market trafficking, 420,000 firearms were stolen, and thousands of guns with obliterated serial numbers were recovered by law enforcement. While law enforcement is working overtime to track down illegal guns and apprehend those who traffic these weapons, current law restricts their ability to investigate and prosecute these crimes. We may all agree this simply makes no sense and leaves all our communities vulnerable.

I am very proud to have worked with my colleague and friend Senator Mark Kirk to introduce a bipartisan bill today, S. 179. This bill takes the problem of gun trafficking head on. Our bipartisan bill would empower local, State, and Federal law enforcement to investigate and prosecute gun traffickers, straw purchasers, and their entire criminal networks. Our bill does nothing to affect the constitutionally protected rights of responsible, law-abiding gun owners.

By cracking down on illegal trafficking and their vast criminal networks, we can stop the flow of these illegal guns that are coming into our city neighborhoods and reduce gun violence. Law enforcement officials across the country have said they need this legislation to be able to fight crime.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I urge passage of this commonsense, nonpartisan, bipartisan piece of legislation.

Mr. President, I thank Senator Mikulski for her leadership, not only leading the charge for aid that our families in New York so desperately need but, as chair of the Appropriations Committee, making sure this bill is as strong as it possibly can be. I agree with her remarks that the bill would have been better if they left in place what the Senate had written, but I thank the chairwoman for her dedication to helping our families and businesses recover. It has made such a difference.

I also thank Senator Landrieu for her experience and expertise in meeting the needs of States devastated by natural disasters. She has had to live through these tragedies before. She knows what it is like to talk to constituents whose loved ones have been lost, whose families and businesses have been destroyed and torn apart, and whose lives are just in the beginning of being rebuilt. I thank her for what she has done.

I thank Senator Menendez, who will be following me with remarks, and Senator Lautenberg, and Senator Chuck Schumer for the work he has done on behalf of New Yorkers, being a clarion call for common sense and immediate action and for bringing our colleagues together to meet the needs of so many families who are so much in need.

I rise today to urge my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to support our efforts to finally come to the relief of millions of Americans who are suffering in the wake of Superstorm Sandy. New Yorkers in my home State have had to wait far too long for Congress to act.

Superstorm Sandy was a weather event unlike anything we in New York have ever seen before. It claimed the lives of 60 New Yorkers, left hundreds of thousands with significant damage to their homes and their businesses, their neighborhoods and their families. This body came together just before the New Year to provide the desperately needed aid families require to rebuild their homes, their businesses, and their lives; the aid our small businesses so desperately need to get their businesses up and running, the lifeblood of our communities flowing again, and getting our families back on their feet.

This bill should be neither controversial nor partisan. We have already debated and passed an almost identical package that was passed by the Republican-led House of Representatives. Once again, the American people are watching us to see if we can come together and stand by families in need, just as we have done for every natural disaster in our Nation's history. They are watching once again to see if this body will do the right thing or turn its back on them and not give them the support they need to rebuild.

This was always an emergency spending bill. It is an emergency, it is urgent, and it needs our action now. We have to seize the opportunity without causing any further delay and we have to show the American people that we can rise on an occasion such as this, when duty calls, to do the right thing. I assure you, there is no one who wants to spend a single cent more than is actually necessary, which is why we took such pains and effort to make sure this bill was transparent, had accountability and the right kind of oversight. We are urging that we fully fund this proposal that was so carefully put together.

Since 1989, Congress has passed 36 emergency appropriations bills for disaster relief without specifically designating any offsets. There is no reason why we should treat this disaster, this emergency, this horror, any differently than we have past disasters.

When disasters do strike, we have always found the good will and the care for one another to do what is right. Protecting people, looking after them, making sure they are safe, allowing businesses to grow is what we should be doing. Our Federal Government's role is to protect the people first. It is our duty as public servants.

I urge my colleagues once again, find that good will, help others, do the right thing.

Working Together

Mr. President, I wish to engage in a colloquy with the Senator from Maryland, the chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, as well as the Senator from New Jersey, Senator Menendez.

I thank the chairwoman for her leadership in bringing the disaster supplemental appropriations bill to the Senate floor to address the urgent recovery needs of New York, New Jersey, and the rest of the Northeast that was affected by Superstorm Sandy. It is my hope we will pass this bill quickly so that our communities can begin to rebuild.

