Floor Statements

Madam President, I was unable to return to Washington, DC, and was therefore unable to cast a vote for rollcall vote No. 62, the nomination of Kevin Hunter Sharp, of Tennessee, to be U.S. District Judge for the Middle District of Tennessee. Had I been present, I would have voted yea to confirm the nominee.

Mr. President, today I am introducing a bipartisan bill along with my colleague Senator Collins to help improve the health and efficiency of our schools by making them more energy efficient, while creating much-needed jobs in the process. Though it is often over-looked, energy efficiency is a huge job creator. Not only does it create jobs through the purchase and installation of efficient materials, it frees up scarce school finances to retain teachers and important programs.

There are numerous Federal programs and funds already available to schools to help them become more energy efficient. However, as I learned in my travels across Colorado, schools face a morass of programs and agency offices across the government, and it is challenging for schools to take full advantage of them.

The bipartisan Streamlining Energy Efficiency for Schools Act of 2011 will force the government to coordinate their efforts so that schools are less confused and they can better navigate the existing Federal programs and financing options available to them. Put simply, it will streamline the Federal Government while still leaving decisions to the States, school boards and local officials to determine what is best for their schools.

I have seen the benefits of energy efficient buildings first hand when traveling in Colorado. The Cherry Creek School District in Greenwood Village, Colorado has incorporated day lighting techniques and ice storage to cool the buildings during the day. Because of these innovative improvements, the school district has enjoyed significant cost savings. In another example, the Poudre School District in Fort Collins, Colorado, actively promotes sustainable design guidelines, calling it their ``Ethic of Sustainability.'' This program includes an elementary school in Fort Collins that actually uses recycled blue jeans as insulation for the school buildings.

I hope that in passing this bill we will see more examples of these successful and creative projects across the country--projects that will increase the efficiency of our schools and teach our students about the importance of saving energy. I urge my colleagues--of both parties--to join me in supporting this bipartisan legislation.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the Renewable Energy Market Access Program Act, or REMAP Act, which I am re-introducing in the 112th Congress with my colleagues, Senators Stabenow and Merkley. This bill is designed to help grow American renewable energy and energy efficiency exports abroad by helping small and medium sized renewable energy businesses promote, export and ultimately penetrate foreign markets. In turn this bill will help grow the American economy and create American jobs.

This effort is a smaller piece of what needs to be a comprehensive and cohesive approach to reduce our trade deficit in clean energy goods and bolster our economy. Despite efforts to do just that, we still struggle to build a manufacturing base that can provide the goods necessary to meet the global demand for renewable energy products. It is astonishing that increasingly, we import more renewable energy goods than we export. A recent Senate report showed that over a 5 year period from 2004-2008, our trade deficit in renewable energy goods increased 350 percent, which is attributed to increased U.S. demand that is met largely by imports from Asia and Europe. Not only are we failing to meet our own domestic demand, but we are slow to take advantage of market opportunities abroad. It is estimated that 90 percent of worldwide investments in renewable energy goods occur in G-20 countries, and the developing world is projected to comprise 80 percent of the world's future energy demand, yet the United States is not well positioned to capture these growing and burgeoning markets for renewable energy goods. If we are truly dedicated to strengthening our capability to grow renewable energy manufacturing and to becoming energy independent, we need to do more. We need to invest strategically at home, and we must also look beyond our shores to build markets for domestic manufacturers markets that can translate into sustainable, well-paying jobs here at home.

My legislation would create the Renewable Energy Market Access Program to focus on equipping small and medium sized enterprises with the tools they need to access foreign markets, thereby strengthening our domestic economy and creating jobs. Through REMAP, trade associations and state-regional trade groups would apply to the U.S. Department of Commerce to enter into cooperative agreements to provide marketing and trade assistance to small- and medium-sized companies in the renewable energy and energy efficiency sectors. The assistance would help facilitate the export of their goods to existing and new foreign markets. The agreements would also offer eligible participants an opportunity to share the costs related to innovative marketing and promotion activities. The public funding for any one application would never exceed 50 percent of the total cost of the proposal, ensuring buy-in from the applicant and an ongoing working relationship with the Department of Commerce. In sum, this bill will help streamline access to the global marketplace for small businesses and help promote American renewable energy and energy efficiency products overseas.

