Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 1:30 p.m., Sunday, December 13; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate resume consideration of the conference report accompanying H.R. 3288, the consolidated appropriations bill, as provided for under the previous order; and that following any leader remarks, the time until 2 p.m. be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees.

Mr. President, at 2 p.m., the Senate will proceed to a rollcall vote on the adoption of the conference report to accompany H.R. 3288, the consolidated appropriations bill.

Finally, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following the remarks of Senator Thune and Senator Enzi, the Senate adjourn under the previous order.

Mr. President, today, I, along with my colleague Senator Snowe, are introducing legislation to establish a comprehensive ocean, coastal, Great Lakes, and atmospheric research program to support renewable energy. Renewable energy is the most rapidly growing U.S. energy sector. Increasing the use of renewable energy is dependent on baseline atmospheric and oceanic data. Improving NOAA's ability to provide the observations, forecasts, and climate information tailored to the needs of the renewable energy industry will promote growth of this energy sector. This bill would require NOAA to establish a comprehensive research, prediction, and environmental information program to support renewable energy. Specifically, the legislation would require NOAA to develop observation systems and models and collect baseline environmental data to support renewable energy development on land and in the marine environment; and provide best management practices to avoid adverse effects in the marine and coastal environment. The legislation would authorize $100 million annually for fiscal year 2010 through 2014 and allows for up to 50 percent of funds to be available to educational institutions or states to carry out activities in support of the program. As we work as a Nation to decrease our dependency on foreign oil, to encourage scientific advancement, technological innovation and job creation, the Renewable Energy Environmental Research Act of 2009 will be an important component in advancing progress in those areas. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation to support critical research in support of advancing renewable energy development.

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

Madam President, I seek the floor to talk about this package of cost containment offered by the freshmen. I am proud to join them in offering this amendment today.

The technical work in this package is complex and complicated, but the themes it addresses are simple and straightforward, which I know our colleagues on the other side will appreciate and we hope support-- value, innovation, quality, transparency, and cost containment.

The full legislation now under debate in the Senate makes wonderful strides in fixing what is broken in America's current health care system. Under the leadership of Senators Baucus, Dodd, Harkin, and our Majority Leader Reid, the committees have done incredible work.

What the freshmen are saying today is we believe our package can help. We can go further. We can do better. Our goal is a health care system that is more efficient and more affordable.

In a few moments, I will stand together at a news conference with all my freshman colleagues to formally announce this package. What I most appreciate is that we will do so with the support of consumer and business groups.

While the language of this amendment promotes efficiency and encourages innovation within the health delivery system, what it is about is helping individual Americans and businesses get a better deal on health care. I am proud of that, especially when we know that cost containment is the No. 1 priority of small business owners in this health reform debate.

Insurance premiums alone in the last 10 years for small businesses have risen 113 percent. It was reported in the media that small businesses in this country face another 15-percent increase in the health premiums in the coming year.

What about families, our friends, and our neighbors? Health insurance premiums are eating up ever growing chunks of the family budget. Nationwide, family health insurance purchased through an employer at the start of this decade cost about $6,700, almost 14 percent of the family income. Last year, the same premium cost $13,000--21 percent of the family income.

If we do nothing, if we do not reform the system and do not contain costs, this country will be in big trouble. By 2016, the same family health insurance will cost more than $24,000. Because health costs are skyrocketing compared to wages, that $24,000 will represent 45 percent of the family budget. Enough is enough. The package we are offering today will help.

I want to focus briefly on a small but significant piece of this package that addresses rural health care. It will help hospitals in several States, including Alaska, my home State, by extending the Rural Community Hospital Demonstration Program. We are building on known success. The program is small. Even with this amendment, the number of eligible hospitals nationwide will expand from 15 to 30, and 20 rural States will be eligible to participate instead of the current 10.

Part of what we are saying in this package is this: If something is working to provide better health care access and value, for goodness sake, let's keep it going and do what we can to improve on it.

