Floor Statements

Mr. President, today I pay tribute to the professional career and community achievements of Terry Sherwood of Magnolia, AR.

Terry Sherwood, a graduate of Michigan State University, began working as an employee of Southwest Arkansas Planning and Development District, Inc. in 1969. His hard work and dedication showed as he became the executive director in January 1992. He has provided the people of Arkansas with many accomplishments that are spread throughout the State.

He has served on several boards in several leadership roles such as past president and board member of the National Association of Development Organizations, NADO, vice president and member of the executive board of the I-69 Mid-Continent Highway Coalition, chairman of the Arkansas I-69 Association, vice-president of Arkansas Good Roads, board member of the Council of Peers Southeast Regional Executive Directors Institute, board member of the Southwest Regional Economic Development Association, chair of the Association of Delta Development Districts Delta Regional Authority, member of the Public Participation Committee Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department, and member of Arkansas Association of Development Organizations.

Terry has brought great leadership and outstanding integrity to the south Arkansas community. His leadership is unique and has inspired many other people in the area to get involved in their local neighborhoods and towns.

Mr. President, I ask that my colleagues join me in recognizing the great contributions Terry Sherwood has made to Arkansas and the United States of America.

Mr. President, I am here to speak on my amendment, which is a simple and straightforward amendment to create an enrollee satisfaction survey for the qualified health plans offered through the exchange established in the Senate health care reform bill. Let me show you how this will work. This is taken from the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program Web page that is administered by the Office of Personnel Management, OPM. They lay out on the Web page how the survey works.

The first question is:

How would you rate your overall experience with your health

plan?

Other questions are:

When you needed care right away, how often did you get care

as soon as you thought you needed it?

How often did your personal doctor listen carefully to you,

show respect for what you had to say, and spend enough time

with you?

This is all collected and put into a form and used when people make health care decisions on what plan to choose. One of the real measures of the quality of a health care plan is how satisfied people are with that plan. It is a little bit hard to measure. We send out these surveys to Federal employees. They come back and the information is available to the public. People can click on this and know, when they are about to sign up for a plan, how the plan rates in satisfaction.

This is not a new idea. It has been around for a long time. It helps people make good health care decisions. It allows them to compare one company to another. It allows them to look at what the people who have that health care plan right now, how they perceive the performance of the plan. It is a win-win for the whole system.

The idea is to make this part of the new law, and if you are on the exchange, you would have access to filling out one of these surveys; but, more importantly, you would also have access to reading the surveys and knowing, when you are making your health care choice, how your company rates. Here are a few examples.

Again, this is from the Web page right now under the Federal health care plan. The first question was about overall plan satisfaction. The FEHBP national average is 80 percent. People are 80 percent satisfied with that. There is one insurance company that only has 54.5 percent. Another one has 88.7 percent. So you can understand the range. Again, that is not to say nobody is happy with that one at 54.5 percent, but it allows the people who are purchasing the health care to make an informed decision before they enter into a contract with the company.

One of these categories is ``getting care quickly.'' The average is 91.6 percent. It is not a big spread, but one company is at 88 percent, a little below average. The highest company is at 93.5 percent, a little above average. That is not a very big spread, but if getting care quickly is your most important thing, you may want to go to the one where the people who use that insurance company right now say you get care the quickest.

Another issue is the claims processing. That is one of the questions here: How does a company do in processing your claims? In our office, we have hundreds of complaints from people around Arkansas who have had problems with insurance companies processing their claims. Again, the average here is 92 percent. That is what the FEHBP average is. There is a company that has a 77-percent rating as a result of the survey. There, again, that is not saying people would not choose that company; they may choose it for other reasons. But if the claims processing part of their business is important, they may not choose that company, or at least they know what they are getting into. The highest one I saw in the claims processing was 96.8 percent.

You understand this is something that already exists, something I cannot imagine anybody having a problem with because it puts the tool in the hands of the people making decisions on the health care provider that they are going to choose. It puts the tool in their hands, before they choose them, to know what they are getting into.

Lastly, basically, this doesn't cost any money--and if it does, it is just a tiny amount. This is a very consumer-friendly tool. It simplifies the process for people. It takes a lot of anxiety out of the process for people. It is also a very good commonsense, grassroots way to hold insurance companies accountable. If they don't do well in these customer surveys, chances are they will not get a lot of business in the coming year. It puts a quality control there--a satisfaction-based quality control there. I think it is a great tool for keeping people happy. I can guarantee you that, when they look at the survey from this company that only had 55 percent respond in a positive way, they are going to talk to their folks and say: We have to get that number up. What is going on in this company?

