Floor Statements

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I yield back the Democrats' time on this nomination.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 13, 2013, at 11 a.m., in room SD-215 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Madam President, I want to echo at least some of the sentiment that my distinguished colleague from Tennessee just mentioned--that I am disappointed in the use of the nuclear option. I opposed that. I think it could do permanent damage to this institution and could have some very negative ramifications for our country and for the American people.

I do not want to be an alarmist about it, but I do have concerns. I am very disappointed that it got to this point, and I want to talk about that in a moment. But before I do, I would like to say, if you step back, the Senate was designed to be a place for debate. It is where Members--the way it was designed, the way the rules were structured, the size of it, the history of it--the Members can reach across the aisle and find solutions.

That is what this country needs right now. We need solutions. We need people who are willing to work together to get things done. Part of that is to allow the minority to speak, even if it is a minority of one. We need to protect that right, and we need to protect every Senator's right to debate and to amend legislation. I think no one here with a straight face would say there have not been abuses from time to time. We know that. There have been, and I have seen a lot since I have been here.

But also, if you step back and look at the Senate, it is the only place in our government where the American people can actually see law being made. With all due respect to our colleagues in the House, you do not see law being made there. They come out of their Rules Committee and it is all pretty much set up, and right now at least they kind of tend to vote party line, party line, party line--done. You do not see law being made at the White House. When they are doing things such as executive orders, all you know is you kind of get the press release or you see an announcement in the Rose Garden, and that is it. You do not see law even being made in the courts. A lot of law in this country is made by the courts. For example, across the street at the U.S. Supreme Court, what you have is they hear the arguments, and they all go back in chambers. You do not really know what they talk about, you do not really know how that is working, and then they come out with their decision--and in some cases decisions because a lot of times there is a dissent.

But the Senate is unique in that way. We are the only place in our government where you can actually see the law being made. It is also, in that same sense, the only place where the minority is guaranteed a voice. They sometimes get outvoted, but they are guaranteed at least to be heard. I think that is important.

So again, I share the disappointment of many of my colleagues today in how this happened.

The Senate rules I have worked with for 11 years now. They can be arcane and frustrating. But the way it is designed is it allows people to fight for their State's interests or their ideological beliefs, whatever it happens to be, and the sense is everybody is fighting for what is best for the country. We may disagree with what is best, and that is why we should have votes eventually on these matters. But it allows people to fight for what they think is right, best for their State, best for the country, best for the world--whatever the issue happens to be.

Since I have been here, what I have tried to do consistently is to fight to maintain the integrity of this institution. Since I have been here, there have been numerous times--and I have been part of bipartisan groups. Probably the most high profile one was the Gang of 14 back in 2005, where we worked out some judicial nominations. But nonetheless I was a part of that; just recently, the Levin-McCain group that helped to change the rules, as the Senator from Tennessee talked about.

What that is all about is working with Senators from both sides of the aisle to reach commonsense solutions--not just to protect the rights of the minority but also to improve the legislative process, to make sure this place works as it is designed. So certainly that is what I try to do every single day when I come here. I do understand that if you are going to get anything done in Washington, anything done in this Senate, you are going to have to work together to do it. It is like in the Book of Isaiah. It says: ``Come now, let us reason together.'' I think that is the

one verse in the whole Bible that sort of sums up the Senate: Come and let us reason together. The Senate should always be the place for that.

Let me make two last points on this nuclear option. The first is that I would encourage the American citizens to be very careful in looking at statistics. They are difficult to use. They can be very misleading because almost always these statistics lack context. I hear the talking heads. I hear folks on talk radio. I have even seen a few people right here in this Chamber use these extensively, and very often there is no context. Sometimes, for example--if you just look at cloture motions-- you can actually have a filibuster without filing a cloture motion, and you can have a cloture motion without there actually being a filibuster. So, again, that will skew the numbers.

The bottom line is, there is plenty of blame to go around--plenty of blame. If one person says it is all the other side's fault, they are not being truthful. There is plenty of blame to go around. On this both parties are at fault. I will give you one example. It was not too long ago that I heard people come down here and say the DC Circuit's workload was such that they needed more judges. Well, guess what. Now I have heard those very same people say that the DC workload is so light they do not need any more judges. The shoe is on the other foot. Democrats back in the day said the DC Circuit had a light workload and did not need any more judges. Now Democrats are saying it does need more judges.

We need to stop the games and get back to work. I think there is one way to fix this, and that is by following the Golden Rule. I think if we take those words of Jesus literally and apply those to what we do here in the Senate--``Do unto others as you would have them do unto you''--and really mean that and really apply that--to do unto others as you would have them do unto you--I think all these problems would go away.

It is about respecting one another. It is about working with one another. It is about respecting elections in other States, and national elections. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you and all this would go away. Also, a little dose of forgive one another would also help.

Mr. President, I rise today to talk about an important initiative that is not only important to my State of Arkansas but important to our entire Nation, and that is manufacturing. This country is an economic powerhouse, and we are certainly a manufacturing powerhouse. There is an important initiative that is being put together here in the Senate called the Manufacturing Jobs for America campaign. I think so far we have maybe 21 colleagues, maybe 22, or maybe even more who are in support of this effort. I encourage others to look at it.

We see a lot of manufactured crises here in Washington. It may be the farm bill or the government shutdown or the near debt default. Those are all just kind of manufactured by the Congress. But I am glad to see we have 21 or 22 or 23 colleagues here who are ready to turn off the ``my way or the highway'' politics and turn down the rhetoric and really focus on what our No. 1 priority should be, which is jobs and the economy, because if we didn't learn anything else from the shutdown and some of those high-wire act politics of the last few weeks, hopefully we learned that if we want to get anything done in Washington, we need to work together. That is the bottom line. That is what this package of bills and this initiative are intending to do. If we really want to create jobs and if we really want to make a difference for the U.S. economy, we have to reach across the aisle.

There are many bright spots in the Congress. Listen, we know we have been through the ringer. We know how difficult this recession was. It was the hardest economic downturn in my lifetime and most of our lifetimes, the hardest economic downturn we have ever seen since we have been alive, but we are coming out of it.

There are many bright spots in the economy. Yes, we get good economic news pretty much every day, and we also get some mixed economic news pretty much every day. So it is not happening as fast as we would like it to, and it is not happening in every sector of the economy and in every section of the country as we would like it to, but it is happening.

One of those bright spots is manufacturing. Last year manufacturing contributed $1.87 trillion to our economy--$1.87 trillion in manufacturing. That is how much of a difference it made in our economy. There are 17.2 million U.S. jobs; that is, jobs in this country, and 1 in 6 private sector jobs is tied to manufacturing. It also provides a very strong return on the investment we make. So if we invest $1 in manufacturing, it adds $1.48 back into the economy.

