Floor Statements

Mr. President, today I am introducing a bipartisan bill along with my colleague Senator Collins entitled the Streamlining Energy Efficiency for Schools Act of 2010. This bill is designed to streamline the Federal Government's efforts to improve the health and efficiency of our schools, while creating much-needed jobs in the process.

I am pleased that Senators Burris, Merkley and Murray are also joining us as original cosponsors of this bill.

For the past year I have been travelling across Colorado as part of a work force tour to talk directly to Coloradans and hear their innovative policy ideas to create jobs. These ongoing efforts help me identify ways the Federal Government can help or is not as effective as it can be in supporting economic development and meeting our national energy goals. The Streamlining Energy Efficiency for Schools Act of 2010 comes directly from visiting with Coloradans. This bill is just one of several job-creation proposals developed after I hosted an Energy Jobs Summit in February in Colorado.

There are numerous Federal programs and funds already available to schools to help them become more energy efficient. However, schools face a morass of programs and agency offices across the government and it is challenging for schools to take full advantage of them. This bipartisan bill 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 had a longstanding interest in energy efficiency technologies. These technologies further our national goals of broad-based economic growth, environmental protection, national security, and economic competitiveness.

I have also been a long-time champion of energy efficiency in our schools, introducing and co-sponsoring many bills over the years in the House of Representatives that promoted the efficient use of energy by our schools.

I have seen these energy efficient buildings first hand when traveling in Colorado. It is good to see that there are schools in my state that are already incorporating this technology into their buildings. For example, the Cherry Creek School District in Greenwood Village, CO, 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. This is good news not just for Colorado students, but also for Colorado taxpayers.

In another example, Colorado's Poudre School District in Fort Collins, CO, 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. This school has a ``Truth Wall,'' an exposed cross-section where kids can see the denim at work, look at pipes and electrical systems, and check school energy use.

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.

Through effective use of existing Federal Government programs and financing options, schools can reduce costs and create jobs at the same time becoming more energy efficient. Though it is often overlooked, 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.

What excites me most about this bill is that it will create jobs for Americans in every neighborhood where schools improve their energy efficiency. Right now, creating jobs is priority one for all of us.

But additionally, this bill helps reduce barriers to schools wishing to incorporate innovative energy efficiency measures, and creates a simple, streamlined structure to allow schools

to more effectively use existing Federal funds and programs--at a low cost. These cutting edge actions--which we are all seeing across our states--are making government more efficient and saving taxpayer dollars, a goal we all share. I urge my colleagues--of both parties--to join me in supporting this bipartisan legislation.

Mr. President, are we in morning business?

Mr. President, I rise today to speak about a bipartisan amendment which Senator Lugar and I have filed based on our bill, the Fair Access to Credit Scores Act of 2010. This amendment is cosponsored by 17 of our colleagues from both sides of the aisle, which I have to say is a rare bipartisan piece of legislation. Our amendment corrects one of the fundamental inequities in our financial system by giving Americans free annual access to their credit score.

The problem is that most people have been misled to believe that people have access to a free credit score, but that simply is not true. They only have access to their report. A credit report

tells consumers what outstanding credit accounts they have open, such as student loans or credit cards, perhaps a car or home loan. Unfortunately, it tells Americans little else. On the other hand, your credit score, which our legislation makes available, has the critical information consumers need to know.

This score is the very first point of entry into our entire financial system which rates each and every one of us. It is a number that banks, lenders, and large financial firms have easy access to, while hard- working Americans--the engine of our economy--do not have access to it. A credit score affects consumers' interest rates, monthly payments on home loans, and can even affect a consumer's ability to buy a car, rent an apartment or get phone or Internet service. They can be paying interest rates on their home loan, car loan, or student loan which are two to three times higher because of their credit score. This inequity absolutely needs to be fixed if Americans are to take control of their finances. How do we expect them to do that if they do not know if their credit score is bad or good?

Mr. President, I will be insisting on a vote because we must put consumers back in control of their finances by offering Americans annual access to their credit score when they access their free annual credit report.