Again, this is something people talk about. I have heard many people in Arkansas and around the country say they want the same deal we have in Congress. This isn't all the same deal, but this is part of it. What we are able to do is, when we make health care choices, we are able to have this knowledge before we make a decision. Accountability and performance go hand in hand. This is a great example of how we can do that and have a very inexpensive way and a way that is meaningful to the people making the decision. This is there at the point of decision.

I ask that all my colleagues join in this amendment. We will vote on this, I understand, around 4 o'clock.

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

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time during the quorum call be charged equally between the two sides.

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

Mr. President, I would like to speak on my amendment for just 1 minute.

Mr. President, I would ask my colleagues to look at this amendment very closely. It is a good consumer-oriented amendment that will allow people to make smart decisions on their health insurance. We need more of this type of information to allow the premium payers to make good decisions for themselves, for their families, and for their businesses. So I would ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to consider voting for this amendment.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

I believe the sequence was that I would go first.

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 2939.

I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that no further amendments or motions be in order today.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that no amendments be in order to the pending amendments prior to the votes on Sunday, December 6.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 12:30 p.m., Sunday, December 6; that following the prayer and the 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 H.R. 3590, the health care reform legislation, as provided for under the previous order, with the majority controlling the first 60 minutes and the Republicans controlling the next 60 minutes.

Madam President, Senators should expect at least two rollcall votes tomorrow to begin at approximately 3:15 p.m. The first two votes will be in relation to the Lincoln amendment No. 2905 regarding executive compensation, to be followed by a vote in relation to the Ensign amendment No. 2927 regarding attorneys fees. We are also working on the next amendments that will be offered, and we are hopeful we will be able to vote on those tomorrow after the 3:15 p.m. votes. Senators will be notified when any additional votes are scheduled.

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

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the National Association of Black Men United, NABMU, and congratulate them for 10 years of dedication to advancing education.

The National Association of Black Men United has been instrumental in increasing college students' graduation rates in my home State of Arkansas. Their focus on graduating students at the University of Central Arkansas has sparked expansion to Howard University in the District of Columbia.

Furthermore, the National Association of Black Men United was founded on the principle that everyone who attends college should reach the goal of graduation, regardless of race. The purpose is to assist black men in obtaining a bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university. The organization provides men with the tools needed to increase graduation rates and improve economic advancements within the African-American community. These tools include educational forums, workshops, mentorship programs, and financial plans to guide students to graduation. NABMU's vision is to expand across the country, helping individuals in all corners of the United States.

NABMU teaches a set of 10 primary responsibilities that encourage students to earn their degree. These responsibilities range from sitting in the front of the classroom, being diligent with their finances, and being responsible for their own actions. Another vital function of the organization is to assist young men in finding careers in the field of their choice.

I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the National Association of Black Men United and especially their chapter at the University of Central Arkansas for their outstanding work.

Mr. President, today I wish to congratulate and thank a true dedicated public servant upon her retirement. Ms. Carol Broadnax, a long-time resident of Alexandria, VA, is retiring on October 2, 2009, after 42 years of service in our Federal Government. I want to recognize Carol's outstanding service to the public, and especially, her 30 years of Federal service at the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. Carol started out at the CPSC as a clerk typist and then as a secretary in the Directorate for Communications under Kenneth Rashid and Bessie Draper at the 18th Street location, and then she moved to the agency's Bethesda, MD, location. There, she worked in the Office of the General Counsel as the secretary for Richard Allen, general law division. Over the course of her long and distinguished Federal career she served as the secretary for the following general counsels: Martin Katz, Daniel Levinson, Acting General Counsel John Mackey, James Lacy, Acting General Counsel Susan Birenbaum, Clement Erhardt, Jerry Thorn, Eric Rubel, Jeffrey Bromme, Michael Solender, William DuRoss and John ``Gib'' Mullan. Since 2005, she has been the administrative officer in the Office of General Counsel at the CPSC to former General Counsel Page Faulk and Acting General Counsel Lowell Martin. Carol currently works for CPSC General Counsel Cheryl Falvey. We congratulate and thank Carol for her enormous contributions to product safety and for her outstanding Federal service.

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

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

Madam President, I rise today to speak about the fiscal year 2010 Homeland Security Appropriations bill and a program within it which is very important to my home State and also to many other States here in this great Nation. First, I thank the chairman and the ranking member, and their staffs--the staffs, as we know, do so much great work around here--for their leadership and foresight in crafting such an important piece of legislation. I thank the chairman for taking my thoughts and considerations into mind when they drafted this legislation, as well as the thoughts and considerations of many of my colleagues. This has truly been a bipartisan effort and shows the Senate can get good results when we work together.