America is a powerhouse when it comes to manufacturing, and we need to keep it that way. Everybody knows--look at all the studies--the United States is the world's largest manufacturing economy. In fact, if we just took manufacturing and put everything else on the side, the United States would still be the 10th largest economy in the world just based on our

manufacturing. We are a powerhouse, but we can do more, we can do much more, and we should.

We need to fight hard to make sure that ``Made in America'' remains the gold standard. We want it to be the thing everybody wants to see in every market. ``Made in America'' means something. It also means something here because the investment is here, the workers are here, and the productivity is here. It is good for GDP, et cetera. We want to make sure manufacturing remains what it has always been. That is why today I offer my public support for this Manufacturing Jobs for America campaign, and it is why I have supported a lot of provisions in the past. Most of them have been bipartisan efforts where we have reached across the aisle to try to work with my Republican colleagues on all kinds of issues, including the America COMPETES Act and the America COMPETES reauthorization efforts. I am totally for them. I think they are good initiatives.

One of them we have talked about is the national strategic plan for advanced manufacturing. Advanced manufacturing is a little different from traditional manufacturing. We need to make sure that we are strategic and focused and that we know what we are talking about, as with angel investors. A lot of times people think investment just happens. A lot of times it does, but sometimes, if we can give that little nudge to angel investors, they can invest and make a huge difference in those companies and they can touch millions of people's lives. We have seen that in our State of Arkansas, and that resulted in some real success stories.

Then, if we can bring it back down to a really small scale, one of the initiatives I have supported over the years is the small business startup savings account. People can take a certain amount of money from a paycheck, put it in a savings account tax-free--kind of like an IRA or a fund like that--put it in that savings account and use it to start a business or somehow grow the business. They never get taxed on it. They can cash it in at some point and use it to start a business. That is good for savings, it is good for the economy, and it is good to get these small businesses started. Everybody knows as well as I do that when someone walks into a lender, a bank, and they have, say, $10,000, $20,000, or $30,000 saved, that gives them a big advantage when they need a loan for the rest of the money. So that is a win-win across the board.

Again, I support working on this commonsense package of bills that really accomplishes four goals: First, strengthening our manufacturing sector; second, leveling the playing field for American companies; third, helping startups get access to capital; and fourth, enhancing innovation, competitiveness, and trade opportunities for businesses here at home. Various Senators in the Chamber have different ideas on how we accomplish them, but I think we can all agree on those goals. If we work together, we really can make a great difference for our Nation.

One of the reasons why coming out of this sluggish economy has been a little more slow than we would have liked is because we don't have as many manufacturing jobs as we used to. Although the number is on the rebound and it is growing, we all know we have lost a lot of manufacturing jobs in the last couple of decades. But we are back. It is because of energy. It is because of the trained workforce. It is because of our efficiencies, et cetera. We are back. We need to push this advantage and keep it growing. Our country has the workforce, we have the infrastructure, and we have the manufacturing base and the work ethic here; we just need to give our businesses that little extra boost to manufacture jobs for America.

With that, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, today I wish to recognize and congratulate Arkansas's native son, COL Kirk Van Pelt, for attaining to the rank of brigadier general. On November 3 of this year, Colonel Van Pelt will receive this well-deserved promotion at a ceremony in Arkansas.

Colonel Van Pelt began his military career in 1983 and was commissioned as a second lieutenant in 1985. Colonel Van Pelt has served in a variety of positions in the 39th Infantry Brigade, including Company Commander, Battalion Operations Officer, Battalion Executive Officer, Battalion Commander, Brigade Operations Officer, Brigade XO, Deputy Brigade Commander, and Brigade Commander. Colonel Van Pelt also served as the Commandant of the Arkansas Regional Training Institute Officer Candidate School and the Arkansas Army National Guard G3.

Colonel Van Pelt is a graduate of Excelsior College and received a master's degree from the U.S. Army War College in 2011. He is a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom and has received numerous awards and decorations for his service to our country, which include the Bronze Star Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster, the Meritorious Service Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster, the Army Commendation Medal with five Oak Leaf Clusters, the Army Achievement Medal, the Army Reserve Component Achievement Medal with seven Oak Leaf Clusters, the Iraqi Campaign Medal with Bronze Service Star, the National Defense Service Medal with Bronze Service Star, the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, the Humanitarian Service Medal, the Armed Forces Reserve Medal, the Army Service Ribbon, the Overseas Service Ribbon with Numeral `2', the Army Reserve Component Overseas Training Ribbon with Numeral `2', and the Joint Meritorious Unit Citation.

In addition to his excellent military career, Colonel Van Pelt is also the vice president of AIC Inc., a systems integration firm in Sherwood, AR. He and his wife, Kelley, have raised three children: James, a senior at the University of Central Arkansas, Katie, a freshman at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville, and Hannah, a junior at North Little Rock High School.

Colonel Van Pelt is a valued servant to the people of Arkansas and the United States of America. Our State and Nation have been fortunate to have Colonel Van Pelt's 30 years of service, and I can only hope he can serve another 30 years. I thank him again for his dedication and commitment to keeping our Nation and State safe.

Mr. President, today I wish to acknowledge and thank BG Roger McClellan, who will retire from the Arkansas Army National Guard at the end of this month after proudly serving 36 years.

A native of Warren, AR, Brigadier General McClellan, is a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom and has served in a variety of positions in the Arkansas Army National Guard's 39th Infantry Brigade, including Battalion Commander, Civil Affairs Officer S-5, and Deputy Commander of the 39th Infantry Brigade Combat Team.

Since January 1, 2008, Brigadier General McClellan has served as the Arkansas Army National Guard Land Component Commander, where he has been responsible for the overall readiness, training, maintenance, and operational employment of the units assigned and attached to the Arkansas Army National Guard, a position which he has commanded with distinction.

Brigadier General McClellan is a graduate of the University of Arkansas at Monticello and has earned master's degrees from Louisiana Tech University in 1983 and the United States Army War College in 2003. He has received numerous awards and decorations for his service to our country,

which include the Bronze Star Medal, the Meritorious Service Medal, and the Combat Infantry Badge. He and his wife, Patricia, reside in Edinburg, AR, and are the proud grandparents of Wren, Avery, and Jackson.

Brigadier General McClellan has been a valued servant to the people of Arkansas and the United States of America. Our State and Nation have been fortunate to have had his 36 years of service, and I thank him again for his dedication and commitment to keeping our Nation and State safe.

Madam President, I had not intended to speak right now. I know the leaders are working on trying to get the process clear so we can move this legislation forward. But I would like to mention a few of my colleagues who really helped in this process.

We had a number of Democrats and Republicans who met together and talked to try to come to a resolution on a package we wanted to present to the leaders. In fact, the structure of what the two leaders have agreed on is very similar to what we had proposed to them.