I know lobbyists have been calling everyone in the Capitol. These credit reporting agencies have misled Americans for years, and now their lobbyists are trying to mislead my colleagues in the Senate. They are making calls and asking Members to fight this transparency and coming up with all sorts of phony arguments. The truth is, this amendment accomplishes what the television commercials and their fine print have claimed for years--the offer of a free credit score.

Our bipartisan amendment would simply require that a credit score be included when a consumer accesses their free annual credit report once per year from each agency. This would provide some context for consumers who access their free annual credit report and allow them to take responsibility for their financial situation.

Since we filed this amendment--and I want to thank the Presiding Officer who has joined me on this amendment--credit reporting agencies and their lobbyists have been hard at work perpetuating fine-print arguments. They claim our amendment would confuse consumers; that the information belongs to the agency and not the people; and they have even been threatening Members it will cost them jobs in their particular State.

I don't have to tell those watching and my colleagues that those arguments are overstated and are really no grounds for keeping Americans from having access to their individual credit score. According to credit reporting agencies and their lobbyists, providing a free score for transparency and therefore a sense of financial standing simply would distract and confuse the American consumer.

How can they say these scores would confuse Americans, even though they are happy to sell them that same information? These same lobbyists we are discussing also claim that credit scores belong to them. In other words, a credit score to gauge the creditworthiness of a consumer, based upon their personal information, is the property of the credit reporting agency, not the consumer. So, in other words, they are making the argument it belongs to the agency, not to the individual who creates the credit score.

I can't help but wonder: Would a doctor say someone's blood pressure reading is their information, not their patient's?

I have to say I am disappointed to hear these credit reporting agencies are even making the suggestion that this amendment might result in job losses in their particular States. These are tough times, and who wouldn't be moved by the argument about jobs. But what they do not tell you when they make that argument is that they opposed the 2003 law that required disclosure of consumers' credit reports and the industry has tripled its business since that time. It has tripled because consumers have gotten engaged. They care about those credit reports. And I would predict that if we have free credit scores, it will only enhance the interest of consumers to have additional financial literacy.

Talking about jobs, I have some of these jobs in my State, but I don't consider deceptive practices and keeping Americans from their personal information to be a kind of jobs program. In fact, if anything, not knowing your credit score could be the greatest threat to employment for any given individual. Employers are increasingly using this information to decide whether to hire one person over another.

I came to the Senate floor yesterday to speak about the frequent television commercials and Internet advertisements we have all seen which falsely claim to offer consumers free access to their credit score. Their ads clearly indicate to Americans that their credit score is critical information. What they do not tell you--and I know the Presiding Officer shares some personal experiences with me on this account--is that they want to lure you into a costly monthly monitoring service that can cost hundreds of dollars a year.

What is comical about all this is that credit reporting agency representatives are walking the Halls of Congress as I speak telling Members that our bill is somehow unfair and unfounded. They want to protect a Federal law that has given them a monopoly on these scores and continues to direct unwitting consumers their way. They are using the same tactics of confusion and misdirection to fight our amendment.

We agree with the credit reporting agencies that a credit score is important information, and perhaps their misleading ads, if anything, have convinced consumers they need to know this information. However, luring Americans into a costly credit monitoring service is simply not fair.

As I begin to close, I want to say that we have all come to the floor this week from both sides of the aisle explaining that what we want to do is to protect consumers and to do what is right for Main Street in this important and historic bill we are considering. We have a chance to right this wrong here and now. That is why the Consumer Federation of America, Third Way, the Consumers Union, and a wide range of consumer advocates support this legislation.

While free access to a consumer's credit score is only a small part of the larger reforms that are needed, it addresses one of the fundamental inequities that pervade the financial system.

I wish to thank a group of bipartisan Senators who have held strong amidst the lobbying blitz by these large multibillion-dollar entities to stand with consumers and cosponsors of my bipartisan amendment. That list includes Senators Lugar, Bond, Cochran, Brown of Massachusetts, Schumer, Lieberman, Levin, Hagan, Brown of Ohio, Shaheen, McCaskill, Lautenberg, Menendez, Tom Udall, Gillibrand, Burris, and Begich.

I hope and expect more Members will join us in cosponsoring this amendment and vote for it when it comes up for a vote.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider en bloc the following nominations on the Executive Calendar: Nos. 832, 833, 834, and 835; that the nominations be confirmed en bloc, that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid on the table en bloc, that any statements relating to the nominations be printed in the Record, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then resume legislative session.