My thanks go to Senator Ben Nelson who has been a champion of this program and is also pushing for the extension.

As I conclude, I wish to stress once again how proud I am to stand with my freshman colleagues. The cost containment package we are proposing today will help all Americans, and I hope it will move the Senate that much closer to a historic vote on the landmark legislation that is before us today.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I wish to remember the life of a much respected and accomplished resident from my home State of Alaska, Mr. Mitch Demientieff of Nenana. Mitch passed away on December 1, 2009. He was 57.

Mr. Demientieff not only held many important positions in the Native community, he was an ardent preserver of his Athabascan culture and a true family man. While a student at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, he accomplished something truly amazing: at age 19, he was elected president of the Tanana Chiefs Conference, a post he held again years later. One year before his election as president, he broke into the local political scene as mayor of Nenana.

His legacy at the Chiefs included the modernization of the tribal health programs and working to provide education to the youth in the Native community. His personal legacy revolves around his dedication to preserving Native culture. Mitch was committed to making sure the traditions of Alaska Natives and his people were not lost. His interests included the stories he heard and passed on, traditional songs and dances, how clans were run and the practices of traditional medicine.

His achievements later in life included service on the Federal Subsistence Board where he was a strong advocate for subsistence rights for Natives. At the time of his passing, he was serving on the Nenana City Council and was the Nenana tribal chief.

In his personal life Mitch was an avid sports fan and coach who was loved by his family and community. He and his wife Kathleen, married for 24 years, have a blended family of six children and 14 grandchildren. Mitch was both beloved and respected in their community and throughout interior Alaska. Everywhere Mitch went, he made friends.

Mitch Demientieff will be missed by his family, friends, and all of the people he touched in the State of Alaska.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m., Monday, December 7; that following the prayer and the pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed to have expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate resume consideration of H.R. 3590, the health care reform legislation; that following leader remarks, the first 2 hours be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each, with the Republicans controlling the first 30 minutes, and the majority controlling the next 30 minutes, and with no amendments or motions in order during the controlled time.

Mr. President, rollcall votes in relation to the amendments to the health care reform bill are expected to occur after 3:15 p.m. tomorrow.

Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it adjourn under the previous order.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Motion to Commit

Mr. President, I want to comment today on the confirmation earlier this week of the Honorable Jacqueline Nguyen to be judge on the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Unfortunately, I was delayed in my return from Alaska, and I was unable to be here for the vote. Had I been here, I would have proudly cast my vote along with the rest of my Senate colleagues to confirm this highly qualified and well-respected jurist. Upon her confirmation, Judge Nguyen made history by becoming the first Vietnamese-American to serve as a U.S. district court judge in U.S. history.

I applaud the judge's unanimous confirmation by the Senate as an example of what we do all too infrequently, I am afraid--recognizing a public need and to acting appropriately and expeditiously to address it. I commend the President for heeding the recommendation by our colleagues from California and nominating a woman of obvious talent. The President nominated Judge Nguyen, I am sure, because he perceived in her a combination of the education, experience, and temperament appropriate for a life-tenured position on the federal bench. Her unanimous ``well qualified'' rating from the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, earned after an 18-year career in the law, including nearly 7 years as a California Superior Court judge and roughly the same amount of time as an assistant U.S. attorney in the same district in which she will now serve as a Federal judge, would seem to be completely justified. I have little doubt that Judge Nguyen will be an outstanding Federal judge.

