Floor Statements

Mr. President, I request the time to make my statement as required.

Mr. President, I come to the floor to speak on the Violence Against Women Act, but before I do that, I wish to say I appreciate the comments of my friend from Indiana. We all want to get this budget under control. We all recognize we have to get it under control not only for today's generation but for multiple generations to come.

During the last few years we have been able to cut almost $2 trillion of our budgetary costs over the next 10 years, cuts we have been able to accomplish in a bipartisan way but led a lot by this side. Let me remind folks where we are. Four years ago this economy was flat on its back--an economy that didn't have any air in it. It was in a grave situation. But where are we today? We have a 5-year housing start, incredible activity within the automobile industry, with record-high sales going on there. The stock market has doubled in the last 4\1/2\ years. Most recently, the CBO--the Congressional Budget Office, a bipartisan office which doesn't show any favoritism to any side-- verifies that in 4 years we have cut the annual deficit by 40 percent. I know that is not where it should be yet because we want to balance it, but a 40-percent reduction in the annual deficit is significant.

So we are on the road. Is it a slower road than we would like? Sure, but it is on the road to recovery. It is having a positive impact. As a matter of fact, now the deficit, as the amount compared to our GDP, is cut in half. So we are making some inroads.

Democrats are not afraid at all to cut the budget where it is necessary, but we need to solve this problem with three types of moves. We have to cut the budget, deal with revenues, and invest in this economy for education, energy, and infrastructure. It is a three- pronged approach. Even if we think we can do one of these and somehow, magically, a $16 trillion debt will just vanish overnight is in another world that doesn't exist on this planet.

I appreciate the debate that goes on, but we need to be honest, realistic, and practical in dealing with these budgetary issues, and they will be tough. People will not like all of it. I can see it now at my townhall meetings when I go to them. They will say cut the budget, which we will do--don't get me wrong, we will do that--but then when I go back to my hometown they will say, I didn't actually mean that program. That will be the story.

The fact is we have serious issues with which to deal. So this is not a Democratic issue or a Republican issue. When people come to the floor, we should think about this as an American issue and that we have to resolve this for the right reasons. We have done some exceptional work over the last 4 years, despite the hurdles, the political slogans, and all the other stuff that goes along with it in getting results. A 40-percent reduction in the annual deficit in 4 years is significant. Is it zero? Is it balanced? No; because there have been 40-plus years of not paying attention to the budget.

A lot of us are new around here. As a matter of fact, 60 percent of the Senate is made up of people who haven't been here more than 6 years. I am looking at three Senators on the floor right now. We are here to solve this problem. However, do not be mistaken. We have made progress. The American people should be proud of what we have done. But is it perfect? No. Do we have more work to do? Yes. That is why we are here and that is why we are going to do this with a bipartisan approach.

So I digress from the issue I came to discuss. I like the debates that happen on the floor, and I wish more would happen, but when a Member speaks, I want to make sure all the information is on the table.

I came to speak on an important piece of legislation, the Violence Against Women Act. We debate issues that are important around here, but not too often can we stand on the floor of this Chamber and say our votes are a matter of life and death. In this case, it is absolutely true. This bill saves lives. It is our job to pass it now--today.

The Senate, as we did last year, needs to send a simple and important message that America will not tolerate violence against its women, children, and families. We must do our part to reduce domestic violence and sexual assault. Even though the House has refused to act for over 300 days since we sent the bill over there, we are now in a new session and there is bipartisan support in this Chamber. The VAWA bill passed the Senate with 60 votes last spring and there are at least 60 of us already signed up and cosponsoring this legislation.

We know the reality. The fight to protect women and families from violence is far from over. VAWA was first

passed just 20 years ago and it has not been reauthorized since 2006. The law has made a difference. We know a great deal more about domestic violence than when VAWA was first written. Services for victims have improved. Communities offer safer shelter. Local, State, and Federal laws are stronger. Yet there are still too many awful stories and inexcusable numbers, especially in my home State.

Alaska continues to have some of the worst statistics in the country. Three out of every four Alaskans have experienced domestic or sexual violence or known someone who has. The rate of rape in Alaska is nearly 2\1/2\ times the national average, even worse for Alaskan Native women. Child sexual assault in Alaska is almost six times the national average. Out of every 100 adult women in Alaska, nearly 60 have experienced physical or sexual violence or both.

So my colleagues can see why I am standing here today. We need to do something about this not someday, not next year but today.

In one typical day in my State, victim services agencies throughout Alaska serve an average of 464 victims, 114 hotline calls are answered, and 308 people across Alaska attend training sessions offered by local domestic violence and sexual assault programs. Yet people are still turned away because of a lack of funding, a lack of service. On an average day in Alaska, 52 requests for services are not met--basic needs such as transportation, childcare, language translation, counseling and legal representation. The bill before us is critical in ensuring all victims receive the services they need.