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

Mr. President. I rise to speak about a bipartisan amendment, No. 3778, which Senator Lugar and I have filed based on our bill, the Fair Access to Credit Scores Act of 2010. This amendment has wide and growing support, both with consumer groups and legislators of all political persuasions. I thank Senators Bond, Brown of Massachusetts, Brown of Ohio, Hagan, Levin, Lieberman, McCaskill, and Shaheen who are also sponsors of this amendment.

Our amendment takes a commonsense yet significant step toward putting consumers back in control of their finances by offering Americans annual access to their credit score when they access their free annual credit report.

I wish to clarify, because this is important. A credit report tells consumers what outstanding credit accounts they have open, such as student loans, credit cards, even, perhaps, a car or a home loan. Unfortunately, it tells Americans little else. One's credit score, on the other hand, which our legislation makes available, has the critical information consumers need to know. A credit score affects consumer interest rates, monthly payments on home loans, and could be the difference between whether a child is able to afford college. Credit scores even affect the consumer's ability to buy a car, rent an apartment, and get a phone or even Internet service.

In 2003, Congress enacted legislation requiring the three major consumer credit reporting agencies to provide a free annual credit report to consumers. This law, known as the FACT Act, was an important step in ensuring financial records of American consumers are accurate. However, since that time, many of my constituents have been misled to believe they have free access to their credit score, when what they have is free access to a credit report. So we have the score versus the report. Even thoughtful lawmakers in Congress do not realize American consumers ultimately have to buy access to their credit score.

To be clear, banks and lenders can easily obtain these scores while consumers cannot. That simply is not fair. We have all seen the frequent television commercials or Internet advertisements which claim to offer consumers free access to their credit score. Unfortunately, consumers are often disappointed to learn they only have access to their credit report, not the critical information they need to judge their own creditworthiness, their score. In the most troubling cases, consumers often believe they are signing up to get a free credit score, only to find out later that they unwittingly signed up for a costly monitoring service that could cost nearly $200 a year.

In considering reforms to hold Wall Street accountable and rein in their shady dealings, we believe Congress should also work to protect consumers from other unscrupulous financial practices. When there is a deal that often seems too good to be true, many Americans ask themselves: What is the catch. There certainly is a catch in this instance. The problem is that Federal law tacitly supports it by directing consumers to credit rating agencies under false pretenses. We all know consumers want their score, but it is the last thing they receive. We are literally sending Americans every day into a fine print trap.

I am not surprised the credit reporting agencies and their lobbyists have been hard at work over the last several days perpetuating fine print arguments in opposing our amendment. They even claim credit scores belong to them, not the consumers whose livelihoods depend on them. Would a doctor say that someone's blood pressure reading is their information, not the patient's? These agencies have also been circulating a document opposing our effort because, according to them, it would not provide consumers any greater benefit than already available. Something is up. They oppose our bill because it does not offer consumers enough benefits.

This is precisely the kind of misleading information included in their advertisements, as we see here in this photograph. This snapshot does not fully reflect the deception in this particular ad. It does picture a squirrel directing consumers to one of the Web sites claiming to offer a free credit score. But there is more to the story. While it patently seems to offer a free score, this credit reporting agency requires consumers to enter their credit card information and registers them for a costly credit monitoring service. We have to look closely at the top of the ad to read the fine print that actually tells consumers the real story. They have to subscribe to the company's service to receive the actual credit score.

Members have probably seen this commercial which tells a sad story about an individual whose poor credit score landed him in a dead-end job. If only he had access to his credit score, the ad explains with a catchy jingle, he would have been able to take action and improve his credit and his quality of life. Again, we have to look closely to read the fine print. If the consumer goes to this site, they once again have to enter their credit card information and register for a service costly of nearly $200 a year.

It says:

Free credit score and report with enrollment in Triple

Advantage.

Ironically, these credit reporting agencies are walking the halls of Congress telling Members that our bill is somehow ``unfair and unfounded.'' They want to protect a Federal law that has given them a monopoly on this information and continues to direct unwitting consumers their way. We agree, those of us who have sponsored this legislation, with these credit reporting agencies that a credit score is important information. Perhaps their misleading ads have convinced consumers they need to know this information. However, luring hard- working Americans into a costly credit monitoring service is simply not fair, especially when Federal law nudges consumers in their direction.