I see some of my colleagues here today who were instrumental. I see the Senator from Alaska, Ms. Murkowski, and I know Senator Ayotte is here, as well as Senator Flake, who happens to be in the Chamber right now, and Senator Kirk, Senator Johanns, Senator McCain, and, of course, Senator Collins. Senator Collins really led and spearheaded the effort, and she deserves a lot of credit for getting us together and helping to move the ball down the field.

I hadn't planned on controlling the floor right now or even talking about this very much, but since we have the opportunity--I know on our side of the aisle Senators Manchin, Klobuchar, King, Donnelly, Heitkamp, and Shaheen all played a critical role. Again, this had not been planned by anyone; it just looks as though we have a little bit of time.

If it is agreeable, I would like to yield to one of my colleagues to say a word about the agreement we reached or that we were working on to try to present to the leaders and just really say thank you to Senator Collins and thank you for all 14 of us. It turns out we had seven Republicans, six Democrats, and one Independent. Basically what we tried to do is come up with a sensible framework the leaders could use to get us to where we are today. Again, they didn't accept every single thing we wanted, but the framework was good, and certainly it was great to see everyone work together.

Before I turn it over to the Senator from Arizona, I wish to thank him because he was great and very instrumental in moving this ball down the court.

Madam President, I would like to say a few more words.

When the Democratic leader pointed at me to say something a few moments ago, we were not really prepared for that. We talked about coming to the floor later. I am so glad Senator Collins is on the floor now. She really deserves a lion's share of the credit for pulling this together. I am sorry we had no notice on that.

Some have kind of joked about the process and the women of the Senate. The truth is that women in the Senate is a good thing, and we see leadership. We are all glad they allowed us to tag along so we could see how it is done. Isn't that right?

It was a great experience for us to work together. I know it will be a Reid-McConnell product at the end of the day, and that is great. That is really what we wanted it to be. We talked about, in one of our first meetings, how we understood that we would be the plan B. The problem was there wasn't really a plan A. We would be the plan B, so that if we could help move things along, that would be beneficial and constructive. And I think it was. I think the fact that the leaders knew we were working and trying to do some problem solving helped to move the process along. I know it wasn't always a pretty process, but we tried.

I think what this is all about today is a victory for bipartisanship. When we look at all the talk shows and listen to all the talking heads and do all that stuff, they never mention this. But the truth is the only way to get work done is by doing it in a bipartisan way. It doesn't really matter if we are in the Senate or on the local school board. If we want to get something done, we have to work with the other people in the room. We may not always agree with them. Maybe that is not who a particular individual would have elected, but that is who was elected.

I think that is really one of the lessons today; that is, if we work together, we can solve these problems. That starts by putting the rhetoric aside, putting the party labels aside, sitting down, and listening to the other side. We had to do a lot of listening because sometimes people have different views. They come at issues from different angles. They have different backgrounds to bring to the table. Nonetheless, we have to do a lot of listening.

I hope today is a big loss for blame game politics. From my standpoint, when I turn on the television and I see people here on this floor or on the floor down the hall or having press conferences and it is just blame, blame, blame, to me that is dead end politics. That is one of those situations where some people put on a red jersey and some people put on a blue jersey. We shouldn't do that. To me that is how we have ended up where we have, with shutting down the government and with running the risk of breaching the debt ceiling.

We should never allow that to happen. That is what is wrong with Washington. We need to work together to get things done.

We have always said--I think all 14 of us who were in this group, the Collins group, who worked together--we said we can do this if cooler heads prevail, and that is what happened. We were so delighted and pleased to be a part of it. I wish to thank the two leaders for their leadership and for encouraging us to, behind the scenes, move forward and get this done, and we definitely appreciate that.

The truth is we have a lot more work to do. We have a lot of work to do. There is a lot of work in this city that has been left undone, and Congress is largely responsible. If we can work together and if we can do what we did today, if we can drop the rhetoric, if we can roll up our sleeves, just as they do in Maine and in Arkansas and in other places around the country--people in this country know that governing is hard work, but that is why they sent us here. That is why we run for these jobs. We run for these jobs so that we can make the hard decisions, so that we can make the big decisions. That is what the American people are starving for. They want us to work together. I know it is the last day before we have some terrible consequences to the economy, but that is what people want. They wish we would have done it a lot sooner than we did, but nonetheless that is what they want.

I hope and pray that, in this body, we will continue to work together and we will be problem solvers and that we will get work done. The legislative process is not always pretty, and we understand that. But work will get done at the end of the day, and we will reach those bipartisan agreements that will make this country proud.

With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today I wish to recognize an organization that has been providing opportunities for Arkansans that are blind or visually impaired since 1940. The Arkansas Lighthouse for the Blind started as a dream of a blind Methodist minister, the late Rev. Jeff Smith, and became a reality thanks to $100 in donations from friends. Since those humble beginnings, the Arkansas Lighthouse for the Blind has grown into a nationally recognized manufacturing business, now employing over 80 people in Little Rock.

The Arkansas Lighthouse for the Blind is a partner of the AbilityOne Program, a Federal purchasing program that enables over 47,000 Americans who are blind or severely disabled to work and provides products and services to Federal and commercial customers. This year marks the 75th anniversary of AbilityOne, and I am pleased to have such an important organization promoting the employment and advancement of people who are blind and visually impaired in my State.

Today in America, 70 percent of blind and visually impaired working- aged Americans are not employed. Through the AbilityOne Program, organizations like Arkansas Lighthouse for the Blind harnesses the purchasing power of the Federal government to provide quality products and services from participating community-based nonprofit agencies dedicated to training and employing individuals with disabilities. These workers proudly manufacture a wide range of paper, textile, and apparel products. From the small SKILCRAFT memo pads on our desks, to the shirts on the backs of our men and women in uniform, they are a part of our American manufacturing base that keeps our government moving each and every day.

I have visited the Arkansas Lighthouse for the Blind and had several opportunities to meet with their employees. During each interaction, I have been impressed by the opportunities this organization provides their associates, both personally and professionally. It is a place that truly lives up to its mission and expands opportunity for persons who are blind throughout the State. I am a proud AbilityOne Champion and appreciate this partnership which allows us to work together to expand opportunities for individuals with disabilities.

The month of October serves as National Disability Employment Awareness Month and I recognize the Arkansas Lighthouse for the Blind, as well as the AbilityOne program, for the opportunities they have provided for Americans with disabilities. Americans that have worked through this program over the years have acquired job skills and training, received good wages and benefits, as well as gained greater independence and quality of life. It is for this reason that I stand in support of the work they do each and every day to open doors of opportunity for Americans who are blind or visually impaired.

Madam President, I rise to say I have disappointment and frustration and that is what is causing me

to speak today, because this is the day I worked very hard to prevent. I think many in this Chamber, on both sides of the aisle but particularly on this side of the aisle, have worked very hard to prevent this day from happening. Our government has shut down. It hurts our economy just when we are turning the corner, and this is something I think the economists are talking about. When we talk to our colleagues, not just in this Chamber but around the country, when we talk to Governors and talk to State legislators and businesspeople, people we know from all around the country, they are so disappointed that it has gotten to this point.

