Floor Statements

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there now be a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H. Con. Res. 79, just received from the House and is at the desk.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, without intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H. Con. Res. 123, just received from the House and is at the desk.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, without intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 204, which was submitted earlier today.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating thereto be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 205, which was submitted earlier today.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the HELP Committee be discharged from further consideration of and the Senate now proceed to H. Con. Res. 62.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I understand that S. 1415, introduced earlier today by Senator Reid, is at the desk, and I ask for its first reading.

Mr. President, I now ask for its second reading and object to my own request.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that I believe is an important component of comprehensive energy policy. In order to transition away from an overreliance on fossil fuels, we must promote investments in clean energy generation using renewable resources and reduce the growth in demand for energy by stressing efficiency.

I think every Member of the Senate recognizes that while there is no single technological silver bullet for our energy problems, there are many emerging technologies that if adopted and deployed could go a long way in meeting our vexing energy security and climate challenges.

We also know that Government can play a key role setting technology standards and clean energy goals, but shifting our Nation's and the world's energy system to clean energy alternatives will take substantial private sector investment. Here, too, the Government can play a key role by enabling the market conditions that will take the technology from the laboratory and turn it into fully operational energy producing facilities.

A number of reports have suggested that private investment in energy technologies is on the rise. While estimates vary widely, New Energy Finance has reported that 1,246 private equity funds put more than $70 billion into clean energy technologies in 2006--a 43-percent increase relative to 2005. Similarly, a survey conducted late last year by the National Venture Capital Association found that more than 90 percent of respondents expect to increase investment in the energy sector in 2007.

This is a unique time. There is growing consensus that our Nation's energy demands need to be better and more smartly managed and, more importantly, consensus that those growing energy demands should be met using clean, renewable energy resources.

The Clean Energy Investment Assurance Act of 2007, which I introduce along with my colleagues, Senators Gordon Smith and John Kerry, responds to the clear message that was delivered to both the Senate Energy and Senate Finance Committees by businesses that are on the cutting edge in this area. What we heard from the renewable energy community and the investment community is that what they need most is some certainty in the Tax Code.

This type of Federal assistance will support the needed long-term investments that ultimately will drive down the costs of electricity from renewable sources. Once the market for these new technologies is up and running, such facilities will be economically self-sustaining and profitable.

Our legislation adheres to the following principles:

Certainty. We put the existing tax incentives in place long enough to drive investment dollars so these new technologies can be commercialized. The core of this bill is a 5-year extension and modification of the production tax credit. This tax credit is designed to help businesses and utilities diversify their sources of energy and promote energy production using biomass, wind power, hydropower, geothermal power, and other clean, renewable resources. In addition, we extend for 8 years the investment tax credit that is so important in encouraging the large upfront outlay of capital that is required for solar and fuel cell power plants.

Technological neutrality. This bill levels the playing field by providing an incentive to both thermal energy production and electricity production that use renewable resources. It also modifies the tax credits to increase the incentive effect for all renewable technologies that can produce energy with zero carbon emissions.

Parity between investor-owned utilities and consumer-owned public power utilities. The bill provides a powerful, complementary incentive through the Clean Renewable Energy Bond Program so that public power and consumer-owned utilities that cannot benefit from tax credits are not financially disadvantaged when they invest in renewable facilities. Public power utilities are required to meet State renewable portfolio standards in the same way as investor-owned utilities, and Government should provide comparable financial incentives so that ultimately the cost of electricity can be reduced for all customers.

Importance of efficiency. This bill includes provisions that better utilize the incentives in the Tax Code to promote energy efficiency in manufacturing, construction of ``green buildings,'' and more efficient homes. These tax incentives help defray the additional costs associated with using new energy-efficient technologies, systems, and materials to construct and retrofit factories, commercial buildings, and houses in order to reduce energy demand. I know Senator Snowe has done a great deal of work in this area, and I look forward to working with her on these important provisions.