The funding in this bill covers a wide range of activities from protecting our Nation from terrorist events to strengthening our local preparedness and response activities. Today I rise in response to opposition to the Feingold-McCain amendment to strike funding for emergency operations centers. The most fundamental responsibility of government is protecting the lives and safety of the public. Arkansas finds itself as No. 10 on a list of the 59 States and territories and districts with the most presidentially declared major disasters. It is not a welcome ranking, but it is a measurement of the risks Arkansans face.

Since 9/11, State and local governments have faced increased emergency preparedness responsibilities and costs for public safety. Now, in the midst of continued all-hazard risks, State and local governments are cutting spending on many critical programs, but emergencies and disasters will not wait for our economy to improve. Reports following Hurricane Katrina's response found multiple flaws in situational awareness, command and control, logistical tracking, and communications. Fully capable emergency operational centers at the State and local level are essential to a comprehensive national emergency management system.

EOCs require basic resources to operate smoothly and effectively in a time of crisis. Some of the resources funded through EOCs include a hardened and safe location for emergency management staff, communications for reliable and accurate information gathering, and effective, usable technology for tracking all resources, including personnel and emergency supplies.

For example, the city of North Little Rock, AR's Office of Emergency Services will be a recipient of these funds. This office is one of the emergency operations centers tasked with providing disaster assistance and support to a population of over 500,000 people in the central Arkansas area--not just North Little Rock but the entire area. Although the office's current personnel work very hard and are very diligent

about providing meaningful services to the area, the age and size of its location limit its ability to house the needed technologies and staff to adequately serve central Arkansas in the event of emergency.

Again, we have lots of emergencies there, as we will talk about. These funds will be used to address these limitations and provide the needed safety assurances.

Recently it has become popular to attack so-called earmarks. I agree that congressionally directed spending needs to be transparent. I think the Senate has already taken care of that. Its Members should be accountable for the programs they support. I think the Senate has taken care of that as well.

I am proud to support funding for emergency operations centers. I also believe the Representatives of the States and the congressional districts have an in-depth understanding of the needs and priorities in their States, rather than employees serving in Federal executive departments and agencies.

There is now great accountability in the congressionally directed spending in appropriations bills. The public can easily review congressionally directed spending requests and funding on Web sites fully accessible to the public. In fact, the Constitution gives this authority to the Congress.

The Constitution, article I, section 9, says:

No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in

Consequence of Appropriations made by law.

That is what we are doing here today and that is what the appropriations process is about, this constitutionally required system we have, where Congress controls the purse strings.

For all these reasons, I voice my strong support for the funding in the underlying bill that supports emergency operations centers. I ask my colleagues, very respectfully, even though it is well intended, to oppose the Feingold-McCain amendment.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today along with Senator Inhofe to introduce the Fueling America Act of 2009 which will provide incentives for the production and use of natural gas and propane vehicles throughout the United States.

In response to high gasoline and diesel fuel prices, consumers have become more interested in alternative fuel vehicles that run on natural gas or propane. These vehicles and aftermarket conversion kits have been available for years, but they have been used mostly in government and private fleets. Very few have been purchased and used by consumers. Larger natural gas and propone vehicles are often used for clean- burning transit buses and delivery trucks.

Natural gas and propane are clean, cost-effective alternative fuel choices. Two important potential benefits of increasing the supply of natural gas and propane vehicles are energy security and reduced pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions than comparable gasoline or diesel vehicles. Compared with conventional vehicles, natural gas vehicles produce only 5 to 10 percent of allowable emissions, which means far less greenhouse gases.

Thanks to new drilling technologies that are unlocking substantial amounts of natural gas from shale rocks, the nation's estimated gas reserves have surged by 35 percent, according to a study released last week. The report by the Potential Gas Committee, the authority on gas supplies, shows the United States holds far larger reserves than previously thought. Estimated natural gas reserves rose to 2,074 trillion cubic feet in 2008, from 1,532 trillion cubic feet in 2006, when the last report was issued.

Increasing the production of natural gas and propane vehicles for both individual and public transportation will provide a huge boost for Arkansas'

economy and job growth. Arkansas, with its abundant natural gas resources, has the capability to be a leader in the alternative energy sector and the fight to reduce our country's dependence on foreign oil. Developing the natural gas vehicle and propane industry will help Arkansas' natural gas producers grow and thrive, boosting the State's economy. In Arkansas, the Fayetteville Shale is proving to be a major new find of domestic natural gas. The Center for Business and Economic Research at the University of Arkansas estimates that this shale play will result in about $17.9 billion in economic stimulus and 11,000 jobs for the State.