It is also important that as we rebuild, agencies of the Federal Government work in a collaborative way, across agencies and in concert with our State and local governments. We should not have multiple agencies studying the same problem separately, but rather the Federal Government should be working together to develop the best models for rebuilding our battered coasts as well as planning for the long-term sustainability and resilience of these vulnerable areas.

I thank the chairwoman for making this clarification. It is my hope that as the Army Corps and other agencies work to assess the region's needs post-Sandy, they will work collaboratively to develop the best techniques to rebuild our coasts to reduce flood risks and provide for long-term sustainability of the coastal ecosystem.

Mr. President, I thank the chairwoman for her leadership on this essential bill. I can't thank her enough for her tenacity and determination to meet the needs of so many affected families in our State.

I also thank Senator Landrieu for her leadership to help craft this bill in a way that has transparency and accountability and to learn from the mistakes of the past with Hurricane Katrina. She has worked overtime to make this bill a reality and I thank her.

Of course, I thank my colleague Senator Schumer for his extraordinary leadership and Senators Menendez and Lautenberg on behalf of their State. It makes a huge difference. But I do want to start where Senator Mikulski left off and give recognition to Senator Blumenthal.

During the holidays, we often reflect on our blessings. We think about what is going well in our lives. We are very thankful for what has been given to us, whether it is the health of our children, being in a safe, warm home, whether it is having a good job, whether it is having a business that is profitable--whatever those blessings are, that is what the holidays are about, being grateful for them.

This holiday will be a very difficult time for so many families in New York and New Jersey and Connecticut. There were many loved ones lost during Hurricane Sandy. There were many children lost in Connecticut. When a loved one is no longer around the dining room table, when there are gifts that were bought that were not able to be given, it is a very sad time for our country.

What I am urging my colleagues to remember is what that loss feels like in their own States. We have seen so many tragedies this last year. We have seen so many disasters over the last several years. As Senator Mikulski has said and Senator Schumer has said: This country always stands together in these times of disaster and grave need. When it was Hurricane Katrina, we stood by that State, that region; immediately, within 10 days, we delivered $60 billion of aid and relief to the families in need. We did the same thing for Florida. Hurricane Andrew left devastation in its wake. We did the same thing when tornadoes hit Joplin, MO, and Tuscaloosa, AL. We stand by families in times of need. It is the job of the Federal Government to keep our families and communities safe. It is what we do. It is that gratitude we have when others come to our side in that moment of great need that draws this body together.

What I am urging most is that we all do count our blessings during these holidays, we do look to what we have and know there are many families who are going without--without a warm home, without that loved one who has been lost. We know from this disaster children were taken, grandparents were taken, husbands and wives were lost. So the least we can do is help a community rebuild from that devastation.

It starts with homes. We saw so much loss in our State. We worked out that we needed about $17 billion to rebuild the homes in New York and we asked for a community development block grant to cover that. Our colleagues on the other side of the aisle will have a substitute bill, a substitute bill that will cut funding drastically. It is akin to, if you have 5-alarm fire, you are just sending one firetruck because that is all you want to pay for today.

They have cut that money for housing from $17 billion to $2 billion, so what you are saying to the families in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut in the region: We are just not going to rebuild your house.

FEMA right now provides individual assistance up to $31,000 for each homeowner. You cannot rebuild a home for $31,000--particularly not in New York. If you did not have insurance that covered or your insurance claims didn't pay out or your insurance companies said, sorry, it was a flood, you are not covered, what are you supposed to do? You are homeless. You have nowhere to go with your family.

That is what we have to address in this bill. We have to provide the resources for these families to rebuild. The businesses are suffering. I can tell you, I saw many businesses where the structures were in rubble, but every business owner I talked to said to me: I am a New Yorker. I am going to rebuild. I am going to rebuild better. I was born here. I am going to stay here.

That determination and that gratitude for what they have and what they will have is what is going to make the difference.

I thank you, Mr. President, for giving us a chance to advocate on behalf of our families. We do need the help of everyone in this Chamber to do the right thing, to stand by others in their gravest time of need. That is what we have always done and that is what we must do now.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I would like to engage my colleague, the Senator from Iowa, in a colloquy.