I believe that this legislation takes an important step in the right direction to support the growing renewable energy industry. I have been encouraged by the efforts of my colleagues here in the U.S. Congress and in the Administration to place a strong emphasis on supporting and growing all of America's exports but our future will be in solving our shared energy challenges.

While we look at ways to enhance market access to foreign markets, Congress must also develop sensible policy mechanisms to address unfair trade barriers and other anti-competitive tactics that are used to keep our goods from markets in countries with which we have stable relations. Such tactics should be addressed, but should not keep us from pursuing other opportunities to build foreign markets for American businesses. This is why I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation to support our small business community in growing our nation's economy.

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

Mr. President, today I am introducing a bipartisan bill along with my colleague Senator Collins to help improve the health and efficiency of our schools by making them more energy efficient, while creating much-needed jobs in the process. Though it is often over-looked, energy efficiency is a huge job creator. Not only does it create jobs through the purchase and installation of efficient materials, it frees up scarce school finances to retain teachers and important programs.

There are numerous Federal programs and funds already available to schools to help them become more energy efficient. However, as I learned in my travels across Colorado, schools face a morass of programs and agency offices across the government, and it is challenging for schools to take full advantage of them.

The bipartisan Streamlining Energy Efficiency for Schools Act of 2011 will force the government to coordinate their efforts so that schools are less confused and they can better navigate the existing Federal programs and financing options available to them. Put simply, it will streamline the Federal Government while still leaving decisions to the States, school boards and local officials to determine what is best for their schools.

I have seen the benefits of energy efficient buildings first hand when traveling in Colorado. The Cherry Creek School District in Greenwood Village, Colorado has incorporated day lighting techniques and ice storage to cool the buildings during the day. Because of these innovative improvements, the school district has enjoyed significant cost savings. In another example, the Poudre School District in Fort Collins, Colorado, actively promotes sustainable design guidelines, calling it their ``Ethic of Sustainability.'' This program includes an elementary school in Fort Collins that actually uses recycled blue jeans as insulation for the school buildings.

I hope that in passing this bill we will see more examples of these successful and creative projects across the country--projects that will increase the efficiency of our schools and teach our students about the importance of saving energy. I urge my colleagues--of both parties--to join me in supporting this bipartisan legislation.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the Renewable Energy Market Access Program Act, or REMAP Act, which I am re-introducing in the 112th Congress with my colleagues, Senators Stabenow and Merkley. This bill is designed to help grow American renewable energy and energy efficiency exports abroad by helping small and medium sized renewable energy businesses promote, export and ultimately penetrate foreign markets. In turn this bill will help grow the American economy and create American jobs.

This effort is a smaller piece of what needs to be a comprehensive and cohesive approach to reduce our trade deficit in clean energy goods and bolster our economy. Despite efforts to do just that, we still struggle to build a manufacturing base that can provide the goods necessary to meet the global demand for renewable energy products. It is astonishing that increasingly, we import more renewable energy goods than we export. A recent Senate report showed that over a 5 year period from 2004-2008, our trade deficit in renewable energy goods increased 350 percent, which is attributed to increased U.S. demand that is met largely by imports from Asia and Europe. Not only are we failing to meet our own domestic demand, but we are slow to take advantage of market opportunities abroad. It is estimated that 90 percent of worldwide investments in renewable energy goods occur in G-20 countries, and the developing world is projected to comprise 80 percent of the world's future energy demand, yet the United States is not well positioned to capture these growing and burgeoning markets for renewable energy goods. If we are truly dedicated to strengthening our capability to grow renewable energy manufacturing and to becoming energy independent, we need to do more. We need to invest strategically at home, and we must also look beyond our shores to build markets for domestic manufacturers markets that can translate into sustainable, well-paying jobs here at home.

My legislation would create the Renewable Energy Market Access Program to focus on equipping small and medium sized enterprises with the tools they need to access foreign markets, thereby strengthening our domestic economy and creating jobs. Through REMAP, trade associations and state-regional trade groups would apply to the U.S. Department of Commerce to enter into cooperative agreements to provide marketing and trade assistance to small- and medium-sized companies in the renewable energy and energy efficiency sectors. The assistance would help facilitate the export of their goods to existing and new foreign markets. The agreements would also offer eligible participants an opportunity to share the costs related to innovative marketing and promotion activities. The public funding for any one application would never exceed 50 percent of the total cost of the proposal, ensuring buy-in from the applicant and an ongoing working relationship with the Department of Commerce. In sum, this bill will help streamline access to the global marketplace for small businesses and help promote American renewable energy and energy efficiency products overseas.