Another key component in this regard is an inducement for customers and utilities to upgrade to ``smart meters.'' A ``smart meter'' is a device with an electronic circuit board containing computer chips and a digital communications device. It allows a customer to interact with a utility in real time. This interaction allows the utility to better forecast and manage energy load and the customer can manage his energy use to lower the cost.

The electromechanical meter, the device that measures energy use with the little wheels turning inside it that is hooked up to almost every home and business in America, is almost the

same as when it was invented in the 1930s, when FDR was President.

Inefficient use of energy forces utilities to invest millions in building plants that operate only when energy demand peaks. As a result, the power these plants generate costs far more than power from other sources. This means more expensive power when demand is high.

Our bill would allow a faster recovery period for the costs of installing these new ``smart meters,'' which will make it easier for consumers to reduce energy use during these peak periods and shift their energy use to low-demand, low-cost times of the day.

We know that we don't have an unlimited pool of Federal resources, and I believe strongly that the Finance Committee should redirect subsidies that historically have propped up the oil and gas industry to now support this new direction in energy policy.

Our tax policy here should be driven by our energy policy goals. We cannot make a long-term difference with start-and-stop tax policy. But we must be mindful that after a reasonable period all tax incentives should be reexamined to see whether we have gotten the results we anticipated and whether the marketplace is ready to function on its own.

We should focus tax incentives where they will have the greatest impact in helping meet those goals. While this bill seeks to address renewable power and efficiency, I plan to continue working on legislation to effectively align the other incentives in the Tax Code that are designed to promote alternative fuels and vehicles.

We all witnessed how innovation in information technologies served as a forceful driver of productivity and economic growth in the recent past.

Energy technology innovations now have similar potential to fuel a new wave of economic growth and job creation.

I would like to note that this bill has already received the support of the following organizations: American Forest Resource Council; American Public Power Association; Biomass Investment Group; Energy Northwest; Large Public Power Council; Northwest Public Power Association; Southern California Public Power Authority; Solar Energy Industries Association; USA Biomass Power Producers Alliance; Chelan County PUD, Snohomish County PUD, Tacoma Power, and Seattle City Light; Washington Public Utility Districts Association; Simpson Investment Company, Tacoma; National Hydropower Association; Seattle Steam; and TechNet.

We have a tremendous opportunity in this Congress to set a new course in energy, environmental, and economic policy for the 21st century, and I hope we aggressively move forward and meet this challenge.

I ask unanimous consent that a section-by-section summary of the Clean Energy Investment Assurance Act of 2007 be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that I believe is an important component of comprehensive energy policy. In order to transition away from an overreliance on fossil fuels, we must promote investments in clean energy generation using renewable resources and reduce the growth in demand for energy by stressing efficiency.

I think every Member of the Senate recognizes that while there is no single technological silver bullet for our energy problems, there are many emerging technologies that if adopted and deployed could go a long way in meeting our vexing energy security and climate challenges.

We also know that Government can play a key role setting technology standards and clean energy goals, but shifting our Nation's and the world's energy system to clean energy alternatives will take substantial private sector investment. Here, too, the Government can play a key role by enabling the market conditions that will take the technology from the laboratory and turn it into fully operational energy producing facilities.

A number of reports have suggested that private investment in energy technologies is on the rise. While estimates vary widely, New Energy Finance has reported that 1,246 private equity funds put more than $70 billion into clean energy technologies in 2006--a 43-percent increase relative to 2005. Similarly, a survey conducted late last year by the National Venture Capital Association found that more than 90 percent of respondents expect to increase investment in the energy sector in 2007.

This is a unique time. There is growing consensus that our Nation's energy demands need to be better and more smartly managed and, more importantly, consensus that those growing energy demands should be met using clean, renewable energy resources.

The Clean Energy Investment Assurance Act of 2007, which I introduce along with my colleagues, Senators Gordon Smith and John Kerry, responds to the clear message that was delivered to both the Senate Energy and Senate Finance Committees by businesses that are on the cutting edge in this area. What we heard from the renewable energy community and the investment community is that what they need most is some certainty in the Tax Code.