We have all come to the floor this week from both sides of the aisle explaining what we want to do to protect consumers and do what is right for Main Street. We have a chance to right this wrong here and now, this week. Put simply, this amendment accomplishes what the television commercials and their fine print caveats have deceptively claimed for years--the offer of a free credit score. That is why the Consumer Federation of America, the Consumers Union, and a wide range of consumer advocates support this legislation. While free access to a consumer's credit score is only a small part of the larger reforms needed, it addresses one of the fundamental inequities that pervades the current financial system. Put simply, our one-sided marketplace today is often rigged to benefit large financial institutions at the expense of hard-working Americans struggling to support their families and save for retirement.

If we want to empower Americans to reclaim their financial health, we have to start with a dose of transparency.

When so much is at stake, this amendment is a small step that will help restore balance and give Americans the tools they need to take back control of their personal finances.

My strong hope is that we will be able to vote on this important amendment in order to restore an even greater dose of fairness to consumers in my state of Colorado and all around the Nation.

I urge and request that each one of my colleagues support its passage.

I thank the Banking Committee chairman for his interest in this bipartisan amendment. I take to heart his comments on the importance of having access to one's credit score. We all have access to our credit reports. Those are important. But frankly, one ought to understand what is in their credit report. It is the loans, the financial obligations and liabilities one has. It is much harder to get one's credit score. We hear a lot about financial literacy, about taking control of one's own destiny when it comes to their financial future. This would be an important tool to have in the hands of consumers.

The agencies and the institutions that develop these scores are saying, as I said, that this is unfair and unfounded. But they have found, frankly, when they made the credit reports available on a one- time basis annually for free, it actually created more traffic and more business. I predict that when you get your score that one time each year for free, you will want to check over time on that score, and that will create additional business for these companies. Much like when I to go my ATM, I am always curious about the flow in and out of my checking account. Sometimes I check the last ten transactions. That results in a little bit of income stream to the bank. I don't resent that because I have the information at hand. When I was given the opportunity to have that information initially, that triggered a greater interest in being more financially engaged.

This is common sense. Its bipartisan support shows there is widespread support for this idea. I thank the chairman again for his interest and support.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the critically important legislation before the Senate, the bill to reform Wall Street and end the excesses that sent our economy into a tailspin.

Having made the tough choice to fend off a collapse of our economic system, we must now look back and decide what actions are required to hold Wall Street accountable and put consumers back in control of their finances.

This Congress has taken decisive action to stem the bleeding, actions that were not always comfortable, but were necessary. And our economy is starting to heal. Yet we remain at a seminal moment in history.

One tenth of our population remains unemployed, the threat of home foreclosure haunts far too many families, and American seniors are scrambling to replenish what were once considered their retirement accounts.

The fault for this economic decline, however, does not lie at the feet of the working class nor reflect the steady strength of American ingenuity. Instead, the Wall Street bailout, and the threat of global economic depression

that necessitated it, was thrust upon us by those who put short-term self-interest above the economic security of a nation.

It is an unpleasant fact to admit. But the current financial system all too often rewards greed and recklessness, fans speculative trading, and has fostered shady dealings that are so complicated that only those Wall Street firms that stand to benefit can comprehend them.

Compounding this, consumers have found themselves on the losing end of these deals. Wall Street executives have taken excessive risks, knowing a sweetheart contract, bonus or stock option will cover their losses while stockholders are left empty handed. Nearly one quarter of Americans have found themselves with home mortgages they struggle to afford, while the lender's commission has long been spent.

And, American consumers have to jump through hoop after hoop and ultimately pay to have access to their own credit score, while banks and lenders can easily obtain this information to hike their annual interest rate or monthly payment.

Don't get me wrong, I am the first to recognize that our financial sector historically has played a driving role in the growth of our economy. In many instances, Wall Street's ingenuity has spurred solid investment and helped U.S. businesses compete world-wide.

But we cannot ignore the plain fact that transparent investing and fair business dealings seem to be the exception, rather than the rule.