I believe that this legislation takes an important step in the right direction to support the growing renewable energy industry. I have been encouraged by the efforts of my colleagues here in the U.S. Congress and in the Administration to place a strong emphasis on supporting and growing all of America's exports but our future will be in solving our shared energy challenges.

While we look at ways to enhance market access to foreign markets, Congress must also develop sensible policy mechanisms to address unfair trade barriers and other anti-competitive tactics that are used to keep our goods from markets in countries with which we have stable relations. Such tactics should be addressed, but should not keep us from pursuing other opportunities to build foreign markets for American businesses. This is why I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation to support our small business community in growing our nation's economy.

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

Mr. President, today we recognize the life of Ruth Humphreys Brown, a remarkable Coloradan who dedicated herself to a life of service and good will and a woman who was deeply tied to the American West. Ruth passed away on December 30, 2010, at the age of 90.

Ruth led a life full of courage and giving, and our country is indebted to her for her service. In 1943, at the age of 22, she answered our nation's call and was among the first women accepted to fly American military aircraft in the Women Airforce Service Pilots. As a young pilot stationed in Texas, her efforts prepared our bombardiers and ground artillery units to fight and win in World War II, and Congress rightfully acknowledged her heroic contributions by awarding her a Congressional Gold Medal in 2010.

I knew Ruth to often work behind the scenes, but she never lacked in ambition. Ruth's service extended to countless projects that continue to improve the health and activity of Colorado's communities. She took part in starting the first Outward Bound Program in the country. I am personally grateful to Ruth for her efforts to start this program, having made it my career for 20 years. Coloradans and adventurers across the continent benefit from Outward Bound's strength in training leaders and building community--two ideals to which Ruth contributed tremendously. Her love for the outdoors, from whitewater rafting and picnicking to swimming and skiing, carries on through the mission of Outward Bound.

Ruth gave to improve her community and never asked for the credit. But many agree she deserved it. One of her well-known and early contributions was committing the money to clear a new run on Aspen Mountain in 1949. Skiers have since come to love Ruthie's Run, aptly named after its originator, in much the same way that so many of us admire Ruth.

She grew up in Denver, worked and played on her family's Wagon Wheel Ranch in Southern Colorado, and was fundamental in making Aspen a thriving mountain town and wonderful place to live. Ruth's touch spanned the State and never failed to reach a person or community in need.

A veteran, entrepreneur, philanthropist, and mother, Ruth was a truly accomplished and inspirational Coloradan. Today we pause to honor her legacy and her welcomed contribution to Colorado's rich heritage.

Mr. President, last year we lost a great man and leader whom I knew well, Dave Genova. On March 28, 2010, Dave passed away at the age of 67.

From my days as an educator and guide in the Outward Bound Program, I

knew Dave to be a remarkably talented and committed individual with a gift for leadership.

Dave spent 32 years with Outward Bound, a program that uses the outdoors as a classroom to inspire service to others and to coach leadership skills, oftentimes to underprivileged youth. Having taught some 2,000 students, he had an incredible enthusiasm for bringing people together to overcome challenges in ways they never thought possible.

Throughout his tenure in the North Carolina Outward Bound, Dave played an invaluable role as an educator, but he was also an innovator. In 1999, he started the Unity Project, which is designed to break down barriers of social and economic inequality. His efforts have enabled nearly 1,000 young leaders to become agents of social change in their local schools and communities, and the program continues to educate and train future leaders today.

Dave once said of the Outward Bound School, ``Compassion is the well- spring from which we derive our relevance.'' These words should serve as a guiding compass for us all. Dave taught from a place of understanding, and he sought to ensure every one of his students came away with a greater appreciation for others and the knowledge that, in his words, ``We're all in this together.'' He used the great outdoors to build a sense of community among adventurers, but more important, he taught them how to carry on his work to build bridges between people. Neighborhoods, cities, and States have been touched by Dave's work, and we can all be grateful for his contribution.

A longtime outdoorsman myself, I appreciate and admire Dave's passion for our wild lands and the lessons they can teach us. Always a bold leader, scaling the toughest of life's mountains, Dave's extraordinary character exemplifies an ideal to which we all should strive. He is missed by many, but his memory continues to guide me and all his students.