This type of Federal assistance will support the needed long-term investments that ultimately will drive down the costs of electricity from renewable sources. Once the market for these new technologies is up and running, such facilities will be economically self-sustaining and profitable.

Our legislation adheres to the following principles:

Certainty. We put the existing tax incentives in place long enough to drive investment dollars so these new technologies can be commercialized. The core of this bill is a 5-year extension and modification of the production tax credit. This tax credit is designed to help businesses and utilities diversify their sources of energy and promote energy production using biomass, wind power, hydropower, geothermal power, and other clean, renewable resources. In addition, we extend for 8 years the investment tax credit that is so important in encouraging the large upfront outlay of capital that is required for solar and fuel cell power plants.

Technological neutrality. This bill levels the playing field by providing an incentive to both thermal energy production and electricity production that use renewable resources. It also modifies the tax credits to increase the incentive effect for all renewable technologies that can produce energy with zero carbon emissions.

Parity between investor-owned utilities and consumer-owned public power utilities. The bill provides a powerful, complementary incentive through the Clean Renewable Energy Bond Program so that public power and consumer-owned utilities that cannot benefit from tax credits are not financially disadvantaged when they invest in renewable facilities. Public power utilities are required to meet State renewable portfolio standards in the same way as investor-owned utilities, and Government should provide comparable financial incentives so that ultimately the cost of electricity can be reduced for all customers.

Importance of efficiency. This bill includes provisions that better utilize the incentives in the Tax Code to promote energy efficiency in manufacturing, construction of ``green buildings,'' and more efficient homes. These tax incentives help defray the additional costs associated with using new energy-efficient technologies, systems, and materials to construct and retrofit factories, commercial buildings, and houses in order to reduce energy demand. I know Senator Snowe has done a great deal of work in this area, and I look forward to working with her on these important provisions.

Another key component in this regard is an inducement for customers and utilities to upgrade to ``smart meters.'' A ``smart meter'' is a device with an electronic circuit board containing computer chips and a digital communications device. It allows a customer to interact with a utility in real time. This interaction allows the utility to better forecast and manage energy load and the customer can manage his energy use to lower the cost.

The electromechanical meter, the device that measures energy use with the little wheels turning inside it that is hooked up to almost every home and business in America, is almost the

same as when it was invented in the 1930s, when FDR was President.

Inefficient use of energy forces utilities to invest millions in building plants that operate only when energy demand peaks. As a result, the power these plants generate costs far more than power from other sources. This means more expensive power when demand is high.

Our bill would allow a faster recovery period for the costs of installing these new ``smart meters,'' which will make it easier for consumers to reduce energy use during these peak periods and shift their energy use to low-demand, low-cost times of the day.

We know that we don't have an unlimited pool of Federal resources, and I believe strongly that the Finance Committee should redirect subsidies that historically have propped up the oil and gas industry to now support this new direction in energy policy.

Our tax policy here should be driven by our energy policy goals. We cannot make a long-term difference with start-and-stop tax policy. But we must be mindful that after a reasonable period all tax incentives should be reexamined to see whether we have gotten the results we anticipated and whether the marketplace is ready to function on its own.

We should focus tax incentives where they will have the greatest impact in helping meet those goals. While this bill seeks to address renewable power and efficiency, I plan to continue working on legislation to effectively align the other incentives in the Tax Code that are designed to promote alternative fuels and vehicles.

We all witnessed how innovation in information technologies served as a forceful driver of productivity and economic growth in the recent past.

Energy technology innovations now have similar potential to fuel a new wave of economic growth and job creation.

I would like to note that this bill has already received the support of the following organizations: American Forest Resource Council; American Public Power Association; Biomass Investment Group; Energy Northwest; Large Public Power Council; Northwest Public Power Association; Southern California Public Power Authority; Solar Energy Industries Association; USA Biomass Power Producers Alliance; Chelan County PUD, Snohomish County PUD, Tacoma Power, and Seattle City Light; Washington Public Utility Districts Association; Simpson Investment Company, Tacoma; National Hydropower Association; Seattle Steam; and TechNet.

