Floor Statements

Mr. President, today I rise to introduce legislation to amend title 38, related to this Nation's obligation to provide benefits to our veterans. Specifically, the bill I introduce today with my distinguished colleagues, Senator Grassley of Iowa and Senator Tester of Montana, will waive collection of copayments for telehealth and telemedicine visits for Veterans.

More than 42,000 veterans are receiving care in their homes, enrolled in the Veterans Health Administration's, VHA, Telemedicine program as one form of treatment. In Alaska, as of March 2010, there were 226 veterans receiving this service. Just over a 100 of those live in rural Alaska.

Home Telehealth programs provide needed care for the 2-3 percent of veterans who account for 30 percent or more of agency resources. These men and women are frequent clinic attendees and often require urgent hospital admissions. VHA programs have demonstrated reduced hospital admissions and clinic and emergency room

visits, and contribute to an improved quality of life for our veterans.

For no group of veterans is this service more important than for those who live in rural and remote America. Telemedicine has become an increasingly integral component in addressing the needs of veterans residing in rural and remote areas, and is critical to ensuring they have proper access to health care, especially in rural areas.

While the VHA is saving taxpayers money by usingtelemedicine, currently all telemedicine visits require veterans receiving these treatments to make copayments. My legislation would implement a simple fix. It would waive the required copayments--sometimes up to $50 per visit--to lessen the burden on our veterans, who have sacrificed in service to our great nation. I believe that waiving these fees may encourage more veterans to take advantage of VHA's telehealth programs, which can be a godsend for rural veterans with few other viable options.

For rural veterans in Alaska, who have to travel by small float planes or boats or even snow machines to get to the nearest clinic for monitoring of their diabetes, high blood pressure, or other chronic conditions, Congress can go a long way in repaying this Nation's debt to our veterans by passing this legislation.

The VHA plans to expand Home Telehealth for weight management, substance abuse, mild traumatic brain injury, dementia, and palliative care, as well as enabling veterans to use mobile devices to access care. I would hate to see these vital services go unused by veterans living in remote villages and communities because of the cost of copayments. But, this is not primarily about saving veterans money. This is about the federal government doing what is good for our veterans. The monetary benefits for veterans are a plus.

Basically, this legislation will amend title 38 to authorize the waiver of the collection of copayments for telehealth and telemedicine visits of veterans by giving the Secretary the authority to do so.

In closing, I must say it is an honor for me to serve as a member of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee. I feel very privileged to be involved with policy formation that helps our veterans. I appreciate my distinguished colleagues on the committee.

This is a bipartisan bill to address an issue with no partisan connection. I strongly encourage my colleagues to join Senators Grassley, Tester, and me in cosponsoring this legislation, and I urge expeditious consideration of the legislation to address a growing need for our rural veterans.

Mr. President, today I rise to introduce legislation to amend title 38, related to this Nation's obligation to provide benefits to our veterans. Specifically, the bill I introduce today with my distinguished colleagues, Senator Grassley of Iowa and Senator Tester of Montana, will waive collection of copayments for telehealth and telemedicine visits for Veterans.

More than 42,000 veterans are receiving care in their homes, enrolled in the Veterans Health Administration's, VHA, Telemedicine program as one form of treatment. In Alaska, as of March 2010, there were 226 veterans receiving this service. Just over a 100 of those live in rural Alaska.

Home Telehealth programs provide needed care for the 2-3 percent of veterans who account for 30 percent or more of agency resources. These men and women are frequent clinic attendees and often require urgent hospital admissions. VHA programs have demonstrated reduced hospital admissions and clinic and emergency room

visits, and contribute to an improved quality of life for our veterans.

For no group of veterans is this service more important than for those who live in rural and remote America. Telemedicine has become an increasingly integral component in addressing the needs of veterans residing in rural and remote areas, and is critical to ensuring they have proper access to health care, especially in rural areas.

While the VHA is saving taxpayers money by usingtelemedicine, currently all telemedicine visits require veterans receiving these treatments to make copayments. My legislation would implement a simple fix. It would waive the required copayments--sometimes up to $50 per visit--to lessen the burden on our veterans, who have sacrificed in service to our great nation. I believe that waiving these fees may encourage more veterans to take advantage of VHA's telehealth programs, which can be a godsend for rural veterans with few other viable options.

For rural veterans in Alaska, who have to travel by small float planes or boats or even snow machines to get to the nearest clinic for monitoring of their diabetes, high blood pressure, or other chronic conditions, Congress can go a long way in repaying this Nation's debt to our veterans by passing this legislation.

The VHA plans to expand Home Telehealth for weight management, substance abuse, mild traumatic brain injury, dementia, and palliative care, as well as enabling veterans to use mobile devices to access care. I would hate to see these vital services go unused by veterans living in remote villages and communities because of the cost of copayments. But, this is not primarily about saving veterans money. This is about the federal government doing what is good for our veterans. The monetary benefits for veterans are a plus.

Basically, this legislation will amend title 38 to authorize the waiver of the collection of copayments for telehealth and telemedicine visits of veterans by giving the Secretary the authority to do so.