As impressed as we all should be with her qualifications, I believe we can all look at the details of Judge Nguyen's life as a truly great and quintessential American story. Born in Da Lat, Vietnam, Judge Nguyen and her family were able to escape the approaching North Vietnamese and Viet Cong armies, departing Saigon in 1975 on a crowded helicopter as gunfire could be heard in the background. The Nguyen family was part of the great wave of Vietnamese immigrants who left their homeland to escape the Communist takeover. After stops in refugee camps in the Philippines and on Guam, the Nguyens made their way to California, spending several months living in a tent on the grounds of the Marine base at Camp Pendleton. The Nguyens eventually settled in La Crescenta. The judge, her siblings, and their mother cleaned dental offices after school and at night, while her father studied to be a computer programmer and worked in a gas station at night and on weekends. Eventually, her parents purchased a doughnut shop in North Hollywood. Judge Nguyen says she often did her homework during high school between shifts at the doughnut shop and also worked there while she was earning her degree from Occidental College. She would ultimately earn her law degree from UCLA.

I do not know Judge Nguyen, but I am impressed by her accomplishments and the drive she and her family have shown in coming to this country and embracing the opportunities the United States offers it citizens. I recognize in her story the same drive and love of country that I have seen among the Vietnamese-American citizens of Alaska. The United States is a nation made great in part by its diversity. I personally take pride in serving alongside our first African-American President, and at the same time as our first Vietnamese-American Federal judge. Still, as much as the confirmation of this highly qualified woman is an example of the possibilities available to all Americans, I cannot help but believe it is being hailed today as a point of immense pride by the Vietnamese-American community in my home State of Alaska, in Judge Nguyen's State of California, and all across this country. I extend the judge, and the Vietnamese-American community, my sincere congratulations.

Mr. President, I wish congratulate Fairbanks, AK, resident Mr. Harry R. Bader for being the first Civilian Response Corps-Active Officer in the United States Agency for International Development, USAID, to be trained and ready for world-wide deployment.

Mr. Bader's specialized training, which will allow him to work in high threat environments, was recognized by the Administrator of USAID in a November 23, 2009, ceremony in Washington, DC. Currently, Mr. Bader is the USAID Deputy Environmental Officer for the Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance Bureau.

USAID's Civilian Response Corps is a commendable program. The Corps plays an integral part in U.S. national security strategy. One of their missions is to bring coordination to military and civilian efforts in order to stabilize fragile states and to improve the effectiveness of counter-insurgency operations.

As an active officer, Mr. Bader's environmental security specialty will be brought to bear in those areas of the developing world where scarcity or degradation of natural resource contribute to conflict. His task will be to find ways to reduce the means and motivations for violence.

Mr. Bader's diverse educational and professional backgrounds make him well suited to excel as a Civilian Response Corps-Active Officer. He has a law degree from Harvard and B.A. from Washington State University. His career has been one of distinction and variety as a professor, author, researcher, lecturer, natural resource manager and consultant.

He taught at the University of Alaska Fairbanks as an associate professor of resources policy at the School of Natural Resources Management. During his tenure, he served on the Alaska Sea Grant Legal Research Team, which was created in response to the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill to help strengthen oversight of hazardous materials.

At the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Mr. Bader was the northern region land manager in Fairbanks, where he was responsible for the stewardship of 40 million acres of public land in the arctic and boreal regions of Alaska. He often collaborated with industry and academia in developing land use policy.

Until recently, Mr. Bader was active with the Betula group, a consulting firm he founded which specializes in resource management issues in challenging social and physical environments. He travelled to Tajikistan, Iraq,

and Ukraine lending his expertise in the development of democracy and governance. Mr. Bader is also perusing a midcareer doctorate at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies.

I applaud Harry on this appointment and am confident he will make contributions to security and environmental improvement wherever he is assigned by the Corps.

Madam President, today I wish to recognize a milestone for my constituent Pat Vezina. On Friday, December 4, 2009, Pat will mark the 50th anniversary of her arrival in the State of Alaska. Alaska became a State in January 1959 and Pat made it her home less than a year later, one of thousands of people who have built our State over the last half century.