In one recent example, the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission alleged that Goldman Sachs realized that the only way out of bad securities was to sell them to unwitting investors.

This investigation is rapidly expanding to other financial firms and products, and is symptomatic of how out of touch Wall Street has become with the American workers who are the real engine of our economy.

As the 2008 collapse washed away nearly half of Americans' savings and investments, these same taxpayers were on the hook to finance Wall Street's rescue. I understand the anger of Coloradans and Americans all around the country, many who felt that the big banks should have been left to fail.

So our constituents have asked us: Please reform the current laws so that this does not happen again. Please hold Wall Street to the same rules that hardworking families and small businesses are held to.

But now, as the economy recovers, slowly adding jobs and allowing families to rebuild their savings and retirement portfolios, Wall Street is reporting record profits and its executives are again pocketing record bonuses.

It is time to put American consumers back in control of their financial future. We must hold Wall Street accountable and create a financial system that works for all Americans, not just rich executives.

The legislation that we are trying to bring up for debate this week does just that. With Senator Dodd's leadership, the Wall Street Accountability Act will:

Safely regulate the shadow markets and the hidden side-bet financing that escaped the regulatory radar and allowed financial firms to engage in the risky and irresponsible behavior that wiped out trillions in family savings.

The bill will hold big banks and financial institutions accountable for the bad decisions they make, and make them plan ahead to deal with their losses to ensure that taxpayers are never again responsible for bailing out a financial firm that is deemed too big to fail, like AIG.

The bill will also hold Wall Street accountable by giving consumer shareholders new power to prevent excessive bonuses that reward executive failures, while average Americans are left holding the bag.

Complementing the credit card bill I introduced in the House of Representatives several years ago and legislation Congress passed last year, this bill forces big banks and credit card companies to provide clear, understandable information to consumers. This bill will also hold the nonbank lending industry to the same sort of standards as the traditional banking industry.

Finally, this bill will start to change the culture of Wall Street by instilling new transparency and accountability rules to ensure that complicated financial derivative transactions take place in an open marketplace.

This legislation provides what our friends, neighbors, and family members for years have been demanding, a system that is designed for them, rewards hard work, and is grounded in the kind of business integrity that Americans every day certify with a handshake. In short, Americans back in control of their financial well-being.

That is why, in addition to the reforms we will be discussing this week, I introduced legislation last week with bipartisan support to put everyday Americans back in charge of their finances by giving consumers free access to their credit score.

I thank Senators Lugar, Menendez, Lieberman, Levin, Hagan, Shaheen, Klobuchar, Tom Udall, and Scott Brown for joining me in putting consumers first by cosponsoring this commonsense legislation, which has the support of a wide range of consumer groups.

Today, in looking back on the mistakes of the past and the imbalances that still disadvantage consumers, Americans deserve a Congress on their side.

Yet some here appear to still support a risky system where Wall Street can act with impunity and get bailed out when things go bad. They want to protect speculators at the expense of consumer protections and shield financial institutions from rules that would avert taxpayer- financed bailouts.

I am here to say that those days are over. We must hold Wall Street accountable and we cannot let the status quo persist.

A few blocks from here outside the Federal Trade Commission stands a pair of statues, each depicting a heroic figure straining to control a powerful horse. They were erected under the Roosevelt administration as an emblem to Americans from all walks of life that fair business practices would serve to further the common good of all. Well, I have news: Under our current system, the reins have been released when it comes to Wall Street. And now some 70 years later here we are, at a similar point in history. We must stand together once again as a nation committed to sound investing, transparent business dealings and an economic system that puts consumers first.

This debate is about choices, and the American people have a clear choice. There are a lot of us here who want to get to work.

But the vote we just took tonight also showed that some in this institution are willing to filibuster and delay to prevent the Senate from even debating Wall Street reforms.

It is clear to me and clear to Coloradans that a vote against even having this debate is a vote to protect Wall Street at the expense of hard-working Americans. Too much is at stake to let this delay persist.

President Roosevelt said in 1932, ``Never in history have the interests of all the people been so united in a single economic problem.'' Once again, as we did 70 years ago let us get to together put in place protections against the Wall Street excesses that threaten our economic stability.