I would first like to take this opportunity to commend Senator Harkin, Senators Inouye and Cochran and the rest of the Members of the Senate Appropriations Committee for crafting a responsible, commonsense and critical supplemental appropriations bill to allow New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and other impacted areas recover from the devastation left by Superstorm Sandy.

I would like to highlight an important aspect of the recovery effort, and that is addressing the employment and workforce crisis following the storm that has exacerbated the already chronically high unemployment rates in many of the impacted areas in New York and beyond.

The human, infrastructure, and economic devastation that Superstorm Sandy inflicted upon New York has been crippling and only comparable most recently to the tragedy of the September 11 terrorist attacks. While it will be months before the economic impact of Sandy can be fully assessed, particularly as it relates to the dislocation of workers, initial figures clearly indicate a long economic recovery for businesses and employees, particularly given that the most densely populated region of the United States was at the center of the storm. In fact, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that four of the five counties with the highest number of labor force participants per square mile were among those hardest hit by Sandy. In addition, all 26 of the counties designated as major disaster areas are among the top 10 percent of U.S. counties in terms of labor force density, highlighting the sheer number of workers impacted by Sandy.

Preliminary estimates are that Sandy destroyed 265,000 businesses in New York State and 189,000 businesses in New Jersey, the two hardest hit States. To put these figures in perspective, it is estimated that 18,700 businesses were impacted by the devastation of Hurricane Katrina in 2005. The estimated 265,000 New York businesses impacted employed approximately 3.8 million workers with over $264 billion in annual wages. It is also worth noting that preliminary estimates point to the fact that 90 percent of the impacted firms are small businesses. Worth noting is also the surge in applications for jobless benefits increasing by 78,000 to 439,000 in the week of November 10, the highest since April 2011, mostly because a large number of applications were filed in States damaged by the storm. Given these staggering numbers, we can only assume that the recovery efforts of our impacted businesses and displaced workers will be long and difficult, demanding investment in government programs that can effectively help get businesses back on their feet and put people back to work.

While all levels of government have been very responsive in addressing the immediate emergency needs, it is essential to understand the lessons of previous catastrophic events when designing and implementing appropriate, long-term strategies for the impacted region's recovery. In particular, business closures and layoffs resulting from the storm's devastation could prolong the economic distress Sandy has caused without a dynamic, immediate, and comprehensive workforce initiative to head off these impacts.

It is well recognized that small- and medium-sized business are the backbone of our economy, employing half of private sector workers and accounting for the creation of two out of three new jobs in the United States. Immediate support and stabilization is critical to full recovery of small businesses, which, as noted, make up about 90 percent of the 265,000 estimated New York firms impacted by Sandy. Business continuation, including keeping the doors open while loans, insurance payments and other incentives are realized, is essential. One Federal investment worthy of consideration is temporary employment support, which will help maintain both business operations and help prevent the loss of jobs through the recovery, reducing the need for unemployment and other Federal benefits.

In addition to Federal investment in workforce retention programs, rapid response in identifying and servicing impacted businesses and unemployed workers is required. As recovery efforts move forward, Federal, State, and local authorities should look for ways to invest in and partner with the extensive networks of community-based organizations, economic development groups, as well as organized labor and affiliated management to deliver workforce development services, including outreach for job opportunities, job training, and placement for in-demand occupations and other related reemployment activities.

For example, the Consortium for Worker Education, CWE, a nonprofit agency specializing in workforce preparation, industry specific training, and employment services has partnered in the past with all levels of government and other community based organizations to deliver job placement services and temporary employment support programs to ensure worker retention in the aftermath of disasters. Their efforts alone have helped train and put back to work thousands of people during similar workforce crisis situations as New York finds itself in now following Sandy.

By investing in innovative programs like CWE's, workforce recovery efforts will more effectively take into account the unique needs of each impacted area and deliver tailored services to impacted businesses and displaced workers alike.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support our efforts to come to the relief of millions of Americans who are suffering in the wake of Superstorm Sandy.

I thank my fellow Senators from the Northeast, especially Senators Lautenberg and Menendez, as well as my colleague, Senator Schumer, for all their leadership. Senator Schumer and I have been working in unison with many of our colleagues. We have been testifying at hearings and talking to our other colleagues since the storm hit.