We have a tremendous opportunity in this Congress to set a new course in energy, environmental, and economic policy for the 21st century, and I hope we aggressively move forward and meet this challenge.

I ask unanimous consent that a section-by-section summary of the Clean Energy Investment Assurance Act of 2007 be printed in the Record.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business for 5 minutes.

Madam President, I come to the floor this morning with a lot of enthusiasm for the progress we are making in various committees toward an energy policy we can discuss on the Senate floor which will eventually lead us to greater energy independence. I am very excited about this prospect; especially since I participated in the 2005 energy legislation, which was passed with great bipartisan support. We worked together to enact this groundbreaking energy bill in 2005, which greatly benefitted my State by giving tax credits to alternative energy technologies--wind and solar--and aided in the further development and broadened use of biodiesel and including the construction of a 100 million-gallon biodiesel facility in Washington State.

There were many great things about the 2005 Energy bill but the fact that stood out to me the most was that it was a bipartisan effort. I do wish that there had been a much more aggressive effort on energy independence then, but I think today we are on the cusp of achieving this important goal.

Senator Reid has been very specific since the beginning of this legislative year that he wants energy independence to be a key priority. In fact, there are six different committees that are working on energy legislation today: the Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee, the Finance Committee, the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, the Environment and Public Works Committee, the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. All of these committees are working hard on legislation, and more importantly, they are working on legislation in a bipartisan fashion. In fact, two of these committees have reported out significant energy legislation, working across the aisle ensure that we are getting the best ideas onto the Senate floor and continuing to discuss those ideas on which we have not yet been able to reach consensus.

Yesterday was undoubtedly a historic day because it marked the first time in 20 years, that we have been able to, in a very bipartisan way, put a CAFE bill on the Senate floor--which I hope we will be discussing soon--that actually increases the fuel efficiency standards of automobiles and hopefully lowers our consumption of foreign oil. If we can move from the current miles-per-

gallon standard of 25 miles today to 35 miles in a 10-year period, this would unquestionably be a great accomplishment.

Attached to this legislation is also very important consumer protection legislation that provides the Federal Trade Commission the tools it needs to protect consumers against price gouging. With our current statutes, the FTC has the ability to investigate certain cases on the basis of antitrust laws, which are based on whether we think oil companies are colluding to set prices. What we really have to question is whether the companies may be conducting activities that actually take supply offline and thereby decrease the supply, leading to shortages at the pump. Therefore we need to give the FTC the authority it needs through this legislation and make sure consumers are protected.

This legislation, as part of a package, was passed unanimously out of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee yesterday. It was the result of a bipartisan effort, led by the work of the chairman, Senator Inouye, and the ranking member, Senator Stevens. Unfortunately certain provision did not make it into the final version of this bill, however I firmly believe that it is a historic and important piece of bipartisan legislation that will come to the Senate floor for all of us to discuss.

Just recently, the Energy and Natural Resources Committee passed another very positive landmark legislation which relates to setting a higher mandate on biofuels. In the last Energy bill we were able to pass, we stipulated that we should have a goal of producing 7\1/2\ billion gallons of biofuel a year by 2012. Both the President and the Congress are trying to achieve a higher goal. In this legislation, that sets the goal that by 2022, we would actually have a mandate of having 36 billion gallons of alternative fuel produced in this country. I firmly believe that this is a realistic goal and an achievable mandate for us, and that it will aid in starting mass-production of alternative fuels in this country.

In addition, that legislation had money for what we call a biofuels infrastructure--how we do actually get this product out to the consumer and to the corridors of transportation so the public does not have to worry about where they can fill up their cars. Thanks in part to this legislation we will have the infrastructure to do that.

In the Commerce Committee, we also produced legislation focusing on flex-fuel cars so that, by 2015, 80 percent of the cars being driven on our roads will be flex-fueled. These are vehicles that could either use gasoline or an alternative fuel.