I think most people express what I heard about 10 days ago when I was in Arkansas. I was at a big dinner to raise money for cancer research at the University of Arkansas for medical sciences. By the way, they raised about $1 million that night. It was a great evening. They honored my parents, which was very nice. But nonetheless, when we were there, I bet I had a dozen people come up to me and say: What is wrong with the House? Have these people lost their minds? What are they doing over there?

This is back about 10 days ago when they voted the way they voted recently on the farm bill. That was on a Thursday. On Friday, they took that step that was leading to where we are today on shutting down the Government.

What I tell the folks in Arkansas is: Look, hyperpartisanship has taken over here. This is one of those situations where if we look at the track record of the Senate--I know it is not true in every single case--but if we look at the track record of the Senate in our Chamber, we try to work in a bipartisan way. Because of the nature of the rules, because of the size of the body, because of the traditions, quite honestly because of the Constitution, because of our DNA, we tend to work together in this body. That has been a key to the Senate for years and years.

What it has led to in this particular case is we have passed four what I think of as very responsible measures to keep the government open. These are four responsible measures we voted on fair and square. They came to the floor. The votes were not all 100 to nothing, but nonetheless people are working together to try to get this resolved.

You go down the hall to the House and what you see down there is ``my way or the highway'' politics. My fellow Americans know it is true that these are dead-end politics. It is leading us nowhere.

We have to think of where we have been in the last few years. Think about how bad things were in the great recession. Think about the progress we have made since then. Look at our housing market. It is so much better today than it was 5 years ago. Consumer confidence is back, headed in the right direction. It is good. It is getting stronger all the time. Look at sales of trucks and cars in this country. They have reached their fastest pace since November of 2007, before the crash.

In the private sector, month after month they continue to add jobs all around the country. Those are good results. Why in the world does the House want to put this all in jeopardy? I have been concerned because in the last few days I have had reporters who kind of stalk us out in the hallways on our way in and out of the Capitol or when we are voting--I have had more than one stop me and say: You realize when we go down and cover the House, they talk about red State Democrats. They talk about your race in Arkansas.

It is going to be a very sad day in this country when we learn this is all about politics. I sincerely hope it is not all about politics. I hope we do not have people down in the other Chamber who have elevated politics above what is best, what is right for our country.

When I hear those questions from reporters, there certainly are people down there who are talking a lot about politics when this Nation is in crisis. I think we should all be concerned about that. I think we should make sure that is not the case. If they have a legitimate philosophical issue, that is one thing. But if this is all about politics, if these irresponsible set of votes to shut down the Government is all about politics, then shame on them. Because when we look at the impact this is going to have--the Social Security Administration will be forced to reduce staff. That causes delays for our seniors as they file for benefits and as they apply for replacement Social Security cards. The progress we have made with the VA--I have been very involved in trying to cut back the VA backlog of claims. That progress we have made there is going to stop. It is going to force our vets to wait even longer to get the benefits they have earned.

When we look at small businesses with the shutting down of the Small Business Administration, we are going to have hundreds and hundreds of small businesses that are going to lose their access to capital just in the next few days. The national parks, wildlife refuges, recreational areas--it is a terrible thing for American families who want to take their children out and want to take their families out to explore and experience the great outdoors here in America, some of the raw beauty America has to offer. But it is also bad for business. We have a lot of businesses in my State, we have a lot of businesses around the country that are around these areas. They thrive on things such as canoe rentals, camping equipment, et cetera. It could be bicycling, could be hiking boots, whatever it is. These businesses depend on that type of activity. They depend on those facilities being open, and they depend on Americans having the ability to go out and see and experience the great things in this country.

I am also chairman of the subcommittee on agriculture appropriations. I know firsthand the devastating impact this shutdown will have on our agricultural industry. It is going to have negative ripple effects all around the Nation's economy.

One thing I have learned the hard way in Washington in the last 10 or 11 years, there are a lot of people inside the beltway who do not understand agriculture. They do not get excited about agriculture. They do not care about agriculture. Sometimes they take it for granted. But the truth is agriculture is one of the core strengths in the U.S. economy. It is something we do better than everyone else in the world. Everyone else in the world wants to be like us. It is something we can be proud of. It adds a lot to the Nation's economy. It is also great for our trade.

If we take my one State of Arkansas, it is our largest industry. It supports one in six jobs in my State. It also creates about $17 billion of economic activity, and overall, when we look at the State's economy, it is about 25 percent of the economy of Arkansas. That is going to be true--maybe those numbers are not exactly the same--that kind of ratio, those kinds of numbers are going to be true in every State in the Union.

I know Senator Stabenow is chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee. She talks about how everybody thinks about Michigan as heavy industry, the auto industry, et cetera, and all that is true. But the second largest industry in Michigan is agriculture.

It is just like if we go to a State such as Massachusetts. The mix of agricultural products in a State such as Massachusetts is going to be very different than what we have in the State of Arkansas, but it allows Massachusetts to utilize its natural advantages, natural resources. Things such as specialty crops are going to be very important up there. We have some of that in our State. But every State has a different mix and it is important that every State be very strong in agriculture.

One of the newer areas in agriculture, which is good, is organic farming and the like. Certainly, that is part of the future. That is something in the Senate farm bill. It is something we want to see get done. We don't want to see that brought to a halt or hampered in any way.

We don't want to see our food supply and fiber supply jeopardized by rank politics down the hall in the House of Representatives. The House has already created turmoil in this vital industry by shutting down the government. But to complicate matters, they have also taken another very irresponsible set of actions in the last few weeks; that is, they have allowed, because of their own problems down the hall, they have allowed the 2008 farm bill to expire.

Last night at midnight we went from the 2008 farm bill to the 1949 law. The United States of America is currently

under the 1949 agriculture law. The problem is there is no solution in sight.

God bless Debbie Stabenow. Senator Stabenow has been an amazing champion for agriculture. I mentioned her--agriculture is the second largest industry in Michigan--but she has worked so hard in the last couple of years to try to get this Chamber to do right on agriculture, and it has.

Last year we passed a farm bill. It went down the hall and died. This year we passed a farm bill. It went down the hall and they blew it up.

We see us working in a bipartisan way. By the way, that farm bill in the Senate got something like 66 votes, a good, solid bipartisan vote. But the House Members, they continue to wreak havoc with this economic powerhouse.

Right now, think about agriculture, one of the core strengths, one of the pillars of the U.S. economy. We see it facing a double whammy. They got the slowdown. Now they have the expiration of the 2008 farm bill.