In closing, I must say it is an honor for me to serve as a member of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee. I feel very privileged to be involved with policy formation that helps our veterans. I appreciate my distinguished colleagues on the committee.

This is a bipartisan bill to address an issue with no partisan connection. I strongly encourage my colleagues to join Senators Grassley, Tester, and me in cosponsoring this legislation, and I urge expeditious consideration of the legislation to address a growing need for our rural veterans.

Mr. President--I wish to speak about legislation I am introducing today aimed at streamlining a cumbersome development process for offshore oil and gas development adjacent to Alaska.

About a month ago, President Obama proposed essentially that when he called for increased domestic oil and gas development and cutting foreign oil imports by a third by 2025. The President even said his administration is ``looking at potential new development in Alaska, both onshore and offshore.''

We Alaskans were glad to hear the President use the ``A'' word-- Alaska. As America's energy storehouse for better than a quarter century, we are anxious to continue supplying our nation a stable source of energy just as we have been doing since oil starting flowing through the trans-Alaska pipeline in 1977.

Simply put, Alaska has enormous untapped oil and gas reserves--an estimated 40 to 60 billion barrels of oil on State and Federal lands and waters. That is approaching a decade's worth of U.S. consumption.

We also hold the Nation's largest conventional natural gas reserves-- more than 100 trillion cubic feet of this clean-burning fuel.

As is always the case, it is the details that matter. While we welcome the President's interest in increased energy development in our state, his administration--and those which preceded him--have enacted roadblocks to this laudable goal.

In the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, ConocoPhillips has been working for years to secure a permit to build a bridge into a petroleum reserve to development oil--only to be stalled by the Army Corps of Engineers and EPA.

Moving to the offshore, Shell has been working for 5 years and invested more than $3 billion for the opportunity to drill exploratory wells in Alaska's Beaufort and Chukchi Seas. They got very close last year but just when it appeared the development had the green light a few weeks ago, an internal EPA Environmental Appeals Board sent the air quality permit back to the drawing board.

Business as usual simply isn't working when it comes to increased oil and gas development in my State.

Accordingly, today I am introducing legislation that would create an office of Federal coordination for the Arctic OCS, modeled after legislation the late Senator Ted Stevens passed establishing a Federal gas pipeline coordinator. This office would have authority to work across the agencies causing Alaska so much heartburn today--the EPA, Army Corps of Engineers and Interior Department.

The Federal OCS coordinator would work with the State of Alaska and affected local governments to streamline development in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas, which hold such promise for future oil and gas development.

Additionally, it would expedite judicial review of claims related to Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Interior permits for development in this area. Let me be clear, this legislation does not prevent citizens from solving disputes in the court system. However, it does recognize that America needs this energy and issues surrounding it should be solved quickly.

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 aimed at streamlining a cumbersome development process for offshore oil and gas development adjacent to Alaska.

About a month ago, President Obama proposed essentially that when he called for increased domestic oil and gas development and cutting foreign oil imports by a third by 2025. The President even said his administration is ``looking at potential new development in Alaska, both onshore and offshore.''

We Alaskans were glad to hear the President use the ``A'' word-- Alaska. As America's energy storehouse for better than a quarter century, we are anxious to continue supplying our nation a stable source of energy just as we have been doing since oil starting flowing through the trans-Alaska pipeline in 1977.

Simply put, Alaska has enormous untapped oil and gas reserves--an estimated 40 to 60 billion barrels of oil on State and Federal lands and waters. That is approaching a decade's worth of U.S. consumption.

We also hold the Nation's largest conventional natural gas reserves-- more than 100 trillion cubic feet of this clean-burning fuel.

As is always the case, it is the details that matter. While we welcome the President's interest in increased energy development in our state, his administration--and those which preceded him--have enacted roadblocks to this laudable goal.

In the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, ConocoPhillips has been working for years to secure a permit to build a bridge into a petroleum reserve to development oil--only to be stalled by the Army Corps of Engineers and EPA.

Moving to the offshore, Shell has been working for 5 years and invested more than $3 billion for the opportunity to drill exploratory wells in Alaska's Beaufort and Chukchi Seas. They got very close last year but just when it appeared the development had the green light a few weeks ago, an internal EPA Environmental Appeals Board sent the air quality permit back to the drawing board.

Business as usual simply isn't working when it comes to increased oil and gas development in my State.

Accordingly, today I am introducing legislation that would create an office of Federal coordination for the Arctic OCS, modeled after legislation the late Senator Ted Stevens passed establishing a Federal gas pipeline coordinator. This office would have authority to work across the agencies causing Alaska so much heartburn today--the EPA, Army Corps of Engineers and Interior Department.

The Federal OCS coordinator would work with the State of Alaska and affected local governments to streamline development in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas, which hold such promise for future oil and gas development.

Additionally, it would expedite judicial review of claims related to Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Interior permits for development in this area. Let me be clear, this legislation does not prevent citizens from solving disputes in the court system. However, it does recognize that America needs this energy and issues surrounding it should be solved quickly.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to ask a simple question: What are we doing here? What are we doing jeopardizing our economic recovery to score political points?