We have also passed legislation now for studying plug-in hybrids and making sure the plug-in hybrid research continues to move ahead.

In the Energy bill, we also included language about carbon sequestration, making sure we move ahead so carbon sequestration becomes a reality. Again, this is an important issue and it is a very important bill to my colleagues in various parts of the country in which we have an ample supply of coal. I commend Senators Domenici and Bingaman for working so closely together. That legislation also was passed in a bipartisan effort. It is a great compliment to those two distinguished Senators who worked so closely on the last Energy bill to yet produce another Energy bill.

We are in a position to make a very positive impact on what I think is one of the biggest challenges we face, getting off our overdependence on foreign oil and providing sources of cleaner energy. We are well poised to take up that debate here on the Senate floor with this landmark bipartisan legislation out of two different committees.

We will have a lot of work to do across the aisle. We still have great opportunities to see legislation out of those other four committees I mentioned that will contribute to this energy package. But we should embrace the opportunity the President laid out in his State of the Union Address when he said that he wanted to make sure we had a higher fuel efficiency standard and that we also set a higher renewable fuel standard, and that is exactly what we are doing now.

I personally think we should also set a renewable standard for the amount of electricity we use from our electricity grid to further reduce our dependence on fossil fuel. These are topics that will be debated. I am sure later in the year we will have an important debate about climate change. But for now we are making great progress. I hope my colleagues will focus on the fact that this energy bill gives us another opportunity to work together here on the Senate floor and put real energy solutions before the American public.

Right now, with gas prices reaching $4, Americans want to know we are going to have an aggressive policy, not only giving them consumer protections but better planning for the future so our economy can benefit from alternative sources of fuel.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to speak about an investment program in lifelong education for our service members and veterans. The Montgomery GI Bill is consistently cited as an important reason people join the military and continues to be one of the most important benefits provided for military service today. There is no reason why 100 percent of our active duty, selected reserve, and veteran servicemembers should not have the

opportunity to take advantage of their earned education benefits.

That is why I'm reintroducing the Montgomery GI Bill for Life Act of 2007, which would allow Montgomery GI Bill participants an unlimited amount of time to use their earned benefits.

I am pleased that my colleague, Senator Tom Harkin, is again joining me in sponsoring this legislation and that Senator Sherrod Brown has also signed on to further extend MGIB benefits.

The MGIB is a program that provides up to 36 months of education benefits for educational opportunities ranging from college to apprenticeship and job training, and even flight training. Upon enlistment, the GI Bill also requires service members to contribute $100 per month for their first 12 months of services.

Basically, the MGIB is divided into two programs. One program targets active duty and veteran members, paying over $1,000 per month to qualified students. That's more than $36,000 for school. The other is directed at the Selected Reserve. This program provides educational benefits of $288 per month, for a total of $10,368.

If recruits are overwhelmingly declaring that education opportunity under the GI Bill is the key incentive for them to join the military, then it makes sense that most--if not all--of our troops, who signed up for the program, would also be cashing in on their benefits. But reports show that the majority, 40 to 60 percent, do not actually use the benefits they have earned.

Currently, MGIB participants have up to 10 years from their release date from the military to use their earned education benefits. Members of the Selected Reserve are able to use their MGIB benefit for 14 years. However, that means your earned education benefits expire if you don't use the within the required timeframe, closing your window of opportunity to go to school or finish your college education. Plus, you lose the $1,200 dedicated for your GI Bill during your first year of enlistment.

Originally, the intent of 1944 GI Bill of Rights was to help veterans successfully transition back into civilian life as education is the key to employment opportunities. Looking back now, we know that the GI Bill opened the door to higher education, helping millions of service members and veterans who wouldn't otherwise have had the chance to pay for college. That is, servicemembers benefited from the GI Bill because they used the payments within the 10 and 14 year limitation.

But there are many others who did not use their earned education benefits within that timeframe. For example, after leaving the military, some servicemembers postponed going to school because they had to go straight to work in order to support their family. Others unfortunately, were either homeless or incarcerated for long periods of time due to disability associated with military service, but are now ready to move forward in their lives, and going back to school is their first step. In some cases, due to random life circumstances, some people just lost track of time. Additionally, because of misinformation and bureaucratic language, the GI Bill is known as a complicated program to navigate.