What does that mean? If you are a farmer, you will know what this means. The Farm Service Agency, Rural Development, the Natural Resources Conservation Service--the county offices will all be closing. We had farmers today call us and say: Can I get this payment? I can make this happen? Can I apply for something? A lot of times the answer to that is going to be, no, because those offices will be closed. When they need help, there is not going to be anyone there to help them. When they go there, basically they are going to knock on the door and it is going to be locked up. They are going to be closed for business. This means that new USDA loans and grants are being stopped. This means the cutting-edge agricultural research that America is famous for is going to stop.

It also means that when it comes to food inspection and those workers, that is going to be in jeopardy as well. That is something we fought very hard on. I was allied with many of my Republican colleagues on that matter.

The worst part about this--and maybe the saddest part about this--is that it was all so preventable. We can still prevent it from happening. We can do something today to make this go away. But, nonetheless, here again the House refuses to compromise. It is this ``my way or the highway'' attitude, as I said before, that is leading us to a dead end.

About 2 weeks ago, several of us were fortunate enough to listen to Tom Carper come and speak to us about some things that were on his mind. It was a bipartisan group. There were 15 or 20 of us there. Tom singled out one of our great colleagues, Mike Enzi. Mike Enzi has been a stalwart conservative, red rock Republican, but he is someone we all know, trust, and respect.

He talked about when Mike Enzi and Ted Kennedy were paired up as chair and ranking member of the Senate HELP Committee. That is a very unlikely pair. They don't get any different than that in philosophy, personality, background or regions of the country. Nonetheless, those two Senators adopted what they called the 80-20 rule. They knew they didn't agree on everything so they said: Let's find 80 percent of the things we can agree on. Let's work on those and let's get it done and that is what they did. It is a great example of bipartisanship.

Senator Kennedy, as liberal as he was--he was a great liberal lion, and everybody knows that. He was very staunch in his views and very serious about how he took those views, but he was also very much willing to reach across the aisle. That 80-20 rule is what is missing down the hallway. We still have it in the Senate, to some extent but not as much as we used to. We need to make sure we reestablish this 80- 20 rule and find areas of common ground where we agree so we can work with each other in every single situation we possibly can. But down the hall, that is gone, and that is the problem right now in Washington.

There are a lot of people in the Congress--some in the Senate as well but in the House and Senate generally--who say: I want 100 percent or nothing. If I can't have 100 percent, you get nothing. They will do everything they can to stop it, and that is exactly what happened. That is why we have this crisis today. It is completely manufactured by the U.S. House of Representatives.

I feel that I am elected by my people to make the hard decisions, do what is best for the country, do what is right, and use my best judgment. All of these are judgment calls, and they are tough calls, but that is what governing is about. It is about making those tough calls and showing some leadership.

So tonight I urge our colleagues in the House, all 435 of them, to stop the hyperpartisanship, especially those on the Republican side of the aisle who just can't seem to say yes when it comes to a bipartisan solution. I urge them to stop the hyperpartisanship and work with the Senate to reopen our government.

I will be working very hard to find a responsible agreement, and I sincerely hope we have a sufficient number in the House who will join me, and let's get this done.

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

Madam President, today I wish to address the serious issue of childhood hunger in my home State of Arkansas, and the important work of the Arkansas Hunger Relief Alliance and the Arkansas No Kid Hungry campaign in addressing this issue.

New data released by the United States Department of Agriculture on our Nation's food insecurity showed that nearly 20 percent of Arkansas households struggle to provide adequate food during the year. Today, more than one in four kids in Arkansas face hunger. Since 2010 the Arkansas No Kid Hungry campaign, a partnership between the Arkansas Hunger Relief Alliance under the leadership of Kathy Webb, the office of Arkansas Governor Mike Beebe, and other stakeholders, has been committed to ending childhood hunger and food insecurity for families in my State.

Fortunately for Arkansas, the No Kid Hungry campaign is hard at work to make sure that kids across the State have access to the healthy, nutritious foods they need. Since the No Kid Hungry campaign came to Arkansas, it has brought 1.2 million additional meals to kids who need them. They are dedicated to expanding access to school breakfast, free summer meals, and afterschool meals. Additionally, through its Cooking Matters nutrition education program, the Arkansas No Kid Hungry campaign empowers families with the skills, knowledge, and

confidence to prepare healthy meals on a budget. More than 1,800 families across the State have already participated in Cooking Matters programming.

Research shows eating breakfast has a dramatic and positive effect on students, and as Arkansas kids head back to school, more will be starting their days with a healthy breakfast. However, there is a large gap in the number of kids who are eligible for free or reduced-price meals at school and those who are accessing the Federal School Breakfast Program. In Arkansas, only about 55 percent of the students who eat free or reduced-price school lunches each day are also getting school breakfast. The Arkansas No Kid Hungry campaign is working to change that by moving school breakfast out of the cafeteria and making it a part of the school day, ensuring more low-income students are able to start with a healthy meal. In 2012, the campaign helped to connect approximately 4,400 additional kids to the School Breakfast Program.

Summer continues to be a challenging time for low-income kids. The Arkansas No Kid Hungry campaign ensures that kids have continued access to healthy meals. Again, the Arkansas No Kid Hungry campaign stepped up to the challenge, increasing the number of meals served to kids during the summer by more than 730,000 between 2010 and 2012.

``Hunger in Our Schools,'' a new report by the No Kid Hungry campaign, found that three in four public school teachers see their students arrive at school hungry. In the report, an Arkansas teacher spoke about kids in her classroom impacted by hunger. She said, ``Asking a student to come to school and learn while they're hungry is like trying to tell an adult to sit in their cubicle and work with a nail in their foot; the pain is all you'd be able to concentrate on, just like food is the only thing hungry kids can focus on. Before you can focus on grades or behavior, you have to make sure kids have the basic necessities of life.''

There is still work to be done across Arkansas to ensure kids and families have consistent access to healthy, nutritious foods. I am confident that with the continued strong work of the Arkansas No Kid Hungry campaign and the Arkansas Hunger Relief Alliance, with its six Feeding America member food banks, we can create an Arkansas where no child goes hungry.

Mr. President, I rise today to talk about the Agriculture appropriations bill, but I have to start by thanking our chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee. She has already done so many good things for that committee and for the Senate. Obviously, she has been a great Senator for the State of Maryland, and we see that greatness as she leads the Appropriations Committee. I think all the members of the Appropriations Committee, both Democrats and Republicans, would like to thank her for her service and her leadership.

Today I do want to talk about the agriculture appropriations bill and the impact a government shutdown would have on the activities it supports and the negative ripple effects--and there would be many negative ripple effects--that would come to our Nation's economy if that in fact does happen.