I happen to agree with my friend and colleague from Nebraska. I am optimistic also in that we have agreed on a $78 billion reduction in the 2011 budget. The glass isn't half full, it is more than three- quarters full. They are grandstanding over the Federal budget when we should be focusing on making sure American families can make their monthly budgets and get back to work.

I am here to downplay the need to cut the Federal deficit. I agree with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle--we need to make real cuts now. We have already committed to the deepest cuts in discretionary spending since World War II. Given that we are already halfway through the fiscal year,

these cuts are a good downpayment on even more progress in our fiscal 2012 budget and beyond.

As a member of the Senate Budget Committee, I am already putting forth concrete recommendations for more cuts in future budget years, such as eliminating the ``orphan earmarks,'' saving upwards of $1 billion; cutting subsidies for millionaire farmers, saving, again, billions of dollars; cutting tax loopholes, saving tens of billions of dollars.

Shutting down the government is not going to get us any closer to the real goal of reducing the deficit. We didn't save a single dime during the last shutdown. In fact, it cost the American taxpayers $1.4 billion.

The economic costs will be even more. Dozens of military construction projects are stalled right now, putting at risk hundreds of jobs this summer and needed improvements to Alaska's military bases. I have talked to these contractors, these individuals who are waiting for us to get our work done to provide the certainty they need to get their work done. There is over $\1/4\ billion pending and waiting for the work to be done.

Military families are also caught in the middle. The military will get paid, but the uncertainty of when they will get paid, because they will be waiting on us to pass a bill, is unfair. We should push harder to work out a compromise for them.

At the same time, civilian construction projects and the jobs created by them for docks, housing, and facilities are also at risk. Critical contracts to move forward on the land transfers to the State of Alaska and Alaska Native Corporations will not get done in time for the summer work.

Alaska businesses looking to start new operations won't be able to get the SBA loans, families won't get the FHA or the USDA home loans, and the tax refunds for people who have sent in their taxes by mail won't be processed.

Also, key permits to onshore oil and gas development, which have been painfully slow to move forward, will be stalled even further.

When I was home during this past week, I heard from some of the more than 17,000 Federal workers in Alaska about their concerns. It might be easy for some to criticize public employees, but in Alaska these workers are members of our communities. They contribute to our economy, pay taxes, and they provide critical services all across my State. Many are getting by paycheck to paycheck. A shutdown could mean their rent doesn't get paid, their mortgages are put at risk, and their bank accounts won't balance. We cannot and should not play politics with their jobs just because we are not doing our job.

Americans--Alaskans--are frustrated. They are wondering what the heck we are doing here, and I agree with them. It has only been 3 months since the new Congress convened. Not much to report back home to Alaskans who work every day making progress in our State.

It is past time to get back to work, to roll up our sleeves, finish this budget, and put the 2012 budget on the table and focus on the economy and creating jobs. Our economy is starting to turn the corner. Frankly, the many steps Congress took over the last 2 years to rebuild this economy are working. Unemployment dipped to 8.8 percent, 216,000 jobs were created last month--the largest increase since last May--and TARP, which we all had mixed feelings about, is not only being paid back. It is returning a profit to the Federal Government.

Let's not put a wrench in our economic recovery. These are good data points, but we are far from getting the job done. The economy is still fragile. Rising gas prices make it harder. We need to show voters and the folks back home we can work together on deficit reduction but also tackle energy legislation, tax reform, small business support, and education investment.

I know it will not be easy to get all this done, but this is what folks in my State sent me here to do--to get the work done, balance the budget, reduce spending, and continue to invest in growing our economy. I always tell Alaskans when I get back home that all the easy issues are done. Only the hard ones are left. That is why we are here.

Mr. President, it is time for us to get back to work.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a period for morning business for debate only be extended until 6 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each, with the majority leader to be recognized at 6 p.m.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise to speak about the Wyden-Coats- Begich bipartisan Tax Fairness Simplification Act. It is that time of the year again, tax time. Across our Nation, small businesses and families are struggling to unravel the annual nightmare of paperwork required to file their taxes. Across our Nation, small businesses and families are struggling. My wife and I are small business owners so I especially understand how burdensome and expensive the Tax Code and filing process can be for folks at this time of year.

This process is costly and burdensome. The IRS estimates that Americans spend 6.1 billion hours each year filling out tax forms and roughly $163 billion each year on tax compliance. Small businesses are the engine and the backbone of our still recovering economy. We should allow them to spend more time doing what they do best--creating jobs and growing the economy--not filling out burdensome paperwork. This is why I have joined my colleagues from both sides of the aisle, Senators Wyden and Coats, to introduce the bipartisan Tax Fairness and Simplification Act.

Tax reform has been a long priority of mine. I am happy to be moving forward on this important piece of legislation today. In a nutshell, our legislation simplifies the Tax Code and alleviates many of the burdensome paperwork and costly requirements that are bogging down American families and businesses. Our legislation will allow most taxpayers to file their taxes using a straightforward and shortened 1- page 1040 IRS form. This is an example of exactly what it would look like. Also individuals and families will be able to request that the IRS prepare a tax return for them to review, modify, and sign.