I wish to spend just a few more minutes discussing the safety of women and children in Alaska Native and American Indian families. For the sake of our Nation's first peoples, the tribal provisions in this bill need to become law. Yet some of my colleagues on the other side of this Chamber are trying to strip out our expanded authority over domestic violence in Indian Country. Why are we debating this? One out of every three Native American women has suffered rape, physical violence or stalking. Yet some Members want to debate the rights of their abusers. I fully support the tribal provisions in this bill. Yet I must point out that none of the expanded criminal jurisdiction applies to Alaska Native tribes except for one true reservation at the very southern tip of Alaska. Today is not the day to fight that fight, but I will take it up again soon from my seat on the Indian Affairs Committee in the Senate.

Study after study has concluded that the lack of effective local law enforcement in Alaska Native villages contributes to so many problems: increased crime, alcohol and drug abuse, domestic violence, and poor educational achievement. When it comes to protecting those most at risk, Congress must recognize the need for local control, local responsibility, and local accountability. This bill will take a big step forward today on Indian reservations in the lower 48.

At a later time, we will get to my bill, which I have introduced in the past as the Alaska Safe Families and Villages Act.

My bill would establish small demonstration projects so a handful of federally recognized tribes in Alaska's villages can take action. They would be allowed to address domestic violence and alcohol-related cases within their villages and village boundaries.

Our Native villages are vibrant, resilient communities, and we must answer their calls for help. That includes an ``all of the above'' approach to combating domestic violence and abuse. The one thing we know for sure is the status quo is not working. It is not just about slogans or feel-good statements. We need to act.

But for now--for today--let's vote on VAWA and get this bill passed. Let's protect women and children and families all over this country. And let's send a strong message to our colleagues in the House, that this time there is no hiding. It is time to get the job done. It is time to put politics aside. Pass this bill and truly save lives.

Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I wish to speak about legislation I am introducing today that would restore basic fairness to how our Nation shares revenue from energy produced Federal waters.

The Alaska Adjacent Zone Safe Oil Transport and Revenue Sharing Act would provide Alaskans with the same share of Federal bonus bid and royalty revenue, 37.5 percent, as residents of Gulf Coast States. This is about fairness and a fix that is long overdue. Alaskans deserve to be treated as well as residents of the Gulf Coast. We bear the risks and the responsibilities of offshore development. It is only fair that we share in the proceeds.

Revenue sharing will provide funding for the State of Alaska, local governments and tribes to mitigate effects of development and provide support for public sector infrastructure required to both develop the resources and respond in terms of emergency.

The measure distributes to Alaska 37.5 percent of the Federal bonus bids and royalty share from any energy development, fossil or renewable. Of that 37.5 percent; 25 percent is directed to local governments; 25 percent is directed to Alaska Native corporations; 10 percent is directed to tribal governments; and 40 percent is directed to the State of Alaska.

Additionally, the Federal share is subdivided with 15 percent of the Federal royalties directed, without further appropriation, to the Land and Water Conservation Fund; and 7.5 percent directly to deficit reduction.

In addition, this legislation requires oil produced in the Federal waters of the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas to be brought ashore by pipeline, a method that is safer than tanker transport and secures future throughput for the Trans-Alaska Pipeline.

I am committed to putting in place all the pieces necessary to responsibly develop oil and gas from the Arctic Ocean. Beyond better permit coordination, that I have worked on in other legislation and with the administration, this includes more accurate marine science and the two main features of this bill: sharing revenue with the state and coastal communities as well as keeping Trans-Alaska Pipeline System, TAPS, flowing into the future.

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

Mr. President, I wish to speak about legislation I am introducing today that would restore basic fairness to how our Nation shares revenue from energy produced Federal waters.

The Alaska Adjacent Zone Safe Oil Transport and Revenue Sharing Act would provide Alaskans with the same share of Federal bonus bid and royalty revenue, 37.5 percent, as residents of Gulf Coast States. This is about fairness and a fix that is long overdue. Alaskans deserve to be treated as well as residents of the Gulf Coast. We bear the risks and the responsibilities of offshore development. It is only fair that we share in the proceeds.

Revenue sharing will provide funding for the State of Alaska, local governments and tribes to mitigate effects of development and provide support for public sector infrastructure required to both develop the resources and respond in terms of emergency.

The measure distributes to Alaska 37.5 percent of the Federal bonus bids and royalty share from any energy development, fossil or renewable. Of that 37.5 percent; 25 percent is directed to local governments; 25 percent is directed to Alaska Native corporations; 10 percent is directed to tribal governments; and 40 percent is directed to the State of Alaska.

Additionally, the Federal share is subdivided with 15 percent of the Federal royalties directed, without further appropriation, to the Land and Water Conservation Fund; and 7.5 percent directly to deficit reduction.

In addition, this legislation requires oil produced in the Federal waters of the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas to be brought ashore by pipeline, a method that is safer than tanker transport and secures future throughput for the Trans-Alaska Pipeline.

I am committed to putting in place all the pieces necessary to responsibly develop oil and gas from the Arctic Ocean. Beyond better permit coordination, that I have worked on in other legislation and with the administration, this includes more accurate marine science and the two main features of this bill: sharing revenue with the state and coastal communities as well as keeping Trans-Alaska Pipeline System, TAPS, flowing into the future.