When people hear the phrase Agriculture appropriations, they naturally think about farmers, and that is certainly a key part of what is in our agriculture sector and in this bill, but that is certainly not all it does. The bill helps farmers with operating loans and conservation projects and marketing--all those are very important--but it also funds programs that benefit rural communities to supply clean drinking water for people in rural areas, and housing. It supports nutrition programs. It helps kids all across the country. It also not only involves food but the international food programs--programs such as Food for Peace, et cetera. It also has the Food and Drug Administration in it, and that is critically important. We need a strong, robust FDA.

This bill has been very bipartisan. This bill is about investing in our future. What we do here in this bill is actually try to save money. We understand there are budget constraints. We get that. We want to lead the way by responsible governing, making sure we do things in the right way by making smart, targeted investments and saving taxpayer dollars by eliminating redundancy and streamlining loan programs and doing things to make the USDA and the FDA spend their money wisely.

At the same time we are trying very hard not to reduce any services to hard-working Americans, and we are also certainly trying not to hurt any industries in this country.

Sequestration is already taking a toll on many of these programs. If we look at the cuts these agencies have had to undergo in the last 2 or 3 years, we already see a strain on their budgets and the difficulties there. A government shutdown would wreak havoc on our economy.

I think I speak for most Americans, certainly most Arkansans, when I say I am currently undergoing shutdown fatigue. We are tired of this. We are tired of the drama. We are tired of, honestly, the other Chamber embarrassing the Congress and engaging in these dramatics. People are just tired of it. When I am home in Arkansas, whether I am filling up at the gas station or I am at the grocery or at the ball game or wherever I happen to be, people

come up to me and say: What is wrong with Congress?

In fact, I was at a major fundraising event for cancer research in Little Rock on Friday evening. I bet I had a dozen people come up to me and say: What is going on with the House of Representatives? Why do they continue to do this? And I agree. It is hard to watch. It is not good for the Congress. As I say, I have shutdown fatigue. We don't need any more drama. We need to get back to the business of governing. Governing isn't always easy. We have to make hard decisions. That is why we run for these jobs. We run for these jobs to work to get things done and to try and make good and wise decisions for our people and for our Nation. That is the way it is supposed to work.

I think my colleagues will agree with me when I say that strengthening our economy and creating jobs is our No. 1 priority right now. We look at the recession we have been through and we see the hardships folks have gone through. Strengthening our economy and creating jobs is our No. 1 priority, and this bill will help us do it. Again, it is hard to get to that No. 1 priority when we have some of the shenanigans going on here in the U.S. House with some of these manufactured crises they have created.

What I want to say about agriculture is it is one of the core strengths in the U.S. economy.

We do a lot of things well. Our economy does a lot of things well. But no one does agriculture better than America. It is something we should be proud of. We do it so well, we probably take it for granted sometimes, but it is a core strength in the U.S. economy.

If we want one little bit of evidence for that, look at our trade deficit. Everyone in this Chamber knows our trade deficit is not good. We know it is bad. We know it is ugly. We want to change that. We want to make it better. But our trade deficit would be horrendous if it were not for agriculture. That is our No. 1 export. This is something we need to be mindful of: Agriculture is very good for the U.S. economy.

Take something as simple as raising chickens. That is not very exciting and a lot of people don't understand the first thing about it, but think about what impact it has on the States and the counties and the communities where this happens.

First, someone has to build the chicken house, someone delivers the chicks, someone delivers the feed. Someone has to maintain the trucks that deliver the chicks and the feed. Someone has to generate the electricity, someone has to supply the water. Someone is paying taxes on all this, and it is helping local schools and local police and fire departments, et cetera. Someone at some point picks up the chickens and delivers them to the processing plant, and it all starts over. Someone has to build the plant. This has a huge ripple effect on the U.S. economy and on everything about agriculture. It is not just the farmers, it is a ripple effect and a positive effect on the economy.

Take the example of Arkansas, and I am sure this is true in many other States. I haven't looked at the numbers, but I bet this is true in 35 or 40 other States, and it is our largest industry. We love having our Fortune 500 companies there and we have several that are based in Arkansas. We have more that have some sort of facility or plant or site of some sort. We love that and we are proud of that. But agriculture is our No. 1 industry. One in six jobs in Arkansas is tied to agriculture. It has a $17 billion net effect on the economy and it is 25 percent of our State's economy.

I was speaking with Debbie Stabenow not too long ago. She said, We are all known for manufacturing and heavy manufacturing in Michigan. And they are. But, she said, our second largest industry is agriculture. She is chairman of the Agriculture Committee, and she fought very hard to get the farm bill back on track, and much to her credit she has moved that ball farther down the field than I think anyone else could.

Another reason I want the House to stop with this manufactured crisis and follow the Senate's lead to pass a commonsense, comprehensive farm bill--and I don't say that lightly. I have a lot of respect for the House. Certainly they are a separate institution within this branch of government. I certainly have a lot of respect for that and their position, and their role is critical. But they need to follow the Senate's lead. They need to follow the Senate and do what the Senate has done. We are trying to be responsible. We are trying to show leadership. We are trying to get things back on track.

But when I mentioned Arkansas a moment ago, we are not alone. There are over 3 million farmers in the United States, and as a nation agriculture employs about 22 million people. The Agriculture appropriations bill would allow us to build on this economic powerhouse that we have in this country. This bill helps farmers get started. It helps farmers increase their yield and it helps them become better stewards of the land. Funding these programs creates jobs in rural America. If you haven't been there recently, rural America needs jobs.

Take a program such as the USDA Rural Development Program. They create construction jobs. They rebuild hometowns and schools and other facilities, and they keep our rural communities strong. We don't want the Tale of Two Nations here where you have urban and suburban America, and rural America is left behind. We want rural America to be strong as well.

Almost every Member of this body has sizeable rural portions in their State. We want those areas to grow and be prosperous. So in this bill we provide guaranteed loans for rural businesses to let them grow and to get small and emerging businesses where they need to be. We also provide money for creation and expansion of businesses in rural settings. A government shutdown would stop these programs. It would bring these programs to a dead halt in rural America. Why break the momentum? Our economy is just turning the corner. We do not need to do this. We can't forget the role that Agriculture appropriations bill plays in keeping our families and communities safe.

One thing I have to say is the Food and Drug Administration does a great job. Again, a lot of people may take them for granted because they do such a good job, but we have the safest food supply in the world and we have the safest drug supply in the world. Do we want to jeopardize that? No. Please, let's not jeopardize that. Why are we playing games with people's food and medicine? It makes no sense at all. It is an unbelievable statistic, but in Arkansas alone the FDA oversees 1,300 facilities, just in my small State. They also have presence there with the National Center for Toxicological Research in Jefferson County that employs about 500 people. They do great things there, and it is a very important, vital part of what FDA does. We are certainly proud to have them.