Pat was born in Wallsend, Northumberland, England, on June 4, 1931, to Clement and Constance Boothroyd. She grew up in Jesmond, Northumberland, and was evacuated for a short time during World War II before returning home to live with her parents for the duration of the war. After attending nursing school in Leeds, England, she emigrated to Canada and then to Alaska

Pat worked as a registered nurse in the labor and delivery department at Providence Hospital, one of Alaska's finest institutions. She began her Alaska nursing career at ``Old Providence'' hospital where hundreds of new Alaskans, including me, were born. After marrying and having two children of her own, she returned to nursing at ``New Providence'' where she worked for 30 years before her retirement in 1996.

Pat has an abiding love for the beauty of Alaska. She enjoys walking on the beaches of Homer, buying summer flowers for her garden in the greenhouses of the Matanuska Valley, picking berries at Sheep Mountain Lodge, and an afternoon with a friend at Summit Lake Lodge. She is loved by her children Karen and John and by the close friends she has made over the last 50 years.

Madam President and colleagues, please join me in honoring and recognizing Pat Vezina on the 50th anniversary of her arrival in Alaska.

Mr. President, I thank Senator Stabenow for her leadership. Last night, I had the honor of presiding while she spoke. I heard her first comment after she heard the other side describe the bill, saying it is so big they cannot read it, but they had great detail, for some reason. She even said she wouldn't support a bill as they described it. I agree with her. After hearing the last hour and what they described, I wouldn't support it either.

But that is not what this bill is about. This bill is about saving lives and saving money, protecting Medicare and stopping insurance companies and their abuse. I sat here for a few days--and I preside quite a bit, and I enjoy the opportunity to watch. I see the props brought out by our opponents. They always bring out the bill. It is almost always taller than they are. It is interesting that the prop is not realistic. The American public should know that. They make it look like it is such a large bill that they are incapable of studying it and reading it in a fashion--something that drives one-sixth of our economy. I learned one thing. In the last 11 months, I have gotten so many different books on different issues, and it is amazing. I took the bill--one of the pages out, page 114, and I was curious and thought, if we converted this into a regular book page similar to the ones we read on a regular basis--or all the books I get that people want me to read--I said, how big would it be? Well, it is just about as big as the book I have here. It is not hard. If you want to do it--and former Senator Martinez, who left us recently, I took his book, and it is an easy read. Maybe you would have to read it twice. It is not as they describe--like it is some complicated, huge document that is bigger and taller than they are. It is not a fair representation of what we are doing.

As you know, we have lots of pages here who work hard every day. I know they were surprised when I grabbed one of their textbooks for just one subject matter that they are required to study in order to be proficient. If you converted it into bill language, it would be four times the size of that document that they stack next to them. We ask our young people to be well educated, to learn the topics, and understand what they are referring to when they are tested. It is a simple thing.

I encourage our colleagues on the other side to not be so extreme in the way they display the bill. It is not accurate. I think it is important to recognize that. This book is short. Probably people cannot see this book because it is so low on this table.

The other thing, as a new Member, I am learning the elements of the process here. I heard some colleagues on the other side talk about the process. The motion to proceed is a simple issue. It is an issue of are we going to debate this in earnest. Are we going to put ideas on the table rather than just talk about it and talk about it? We tried this a few weeks ago on the Medicare fix. The idea was a motion to proceed so we could move forward and debate how we were going to pay for it. The Medicare fix is critical to Alaskans. We have Alaskan seniors who want to make sure the reimbursement rate is the right one to ensure long- term coverage. But they didn't want to move on the motion to proceed. Therefore, we never debated how to pay for it. We couldn't get there with the amendments that many of my colleagues on the Democratic side were anxious to put forward. That is where it is.

To the American public and for folks listening to this forum here, it is important we keep to the facts, and they are very simple. This bill saves lives, money, protects Medicare, and stops insurance abuses. It is proconsumer, pro-patient. It creates more affordable access to health care. It strengthens Medicare, as I said. It is fiscally responsible. We have a long way to go. I hear, again, my colleagues on the other side say rush, rush, rush or, as the Senator from Michigan said, they always want to wait, wait, wait. The fact is, we are going to have weeks of debate, and there are items I will bring forward to improve this, similar to many of my colleagues on both sides who will bring forth amendments. That is what we should let happen in the process--debate it, discuss it, and end up with a product that will improve the health care system of this country. That is the goal.