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

Madam President, I thank my colleague from California for making those important remarks. I am also here to talk about the Paycheck Fairness Act for a few minutes, if I could. As she said in her last remarks, it is very important to note the last few times this issue has come up it was filibustered. We did not even get to the bill. So hopefully, according to the new rules we agreed on here and coordinated in a bipartisan way, we will get to the bill and we will debate it on its merits, not on whether it should proceed. Let's see how that works. Again, I thank her for coming down here today.

I rise here on the anniversary of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 to lend my support to the next bill we need to pass, the Paycheck Fairness Act. I thank Senator Mikulski for organizing this important discussion.

Four years ago I entered this Chamber fresh from Alaska. Madam President, you are fresh from North Dakota. I probably sat right there during that debate in 2009. I was finishing my second term as mayor of Anchorage and was excited to take on the new challenges in the Senate on behalf of all Alaskans. I am honored to say one of my first votes in the Senate as a new Senator was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. I was proud to add my support to the cause.

At the same time it was--and is--disheartening to continue hearing about pay inequity as a major economic problem, that there are still drastic wage gaps for women, that women on average still earn about one-fifth less than their male counterparts.

We all know the numbers. That is why I have cosponsored Senator Mikulski's Paycheck Fairness Act each time it was introduced. It provides women with the tools to close this long-standing gap. Her bill is an important companion to the Lilly Ledbetter Act, which kept the courthouse door open to demand justice over pay discrimination.

This was a crucial victory, but we must continue the fight and finish the job by passing paycheck fairness. At its core, the bill is really very simple: It says employees and employers can share wage information and that discrepancies in pay must be based on experience and qualifications--not on gender.

What is more fair than that?

Unfortunately, my State is not a leader on pay equity. In Alaska, women earn 78 cents for every dollar paid to men. Unless that changes, Alaska women will earn $623,000 less than men during their working careers. This pay gap has harmed the families of roughly 155,000 women in the Alaska workforce. Women in Alaska have higher rates of economic insecurity than men: In 2010, women working full time not only earned lower average wages but also were more likely to live in poverty--more than 10 percent of Alaska women compared to about 7 percent of men.

Women in Alaska make up 47 percent of the state workforce and nearly half of them are married mothers who are the primary wage earners in their families. When they earn less than men, that burden falls on the entire family--including about 112,000 Alaska children who are dependent on their mother's earnings.

The State's highest-paying industries--including manufacturing, natural resources and mining--are mostly dominated by men. Jobs such as miners, mobile heavy equipment mechanics and electrical power line installers pay much better than State average wages, but few women are getting those jobs.

Our Alaska Department of Labor puts it bluntly: ``Women seem to be funneled into lower-pay occupations.''

Listen to these numbers. If the gap between men's and women's wages in Alaska were eliminated, each full-time working woman could suddenly afford to pay for 2 more years of groceries, buy 3,700 more gallons of gas or pay the mortgage and utility bills for 8 more months.

So on this 4th anniversary of the signing of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, I say to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle: Let's finish the job and pass the Paycheck Fairness Act. As I said, it's so simple. The bill will close loopholes in the Equal Pay Act and establish stronger workplace protections for women.

In the real world there should be nothing complicated or controversial about this, but sometimes we wonder where we are; it is not always the real world. As I said at the beginning of my comments, hopefully the issue of filibuster will not be part of this equation, that we actually get on the bill, have the debate, and people can vote up or vote down, amend it or not, and determine where we stand on this issue.

I am from a household where we were raised by a mother, the six of us. My father died when I was 10. She survived raising four boys, which is a miracle in

itself, and two girls. The problem was not the girls, it was the boys. But she raised six of us at a very young age. Hopefully some would consider us productive parts of society. But when I saw what my mom had to struggle through, what she had to earn to make sure we had food on the table, make sure we had opportunities in our lives, it is clear to me that this is not a complicated issue. This is a simple fairness issue.

I hope my colleague on the other side, again, would allow it to come forward. We will debate it and then we will vote on it, and the American people, Alaskans, will see what we think of fairness in the sense of a paycheck for a woman working the same job--equal job as a man does.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, there is nothing like a good meal in a favorite restaurant to make your day. When I travel to Fairbanks, the second largest city in my home State, I often go to Big Daddy's BarB-Q owned by Harold Groetsema.

There are many good barbeque establishments in Alaska. Barbeque has long been a part of our Nation's culinary history. Few people know that our own Library of Congress holds dozens of old drawings, posters and prints depicting barbecued meats at picnics, high society events, fairs and the like. The Library of Congress has barbeque recipes, stories, cookbooks and books on the history of barbeque. Its collection is large because it is a popular subject whether you like your sauce sweet, spicy or vinegar sour.

It would be hard to pick an absolute favorite of mine back home. I like them all. Big Daddy's southern-style barbeque is consistently top quality. Big Daddy's has won competitions in Alaska, done well nationally and was featured on a Food Network TV show. Maybe it's the secret sauce. Maybe it's the meat. Maybe it's the way he slow cooks over a hickory fire.