The Wyden-Coats-Begich bill reduces the number of tax brackets for individuals from six to three: 15 percent, 25 percent, and 35 percent. It eliminates the alternative minimum tax which forces millions of taxpayers to calculate their taxes twice and pay the higher amount. In order to make capital investments more cost effective for small business owners, the Wyden-Coats-Begich bill will allow 95 percent of small businesses--those with gross receipts of up to a million dollars--to expense all equipment and inventory costs in a single year. These changes may seem simple and commonsense, but they make a world of difference to our middle-class families and small businesses.

Let's talk specifically about small businesses for a second, people who are keeping our economy going, such as my friend John Brower from Anchorage. John owns and operates Alaska Laser Printing in Anchorage. John works tirelessly, 365 days a year, and is proud of the business he built. When new technology is developing in the printing business, it is always bringing on needs for new equipment. This legislation would allow him to expense all those equipment costs and would truly make a world of difference for John and save him thousands and thousands of dollars in taxes.

I am here to speak for the John Browers and the other small businesses all across Alaska and the country. My view is very simple: Let's quit giving tax breaks to multimillion-dollar corporations. Let's close the corporate loopholes and help small businesses such as John Brower's.

Right now we are facing a $14.3 trillion deficit. We are hours away from a potential government shutdown rather than continuing on a path toward long-term economic recovery.

Our new bill actually promotes economic growth because it allows businesses to spend more time growing and less time worrying about the overly burdensome tax system which we all know only enables tax avoidance. As all of us around here know, tax avoidance means outsourcing jobs overseas. Instead, our legislation incentivizes and enables companies to invest in America rather than incentivizing them to invest overseas.

The legislation also promotes responsible retirement savings and investments by expanding tax-free savings opportunities.

The American Dream Account, whether it is for a new home, education for your children, or health care, provides a unique opportunity to invest in the American dream. Families and individuals alike can make contributions to an account that functions much like

a retirement savings account, an RSA, to work toward purchasing their American dream.

Right now the U.S. corporate income tax rate is the second highest in the world. That puts American corporations at a competitive disadvantage globally. To resolve that, the Wyden-Coats-Begich legislation cuts the top corporate rate from 35 percent to 24 percent. That means American corporations will pay a more competitive rate than corporations based in trading partner countries such as Canada, Germany, and France.

To make the Tax Code fairer and reduce opportunities for individuals and businesses to avoid paying their fair share of taxes, the Wyden- Coats-Begich bill ends a number of specialized tax breaks that favor one business sector or some special interest that has been fortunate to be here lobbying in years past and getting their special deals, making sure everyone is treated fairly but ensuring we are competitive in the global economy in which we now compete.

Our legislation protects and extends important tax deductions for families. The Wyden-Coats-Begich bill retains many of the most commonly claimed individual tax credits and deductions, including deductions for mortgage interest and charitable contributions, credits for children and earned income. Preferences for the Armed Forces, veterans, and the elderly and the disabled will be retained, as will those that help Americans pay for health care and higher education and save for retirement.

The Wyden-Coats-Begich bill also permanently extends the enhancements of the Child tax credit, the earned-income tax credit, and the dependent care credit. The legislation eliminates the current law phaseout of itemized deductions and personal exemptions, allowing all taxpayers to benefit fully from their deductions and exemptions.

Finally, our legislation requires banks to identify all individuals who benefit from foreign accounts by name and nationality and to withhold 30 percent of all passive income, such as interest on capital gains, sent to any individual who disguises his or her identity.

Tax reform is a bipartisan issue, hands down. Republicans, Democrats, our President, the OMB Director, and many others all across this country have called for it. So let's do it. Let's stop punching holes in an outdated system and make real tax reform happen. Tax reform is about creating jobs, growing the economy, and supporting our families and businesses for the future.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

I thank the Senator.

Mr. President, today I recognize a great Alaskan as she celebrates her 90th birthday at the end of this month. Katie Hurley was born and raised in Juneau, AK, and embodies so much of what makes Alaska great. She is a living history of the State of Alaska.

Katie was there at the very beginning of the push for Alaska Statehood, serving Governor Ernest Gruening in Alaska's territorial days. Katie served as chief clerk to the Alaska Constitutional Convention in Fairbanks during the very cold winter of 1955-1956. With a manual typewriter and mimeograph machine, she had minutes and amendments ready every morning for the delegates. It is Katie's voice you can hear in the audio recordings of the final roll call vote of the Constitutional Convention.

Katie's public service to Alaska transcends every level of government. Governor Bill Egan appointed Katie to the State Board of Education where she served for 7 years. She served to the term limit under Governor Egan but was reappointed by Governor Jay Hammond. She has been elected to the Alaska State Legislature and the Matanuska Telephone and Matanuska Electric association boards. She embodies completely what it means to be a public servant and community member.