When I hear, on the other side, that somehow this bill will be rationing, delaying, and denying care--I don't know about you, but I get letters every single day about people who have been denied care by their insurance company, who have been rationed out because they have preexisting conditions. They cannot get coverage because of the delay of the private insurance companies and the techniques being utilized.

It is important to know the debate on this side of the aisle on this bill is about ensuring that we will no longer have insurance companies denying or dropping coverage. We are asking insurance companies in this bill not to place limits on your coverage and ration your care. As I said, there will be no discrimination for preexisting conditions, and there will be preventive care, making sure people can access their health care and their insurance.

As was said by Senator Stabenow, who clearly understands the job issues because of the struggle in her State, there is a report--I will cite a few things, and I know Senator Merkley from Oregon has many items, because as we have sat here as freshmen talking about health care, I know he has more to share from the small business perspective.

My wife has been a small businessperson for many decades. A report was done by the Small Business Majority, working with MIT. Here is the basic data. The largest employers in this country are small businesspeople. Small businesses will pay $2.4 trillion over the next 10 years for health care costs for their workers. With minor reform, I believe that is what we are offering, at minimum. It will save them as much as $855 billion. That is not me or a bunch of politicians coming up with this; it is people in the small business community working with folks to do the research who determined this. That means more small business can employ people and raise capital, expand employment, create new jobs. As described earlier, it saves real money for small businesspeople.

I can tell you my brother-in-law who owns and manages one of my wife's operations has diabetes, a preexisting condition, and he has a $15,000 deductible. He pays an enormous amount each month, with no preventive care or chronic maintenance. It is a program that will not do much for him until he ends up in a hospital in a severe condition.

This bill is not just about making sure the insurance companies are held accountable and do the right thing for people who buy and have insurance today; it is also about creating jobs and making sure the private sector continues to grow.

The last thing I will mention right now--and we talked about this--is protecting Medicare. This bill protects Medicare. Why I know this is because I have looked at that component of the bill and, most recently, I had to explain this to my mother who is on Medicare; she is 71 years old. She discussed this with me just this week, as I visited her at her home in Carson City, NV. She described her sister, my Aunt Audrey, who has a disease. She is in the doughnut hole, where she has to pay for prescription drugs that she had no idea she would have to pay for. Today, this bill is trying to rectify and fix that problem and make sure seniors who are struggling out there don't end up having enormous out-of-pocket expenses. This issue around Medicare is not real. What we are trying to do is solve the problem and make sure to extend its length of stability but making sure seniors get more. They have earned it and they deserve it. This bill moves it forward.

Again, I wish to reemphasize the point that this bill reduces the deficit. It has a positive impact for this generation and future generations--$127 billion in the first 10 years, $650 billion in the next 10 years. That is what it does.

You will hear all kinds of numbers--and I am sure people who watch this get confused, as I do at times, listening to all these numbers they throw out. But that is the fact. That is not decided by us as Democrats or Republicans; that is the independent office of CBO that made that determination. They determined that is the positive impact to the deficit.

We need to push aside all the debate and rhetoric that is out there that is not factual and focus on what is right. Again, as we move forward on health care and insurance reform, there will be a lot of stuff put on the table. There will be items I will put on the table to work to improve health care and to protect Alaskans--yes, I will be parochial at times--but also look to the greater picture for America. This will be a great debate. It won't end Saturday at 8 o'clock; it will continue on and on, probably to some folks' dismay because it will be longer than people want.

The fact is, we will debate this issue. We will struggle with it. We will struggle with it within our own caucus of what the right decision is. But when done, our focus is the American people, improving the system--the status quo is not acceptable--and ensuring that we save lives, save money, improve Medicare, and hold our insurance companies accountable for their actions.