I also give special thanks to Senator Landrieu, who, because her State has suffered so much, has had not only deep experience in advocating for families who are suffering but she has demonstrated extraordinary leadership in bringing together a bill that can begin to meet some of those needs.

I also thank Senator Boxer for holding a hearing in the Environment and Public Works Committee. That hearing allowed all of the Senators to speak on behalf of their States, the members of our delegations, to bear witness to what actually took place.

Superstorm Sandy was a storm unlike anything we had ever seen in the Northeast before. The sheer magnitude and force struck the most densely populated parts of the region. As you can see here on this chart, the purple is where the storm hit hardest, then the red and on to the yellow. In Sandy's wake, more than 40 New Yorkers lost their lives and hundreds of thousands more have lost their homes or seen significant damage to their neighborhoods and their businesses, and their families are currently still suffering.

I wish to share just one story that indicates the depth of the challenge these families are facing.

This one man, whose name is Pedro Correa, is from Staten Island. Pedro is a lifelong New Yorker. When he saw the Twin Towers fall on 9/ 11, he answered the call of duty. He has been to Iraq and served our country. Since returning home to his family, he has continued to serve in public service. He and his wife are raising two kids, ages 2 and 6, in their Oakwood Beach home. As Sandy approached, Pedro was very smart. He got his family and children out to higher ground and a safer place. Unfortunately, he stayed. The brutal winds hit his home and his community so hard--winds of unbelievable force--that it blew his roof off and collapsed the structure of his house, allowing floodwaters in. With the rising water, he literally felt his life was at risk. He called his wife and kids to say goodbye, but he was a strong man and he endured. He actually was able to fight the storm waters and swam to safety to a neighbor's house.

One might think that was going to be the worst for Pedro and his family, but it is not. It is actually not. His house was completely destroyed. And as he has begun his effort to rebuild, he has found roadblock after roadblock, challenge after challenge, and a great deal of difficulty in that small effort of beginning to rebuild. He called his insurance company and discovered his insurance is capped at half the value of his home. He called FEMA, and FEMA offered him $2,800.

This is a man any of us would be proud to call our own son. He lived through 9/11, he went to fight for our country, and he continues public service. Now he is literally in the fight for his own life and for his own family's well-being and safety. His only choice currently is bankruptcy.

Americans watching us might ask: Are we going to come together to help these families? Will we stand as one body and do the right thing by these families, these communities, these businesses that are just trying to get back on their feet? One thing is clear: There are too many of these stories for any of us to bear.

After spending time in the communities that were hardest hit--from New York City to the Hudson Valley to Long Island--I can tell you the images of the devastation are worse than any I have personally ever witnessed. I spent day after day meeting with families whose lives have been shattered, homes destroyed, such as this one. Many of them are worried because, obviously, as winter sets in, they do not think they can return to their homes. How will they get their kids back in school? How will they rebuild their lives?

But amid all this destruction, one story continues to emerge: neighbors helping neighbors, and unbelievable acts of generosity and kindness. I have met volunteers from every State in this country who came to help Sandy's victims--young kids who want to do their part. I met a bunch of kids--veterans--who had already served in Iraq and Afghanistan who were there just to help people clean out their basements. They put on some gloves and work boots and they shoveled out basements for days and days.

I met one gentleman who, as with this house, had a boat in the middle of his restaurant. He said to me: Kirsten, we will rebuild and we will rebuild better. And we agreed we would have dinner at that restaurant a year from now. So that resolve, that determination to rebuild, is something that is never in short supply in New York. We New Yorkers are very tough. We can get knocked down, but every single time we will get up. We may be forced to bend, but we will not break. But we can't do it alone. We need the rest of this body, the rest of Congress, to come to our support.

I know there has been a lot of discussion, and I have been involved in some with my colleagues, over the past few days about the bill, that we are moving too quickly, that it costs too much. But please, for a moment, think of devastation in your own States, think of talking to a family with children with no place to go. Imagine what it would be like to be without a home, particularly during these holidays. Families need just a small amount of support to begin to rebuild.