A constituent of mine, Ruben Ruelas--who is a Local Veterans Employment Representative, LVER, for the WorkSource in Wenatchee, Washington, wrote to me saying, ``It's been my experience that most people don't know what they want to do in life or are placed in situations where, due to changing economic times, they are displaced and need further education and training to compete for jobs. But most don't have access to training resources to do so.''

In terms of Vietnam Era veterans, Mr. Ruelas goes on to say, ``many 50 year olds are unemployed, untrained and uneducated and could use their educational benefits to improve their skills to compete for better jobs. Many have come to realize, too late, that they need college or retraining and don't have the resources to do so.''

While times have changed remarkably, one thing remains constant: education is critical to employment opportunity. In the 21st Century global labor market, enhancing skills through education and job training is now more important than ever. The need for retraining is even more underscored for our military service members and veterans.

My legislation, the Montgomery GI Bill for Life, would ensure that educational opportunities are lifelong, allowing service members and veterans the flexibility to seek education and job training opportunities when it is the right time for them to do so.

Higher education not only serves as an individual benefit, but positive externalities have transpired: the GI Bill was instrumental in building our country's middle class and continues to help close the college education gap.

Today, employers are requiring higher qualifications from the workforce. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that six of the ten fastest-growing occupations require an associate's degree or bachelor's degree. By 2010, 40 percent of all job growth will require some form of postsecondary education. While a highly skilled workforce is one characteristic of the new economy, working for one employer throughout a lifetime is no longer routine, but rather an evanescent feature. According to findings by Brigham Young University, the average person changes jobs or careers eight times in his or her lifetime. To keep up with these trends, expanding access to education and training is a must do in the 21st Century global marketplace.

A 1999 report by the Congressional Commission on Service members and Veterans Transition Assistance stated that the GI Bill of the future must include the following: Provide veterans with access to post- secondary education that they use; assist the Armed forces in recruiting the high quality high school graduates needed; enhance the Nation's competitiveness by further educating American veterans, a population that is already self-disciplined, goal oriented, and steadfast; and attract the kind of service members who will go on to occupy leadership positions in government and the private sector.

Eliminating the GI Bill 10 and 14 year limitation for service members, veterans, and Selected Reserve moves one step toward improving the MGIB. The Montgomery GI Bill for Life would allow MGIB members, including qualified Vietnam Era Veterans, the flexibility to access their earned education benefits at any time.

As the nation's economy continues to recover and grow stronger, the GI Bill will continue to be the primary vehicle keeping our active duty service members and veterans of military service on track, helping to ensure our country's prosperity.

Mr. President, I rise today to speak about an investment program in lifelong education for our service members and veterans. The Montgomery GI Bill is consistently cited as an important reason people join the military and continues to be one of the most important benefits provided for military service today. There is no reason why 100 percent of our active duty, selected reserve, and veteran servicemembers should not have the

opportunity to take advantage of their earned education benefits.

That is why I'm reintroducing the Montgomery GI Bill for Life Act of 2007, which would allow Montgomery GI Bill participants an unlimited amount of time to use their earned benefits.

I am pleased that my colleague, Senator Tom Harkin, is again joining me in sponsoring this legislation and that Senator Sherrod Brown has also signed on to further extend MGIB benefits.

The MGIB is a program that provides up to 36 months of education benefits for educational opportunities ranging from college to apprenticeship and job training, and even flight training. Upon enlistment, the GI Bill also requires service members to contribute $100 per month for their first 12 months of services.

Basically, the MGIB is divided into two programs. One program targets active duty and veteran members, paying over $1,000 per month to qualified students. That's more than $36,000 for school. The other is directed at the Selected Reserve. This program provides educational benefits of $288 per month, for a total of $10,368.