Harold and his team are heading to the World Championship Barbecue Cooking Contest in Memphis later this year. With his skills and dedication, I wouldn't be surprised if they return with a high ranking. I wish Harold and his team well and I know they will make Alaska proud.

Mr. President, I would like to take the time to recognize and thank those who volunteer, take life saving courses or provide financial donations to support an organization whose mission is to help those in need, and in their honor, recognize March 2013 as American Red Cross Month.

In Alaska the Red Cross works tirelessly statewide through its 18 employees and hundreds of volunteers to help when disaster strikes and when someone needs the comfort of a helping hand. It provides 24-hour support to members of the military, veterans and their families, and provides training in CPR, aquatics safety, and first aid.

Across the country, the American Red Cross responds to nearly 70,000 disasters a year. It provides some 400,000 services to military members, veterans and civilians, collects and distributes about 40 percent of the Nation's blood supply and trains more than seven million people in first aid, water safety and other lifesaving skills every year.

Alaska, and the rest of the country, relies on the American Red Cross and the work of their supporters. I hope that by recognizing March as American Red Cross Month we can highlight their exemplary work and ensure they can continue to help Americans for years to come.

Mr. President, ice hockey is a popular activity in Alaska year round and especially in the winter. Today, I want to highlight hockey in my home State.

You can find someone passing the puck around in nearly any community or military installation with a frozen lake, pond or ice rink, whether it's organized play or a pickup game. There are dozens of leagues and camps for players of all ages from the squirts and midgets to Anchorage's Aces and Seawolves and Fairbanks' Ice Dogs and Nanooks.

At the professional level, the National Hockey League recognizes the importance of hockey in the lower ranks by sponsoring the ``Hockey Is for Everyone'' program in February. This program helps young girls and boys learn essential life skills such as commitment and perseverance.

The NHL, along with USA Hockey, participates in the Presidential Active Lifestyle Award program, to promote activity and good nutrition. Anyone who has ever skated hard for more than a few minutes knows how healthy it can be, whether your goal is to have fun, stay fit or to play in the NHL, on the U.S. Olympic team or at the 2014 Arctic Winter Games in Fairbanks.

Not only does playing hockey teach the ideals of teamwork, fair play and loyalty, when Alaskans get involved in fund raising, coaching, and event chaperoning, they are practicing good civics and citizenship.

And it's exciting to watch live or broadcasted games because the sport is so fast paced, yet graceful and athletic at the same time.

Three cheers for the players, coaches and supporters of hockey in Alaska.

I will tell you, in Alaska it is even magnified in a lot of ways. If you think of this country, three-quarters of the coastline is Alaska. Fishermen have been fishing there commercially not just for a few hundred years but for 10,000 years of survival on our oceans.

When you think of the value in 76,000 jobs in Alaska directly and indirectly connected to the fishing industry, it is over $5 billion. It doesn't matter in a commercial fishery--if you are in McDonald's having a fish sandwich, the odds are that it comes from our fisheries. If you sit in the fanciest restaurants anywhere in the world, the odds are that some of our fish is there.

As Senator Shaheen said, this is a bipartisan issue. The disasters that are declared for fisheries in this bill have been declared disasters. It is not some pie in the sky, some pork, or we sit around and say: Let's get some money for every State. These are actually declared disasters by the States and our Federal Government that need to be funded.

In our situation, it is even more dire--not just the economic impact I just laid out, but an elder told me one time that in urban cities, you walk out the door and you go down the street to Safeway for your food. In rural Alaska, you open your door, and what is in front of you? The nature they see is the grocery store.

So when they have--in our case, the YK Delta, the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta in the western part of Alaska, had a devastating king salmon fishery loss in terms of the quantity of the fish. So when that fish is not able to be harvested, to be put into the storehouses for the winter, then the limited cash that they have, in an area where fuel cost to heat their home is $8, $9, $12 a gallon, now has to go to not only heating that they have already set that cash aside for, now they have to get food shipped in. So their limited cash is now split between heating their home and putting food on the table.

Let me tell you, in Fairbanks, AK, which is urban, outside it was 40 below yesterday. So heating your home is not like just turning on your heater when you come home from work. It is a whole different ball game.

But most importantly, they live off the land. It is not some hobby they do on the weekend. It is not a sports event. They harvest the food. The Senator from Massachusetts said it best--we harvest the ocean. We are no different from any farmer in the Midwest or anywhere else. So when the YK Delta loses its king salmon, a critical piece of their food supply, it is real. It is not about: We will go fishing next year. This is about: Do we have enough food on the table?

When I hear people on the other side and others who say this is a bunch of pork and a bunch of this and that, they need to come to Alaska. I would enjoy them coming right now in the winter at 40 below and seeing what people have to do.

To me, this is such a small amount to make such an impact not only to us but to all the coastal States that are

suffering with this situation in our fishing industry.

Let me conclude with my comments to say I agree especially with the latter part regarding how to engage people on what these resources will be. I want to commend the chairman of the Subcommittee on Appropriations on the eloquent description of exactly how this happened. I like earmarks as well, but this is not an earmark. This is a process that has gone through step after step to ensure that everyone in my State--Republican Governor and a Republican and Democratic delegation--has an important role here.