In New York, because of where the storm hit, a lot of our infrastructure was damaged, and a lot of these projects are extremely expensive. But these projects are emergency spending. This is major transportation infrastructure, such as the Brooklyn Battery tunnel. This is the subway, but the Brooklyn Battery tunnel alone would take $700 million to rebuild. So when we are talking about a bill and that we could fund a little today and fund the rest tomorrow, that is not how business works. It is not how a contract works. You either contract to rebuild the tunnel or you don't. You either make the changes to rebuild it or you don't. You voluntarily, to retire. can't say: We will put down a little now. No State or city can operate that way. If you don't know the funds are there in advance, you can't start to rebuild.

The same is true for our houses. We have estimates that there is $10 billion worth of damage to these homes. If you say, we will give a little now, how is that homeowner going to know if they are even going to be able to rebuild if no one is there to help them?

We have always funded disaster projects when they are needed. We have not asked for offsets, we have not asked for them to be paid for in advance. That is what a disaster is. That is what disaster funding is about. So I think it is important we look to New York and say: We will be there for you. We will stand with you. New York has

stood by every other State, every other region in the country when they have had disasters come to their doorsteps.

Another concern my colleagues have brought up is this issue of what portion of the bill is for future prevention. We call it mitigation. The reality is, if you are going to rebuild a subway such as this, and you don't do it in a way that protects against flooding the next time, then you are wasting your money. Mitigation is attached to each and every project it is going to be used for, so when we fix the tunnel, when we fix the subway, when we fix any part of our city, it will be done in a way that is smart and not blind to future risks.

Some have also asked the question about Army Corps of Engineers projects. For those who are not familiar with Washington speak, the Army Corps of Engineers funds a lot of projects related to our coastal shorelines or to any kind of waterway. They do the engineering required and then the work that has to be done to make sure a beach isn't vulnerable after a massive storm, such as the ones we have seen. Because of Sandy, much of the Army Corps's infrastructure that provided this critical protection was washed away or significantly damaged, leaving a lot of our shoreline exposed. So even if a minor storm hits, lives will be at risk.

When we look at the history of Hurricane Katrina, Congress and the Bush administration immediately provided the Army Corps with $3.3 billion for repair and mitigation with no offsets. Even funds appropriated in 2008 for the gulf coast hurricanes, 3 years after the storms hit, were designated as disaster and emergency funding. In fact, since 1989, Congress has passed 36 emergency appropriations for disasters without any specifically dedicated outside offsets.

It has been 50 days since Superstorm Sandy hit our shores. We need to act swiftly. When Hurricane Katrina battered the gulf coast, the Members of this body and the House united. We passed two emergency spending relief bills worth $60 billion within 10 days. Congress did the same for Hurricane Andrew, and within weeks of the Twin Towers falling on 9/11. I know the Members of this body can come together. When disaster strikes, we always find a way to do the right thing. It is time to do the same today.

It is the fundamental role of government to protect people, to help rebuild communities when disaster strikes. When so many lives have been destroyed and so many communities lie in rubble, when businesses don't know how to begin to rebuild, that is when we have to stand strong and we have to come together.

No doubt we have serious challenges ahead of us, but none of us was sent here to Congress to do what is easy. We serve to do what is right, especially when it is hard, especially when families are counting on us. So I ask my colleagues to find good will, to open their hearts and stand by those families who have suffered so much in the Northeast.

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

Madam President, I call up amendment No. 3058, as modified.

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

Madam President, I rise today on behalf of the 30,000 military families who have loved ones with disabilities, including those on the autism spectrum. Sadly, thousands of these Americans suffering from autism and other developmental disabilities are not receiving the treatment that best practices has determined they need.

For example, military families with children on the autistic spectrum are receiving fewer services than their civilian governmental counterparts across the country, many of whom have been rightfully aided by laws passed in over 60 percent of our States, representing over 75 percent of the American population.

Autism places such tremendous strain on our families--health strains, financial, and emotional. They take such tolls. I want to share briefly just a couple of the stories I have heard from struggling military families. They have done everything we have asked of them as a nation, but now they can't even provide for their children.

One veteran was severely wounded in Iraq while heroically serving his country. His injuries were such that he was forced to retire. Because he is retired, his autistic son Shane was no longer able to receive the applied behavioral therapies that were recommended. The wait list for the Medicaid waiver services where he lives was 9 years. So Shane's family had to sell their home to pay the roughly $5,000 per month out of pocket for the ABA treatment he so desperately needs.