It is appropriate Katie's birthday falls during Women's History Month. Katie is a role model for so many Alaskan women. She was the first woman in Alaska to win her party's nomination for statewide office. Katie was the first executive director of the Alaska Commission on the Status of Women and was appointed by Governor Steve Cowper to the Human Rights Commission in 1987, serving twice as chair.

She is still active in the Alaska chapter of the National Organization of Women. In the past, she would grab her knitting--baby blankets for her grandchildren--to attend legislative hearings on women's reproductive health rights. She has been a tenacious advocate for title IX funding and education equity. Katie is a breast cancer survivor of 21 years and still participates in the annual Alaska Run for Women to raise money for breast cancer research. Last year--at age 89--she finished the 5-mile course with her team.

Anyone who knows Katie understands she is never one to slow down. Her enthusiasm is infectious, and she still spends time imparting Alaska's history to young Alaskans and reminding all Alaskans of the common goals we shared at statehood and the spirit in which our State constitution was drafted.

I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Katie and her decades of service to Alaska on her 90th birthday.

Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the Space Available Equity Act.

Members and retirees of the National Guard and Reserve, their families, and surviving military spouses make great sacrifices for our nation. However, too often these individuals do not receive the benefits they have earned for their service.

In Alaska, the National Guard conducts more search and rescue missions in the most challenging terrain than any other state. They save lives every day in their state role and frequently deploy just like their active duty counter-parts. The demands on our reserve component have been higher than ever before. Yet members of the reserve components and ``gray area'' retirees, National Guardsman or Reservist eligible for retirement but under the age of 60, have limited travel privileges on Department of Defense aircraft under current regulation. Their space-available travel benefits are restricted to the continental United States and are not extended to their dependents, unlike active duty members and retirees.

Surviving spouses of a military member eligible for retired pay retain no space-available travel privileges at all after the death of their spouse, despite having made a lifetime commitment to the military or in many cases, lost their loved one in war. In Alaska, we understand how important surviving spouses are. The Tragedy Assistance Program, or as it's more commonly known--TAPS, was founded in my State.

To correct these inequities, I am re-introducing the National Guard, Reserve, ``Gray Area'' Retiree, and Surviving Spouse Space-available Travel Equity Act. This bill will give these deserving individuals comprehensive and equitable space-available travel privileges on Department of Defense aircraft. The bill is endorsed by the National Guard Association of the United States.

I urge my colleagues to join me in giving parity to our reserve component members and surviving military spouses.

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

Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the Space Available Equity Act.

Members and retirees of the National Guard and Reserve, their families, and surviving military spouses make great sacrifices for our nation. However, too often these individuals do not receive the benefits they have earned for their service.

In Alaska, the National Guard conducts more search and rescue missions in the most challenging terrain than any other state. They save lives every day in their state role and frequently deploy just like their active duty counter-parts. The demands on our reserve component have been higher than ever before. Yet members of the reserve components and ``gray area'' retirees, National Guardsman or Reservist eligible for retirement but under the age of 60, have limited travel privileges on Department of Defense aircraft under current regulation. Their space-available travel benefits are restricted to the continental United States and are not extended to their dependents, unlike active duty members and retirees.

Surviving spouses of a military member eligible for retired pay retain no space-available travel privileges at all after the death of their spouse, despite having made a lifetime commitment to the military or in many cases, lost their loved one in war. In Alaska, we understand how important surviving spouses are. The Tragedy Assistance Program, or as it's more commonly known--TAPS, was founded in my State.

To correct these inequities, I am re-introducing the National Guard, Reserve, ``Gray Area'' Retiree, and Surviving Spouse Space-available Travel Equity Act. This bill will give these deserving individuals comprehensive and equitable space-available travel privileges on Department of Defense aircraft. The bill is endorsed by the National Guard Association of the United States.

I urge my colleagues to join me in giving parity to our reserve component members and surviving military spouses.

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

Mr President, last week I had the privilege to travel to the Army's National Training Center to see the 1st Stryker Brigade Combat Team from Alaska train. I was amazed at what our soldiers do to prepare for the defense of our country.

Despite their upcoming deployment to Afghanistan in May, these Arctic Warriors were not thinking about themselves. They were thinking about their families. Over and over I heard how important their family's security and support system was to them, especially as they prepared to deploy.

To help out our military families today I am pleased to introduce the Service Members Permanent Change of Station Relief Act with my cosponsors Senator Patty Murray, Senator Barbara Boxer, and Senator Lisa Murkowski. This bill will improve financial security for our military families by increasing reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses they often incur during government directed moves.

First, the bill will provide reimbursement to military families for costs incurred transporting a second car on a change of permanent duty station to or from Alaska, Hawaii or Guam. As with their counterparts in civilian life, many military families today own and rely on a second vehicle to work, take care of their children and meet day-to-day needs of the family. By doing this, we can save our military families $2,000 in personal expenses they pay to transport a second car.

Additionally, the bill increases the gas mileage reimbursement rate to $.51 per mile during a move to allow for compensation of all costs and depreciation resulting from use of a personal vehicle for a government move.

Our military families make great personal sacrifices for our country. Providing the Arctic Warriors and other military members a little peace of mind about the financial security of their families is the least we can do. I ask my colleagues to cosponsor this bill.