Mr. President, I also rise to express my appreciation to the Senator from Missouri, Mrs. McCaskill, for her leadership on this effort to reform the way the Senate advises and consents. Because I have great respect for the traditions of the Senate, I was curious as to why holds are a mechanism or a tool available to individual Senators. What I found out is basically speculative; that is, that in the past, there is a belief that Senators--because they could only get back to Washington by horse and buggy or by horse itself--needed time to study a potential nominee. It was a courtesy. It maybe made sense in those horse-and-buggy times, but these are modern times, and the secret hold now, in particular, is being used to accomplish, in many cases, political or perhaps even policy goals. I have great respect for the venerable traditions of the Senate, but this seems like one that should be set aside, frankly.

I was also curious to study some of the statistics that I will share with the entire Senate. Since President Obama took office--I think it is 16 months, give or take a few days--we have voted on 49 nominations. Of those 49 votes, 36 of them--which is about 75 percent of the nominations--have been delayed. On average, these nominations languish or sit on the Executive Calendar for over 105 days. That is on average. Some have waited many months more. Then, when we look at the vote totals of the nominations that finally come to the floor, 17 received more than 90 votes, 10 received more than 80 votes, and 6 received more than 70 votes. So out of the 36 nominees, there were 33 that I think you could characterize as being approved overwhelmingly by the Senate, after a very long and unfortunate wait.

Right now, on the Executive Calendar, there are 94 nominees awaiting the Senate's advice and consent action. At this time in George W. Bush's Presidency, there were 12 nominees. So we have 94 on the one hand and 12 on the other hand.

It is time for my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to stop abusing the Senate's responsibility to provide advice and consent for the President's well-qualified nominees.

Let me just end on this note. If a Senator wants to place a hold, that is all well and good, but it shouldn't be a secret hold. As the previous two speakers have said--and I think Senator McCaskill as well--I have never used a hold. If I wish to put a hold on a nominee, I will make it public. I will make the case and take a stand on the floor of the Senate. That is the way we want our debates to be in the Senate--the world's greatest deliberative body. We shouldn't be doing things such as this in secret.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, earlier, I listened to the colloquy between the two members of the Banking Committee as they outlined the importance of true Wall Street accountability and the Wall Street reforms we will consider in the future.

I rise to speak about a particular opportunity we have as we consider this important and far-reaching reform legislation, and that is to discuss a piece of legislation I have introduced today called the Fair Access to Credit Scores Act of 2010.

Senator Lugar and I joined along with eight other colleagues, to introduce this bill that would put consumers back in control of their finances. This bill takes a commonsense yet significant step in that direction by offering Americans annual access to their credit score when they access their annual free credit report.

Making the distinction between your score and your report, a report tells consumers what outstanding credit accounts they have open, such as student loans or credit cards, maybe a car or home loan. Unfortunately, it tells Americans little else. Often, they already know--they hopefully should know that information in their credit report. In contrast, your credit score, which our legislation would make available, is what banks and lenders and increasingly even employers have access to. It is critical information that each one of us needs to know.

Today, you and I would have to jump through hoop after hoop and ultimately have to pay to have access to our credit score, while banks and lenders can get this information more easily. Mr. President, I know you have been a strong advocate for fairness in America, and that is simply not fair.

In 2003, Congress enacted legislation that required the three major consumer credit reporting agencies to provide a free annual report to each one of us on a yearly basis. This was known as the FACT Act. It was an important step in ensuring that financial records of American consumers are accurate. You could cross-check, as a consumer, what was in your report.

Many of my constituents in Colorado have seen frequent television commercials and Internet advertisements, and they are led to believe that the annual credit report under law includes this credit score I am discussing. Unfortunately, we were all disappointed--I have been personally--to find out that you only have access to your credit report, not the critical information that helps you judge your creditworthiness. You actually have to purchase your score or subscribe to a credit-monitoring service that costs you up to $200 a year to receive it. There are some troubling cases that even go further, where consumers believe they are signing up for a free credit score, only to find out later that they have actually signed up for a costly monthly monitoring service instead. This is simply not fair. It is why the Consumer Federation of America and the Consumers Union support this legislation.