The money is running out for their family, and they do not know what to do. But they want to do what is best for their son. Without this relief, we risk allowing brave military families just like this one to fall through the cracks.

Another story: A marine on Active Duty serving in Iraq and Afghanistan three times has maxed out all his ABA therapies to treat his 11-year-old autistic son Joshua. Joshua is nonverbal and his safety is a key concern for his family. So Joshua is prescribed 35 hours of ABA therapy per week. Because of the severity of Joshua's symptoms, the family is basically faced with the impossible decision of either foregoing the recommended care the doctor has prescribed for their son or paying these bills out of pocket for as long as they are actually able.

I don't believe this should ever happen to our military families. I don't believe it should happen to any child, and that is why I am introducing my amendment to require TRICARE to cover the recommended ABA therapies that a doctor prescribes. It would be a matter that is consistent with the best practices across this country and in the rest of the Federal Government.

Our children need this kind of support--Shane and Joshua need this kind

of support--and we should be standing by our men and women who serve in the military because they stand by us. Every parent who has a child with autism or another disability faces challenges to ensure their child has access to the treatments they require. For these military families, the challenges are even greater and often compounded by frequent deployments overseas, the frequent moves to different bases across State lines, and sometimes significant gaps in their coverage.

Today, TRICARE coverage of ABA is severely limited. It is capped at $36,000 per year for an Active-Duty member, which falls far below what is medically recommended for so many of these children.

This care is limited to Active-Duty servicemembers only. Guard and Reserve families receive intermittent care, and children of retirees can't even get coverage at all. As a consequence, military servicemembers often must turn to State Medicaid Programs to help provide these services to their children. But the problem is that these services are often unavailable because of long--years--wait lists. In Maryland, for example, the wait list is 7 years, essentially eliminating ABA coverage during the early developmental years when a child needs it most. The wait list in Virginia is 10 years long.

Even more remarkable than TRICARE not covering these treatments is that the Office of Personnel Management has determined that such treatments may be covered as medical therapies for Federal civilian employees. A recent court decision, which the DOD is still reviewing and may appeal, determined that TRICARE must cover these treatments. But this decision is being applied under the most narrow definition in the interim, limiting the potential pool of providers. This amendment requires TRICARE to provide coverage and deliver services in a manner that is consistent with the best practices, thereby improving access to care for our military families and aligning the TRICARE policy with coverage that is basically available to anybody else in the civilian sector.

I believe we have a duty to stand by our military families. We have to address this difficult medical issue. We ask so much of our men and women who serve in the military. We must support their families. This amendment simply fulfills that promise.

I yield the floor.

I thank my colleagues for their statements of support for meeting the needs of the children who do suffer from autism and other developmental disorders, and I do appreciate and believe their sincerity in wanting to make sure they are covered with the treatments they need.

I think we can work together to reform the TRICARE system. It is one that has not had the kind of reform it needs. But this is just an authorization for 1 year to meet the needs of these kids now because I don't want to wait until we figure it out and figure out the rest of the program.

In addition, we did have a hearing. We had scientists and doctors and those who are medical professionals come to testify in front of the Armed Services subcommittee. Through that testimony we established that the only reason the DOD wasn't covering this was because they believed it was an educational program. And what we established and what the medical literature says is that it is actually a medically necessary treatment in the same way you would give a child who is sick a medicine.

I want to address the needs of these kids now. I will commit to working with the Senators to reforming TRICARE so we can actually pay for programs over the long term and reform it in a way that is consistent with the benefits our troops so desperately need.

I urge my colleagues to take a more lengthy time to consider how to reform TRICARE and pay for this program than just 1 or 2 hours.

I would like to pass this amendment now. Right now operations and maintenance has $174 billion a year in it. This is $45 million for 1 year just to get the treatments in place for these families. In 1 year's time, we will have more accountability and transparency on what the real cost is. This is just an estimate. So what we want to do is be able to have more facts and then go to reform the TRICARE system properly, and I commit to Senators that I will work with you on that. This is only authorized for 1 year.

I yield my time.

I request a voice vote.

I request a voice vote.