Natural gas and propane vehicles are more fuel efficient and environmentally friendly than their gasoline counterparts, but right now their high cost and lack of infrastructure, such as refueling stations, make them an unrealistic option for the average American. Since the number of natural gas refueling stations is limited only about 400 to 500 publicly available nationwide, compared to roughly 120,000 retail gasoline stations the purchaser of a new natural gas vehicle would likely also install a home refueling system. According to NGVAmerica, a typical home system costs roughly $4,500 plus installation.

The Fueling America Act of 2009 will establish a research, development and demonstration program at the Department of Energy to improve cleaner, more efficient natural gas and propane vehicle engines, on-board storage systems, and fueling station infrastructure; require the GSA to report on whether the Federal fleet should increase the number of natural gas and propane vehicles; extend the Clean School Bus Program through 2014; extend tax credits for natural gas and propane refueling property; and extend and increase the consumer tax credit for the purchase of natural gas, propane and bi-fuel vehicles.

The Fueling America Act will make it easier and more practical for people to buy these clean, green vehicles. This bill will provide incentives for consumers and industry to purchase new natural gas and propane vehicles, as well as aftermarket conversion kits. At the same time, America can become less dependent on foreign oil, utilize our ample domestic natural gas resources, and create a cleaner environment.

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

Mr. President, I rise today along with Senator Inhofe to introduce the Fueling America Act of 2009 which will provide incentives for the production and use of natural gas and propane vehicles throughout the United States.

In response to high gasoline and diesel fuel prices, consumers have become more interested in alternative fuel vehicles that run on natural gas or propane. These vehicles and aftermarket conversion kits have been available for years, but they have been used mostly in government and private fleets. Very few have been purchased and used by consumers. Larger natural gas and propone vehicles are often used for clean- burning transit buses and delivery trucks.

Natural gas and propane are clean, cost-effective alternative fuel choices. Two important potential benefits of increasing the supply of natural gas and propane vehicles are energy security and reduced pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions than comparable gasoline or diesel vehicles. Compared with conventional vehicles, natural gas vehicles produce only 5 to 10 percent of allowable emissions, which means far less greenhouse gases.

Thanks to new drilling technologies that are unlocking substantial amounts of natural gas from shale rocks, the nation's estimated gas reserves have surged by 35 percent, according to a study released last week. The report by the Potential Gas Committee, the authority on gas supplies, shows the United States holds far larger reserves than previously thought. Estimated natural gas reserves rose to 2,074 trillion cubic feet in 2008, from 1,532 trillion cubic feet in 2006, when the last report was issued.

Increasing the production of natural gas and propane vehicles for both individual and public transportation will provide a huge boost for Arkansas'

economy and job growth. Arkansas, with its abundant natural gas resources, has the capability to be a leader in the alternative energy sector and the fight to reduce our country's dependence on foreign oil. Developing the natural gas vehicle and propane industry will help Arkansas' natural gas producers grow and thrive, boosting the State's economy. In Arkansas, the Fayetteville Shale is proving to be a major new find of domestic natural gas. The Center for Business and Economic Research at the University of Arkansas estimates that this shale play will result in about $17.9 billion in economic stimulus and 11,000 jobs for the State.

Natural gas and propane vehicles are more fuel efficient and environmentally friendly than their gasoline counterparts, but right now their high cost and lack of infrastructure, such as refueling stations, make them an unrealistic option for the average American. Since the number of natural gas refueling stations is limited only about 400 to 500 publicly available nationwide, compared to roughly 120,000 retail gasoline stations the purchaser of a new natural gas vehicle would likely also install a home refueling system. According to NGVAmerica, a typical home system costs roughly $4,500 plus installation.

The Fueling America Act of 2009 will establish a research, development and demonstration program at the Department of Energy to improve cleaner, more efficient natural gas and propane vehicle engines, on-board storage systems, and fueling station infrastructure; require the GSA to report on whether the Federal fleet should increase the number of natural gas and propane vehicles; extend the Clean School Bus Program through 2014; extend tax credits for natural gas and propane refueling property; and extend and increase the consumer tax credit for the purchase of natural gas, propane and bi-fuel vehicles.

The Fueling America Act will make it easier and more practical for people to buy these clean, green vehicles. This bill will provide incentives for consumers and industry to purchase new natural gas and propane vehicles, as well as aftermarket conversion kits. At the same time, America can become less dependent on foreign oil, utilize our ample domestic natural gas resources, and create a cleaner environment.

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