This takes nothing away from Superstorm Sandy. We recognize--all of us on this floor--how devastating that was, but this was also a disaster of a different making. As a matter of fact, at the request of Senator Kerry--and as the chair of the Subcommittee on Oceans and Fisheries--I listened to the fishermen there about the many species that are devastated and the quotas they are facing.

This is not only critical to be done now, it is also that the amount of money is so small and the impact is significant when we think about the thousands of jobs that will be affected by this.

In my State it is truly about food and survival for the Alaskan Native community in the winter months with temperatures that are not zero or 10 above but 40 below.

I implore my colleagues on the other side to support this bipartisan effort and reject the amendment by Senator Coburn.

Again, I thank all of my colleagues for coming down here. This just shows one of the roles that we have as a legislative body. When disasters are declared, we unify, no matter where we live, to figure out how to make sure the people of this country are taken care of.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask consent to speak until my comments are completed.

Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to a mentor of mine in the Senate, Senator Daniel Inouye. The histories of my State and Senator Inouye's are closely connected. We both entered the Union at the same time, in 1959. As a matter of fact, I know as a kid growing up I was not sure if we had two Senators or three Senators because Senator Inouye's name was so well known throughout Alaska.

When our States were entered in 1959, there was opposition to both of us becoming States, but we have proven our opponents wrong. Thanks to Daniel Inouye, Hawaii has become a modern, prosperous State. Many Alaskans have a special fondness for the 50th State, especially, I have to say, at this time of the year when it is 40 below in Fairbanks.

Daniel Inouye began his public career and service at the age of 17 when he entered the Army after the attacks on Pearl Harbor. He served with incredible distinction, earning the Nation's highest medal for action in Italy. As a Member of the Senate, Senator Inouye continued his fierce defense of his State and his partnership with Alaska.

My predecessor, Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, knew Senator Inouye as his brother. They worked together and produced much good for both our States that will last for generations.

When I was elected to this office, Senator Inouye was one of the first Members to reach out to me to ask how he could help. The unique thing about Senator Inouye was always his quiet approach to all the issues. He provided me quiet advice and helped me learn how this place works. Many times I would be down in the well waiting for the vote to be tallied and Members to vote, and Senator Inouye would come in, stand at the edge there, and look up and just say: How is it going, Alaska? We would have a brief conversation. Usually his words would have incredible insight. They may not even have

been relevant to the topic we were voting on, but he would say something to me about something he knew I was working on and just share a few words.

I know the first people of Alaska will especially remember him for his dedication to their success. He met with Alaskan Native peoples during their visits to Washington as often--and I would say even more often--as the Alaskan Members of the House and Senate. They made a point to stop by his office on a regular occasion to talk to him about what happened in the past and what was going on today and what they looked for in the future.

Earlier this year, Senator Inouye was in Alaska at my invitation--his last trip to Alaska. He told a memorable story about his support of the trans-Alaska oil pipeline, which was controversial when he supported it and its construction. Senator Inouye has a unique style of how to tell stories. You have to just pay attention and listen. They are not wordy, just to the point. Senator Inouye told this story, told by opponents of the pipeline, that it would destroy the caribou that lived in Alaska's North Slope. This is what he was told over and over.

On his last trip, he was in front of a group of people. I was anxious as he started to talk. He said: I have this story to tell you. He talked about this time of controversy about the Alaska North Slope and the oil pipeline, the caribou and what was happening, the destruction that may occur based on what he was hearing. But he was a strong supporter of the pipeline. In his words, here is how he actually said it. In fact, he said, the warm oil going through the pipeline heats the ground, so grass grows year round. The caribou come around to eat the grass and, in his words, ``make love,'' and the caribou population has grown threefold. Who was I to let facts spoil that wonderful story by Senator Inouye and get in the way of its telling?

But he has done enormous work for our Alaskan people and Alaska in total, the work he did that he described to me when he went out to rural Alaska many years ago and saw the deplorable conditions of our water and sewer, saw an important effort to preserve not only the languages of Alaska but also Hawaii. Yes, like Hawaii, Alaskans loved our earmarks and we still love them. He was an adamant proponent of earmarks, making sure that, as mentioned by Senator Mikulski, they went for the right reasons. As was also mentioned, in his defense of this country and his personal heroic actions, his ongoing everyday work he did to shape the national defense and really international defense, it was an incredible sight to watch him in action.

I will always remember Daniel Inouye for his truly hearty laugh, ready smile, his partnership with my State of Alaska, and his dedication to his State--truly a silent giant.

My condolences go to his wife Irene and the entire Inouye family. We will miss him greatly. When we come down to the Chamber every day, we get the calendar of business, this one dated today. You look on the list of all the committees, and you see the chairman and the Members. But today his name is not there after 41 years.