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

Mr. President, I rise to speak on behalf of the approximately 20,000 military families with loved ones on the autism spectrum. Sadly, thousands of these Americans suffering from autism are not receiving the treatments that are the best practices that have been determined they need. These military families are receiving fewer services than their civilian government counterparts across the country, many of whom have been rightly aided by laws passed in over 60 percent of our States representing over 75 percent of the country's population.

Autism places tremendous strains on our Nation's military families and nonmilitary families--including tremendous health, financial, and emotional tolls. I wish to share briefly just a couple stories from our brave military families.

One veteran was severely wounded in Iraq while heroically serving our country. His injuries forced him to medically retire. Because he is retired, his autistic son Shane was no longer eligible to receive the ABA services he had previously received. The wait list for Medicaid waiver services is over 9 years. Shane's family had to sell their home to pay the roughly $5,000 per month of out-of-pocket expenses that the ABA treatments require that he so desperately needs. The money is running out for their family, and their family's effort is only to do what is best for their son. Without any relief, we risk allowing brave military families just like this one to fall through the cracks.

Another Active-Duty marine, who has served in Iraq and Afghanistan three times, has maxed out his ABA care for therapy treatments to treat his 11-year-old autistic son Joshua. Joshua is nonverbal and his safety is a key concern, so Joshua is prescribed 35 hours of these ABA therapy treatments each week. Due to the severity of Joshua's symptoms, the family is faced with the nearly impossible decision of forgoing the recommended care for their son or paying the bills out of pocket as long as they are able to.

In my opinion--and it is shared by many families--this should never happen to any child, but it should also particularly not happen to the child of someone from our military service. That is why I am submitting an

amendment requiring TRICARE to cover medically recommended autism treatments, including ABA therapy, in a manner that is consistent with best practices so our military families, our heroes, get the care they need for their children, children such as Shane and Joshua.

Every parent who has a child with autism faces challenges in ensuring that their child has access to the treatments they desperately need. For military families, these challenges are often compounded by frequent deployments overseas, frequent movements to different bases across State lines, and sometimes gaps in coverage.

Today, TRICARE coverage of ABA is severely limited. It is capped at $36,000 per year for an Active-Duty servicemember. This falls far below what is medically recommended. This care is limited to Active-Duty servicemembers only. Guard and Reserve families receive intermittent care, and children of retirees cannot get any coverage at all.

As a consequence, military servicemembers must often turn to State- run Medicaid programs to help their children, but these programs are often unavailable to a mobile military family because of the extensive wait lists. In Maryland, for example, the wait is 17 years long, essentially eliminating ABA coverage during the early development years when a child needs it most. The wait list in Virginia, for example, is over 10 years long.

Even more remarkable than TRICARE not covering these treatments is that the Office of Personnel Management has already determined that such treatments may be covered as medical therapies for Federal civilian employees. A recent court decision, which DOD is still reviewing and may appeal, determined that TRICARE must cover these treatments, but this decision is being applied under the most narrow definition in the interim, limiting the potential pool of providers. This amendment basically requires TRICARE to provide coverage and deliver services in a manner that is consistent with best practices. This would, thereby, improve access to care for our military families, and it would finally align TRICARE with the other types of coverage that is available in civilian sectors.

We have a duty to stand by our military families and to address this very difficult health issue that affects their children. When we ask our men and women to serve, we promise we will support them and their families. This amendment simply fulfills that promise.

I also rise to speak about another issue concerning the armed services authorization bill, and this is equally as serious and troublesome; that is, the issue of sexual violence.

While the vast majority of our servicemembers serve our country honorably and bravely and are simply the best our country has to offer, sexual violence in the military continues to occur at an alarming rate by a minority of servicemembers who should not be serving.

Despite Secretary Panetta's efforts to create a zero-tolerance policy in 2011, still more than 3,000 military sexual assaults were reported. But the DOD's estimates themselves indicate that number is much closer to 19,000 cases.

In the words of DOD:

[Sexual violence in the military] is an affront to the

basic American values we defend, and may degrade military

readiness, subvert strategic goodwill, and forever change the

lives of victims and their families.

All our service branches have in place some version of a policy that sends convicted sex offenders to an administrative separation process for discharge. However, the most recent Annual Report on Sexual Assault in the Military shows that in fiscal year 2011, 36 percent of convicted sex offenders remained in the Armed Services, despite these policies.