Mr. President, I rise tonight, as so many of my colleagues have through this long day, to urge all of us to join to prevent a government shutdown.

We have all expressed a growing amount of frustration here with what I would characterize as politics as usual under the dome of this great Capitol, in which we are so fortunate to serve. But it sure seems like these are the kind of politics where the goal posts get continually moved, and no amount of civility can seemingly overcome the impasse that is unfolding down the corridors in the House of Representatives.

I know the Presiding Officer operates in this way, and the American public operates in this way, and they expect us to work together. They expect us to pass an appropriations bill that funds our government. But it appears as though some unrelated policy riders that are not about appropriating money but are about setting policy are leading to an impasse that could lead to an unnecessary and costly shutdown of government operations and services.

Last night--I do not know where the Presiding Officer was--my colleague Senator Bennet was down here. He highlighted how petty the situation has become. He pointed out if you and I went to Applebee's for dinner tonight, and we had a $20 dinner for two, and then we had a fight over the bill, we would be fighting over 4 cents.

Well, I have some news. It looks like today we got an agreement that we reached on the actual numbers, but now the House wants to add some controversial policy riders into the mix. It is as if that same check arrived when we were at Applebee's and after finally agreed on who is going to pay the 4 cents, but we are now arguing over whether the waitress, who is a hard-working American, should receive health care.

I have to say, I think people watching this are scratching their heads. I sure am. We all are facing an impending government shutdown. As I have said, some Members seem to want to inject very controversial policy issues into the debate. These issues have divided us for too many years.

We ought to have that debate elsewhere. It is forcing this shutdown on the American people. Some people who are standing their ground think they are doing something about the deficit. I am often the one highlighting how disturbing our long-range fiscal picture has become.

But what is equally frustrating is the disservice being done to the American public by the current debate. Not only are we taken off the beat from addressing our real fiscal imbalances, which would be the debate we need to have on the 2012 budget or on the longer term challenges the Simpson-Bowles commission pointed out, but we are now focusing on women's health issues. I don't understand. We have a tentative agreement to cut billions from current spending levels, but the Speaker of the House seems to continue to demand that we ought to focus on nonbudget issues. These are hot-button issues. Why we would insert them into an unrelated budget debate when there is so much at stake is beyond me.

I understand we want to show the American people we are serious about deficit reduction. I am, I know the Presiding Officer is, and I know the American people are. But in Colorado, people see straight through this latest ploy to inject nonbudgetary issues into the debate. It is politics as usual.

I know we have felt a little better recently. We have had 13 straight months of private sector growth. We have added 1.8 million jobs during that time. But our economy is still very fragile. Way too many Americans, way too many West Virginians, and way too many Coloradans are struggling.

I have no doubt that a government shutdown at this time would have a counterproductive effect on our recovery.

Don't take my word for it. Listen to what top business leaders of all political persuasions are saying. The Business Roundtable president, John Engler, former Governor of Michigan, a Republican Governor, said businesses would face the dangerous ``unintended consequences,'' where interest rates could rise because of a shutdown and we would have turmoil in our financial markets. Forecasters at Goldman Sachs have warned that a shutdown could shave off growth in our GDP every single week. CEOs of all stripes all over the country have warned about a shutdown's impact on confidence in the U.S. economic recovery. The Presiding Officer and I know that confidence is what we need. That is what is really lacking in many respects.

A shutdown would actually prevent what we need to address our long- term growth and fiscal balance. In other words, if we get the economy growing again, we would have more tax revenue, and we would see that gap between what we are spending and bringing in narrow.

I can't help but think in the context of this debate about my uncle Stewart Udall. I have talked to the Presiding Officer about the effect men like his father had on his upbringing and his values, his public service commitment. But Stewart Udall, my uncle, father of my cousin, Senator Tom Udall, wrote a book called ``The Forgotten Founders'' that focused on the settling of the West. I bet it would apply as well to West Virginia. The theme of the book was on how the West was settled, how it was built. He made a strong case in his book that the people who came out West were not looking to get into gunfights or range wars, regardless of what the Hollywood movies suggest. They wanted to start a new life and in a new country, pursuing what we now call the American dream.