My heart goes out to him--truly the silent giant.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today I would like to honor C.W. Floyd, Vietnam veteran, skeet-shooting champion, advocate for servicemembers everywhere, friend, and one of my longtime staff. On December 22, 2012, C.W. will retire after more than 30 years of service in and to the military. Although his retirement is much deserved, his absence will leave a void that will be hard to fill. In our extensive search to find a replacement for him, it has become clear that finding an ever-smiling, gun-collecting war veteran who provides the office with doughnuts is no easy task.

Mr. Floyd gave the U.S. Army 22 years of service, including a tour of

duty in the Vietnam war. From 1979 through 1985, he served as a member of the Alaska Army National Guard. Those years with the U.S. Army would have been commendable and worthy of thanks in and of themselves, but it is actually the work that C.W. has done since retiring from the Army that sets him apart and needs to be honored. Since his Army retirement, Mr. Floyd has lived and worked to help Alaska's military members at every level. He was appointed the municipality of Anchorage's first military and veterans liaison and was then hired on as special assistant to the Senator in Veteran and Military Affairs. During his time in the U.S. Senate office, Mr. Floyd helped to pass legislation to gain Federal pension and benefits for members of the Alaska Territorial Guard who served during WWII but were overlooked because Alaska was not yet a state when they were active.

C.W. Floyd not only works professionally for veterans and military members, he also volunteers his own time to support the cause. He spent 15 years on the Alaska Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve Committee and works as an organizer and volunteer for Alaska Operation STANDOWN, a program advocating for and supporting homeless veterans. C.W. was named Civilian Volunteer of the Year by the Armed Services YMCA of Alaska and was also honored with the Patrick Henry Award, which provides recognition to local officials and civic leaders who distinguish themselves with outstanding and exceptional service to the Armed Forces of the United States, the National Guard, or the National Guard Association of the United States. The Patrick Henry Award states, ``Mr. Floyd is an inspirational role model for selfless service in support of our total Homeland Security Team and the National Guard of the United States.''

Besides providing doughnuts for the Senate office and championing for the rights of veterans, C.W. has a full and happy personal life. He has been in love with his wife Elaine for 28 years and plans to turn her into a California snowbird when they are both officially retired. They have raised three wonderful men, Chuck, Travis, and Curtis, and are happily watching as their sons repopulate the Earth with girl babies. I am guessing that the sales of powder pink guns will skyrocket as C.W. welcomes each granddaughter into the world. He is a lifetime NRA, National Skeet Shooting Association, Alaska Gun Collectors Association, and Alaska Veterans Museum member.

C.W. is a shining example of all that our country has to offer and all that we can be. He has a smile and wise words of advice for anyone who walks into our office looking for assistance with veterans or military issues. No problem is too small or too big for C.W. to give attention to. My staff and I have witnessed him helping thousands of servicemembers, and I know that there are thousands more we did not witness. It should also be mentioned that his personal experiences and his articulate nature provide a voice that can explain veterans issues to those of us who do not know what it is like. In this way, he has educated all those who have ever had the chance to speak to him. His impact on the lives of U.S. veterans is far-reaching and immeasurable.

Let history remember C.W. Floyd as one of our Nation's true heroes.

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

Madam President, I now lay before the Senate a message from the House with respect to H.R. 2838.

The PRESIDING OFFICER laid before the Senate the following message from the House of Representatives:

Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representatives

(H.R. 2838) entitled ``An Act to authorize appropriations for

the Coast Guard for fiscal years 2012 through 2015, and for

other purposes.'', do pass with amendments.

american Fisheries Act Vessels

Madam President, I rise to engage in a colloquy with my colleague from the State of Alaska, Ms. Murkowski, and my colleague from the State of Washington, Ms. Cantwell, regarding a provision in H.R. 2838, the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2012, that deals with two great fisheries of the Bering Sea. The American Fisheries Act--AFA--regulates one of the single greatest fishery resources in the world: Alaska Pollock. This fishery produces over 2 billion pounds of product in most years and is sustainably harvested, thanks to standards set under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Amendment 80 to the Bering Sea Groundfish Fishery Management Plan regulates fishing for other species of groundfish like Pacific cod, Atka mackerel and yellowfin sole and while smaller than the AFA fishery, it still ranks among the major fisheries of the world.

I further ask that the Senate immediately proceed to a voice vote on a motion to concur in the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 2838.

I further ask that the motion to reconsider be made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate; and that any statements relating to the measure be printed in the Record.

To conclude, this is the Coast Guard reauthorization bill. It is a bill that has taken a while to work out between all of the parties, but it has incredible value, obviously, for my home State of Alaska and for the Presiding Officer's home State of Washington and for, really, the country to make sure we have the right elements for our Coast Guard. It is very exciting to see it now moves from this side, and we anticipate the House will accept it.

So thank you very much, Madam President. I note the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, today I wish to recognize an Alaskan for his extraordinary 34 years of service to the United States Coast Guard and our Nation as well as 10 years of leadership within the Alaska seafood industry where he had a tremendous positive impact for our fishermen.