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

Mr President, last week I had the privilege to travel to the Army's National Training Center to see the 1st Stryker Brigade Combat Team from Alaska train. I was amazed at what our soldiers do to prepare for the defense of our country.

Despite their upcoming deployment to Afghanistan in May, these Arctic Warriors were not thinking about themselves. They were thinking about their families. Over and over I heard how important their family's security and support system was to them, especially as they prepared to deploy.

To help out our military families today I am pleased to introduce the Service Members Permanent Change of Station Relief Act with my cosponsors Senator Patty Murray, Senator Barbara Boxer, and Senator Lisa Murkowski. This bill will improve financial security for our military families by increasing reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses they often incur during government directed moves.

First, the bill will provide reimbursement to military families for costs incurred transporting a second car on a change of permanent duty station to or from Alaska, Hawaii or Guam. As with their counterparts in civilian life, many military families today own and rely on a second vehicle to work, take care of their children and meet day-to-day needs of the family. By doing this, we can save our military families $2,000 in personal expenses they pay to transport a second car.

Additionally, the bill increases the gas mileage reimbursement rate to $.51 per mile during a move to allow for compensation of all costs and depreciation resulting from use of a personal vehicle for a government move.

Our military families make great personal sacrifices for our country. Providing the Arctic Warriors and other military members a little peace of mind about the financial security of their families is the least we can do. I ask my colleagues to cosponsor this bill.

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

Mr. President, I thank the chairman and the ranking member for the work they have done. As I said yesterday, it is fairly exceptional, considering the time it has taken to get to where we are.

I understand the amendment that is being proposed and the goal of it, and I have been one of those who have supported the deficit commission, which brought forward some recommendations on how to manage this budget. I have supported multiple efforts on this floor to reduce and manage the budget in the overall scheme of how we move down to sustainability regarding the finances of this country. But this is one bill where you have to take into account not only what is being proposed but what it does and what it will impact. I will use my State as an example. When you think about Alaska, there is no question that when it comes to air travel, no other State has the kind of rural and extended air travel as we have in Alaska. I talked about the Essential Air Service Program yesterday. Forty-four communities are affected by the funding for this program, which serves people who are not next door to any airport and who are not only not just a few miles from an airport, but in some cases, from their airport to a hub, it might be 1,200 miles. So the work and the resources of the Essential Air Service is critical for us to not only conduct business, to move people back and forth between communities, but for medical services. It is really the lifeblood for our communities. This amendment would literally wipe that out or reduce it to such a point that it would be impossible for us to make it economical for some of these airports to operate and some of these flight services that bring the only service to these communities, allowing them to survive.

When you think about NextGen, if we went to the 2008 levels, NextGen was just in the beginning stages. This is an important investment. And it is not the Federal Government that was anxious to get it done right away. We had to actually push Congress--the chairman may remember this--we had to push the Federal Government to move this forward. Why? Because it was the private sector that came to us. The people in the private sector came to us and said: It is important that the Federal Government move this forward, expedite this resource, help us move this new technology forward to help save fuel, save time, increase capacity at our airports, and make it a better business operation for the private sector airports.

So when I see this amendment, my view is that it is a job- killing amendment. This wasn't a decision where the Commerce Committee said: Well, let's just move this up a few years because we think the government should do this right away. The private sector came to us because they wanted to invest in this new technology. But they are not going to make the investment until there is certainty from the Federal Government on their part of the arrangement. So that is what we are doing. We are doing that in this bill. So this amendment, in my view, is truly a job-killing amendment.

Then I look at the airport improvements, and I was listening to the chairman, who was talking about the contracted services. So I quickly looked at the list affecting Alaska, and I saw Kodiak. Kodiak is where the largest Coast Guard base in this country is. Kodiak is also the contracted services tower. I don't know how that will affect the Coast Guard. I would be very nervous about what it might do.

This type of amendment may be well meaning in the sense of how we all are going to sit here--and I left the Budget Committee meeting to come here. The Budget Committee is where we are now talking about how to plan this budget in a holistic way, not nitpick it like this. The amendment may be well intended to get control of the budget, but it does not understand the impact.

Again, airport improvement is another piece. I would challenge the individual who sponsored the amendment. If he has been to Alaska, great. I would love to take him to a couple of those airports. There is now a great reality show about flying in Alaska. It is so dangerous to fly in Alaska that they had to make a reality show about it. So I would encourage everyone to turn that on and see why NextGen, which was pioneered in Alaska, is so important and why this investment the Federal Government is making is so important for the private sector to have a better tool to utilize in transportation in this country.

Again, airport improvements in my State are critical. It could be anything from refinishing a runway to just having a gravel runway--one that brings food and supplies, medical provisions, and just moving people in and out. It is a critical piece of the equation.