My uncle Stewart pointed out that when we watched those Hollywood movies, it was the people standing on the sidewalks watching the mythical gunfight who were really the people who built the West. They were looking to work together. They weren't looking to get into fights. They were looking out for each other. It didn't matter what one's political party was.

To me, the American people today are standing on those board sidewalks watching the same senseless gunfights and range wars. These are the people who matter. These are the people who will ultimately be hurt and affected by a shutdown.

I know I was hired by the people of Colorado and sent to the Senate to come here and work together and solve some very difficult challenges facing this country. That is why today I introduced the Preventing a Government Shutdown Act of 2011. This bill was originally a Republican idea. It is meant to ensure that the American people are not unfairly subjected to the effects of a government shutdown simply because some Members of Congress want to make a political point and pursue persistent squabbling over the budget. The bill would ensure that Federal appropriations continue at last year's funding levels as a bridge to

keep the government running until a compromise could be reached for the remainder of the fiscal year. Once Congress is able to reach a bipartisan agreement to fund the government for that fiscal year, then the automatic funding under my proposal would stop and it would be replaced by the enacted bill.

I know there are some who say: Wait a minute, the Congress is charged with passing appropriations bills that reflect strategic planning, current functional needs, and create stability. What I am suggesting is that the Preventing a Government Shutdown Act would create a safety valve that would ensure that partisan shutdown politics don't punish the American people and destabilize the economy going forward.

It seems as though a vocal minority wants to be combative, almost for the sake of being combative--let's fight for the sake of fighting. But in this case, in these delicate and fragile economic times, that is not a helpful thing to do, to put it mildly. I think the mature thing to do would be to have a piece of legislation in place that would eliminate that kind of irresponsible behavior moving forward.

As I come to a close, I have to think the American people are amazed at this, if they have time because they are busy providing for their families. We have to settle down here. We have to act as adults. We need to work collaboratively toward a budget solution. We have to reduce the debt and the deficit. The Presiding Officer has been on point on that as well as on this. But you won't find anyone more committed than I to that cause. Let's reach it in a way that protects our senior citizens, veterans, students, and border security--I could go on with a long list of important functions the Federal Government provides--and let's do it in a way that slashes spending but doesn't harm our fragile economic recovery or divert our attention on divisive social issues.

We can't afford a government shutdown. We just flatout can't afford a government shutdown. I will be disappointed, to say the least, if the bipartisan deal that is before us--it is in our hands--is undercut by contentious, unrelated issues that only serve to divide us rather than to bring us together.

One thing we can agree on is that our military personnel deserve better than this. We have young people fighting in two wars as I speak. We have young men and women serving all over the globe in over 50 countries. The last thing our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines need is to worry about whether they will be able to pay their bills. Military families have already done more than their share. Now we are asking them to do even more. That is simply unacceptable.

I know we can find a solution to this particular situation. We worked together in the Senate with Senator Hutchison and a bipartisan group of Senators to introduce the bipartisan Ensuring Pay for Our Military Act. This bill, S. 724, would ensure that our military servicemembers would not have interrupted pay in the event of a shutdown. We need to pass that bill if we don't get the job done tonight.

Three days ago, I wrote a letter, joined by close to 18 of my colleagues, including the Presiding Officer, to Mr. Boehner. I know Speaker Boehner well. He and I served in the House together. I urged him to work with all of us to avoid a shutdown. I will stay here the rest of this day, all night, whatever it takes. I am here to urge all of us, both Chambers, let's sit down together. Let's reason together. Let's use common sense together. Let's find a compromise. That is the American way. I know that is why I was elected to the Senate. People in Colorado know I work across party lines. The Senate could set that example right here tonight. We have numerous examples of us working together across party lines.

I had to come to the floor tonight. I know the night is growing on. I had to come down here and urge Senators in this great body, the world's greatest deliberative body, to find a commonsense compromise to keep our government funded, keep our economy focused upon, and move our country forward. That is job 1.

I thank the Chair for his attention and his willingness to work with me and the spirit with which he serves West Virginia.

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

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

There being no objeciton, the text of the bill was ordered to be

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

There being no objeciton, the text of the bill was ordered to be

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

Mr. President, I rise at this late hour in the afternoon to join many of my colleagues who have come to the floor today to express growing frustration with the politics as usual in the Capitol. I say ``politics'' not ``policy'' because I think we should be focusing on policies that will get our country back on track.