If one-third of convicted sex offenders within the military are being retained, then clearly we must do better. Creating a uniform standard to correct deficiencies in the respective branch policies would be a good step forward.

Experts reviewing current policies have found that the Navy has established a mandatory policy that calls for administrative discharge of any personnel who are convicted of a sex offense.

My amendment would require the Department to oversee that each service branch establish policies that would mandate servicemembers convicted of a sex offense be processed for administrative separation. This means each such perpetrator would get due process but that the process would be required.

This amendment is common sense, and it is one that would strengthen the policies the services have actually already put in place and reinforce DOD's zero-tolerance policy.

I am very pleased Senators Collins and Snowe have joined me as cosponsors of this amendment, and I wish to thank them for their leadership.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I request my amendment be called up.

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

Mr. President, I rise to talk about an amendment that I believe is on an incredibly urgent matter.

Today the vast majority, almost all of our servicemembers, serve this country so honorably, so bravely. But there is a very small number who do not, who are engaging in sexual assault in the military. Despite Secretary Panetta's efforts to have a zero tolerance policy in this country, in 2011 alone there were 3,000 military assaults reported, and the Secretary of Defense reports the real number is much closer to 19,000 assaults. In the words of the DOD, sexual violence in the military ``is an affront to the basic American values we defend, and may degrade military readiness, subverts our strategic goodwill, and forever changes the lives of victims and their families.''

My amendment is very simple. Today each of the services have policies that address this issue, but the one that the Navy has is the best. My amendment requires the Department to oversee that each of the service branches has established a policy that would mandate that servicemembers convicted of sexual offenses will be processed for administrative separation.

The reason this is so important is because one-third of convicted sexual offenders in the military are still retained. They are still serving. So, obviously, we must do better. We need a uniform standard to correct these deficiencies in the respective branch policies to be able to serve our military families and our military members as we should.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I would like to say Senator Collins and Senator Snowe are cosponsors of this amendment.

Mr. President, today I wish to honor the contribution of two great heroes, Kateri Tekakwitha and Marianne Cope. These two individuals from upstate New York worked tirelessly during their lifetimes to bring faith and health to every soul they touched. Bl. Kateri Tekakwitha and Bl. Marianne Cope have served as an inspiration for generations of the faithful both in America and abroad, and are now being recognized with the highest honor of sainthood.

Bl. Kateri Tekakwitha was born in 1656 to a Mohawk father and Algonquin mother along the Mohawk River in upstate New York. After surviving a devastating smallpox epidemic, Kateri was introduced to Christianity by Catholic missionaries. Despite severe disapproval by her tribe, Kateri was baptized into the church as Catherine and lived the rest of her life caring for the sick and elderly in the Mohawk River region. She is informally known as Lily of the Mohawks and will become the patron saint of ecology, the environment, and Native Americans. Although she died young, Kateri's reputation as the first Native American saint will live forever. Her commitment to the Christian faith has served as an inspiration not only to Native American Catholics, but to all American Catholics.

The other beatified person, Bl. Marianne Cope, was a member of the Sisters of St. Francis in Syracuse after growing up in Utica, NY. As the eldest daughter of German immigrants, she worked in a factory to support her family and delayed answering her religious calling until her siblings were self-sufficient. Once she was able to commit to the church, Marianne dedicated her work to establishing a series of hospitals, both public and Catholic, in Syracuse and central New York. These hospitals were some of the first to treat patients regardless of race, religion, or nationality. Marianne was also one of the first hospital administrators to advocate for patients' rights and to accept medical students for clinical instruction. In 1883, she moved to Hawaii to care for those with leprosy, a task that was declined by many other religious groups. Throughout her time in Hawaii she remained a dedicated caretaker and symbol of hope to patients who had been exiled because of their illness.

These two extraordinary women will be declared saints on October 21 in Vatican City by Pope Benedict XVI in St. Peter's Square, marking the end of a long process of examination undergone by all candidates for sainthood. The ceremony will venerate Kateri and Marianne in the eyes of Catholics all over the world.

I would like the U.S. Senate to honor Bl. Kateri Tekakwitha and Bl. Marianne Cope and recognize their unparalleled commitment to faith and their unending sacrifices for the people most in need across New York and our Nation.