The phrase the Chairman used about the amendment was that he was less than enthusiastic about it. I don't like the amendment as it is written today, specifically around this bill. I am anxious to get to the bigger debate, and I hope, once this bill is cleared off, we will get to the big debate of how we manage the deficit of this country, how we look at it long term. I know I will

hear that this is a start, this is the way we have to start, and that would make sense if this bill was started with that intent in mind. But in 2007, when this authorization expired, NextGen was just an idea. Well, this is a new investment we have to make in order to make our air travel safer, more economical, save fuel, and respond to the private sector that has asked us to get off the dime and create certainty so they can make the investments that will make their business model more effective.

Again, I had no intention to speak today. I was in the Budget Committee, but I wanted to come down and say a few words.

I again thank the chairman for the time, allowing me to say a few words from Alaska's perspective. And I would again emphasize that this amendment is a job-killing amendment.

Mr. President, I want to talk on Essential Air Service, but I do want to make a couple of comments after hearing my colleague from the other side talk about the budget. I want to assure him, there are some moderates over here who understand the value and the managing of the budget. If someone comes from Alaska, you know we support gun rights, oil and gas drilling, we support a lot of things as Democrats that the Senator may not be aware of.

But the other thing is, leadership is about all of us working together. I look for the President's budget, but that does not mean we are going to sit here and wait for him to make all of the decisions. We have a responsibility here. I know last year, I sat here and voted for the Sessions-McCaskill amendment that would have reduced some of the spending, controlled some of the spending. We could not get all of the votes on the other side to make it happen.

I supported every dime that came back from the TARP repayment to go to pay off the deficit, which now we are close to 80 percent or better of that money coming back, maybe as much as 90 percent. I supported the Gregg and Wyden legislation, a bipartisan effort to deal with tax reform to get corporate rates from the second highest in the world back to about midstream; lowering the six individual rates down to three rates; making it simplified so people can fill out their taxes on one form, and getting rid of a bunch of loopholes.

It is the combination of all of us that will create leadership. It is not one person; it is not one President. It is Republicans and Democrats and Independents sitting on the floor making tough decisions, not a bunch of political speeches. Let me end there and get to the topic I wanted to talk about. At some point I will come down here and talk about the budget as it is rolled out. I know on the Budget Committee we will have plenty of presentations on that.

I came down here to talk about Essential Air Service. I want to thank Chairman Rockefeller and Senator Hutchison for their leadership on this very important bill. They have worked tirelessly to pass this bill in the 111th Congress, and they are again putting in long hours on it this year.

The bill before the Senate is an incredibly important piece of legislation. The FAA bill is about creating jobs. It puts Americans to work rebuilding our Nation's deteriorating airport infrastructure. It modernizes our air traffic control system to reduce congestion in the skies, and it makes our Nation's air space safer and more efficient.

There are so many important reasons why we should succeed in passing this legislation, which passed the Senate 93 to 0 last year. Even in a year that was marked with contentious and partisan battles, this FAA bill was truly a bipartisan piece of legislation, and this can largely be credited to the hard work of Chairman Rockefeller, Senator Hutchison, and their staffs.

This bill has been delayed far too long. We are currently on the 17th short-term extension since the last comprehensive FAA bill expired in 2007. We owe it to the American people to help reduce airport delays, put Americans back to work, and provide the 21st century air space our Nation needs to facilitate commerce and compete in a world economy.

This bill is especially important for States such as mine. Aviation is the lifeblood of Alaska. It is truly our highway in the sky. We have six times more pilots and 16 times more planes per capita than the rest of the country. In Alaska small planes are the equivalent of minivans in the lower 48. They are how Alaskans get around.

I wish to talk briefly about the Essential Air Service Program, which is vital to my constituents. My friend from Arizona has introduced an amendment which would repeal the Essential Air Service Program. I truly have grave concerns for what this would mean, not only for my rural Alaskans but for rural Americans as a whole.

The Essential Air Service Program originated at the same time as airline deregulation in 1978. When airline deregulation passed, it gave airlines almost total freedom to determine which markets to serve domestically and what fares to charge for that service. This is not a bad thing. Some good things came out of airline deregulation. It fostered competition among airlines. It brought down ticket prices for many air routes between large urban centers.

But when Congress passed airline deregulation, it also recognized that something needed to be done to protect rural communities. They were not the most profitable routes for air carriers, so the idea was to maintain a minimum level of service. That is where the Essential Air Service Program came in. The program provided modest subsidies to air carriers to provide service to communities that would have otherwise lost all air service through deregulation. Since 1978, the Essential Air Service Program has successfully guaranteed small communities that were served by certified air carriers before deregulation that this would maintain a minimum level of scheduled air service. The program has been a vital link for rural America.

There are very real consequences to eliminating this program for my constituents, especially in the 44 communities served by the EAS Program. Let me show you this poster. This poster shows Alaska's limited road infrastructure. Eighty-two percent of Alaska's communities are not on the road system and rely on aviation as a primary means of transportation, for goods, people, mail. It all has to come by aircraft. Let me not confuse those who are watching. We did not oversize the State of Alaska. Alaska does not sit down here by California or in a little box somewhere. This is actually the size of Alaska in comparison to the lower 48.