I have to say, people who are watching the debate are witnessing potentially an impending government shutdown that I think is needlessly being forced on the American people. That is whom we are, after all, here to serve. I know the Presiding Officer feels that strongly. I am not the first person to highlight how disturbing our long-term fiscal picture has become, but what is equally frustrating is the disservice being done to the American public by this current debate on our budget--a budget, by the way, for the second half of 2011. It is not a budget debate we need to have on 2012 or the longer term challenge the Simpson-Bowles Commission pointed out.

We ought to be focusing on supporting economic development and job growth. While we are doing that, I believe the Senate and some Members of the House of Representatives continue to seek sustained confrontation and seem to me to be interested in shutting down the government as a misguided statement that they are serious about debt reduction. It seems they want to pick a fight for a fight's sake while our people, the U.S. citizens, will be left to pick up the pieces from a shutdown.

The latest demands have not been about funding the government at all. I think we have common ground on what the number ought to be. The fight now seems to be on controversial abortion and climate change issues. I do not understand it. We have this tentative agreement to cut billions from current spending levels, but the Speaker of the House seems to continue to demand we ought to focus on controversial climate change issues.

These are hot-button issues. Why we would insert them in an unrelated budget debate when there is so much at stake is beyond me. I understand we want to show the American people we are serious about deficit reduction. I am. I know the Presiding Officer is.

In Colorado, people see straight through this latest ploy. What do abortion and climate change have to do with finding a compromise on keeping our government running? Nothing. They have nothing to do with that. It strikes me the debate has become increasingly ideological and increasingly about sending a partisan political message, one that leaves the American people paying the price.

We have had 13 straight months of private sector job growth. We have added 1.8 million jobs in that time. But our economy is still fragile, and way too many Americans, way too many Minnesotans, way too many Coloradans are struggling. I have no doubt a government shutdown at this time would create a counterproductive effect on our economic recovery.

Do not just take my word for it. I am a Senator from Colorado. Listen to what top business leaders of all political persuasions are saying. The Business Roundtable president, John Engler, a former Republican Governor of Michigan, said businesses would face the dangerous ``unintended consequences,'' where interest rates could

rise because of a shutdown, and there could be turmoil in our financial markets. Forecasters at Goldman Sachs have warned that a shutdown could shave off growth in our GDP every single week. CEOs of all stripes have warned about a shutdown's impact on confidence in the U.S. economic recovery. The Presiding Officer and I know and Senators from across the country know confidence is what we need to build. That is what is lacking in many respects.

A setback of this nature, a shutdown would actually prevent the growth we tangibly need to address our long-term growth and fiscal balance--in other words, get the economy growing again. We will have more tax revenues and we will see the gap between what we are spending and bringing in narrow.

I cannot help but think, in the context of this debate, about my Uncle Stewart Udall, the father of Senator Udall from New Mexico. He wrote a book called ``The Forgotten Founders'' that focused on the settling of the West. I should add he focused on the people who were there at the time the Europeans arrived.

The theme of the book was on how the West was settled, how it was built. It made the strong case that people coming out to the West--I think the Presiding Officer's home State, which is in the near West, might fit this characterization--people coming to the West were not looking to get into gunfights or range wars. They were looking to start their lives over to pursue the American dream.

Stewart pointed out that in reality, particularly when we watch those Hollywood movies, people standing on the board sidewalks watching the gunfights were the people who built the West, and they built the West working together, solving problems, looking out for one another. It did not matter what your political party was. It seems to me the American people are standing on one of those board sidewalks watching the same senseless gunfights and range wars right here in Washington, DC.

I know I was sent to Washington to work together and solve shared problems. I suggest this spirit I described is in stark contrast to this new kind of divisive politics that is brewing away in America. It is the kind of politics that furthers disagreement. It draws ideological lines in the sand, and it sows disrespect at the expense of shared interest and collective prosperity. The American people are seeing a disappointing example of that this week.

While a vocal minority seems to favor acrimony and combativeness which, in the end, will further slow our economy, many of us are doing what we can to do the people's business and try in good faith to prevent a government shutdown.

As the American people look on in amazement at this spectacle, I stand with them wondering if Members of Congress will finally settle down, act like adults, and work collaboratively toward a real budget solution.