Ray Riutta has held the position of executive director of the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute, ASMI, since August 2002. Since then, he has guided the organization through pivotal changes, including the implementation of the sustainability platform to showcase Alaska's commitment to responsibly managed fisheries. ASMI has worked diligently to increase the economic value of Alaska seafood resources through a collaborative partnership with the seafood industry. Since Mr. Riutta's arrival in 2002, the value of Alaska seafood exports increased nearly 23 percent from $1.78 billion to $2.2 billion in 2011.

Prior to joining ASMI, Mr. Riutta served in the United States Coast Guard for 34 years, retiring at the rank of vice admiral. During his career, he served on six ships, commanding four of them with over 12 years of sea service in the Bering Sea, Atlantic and Pacific Oceans as well as the Great Lakes and the Caribbean Sea. For 3 years he was assigned to the U.S. Embassy in London. While assigned to Coast Guard Headquarters in Washington, DC, Mr. Riutta was deputy chief of the Office of Law Enforcement and Defense Operations and later chief of operations.

During his tenure as district commander for Alaska, Mr. Riutta served as a member of the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council. He worked closely with the Pacific Region Coast Guards, China, Japan, Korea, Canada and Russia, while in command of all U.S. Coast Guard forces in the Pacific, a post he held on September 11, 2001. Mr. Riutta is originally from Astoria, OR, where many members of his family were involved in the fishing industry. Prior to entering the service, he worked part time commercial fishing on the Columbia River.

Mr. Riutta is a 1968 graduate of the U.S. Coast Guard Academy and a 1990 graduate of the National War College. He is married to Barbara Starr Kramer of Chester Springs, PA. They have two sons, Ian and Aaron.

On behalf of the State of Alaska, I ask my distinguished colleagues to join me in recognizing Vice Admiral Riutta's exceptional career. We owe him a debt of gratitude for his commitment to the Coast Guard, our Nation and Alaska's seafood industry. We wish him well in his retirement.

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

Mr. President, before I speak on the subject matter of a bill I have submitted for introduction, Protecting and Preserving Social Security Act, I wish to comment on two issues that came up for debate or discussion earlier today. One was on the debt ceiling.

It is somewhat frustrating because at one point I thought for sure we were going to vote on a debt ceiling issue that would bring certainty and some predictability to the markets and to the economy and not hold that issue hostage, as was done a couple of years ago by some. But some threatened today to hold the good faith and credit of this country hostage in these debates on the budget.

The minority leader came forward and proposed an idea which seemed like a pretty good one to me--it obviously was a pretty good idea to him because he brought it forward. I have only been here 4 years, but from my understanding of history, when a debt ceiling issue comes before us as a single item, it only requires 51-plus votes. For the first time I can recall since I have been here and prior to that time, that has changed midway through. They have now said: No, we didn't really mean that. We don't want to really deal with the debt. We told you we did, but we don't, so we are going to make you have a 60-vote threshold.

People back in Alaska are fed up with these kinds of games, this showmanship to try to one-up the other side. This debt issue was a chance to do something to create certainty and predictability in the markets for the next several months and ongoing, ensuring that the markets would not have to

worry about our credit rating, the good faith and credit of this country on the debts we owe, that they would be covered no matter what, which is a good thing. That helps us not only in our domestic markets but across the globe.

What we saw was just some more shenanigans or showmanship or an attempt to get some good headlines. I don't think there are any good headlines for the minority here because it basically showed they were not sincere about the issue of the debt. So now we are back at it again, and I am a little frustrated again.

I would request that the minority leader reconsider his position, that he would bring that piece of legislation forward. I am ready and I know many of my colleagues on this side are ready to vote for that. I think it would be incredible to show bipartisanship on making sure we have debt certainty in this country so people are not worrying about their government's payment on its debt.

Again, I didn't come here to speak on that, but I felt compelled to because I am somewhat frustrated about it.

The Farm Bill

Also, I will mention one other thing. I know Senator Hoeven--and I consider him a friend--is working hard on the farm bill. I support the farm bill. It is ready, but it is on the House side. We are patiently waiting for them to bring it forward. I hope they do. It has deficit reduction reforms, making sure real farmers are getting the benefits they need, the insurance they need, and ensuring that we are still doing incredible things with our farming communities all across the country, including Alaska. So I hope the House does something over there that will help reduce the deficit and help take care of our farmers.

Social Security

Mr. President, today I came to the floor to discuss a subject the Presiding Officer cares greatly about; that is, protecting and preserving Social Security. I have a piece of legislation that I call the Protecting and Preserving Security Act, which I introduced Tuesday. The bill backs up our country's longstanding guarantee that Social Security will be there not just for today's generation but for our grandchildren and their grandchildren.

The bill has two major components. One changes the way the cost-of- living increases are calculated to make Social Security benefits more accurate and fair. The other component adds decades of solvency to the program by asking wealthier Americans to pay just a little more.

Today's COLA--the cost-of-living adjustment--does not take into account the increasing and rising medical costs faced by seniors or the disabled. This means their Social Security checks lose value over the years because costs go up more quickly than the benefits. But there is a solution, and again I credit the Presiding Officer because he talks about this a great deal in caucus and here on the floor.