Arkansas has 85 poultry and 50 meat processing plants. These are inspected by the Food Safety Inspection Service, FSIS. Last year my good friend, Senator Blunt from Missouri, and I worked very hard with the chairwoman of the committee and others in this Chamber to make sure those meat inspectors stayed on the job; because the day that they miss, that jeopardizes thousands of private sector jobs and productivity and disruption to a very efficient market. So we were able to do that. Here again, all that is in jeopardy because of the games they are playing in the House on this issue.

The progress we made when it comes to infrastructure would also stop. We don't want to see that. We want to lay that foundation for future economic growth. We all know infrastructure creates jobs. Clean water, waste disposal systems, broadband expansion we have been fighting for, not just in rural Arkansas but in every rural State.

These investments are critical to growing our Nation's businesses and they are critical to local communities. This helps all Americans.

The programs I have talked about today are supported by Members on both sides of the aisle. When we moved this through the committee, we got a 23-6 vote. Senator Blunt and I worked together, hand in hand, on every single provision. We produced a better bill because we did work together. It is a good solid case for bipartisanship and how to get things done. It is one of the strongest bipartisan votes we have had in the committee so far.

Nonetheless, I urge my colleagues to please follow the example of the Appropriations Committee generally, but the

Agriculture appropriations subcommittee specifically. Let's come together and let's do what is best for our economy and for the American people.

Before I yield the floor, I thank Senator Mikulski for her leadership. It is not always easy to lead Senators. It is sometimes like trying to herd cats, but nonetheless we are responding to her leadership. She is doing great things, not just for the State of Maryland but for the country and the Senate.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Bob Ross, a detailee from the Department of Agriculture to the Committee on Appropriations, and Mike Hallinan, a fellow in my personal office, be granted the privilege of the floor for the remainder of the 113th Congress.

Mr. President, I rise to talk about the farm bill. Ten days, that is all the time we have to work out some agreement on our farm legislation before we revert to the 1949 farm policy in this country.

Let me make this very clear to the American people and to my colleagues. This has nothing to do with the traditional battle lines in agriculture. This is not one of those Midwest farming versus Southern farming type scenarios. This is not a specialty crop versus a row crop type issue. This has nothing to do with that at all. It is an ideological fight, where we see hyperpartisanship and gridlock politics taking over the Congress.

Today, the House of Representatives has a vote. It is a very important vote. What they are proposing is that they cut $40 billion from the nutrition title over 10 years. That is $40 billion.

Here again, this is not about a traditional fight that you see and you have seen for decades in agriculture. This is about hunger in America. It is a sad fact. It is something that maybe people in this building do not like to acknowledge. But we have people who are hungry in this country. They may be people with whom we go to church. They may be our neighbors. They may be friends, coworkers, folks with whom we graduated from high school. They could be seniors or children or the working poor. But we have people in this country who are hungry today.

Can you imagine America being the land of plenty and having hungry people and having folks in this building--in the Chamber of the House of Representatives--voting to not lend a helping hand when people need it the most?

I am reminded of that great song, ``America the Beautiful,'' where it starts out:

O beautiful for spacious skies,

For amber waves of grain,

For purple mountain majesties

Above the fruited plain!

It goes on and on and on to talk about the riches of this great country. But, unfortunately, as I said, today we have way too much hunger in our Nation.

The Congress can do something about that. The Congress can do something about it. In fact, the Senate already has done something about it. Thanks to Senator Stabenow and Senator Cochran and the bipartisan efforts on the Senate Agriculture Committee, they made responsible reforms in SNAP, in other nutrition programs to streamline and fix and correct and improve the nutrition title. They went after what we are concerned about, such as waste and abuse of the system, and fraud. We all know you have some of that in these programs. But we have a saying in our State. It is kind of a country saying. I know people have heard it before. But we say: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Our agriculture law in this country ain't broke.

It can be improved, and I think that is what the Senate has done. The Senate has been responsible. The Senate has worked in a bipartisan way. Again, that bill passed through this Chamber a few months ago with 66 votes, a very bipartisan vote. That is the solution. That is the solution of us working together.

Unfortunately, again we have people down the hall in the House of Representatives who are going to put that in jeopardy with a ``my way or the highway'' political solution. This is not good for the country.

I think the reason some of these folks are doing this is because they do not understand the impact their decision could have on this country. But let me put it in perspective. When we look at America, there are lots of different ways to look at agriculture and look at our economy and look at the global economy, but one way is this: We have several core strengths in the U.S. economy. We do some things better than anybody else in the world, and one of those is agriculture.

If we look at investment, if we look at innovation, if we look at new farming practices and ways to conserve water--how to get more per acre--all these things that improve and increase production and nutrition, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, they come from America. It is one of the core strengths of the U.S. economy. Everybody in the world wants to be like America when it comes to agriculture. Everybody wants what we have. They copy us. They model what they do after this country. It is something we should be proud of. I know inside the beltway it is not very exciting, it is not very flashy, but we have the safest and highest quality and, in relative terms, the cheapest food supply in the entire world. It is one of the true reasons for America's strength.

But, unfortunately, if we do not pass a new farm bill by September 30, we run the risk of putting all that in jeopardy, and there could be dire consequences. There is no question about it. If we talk to all the experts, talk to all the economists, talk to the people who understand this, what we can see very clearly is that crop prices will destabilize, and that means some prices will go up, some will go down.

For example, soybean farmers all over this country are going to lose their crop support. They are going to lose that protection that has been there since the 1960s. Because it was not there in 1949, it will be gone, and that will be devastating to the soybean industry. That is just one little piece of the puzzle.

I could go on and on. We have a huge trade deficit in this country. We know that. But our saving grace, when it comes to trade, is agriculture. Those export programs to sell our ag products overseas will be lost if this agreement is not reached.

Again, food prices will rise dramatically. We have heard others talk about that even this morning. The Democratic leader mentioned it. But it is going to hurt not only farmers, it is going to hurt families all over this country.

This is personal to me. I know in the Acting President pro tempore's home State of Hawaii they have a huge agricultural sector. I know it is very important to his State. Everybody thinks of how beautiful Hawaii is and tourism and all that, but agriculture is critically important to his State's economy, just like it is for the other 49 States. In almost every State--maybe with one or two exceptions--agriculture is very critical to that State's economy. That is true for Arkansas.

Again, this is very personal for me. One in six jobs in our State is related directly or indirectly to agriculture. Agriculture--we love our Fortune 500 companies. We love having them. We have several that are based in Arkansas. We are proud of them. But 25 percent of our State's economy is tied to agriculture--25 percent.

So the question is, How do we fix this? It is something we will never hear on the talk shows. We will not hear the talking heads chatter on about this. But the way we fix it is to work in a bipartisan way, to come together, to be very responsible--as the Senate has been on this issue--to put something together, and to get it done.

This is why groups in my State, such as the Arkansas Farm Bureau, Agricultural Council of Arkansas, Riceland Foods, Arkansas Rice Growers Association, Tyson Foods, the Arkansas Cattlemen's Association, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera--the list goes on--all supported what we did in the Senate, and they do not support what is going on in the House right now.