Yes, we have to reduce our government deficit and debt. One would be hard-pressed to find a Senator more committed to that cause than I am. Let's reach that goal. Let's reach it in a way that protects our senior citizens, our students, our veterans, our border security--I could go on with a long list. Let's do it in a way that slashes spending but does not harm our fragile economic recovery or divert our attention on divisive social issues.

We cannot afford a government shutdown. I will be disappointed, to say the least, if the bipartisan deal that is before us is undercut by contentious, unrelated issues such as abortion and climate change.

I wrote a letter 2 days ago to the Speaker of the House, Mr. Boehner, whom I know well, in which a large number of my fellow Senators joined me to suggest to him and urge him to work with us to avoid a Federal Government shutdown. I will stay here all day, all night, whatever it takes. I am here to urge my colleagues in both Chambers--I served in the House and I now have the great privilege of serving in the Senate-- let's sit down together, let's reason together, let's be commonsensical together. Let's find a compromise. That is the American way. I know that is what propelled me to the Senate, my willingness to work across party lines. I think the Senate of the United States could set an example. There are colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have worked together, and we know the stakes are high.

That is the reason I came to the floor, to urge Senators of both parties to work together to find a commonsense compromise to keep this government moving forward and make sure our economy is focused upon and we produce as many jobs as possible. That is job one.

Mr. President, I thank you for your attention and for your interest. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Before the Senator from Oklahoma leaves the floor, I wanted to join him in supporting the commonsense amendment he just outlined. The Coburn-Udall amendment would fix what I think most Americans, if not every single

American, would be shocked to discover; that is, millionaires and billionaires have been drawing unemployment benefits.

Now, unemployment insurance is a critical temporary safety net for Americans who need help to get by when they fall on tough times, but providing unemployment insurance for millionaires, much less billionaires, who do not need it for their basic necessities is fiscally irresponsible, to put it mildly. Frankly, it doesn't make much sense.

I think Senator Coburn put it best when he said it is foolish. We all recall that for months last year we struggled to find ways to put unemployment benefits in the hands of Americans who were really struggling in the face of this tough economic downturn. It was controversial and we worked hard on that in the Senate. It was drawn out because unemployment benefits are expensive, but I supported extending those benefits for out-of-work Americans because they help. We found a way, ultimately, to pay for them. But little did we know, in taking care of these good Americans, it was made even harder because literally--and this number astonishes me--thousands of millionaires and billionaires were abusing the system to draw extra payments for themselves. So it increased the price tag for all the rest.

In the end, we are talking about values. We are talking about hard work and playing by the rules. That is how most Americans operate. But there are a few folks always looking to game the system, and I can't believe that some of the most well-off among us have been asking for a government paycheck while out-of-work Americans, day in and day out, look for jobs. They want to provide for themselves, and they want to do it in an honest way. They don't want to draw those unemployment benefits. That is a decision and action of last resort.

We have had 13 straight months of private sector growth. We have added almost 2 million jobs. But our economy is still fragile, and too many Coloradans and too many Americans are looking for work. Families in my State, and I know in the neighboring State of Oklahoma, are working to balance their budgets and find a way to set aside money for college, taking care of their kids. Asking them to pay for unemployment insurance for millionaires is unbelievable.

So I am truly honored to work with my colleague from Oklahoma. This would save $100 million. As the Senator said, every day we wait, we waste money. Every day we don't take an opportunity to save money, we are doing a disservice to the taxpayers.

So I ask my colleagues to support this amendment. It is a smart change, and it avoids tarnishing an otherwise worthy and critical way to temporarily assist Americans who have fallen on tough times.

I will be glad to yield.

Mr. President, the Senator makes important points, and it is a small investment, if you will, the $200,000, in saving the taxpayers significant amounts of money. As the Senator points out, the important outcome is that the integrity of the unemployment insurance system is maintained.

I also would note, as the Senator from Oklahoma did, the point that it is $1 million in income or more, not whether an individual has assets or something in that amount--in other words, a rancher who is fortunate enough to have lands valued at significant enough levels but who is illiquid and may be struggling to make ends meet. This applies to people, as the Senator points out, who have incomes of over $1 million annually. That makes sense.

This is an important amendment. I urge all our colleagues to support it. We have a chance to vote for it later today.

Mr. President, it is my understanding that I was speaking on Senator Coburn's time, and I ask unanimous consent that the agreement reflect such allocation.

Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I am pleased to join my friend from Oklahoma in supporting this amendment. He laid out the case in the strongest terms possible. We are spending $100 million a year providing unemployment insurance for people who make over 1 million a year. It doesn't make any sense. It undercuts the integrity of the unemployment insurance program and it would save $100 million, as I mentioned. I ask all of you to join us in supporting this amendment. Let's save the taxpayers some money.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 2:15 p.m. the Senate proceed to a period of morning business with Senator Coburn being recognized for up to 20 minutes; that following Senator Coburn, Senator Mikulski be recognized for up to 15 minutes; and that following Senator Mikulski's remarks, the majority leader be recognized.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 15 minutes.

Madam President, I urge the Senate to free up capital for small businesses to allow them to grow, expand, and begin hiring again. Unfortunately, there is a burdensome Federal regulation that currently limits the number of small business loans credit unions can make to family entrepreneurs. Credit unions have money to lend, and they know small businesses in their communities. They know these businesses desperately wanted to jump-start the economy by taking out new loans to grow their companies and hire more workers.

Two weeks ago I came to the floor to ask consideration of a bipartisan amendment, No. 242, which I offered to the underlying bill to raise this cap I have alluded to on small business loans. The amendment would simply get government out of the way and allow credit unions to increase small business lending in their communities without costing American taxpayers a dime.

I wish to repeat that. It would not cost American taxpayers a single dime.

When I spoke previously in support of this amendment and asked for the amendment to be considered, the chairman of the Small Business Committee, Senator Landrieu, objected to my request and indicated that Senator Johnson, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, opposed the amendment. I wish to clear up some misinformation the American people may have heard at that time and thank Senator Landrieu for removing from the Congressional Record her assertion that Chairman Johnson opposed my amendment.

I understand that as new chairman of the Banking Committee, Senator Johnson has an interest in revisiting this legislation which I negotiated with the Treasury Department, the National Credit Union Administration, and the previous chairman of the Banking Committee, Senator Chris Dodd. But I wish to make it clear in the Congressional Record that Chairman Johnson does not in fact oppose the amendment.

I also wish to clear up some confusion related to the $30 billion small business lending fund established as a part of the Small Business Jobs Act which arose when I tried to call up my amendment 2 weeks ago. As I pointed out in my original remarks, banks were given access to the small business lending fund, but credit unions have not been allowed to expand their small business lending because of the very cap on loans my amendment addresses.

In our discussion on the Senate floor, it was pointed out to me that credit unions had been asked if they wanted to participate in the small business lending fund, but the credit union industry had turned down the invitation. I was unaware of such an offer; I appreciate being told of it. But unlike many banks, most credit unions do not need extra capital in order to make loans, which is what the small business lending fund intended to provide. Rather, as I have said, most credit unions currently have capital to lend to small businesses, but, unfortunately, they are being prevented from making those loans due to the arbitrary cap limiting their small business lending to no more than 12.25 percent of their assets.

It is no wonder credit unions didn't have an interest in the $30 billion bank fund because they don't need the money and couldn't use it anyway because of this burdensome cap that is put on small business loans.

I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the confusion about amendment No. 242. I thank the chairman and ranking member for their great work on the underlying bill which is important to my home State of Colorado.

I wish my amendment would get a vote today, but regardless of what happens I will continue to work with Chairman Landrieu, Ranking Member Snowe, and the rest of my colleagues to find innovative means to free up credit for small businesses in a responsible way.

On a final note, the Presiding Officer hails from a great State that has significant banking and credit union sectors. We know they don't always see eye to eye, which is the root of the objection to my amendment. Yet they still manage to operate side by side to serve the community's credit needs. They both make up the fabric of America and continue to grow our economy. It is simply the way we do business in the United States.

I wish to highlight that spirit, which is in stark contrast to the kind of divisive politics that have been brewing in America; one that furthers disagreements and draws ideological lines in the sand and, frankly, sows disrespect at the expense of shared interests and collective prosperity. The American people are seeing a disappointing example of that today. There is a vocal minority outside this very Capitol demanding acrimony and a combative approach for Members of Congress which I believe--and many of us believe--in the end will further disable our capacity to get the economy back on its feet.

While this is happening outside, many of us are inside doing the people's business. We treat each other with respect, and we are working on a bill to help small businesses invest in R&D. We are also negotiating a compromise to keep our government running.

That is the American way I have always known. I applaud my colleagues who remain committed to working together.

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.