If recruits are overwhelmingly declaring that education opportunity under the GI Bill is the key incentive for them to join the military, then it makes sense that most--if not all--of our troops, who signed up for the program, would also be cashing in on their benefits. But reports show that the majority, 40 to 60 percent, do not actually use the benefits they have earned.

Currently, MGIB participants have up to 10 years from their release date from the military to use their earned education benefits. Members of the Selected Reserve are able to use their MGIB benefit for 14 years. However, that means your earned education benefits expire if you don't use the within the required timeframe, closing your window of opportunity to go to school or finish your college education. Plus, you lose the $1,200 dedicated for your GI Bill during your first year of enlistment.

Originally, the intent of 1944 GI Bill of Rights was to help veterans successfully transition back into civilian life as education is the key to employment opportunities. Looking back now, we know that the GI Bill opened the door to higher education, helping millions of service members and veterans who wouldn't otherwise have had the chance to pay for college. That is, servicemembers benefited from the GI Bill because they used the payments within the 10 and 14 year limitation.

But there are many others who did not use their earned education benefits within that timeframe. For example, after leaving the military, some servicemembers postponed going to school because they had to go straight to work in order to support their family. Others unfortunately, were either homeless or incarcerated for long periods of time due to disability associated with military service, but are now ready to move forward in their lives, and going back to school is their first step. In some cases, due to random life circumstances, some people just lost track of time. Additionally, because of misinformation and bureaucratic language, the GI Bill is known as a complicated program to navigate.

A constituent of mine, Ruben Ruelas--who is a Local Veterans Employment Representative, LVER, for the WorkSource in Wenatchee, Washington, wrote to me saying, ``It's been my experience that most people don't know what they want to do in life or are placed in situations where, due to changing economic times, they are displaced and need further education and training to compete for jobs. But most don't have access to training resources to do so.''

In terms of Vietnam Era veterans, Mr. Ruelas goes on to say, ``many 50 year olds are unemployed, untrained and uneducated and could use their educational benefits to improve their skills to compete for better jobs. Many have come to realize, too late, that they need college or retraining and don't have the resources to do so.''

While times have changed remarkably, one thing remains constant: education is critical to employment opportunity. In the 21st Century global labor market, enhancing skills through education and job training is now more important than ever. The need for retraining is even more underscored for our military service members and veterans.

My legislation, the Montgomery GI Bill for Life, would ensure that educational opportunities are lifelong, allowing service members and veterans the flexibility to seek education and job training opportunities when it is the right time for them to do so.

Higher education not only serves as an individual benefit, but positive externalities have transpired: the GI Bill was instrumental in building our country's middle class and continues to help close the college education gap.

Today, employers are requiring higher qualifications from the workforce. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that six of the ten fastest-growing occupations require an associate's degree or bachelor's degree. By 2010, 40 percent of all job growth will require some form of postsecondary education. While a highly skilled workforce is one characteristic of the new economy, working for one employer throughout a lifetime is no longer routine, but rather an evanescent feature. According to findings by Brigham Young University, the average person changes jobs or careers eight times in his or her lifetime. To keep up with these trends, expanding access to education and training is a must do in the 21st Century global marketplace.

A 1999 report by the Congressional Commission on Service members and Veterans Transition Assistance stated that the GI Bill of the future must include the following: Provide veterans with access to post- secondary education that they use; assist the Armed forces in recruiting the high quality high school graduates needed; enhance the Nation's competitiveness by further educating American veterans, a population that is already self-disciplined, goal oriented, and steadfast; and attract the kind of service members who will go on to occupy leadership positions in government and the private sector.

Eliminating the GI Bill 10 and 14 year limitation for service members, veterans, and Selected Reserve moves one step toward improving the MGIB. The Montgomery GI Bill for Life would allow MGIB members, including qualified Vietnam Era Veterans, the flexibility to access their earned education benefits at any time.

As the nation's economy continues to recover and grow stronger, the GI Bill will continue to be the primary vehicle keeping our active duty service members and veterans of military service on track, helping to ensure our country's prosperity.

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