But even more important than the groups, I have been around my State, of course, all year--and over the last 10 years. But during the August recess, I went around the State, and every time I saw a farmer--and I literally talked to hundreds of them--they said: Please, please, don't let this happen. Don't let this happen. Why do we want to put all this at risk? What we have now is working. Sure, we can make improvements. Yes, we support the Senate bill. Even though the Senate bill is not perfect, we support that because we know the importance of agriculture.

I would ask my House colleagues to please get themselves out of this manufactured crisis they have created for us all. Let's turn off the politics. Let's work together. The American people are counting on us.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I wish to thank my two colleagues from New Hampshire and Ohio and, of course, my colleagues from Alaska and Oregon as well for their leadership on this very important piece of legislation.

I have four amendments that I would love to be considered, that I would love to be included in the legislation, and I hope we are able to move these forward. But let me just talk about two of those. I do not want to take the Senate's time. I understand other Senators may be on their way over to the floor to speak.

Let me first start with the Quadrennial Energy Review. This is something on which I have worked with the Senator from Alaska and many others in this Chamber. In fact, it is a bipartisan amendment. It is amendment No. 1881. Our cosponsors are Senators Alexander, Begich, Boozman, Coons, Heinrich, Tester, Tom Udall, and Wyden. Again, it is a bipartisan group of Senators.

Basically, one of the things we have learned from the Department of Defense is every 4 years they do a Quadrennial Defense Review, and that helps them determine what is going on within their agency as an agency. It helps them determine the strengths and weaknesses, the needs that need to be addressed. It helps them plan, and it also helps us make decisions. We want to make good defense decisions. The only way you do that is by knowing what you have on hand and what you need.

Well, this is the same for energy. We have a lot of very well- intentioned energy programs and ideas that either float around this Capitol Building or float around the various Departments or that are law right now. A lot of these programs exist, but they are not necessarily coordinated. There is no one there who is really making sure all of the dots connect and we are able to have a smart energy policy.

So I feel like a Quadrennial Energy Review, every 4 years we would go--the Federal Government--top to bottom, look at all of our energy needs, look at our capabilities, look at our shortcomings, look at where we need to focus our resources. Should we be doing research in one area and should we be focusing on manufacturing somewhere else? But this will allow us to have a good, solid review every 4 years so we can make good decisions, so the various Departments can make good decisions. Also, it will help industry know kind of what is coming down the pike. It will help bring us together and coordinate in a very positive and constructive way.

So the Quadrennial Energy Review, from my standpoint, is a very important piece and building block. It is laying the foundation for having a smart energy policy for this country. That is one thing we need to recognize, quite honestly, here in the Senate. Again, we have good intentions, but we do not always have a good, cohesive, and smart energy policy. So the QER is something I hope we would be able to get through on this legislation and get this legislation moving through the process.

Let me give you one example, Madam President, on the Quadrennial Energy Review.

We have in our country now a lot more domestic energy than we have had in years past, and it is very exciting. In my State we produce a lot of natural gas through horizontal drilling and fracking, et cetera, and that is common in many other States around

the country. I see some Senators here where they have the same thing. Sometimes it is oil, sometimes it is gas, sometimes it is both.

Let's take natural gas for one moment. We have people come into my office, and they will say: Hey, this is great that we have all of this natural gas now. Why don't we liquefy it and export it? Okay. That is an idea. We ought to talk about that and think about that.

Or another group will come in and say: Hey, we have all of this natural gas. Why don't we actually turn it into diesel fuel? Okay, apparently you can do that. The technology is there. Let's talk about that.

Then we have other folks who come to us and they say: Why don't we take this natural gas and let's convert our diesel fleet over to natural gas? Here again, okay, that all sounds good. But I do not think you can do all three of those things. We do not have any mechanism right now to coordinate that and put all of that together and get consistent with our energy policies.

Absolutely.

That is exactly right. I thank the Senator from Oregon for his good question, because that is exactly right. We need some mechanism to make sure we are consistent and coherent and cohesive in our energy policy in the country. Things change. That is why you want to do this about every 4 years. You do not need to do it every year. It is too much work and too much going on. But just as with the Department of Defense, things change. What happens is you get a benchmark from 4 years ago that suddenly you have a good comparison. You have a baseline that you can look back to 4 years ago and see if you are making progress, if your policy is going in the right direction.

Maybe in this case we have a lot of energy programs that are not working very well. This will help us identify those. Maybe we have some that are working great, that we ought to be spending more money on. This will help us identify those.

I do thank the Senator for his question.

I do see we have other Senators coming to the floor.

Let me talk very quickly about one other amendment I have. It is the voluntary certification program, here again, bipartisan, working with Senator Sessions. It is amendment No. 1879. This is a very specific amendment for some very specific industries: heating, cooling, commercial refrigeration and water-heating products. This is not economywide. This is very specific to those industries. But right now what they do is they self-certify. They self-certify. I think they should be allowed to continue to do that, assuming their certification meets certain credible and scientific standards, which I think they do now. If they do not now, they should.

But what this will do is actually save the government money. There is no reason why the Department of Energy and others should be reviewing this and making them do extra certification and more testing, et cetera, when it has already been done right now to the standards everyone should accept.

I could talk more about this. I do see I have a couple of colleagues here on the floor. It is my understanding they would like to speak.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 18, 2013.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 18, 2013, at 2:30 p.m. in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 18, 2013, at 10 a.m. in room 406 of the Dirksen Senate office building, to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Implementing MAP-21's Provision to Accelerate Project Delivery.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 18, 2013.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 18, 2013, at 10 a.m. in room SD- 430 of the Dirksen Senate office building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 18, 2013, at 9:30 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Indian Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 18, 2013, in room SD-628 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, at 2:30 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, on September 18, 2013, at 10 a.m., in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``Reevaluating the Effectiveness of Federal Mandatory Minimum Sentences.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Small Business and entrepreneurship be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 18, 2013, at 10 a.m. in Room 428A Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a roundtable entitled ``Closing the Wealth Gap: Empowering Minority Owned Businesses to Reach Their Full Potential for Growth and Job Creation.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Special Committee on Aging be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate September 18, 2013, to conduct a hearing entitled ``Older Americans: The Changing Face of HIV/AIDS.''

The Committee will meet in room 562 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building beginning at 2 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Subcommittee on Economic Policy be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 18, 2013, at 2:30 p.m. to conduct a hearing entitled ``Implementation of the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Act of 2012: One Year After Enactment.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Subcommittee on Housing, Transportation, and Community Development be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 18, 2013, at 10:30 a.m. to conduct a hearing entitled ``Recovering From Superstorm Sandy: Assessing the Progress, Continuing Needs, and Rebuilding Strategy.''