The solution has been around for years. In the 1980s, the Bureau of Labor Statistics developed what is known as a CPI-E, the Consumer Price Index for Elderly Consumers. The index more accurately reflects the specific needs and purchases of seniors, unlike the current formula. My bill requires the Social Security Administration to use the CPI-E to calculate the Social Security benefits.

The second goal of the Protecting and Preserving Social Security Act is to make the system fair and more financially solvent. It does so by making sure everyone, even the wealthiest Americans, pays into the program all year long.

A lot of people don't know what the current law does. Under the current law, contributions to Social Security will be capped once a person's income hits $113,700 throughout the year. That is it. No matter how much more they earn, they stop contributing to Social Security for the rest of the year. So let me make sure that is clear.

An example I like to use is us here in Congress. We make $174,000. About the middle or end of September, when we hit $113,000 of income, after that point we no longer contribute to Social Security. So that means anyone making over $113,000, after that fact they no longer contribute to Social Security. To me, this is an unfair system. So my bill gradually lifts that cap. It also says the more one puts into the program, the more they will eventually get out of it.

We are working with the Social Security Actuary to get a final number, but it is fair to say that by lifting the income cap on contributions, this bill will extend the solvency of the Social Security trust fund for generations. We estimate at least a minimum of two generations.

A few weeks ago, back home in Anchorage I joined a group of seniors. I presented this piece of legislation to them at the Anchorage Senior Center. As she loves to describe herself, a young woman from Alaska stood up--an 81-year-old Korean war Navy veteran--Beverly was there because the majority of her modest income comes from Social Security, and she wanted to know how this proposal would strengthen that lifeline for her and thousands of Alaskans.

In fact, one in nine Alaskans receives Social Security. With my State's population of those 65 and older expanding rapidly, Social Security will continue to play a key role in supplementing a decent living. If Social Security were not there for the elderly Alaskans, one-fifth of them would live below poverty. It is vital for our State, it is vital for all our States, and for this whole country.

I have no illusions this bill is going to pass in the final weeks of the 112th Congress, but I wanted to get it into the mix. I wanted to make sure people get the bigger point.

I would say to my Presiding Officer, who says this well, and my friend from Oregon, who is on the Senate floor also, as we talk about the deficit that has taken center stage right now, we want to highlight one very clear thing: Social Security has not contributed, is not part of, and never will contribute to the deficit. So those who like to meddle and try to combine it with this deficit talk are just playing games with our seniors and disabled in this country.

It is a separate issue. It is not impacting the Federal deficit. And I know some like to meld it in because then they like to talk about cuts and--their favorite line--privatize, which really means seniors and the disabled get a lot less in the future. They will not get the guarantee that they paid into.

Also, I want to give credit to Congressman Ted Deutch, who has a similar measure on the House side. Both plans may be difficult to pass, but we are going to continue to push forward, and we will not be alone. A coalition of over 300 national and State organizations have already endorsed our bill. Together they represent 50 million Americans. They are onboard because this bill modernizes Social Security without cutting benefits.

Let me repeat that because I know some will say there must be some benefit reduction there. It will enhance Social Security. It will ensure it continues without cutting benefits because the program plays a vital role in the economy and security of America's working families.

Most of us, including myself, started contributing to Social Security as teenagers. To those who send me e-mails--I just read one recently-- we do pay Social Security as Members of Congress. I know people don't think we do, but we do. I saw one on our newspaper blog--I should inform my press people, I responded to that without their knowledge. I wanted to make sure that individual knew we pay. I have been paying since I was a teenager, and I still pay today.

It is important that when people get to retirement or some tragedy strikes, Social Security is there to help make ends meet. I am proud of the leaders of the past who have fought and had the foresight and wisdom to create Social Security.

Nowadays, some in Washington like to call Social Security an entitlement. If by that it means it is a government handout, they are flat wrong. Americans paid for and earned their Social Security. The benefits are modest. No one is getting rich off Social Security, but it does provide an important foundation. The values that underlie Social Security are American values. It rewards hard work. The longer one works, the more they earn under Social Security, the higher their benefits.

The program reflects the best of America: hard work, personal responsibility, human dignity, and caring for our parents, our children, our spouses, our neighbors, and ourselves. It also assures that those who work long and

hard at low and moderate wages receive a larger return on their contribution. It is financially prudent and conservative.

Regardless, many people worry that Social Security is going to be broke. But here are the facts based on the annual report of the Social Security Board of Trustees. To remind everybody, we get that annual report, a section of it. We see it every year. It projects the program's financial status over the next 75 years.

The latest trustees report issued in April said Social Security ran a surplus--a surplus--of $69 billion last year. The report also says the program can continue to pay all benefits, on time and in full, through the year 2033. After that its shortfall is modest, but it is a manageable shortfall. And, as I said a minute ago, it should not trigger talk of benefit cuts, raising the retirement age, or privatization.

Instead, the modest revenue increases in my bill will go into effect gradually and make Social Security solvent for decades longer, all without adding to the deficit. We can do this. We can protect and preserve the promise of Social Security for generations to come.

I ask my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring this bill.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.