The red lines show the road network. You can imagine the road network that would be shown in the lower 48. But this is all of the road network we have. So for the rest of the State it is by air or boat. People in communities face some of the highest costs of living in the country. Rural Alaskans cannot drive to a Safeway when they need something. There are no roads, and there are no Safeways. If you eliminate the EAS Program, it is going to drive these prices even higher in rural Alaska.

Gary Williams, from the village of Kake, sent me a letter about what the McCain amendment would mean for his community. By the way, the EAS ensures Kake receives at least three weekly flights from a small Cessna 208 aircraft during the winter. Again, this is not a jetliner. Maybe in Alaska we think a Cessna 208 is a jetliner, but that is a very small plane.

Gary Williams in Kake says:

I frankly cannot imagine being without service. It would

isolate and cripple us on many levels.

In addition to eliminating the only source of transportation for many communities, Senator McCain's amendment would actually put people out of work. It would hurt small businesses in Alaska and across this country. It is truly a job-killing amendment.

I wish to read from a letter my office received from the owner of PenAir. PenAir is a family-owned business, started in 1955 by a young 19-year-old teenager named Orin Seybert. When Orin started his business in 1955, he had a two-seat Taylorcraft and a four-seat Piper Tri-Pacer. Orin is a great example of the pioneering spirit that embodies Alaska. Over the years Orin grew the business into a successful regional air carrier, serving communities throughout rural Alaska. PenAir is now run by Orin's son Danny. This is a letter from Danny Seybert, the president of PenAir:

For many of these communities, PenAir is the only scheduled

passenger air service link to the rest of the world.

He goes on to say if the McCain amendment is passed, it:

would have a devastating effect on many remote communities in

Alaska, on many air carriers who provide those communities

with air transportation services, and on Alaska's economy.

Here is an e-mail my office received from the Copper Valley Air Service. Copper Valley flies two EAS routes serving the communities of McCarthy and May Creek. The e-mails read:

If this amendment is approved, it will put Copper Valley

Air Service out of business. It will cost eight jobs. This

cannot pass.

This is an e-mail from Bruce Phillips, the chief pilot of Wings of Alaska: Repealing EAS would ``not only diminish jobs and raise costs, but also potentially abolish air service to some communities entirely. Villages in Southeast Alaska have no roads and limited, if any, ferry service making air service a lifeline. This is how they receive everything from medication to mail to groceries as well as how they travel for medical, personal and business.''

I have got a stack of these letters that my office has received in the past few days from communities that would lose air service if the McCain amendment is adopted, from individuals in the communities who are terrified about what this would mean for the price of goods in their communities, from those worried about the cost of air travel if they get sick and they need to seek medical attention at a hospital, and from small air carriers worried that they will either have to lay off employees or go under altogether.

I ask unanimous consent that some of these letters be printed in the Record.

It is easy to call this wasteful if you do not understand the needs of rural communities. They do not have any other means of transportation. When he introduced the amendment, my friend in Arizona suggested that folks are bypassing Essential Air Service flights to drive to a hub and the hub airports, where they can get cheaper fares to more destinations. Consider how that applies in my State. For the community of Adak, in the Aleutian Islands, the connection to the nearest medium hub is Anchorage. I laugh a little bit, because I want to put this truly in perspective. It is almost 1,200 miles.

So if one wants to, as Senator McCain says, drive to the hub, they can't do that because they are here. In order to get to here, they have to go by air or catch a boat, assuming the weather is good. So his analysis that the people are just driving off to these hubs and catching flights that are cheaper is inaccurate. He is unfamiliar, obviously, with what is going on in Alaska.

To put the number in perspective, it is about the same distance from Los Angeles to Houston, except, unlike Los Angeles and Houston, there are no roads between these two places.

I agree with Senator McCain that we need to do something to address our Nation's budget deficit. Before I started this conversation, I made some comments on things I have done, and I will continue to work on that. But I don't believe we should balance the Federal budget on the backs of communities and people facing some of the highest costs of living and the toughest conditions in the country, and that is exactly what the McCain amendment would do.

When Senator McCain introduced this amendment, he cited a July 2009 GAO report and suggested that the EAS has outlived its usefulness. I have that very same report. Sometimes when people make speeches, they read selectively. I wish to go to page 2 of this report. There, the GAO said:

Our review focused on communities within the continental

United States--

We like to refer to them as the lower 48--

that received EAS subsidized service. We focused our review

on these communities because the requirements for communities

in Alaska are different than for communities in other states,

and airports outside the contiguous states are not

representative of the program in the rest of the country.

I can't speak for Senator McCain's constituents in the four communities in Arizona that receive Essential Air Service. Maybe the folks of Kingman, Page, Prescott, and Show Low, AZ, who receive EAS don't think it is necessary. I am not sure if Senator McCain has checked with them; maybe that is how they feel. But I can speak for rural Alaskans who have contacted my office, who are terrified about this amendment and what it would mean for their community, for their way of life, for the very health and well-being of their families. We are in the midst of a recovery from an economic collapse. It makes no sense to eliminate a valuable program that helps rural America and puts small business to work.

This amendment would take us in the wrong direction. I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.

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

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