Your credit score is a critical piece of information that impacts your interest rates, your monthly payments on home loans, and it could be the difference between whether a child is able to afford college or not. As I alluded to earlier, this information is increasingly being used to decide whether you will be offered a job. When you apply for a job, your potential employer has access to that information, and you don't even know what it is. This is personal information, and the consumers themselves seem to be the only people who don't have easy access to it.

We are talking about empowering American consumers when we pass--and I know we will--Wall Street accountability legislation. We want to empower consumers to be able to shape their own financial futures and thereby the country's financial future. To do that, we have to have transparency.

When you have free access to your credit score, although that is a small part of the larger reforms we need, it addresses one of the fundamental inequities that pervade our current financial system. Put simply, the one-sided marketplace today is rigged to benefit large financial institutions at the expense of hard-working Americans who are struggling to support their families and save for retirement. Consumers continually find themselves on the losing end of this bargain.

With so much at stake, this legislation we filed today is a small step to help restore balance and put Americans back in charge of their financial health. My hope is that, as this Chamber considers the Wall Street accountability bill, we will consider adding this legislation as an amendment and restore a greater dose of fairness to consumers in Colorado, to the Presiding Officer's constituents, and to all the rest of our Nation.

Let me close by thanking a group of Senators who have joined me: Senators Lugar, Scott Brown, Hagan, Levin, Lieberman, Klobuchar, Menendez, Shaheen, and Tom Udall. They have all joined me in putting consumers first by cosponsoring this commonsense, proconsumer legislation.

I ask each one of my colleagues as well to join me in supporting its passage.

Mr. President, I thank the Senator from New Mexico for his courtesy.

I rise in support of this legislation. I intend at some later date to spend additional time on the floor talking about my Uncle Stewart, who was a wonderful man, an uncle to me, but more than that, he was a mentor, he was a leader. In the last 12 years of his life after my father died, he really served as a second father to me; therefore, I feel as though I lost a second father recently.

I thank the Senator on behalf of at least my side of the family. I know my cousin Tom will, at the right time and in the right way, express his thanks as well.

My uncle was many things, but he was at his heart a student of the West. He was a son of the West. He always looked for the lessons that the landscapes and the people of the West could provide all of us.

I know the Senator from New Mexico knows of the many books he wrote. He wrote over half a dozen books. One of the books I took the most insight from was a book called ``The Founding Fathers and Mothers of the West.'' He pointed out in that book that people came to the West-- the Presiding Officer will be interested in this--to find a new life. He continued in that vein by talking about the great western director of western movies, John Ford. He once asked John Ford if his movies portrayed the West as it was. Ford's answer was: No; they portrayed the West as it should have been, doggone it. My uncle's point was that the West was not settled by the gunfighters and those who had gotten into conflicts. The West was settled by those who came looking to create communities and to work together. It was the people standing on the wooden sidewalks watching the gunfights who in the end settled the West, established the West as we know the West today.

My uncle in particular had great affection and respect for the Native populations in the West. That led him to have great passion and even outrage about the way Native Americans had been treated. In his later years, as the Presiding Officer knows, he went to battle in the courts through his words in every form possible advocating justice and fair treatment for our Native American brothers and sisters. In our family, we characterized him as being outraged without being outrageous.

We are going to, obviously, miss him. I am going to miss his wise counsel. I will do everything I can to live by the credo he carried forward, I say to Senator Bingaman, which he believed deeply: We didn't inherit the Earth from our parents; we are borrowing it from our children. I think that is the fundamental lesson our uncle left with us. The inspiring step of the Senator from New Mexico to name the Interior Building after my uncle will help us keep that firmly in our view and keep committed to that purpose for our time on this Earth.

I thank the Senator from New Mexico for his graciousness. I look forward to this bill becoming the law of the land.

Madam President, I thank Senator Warner.

I did want to touch on the concerns of the people of Colorado with respect to the discussion we are having today. I want to start by saying that one of the fundamental roles of the Senate is to advise and consent the President of the United States. We do not even have a chance to advise the President, much less consent, because of the anonymous holds and the slowdown tactics that have been utilized when it comes to all these important nominees.

We ought to have a chance to debate on the floor of the Senate, which is the advisory role, and we may find some judges do not pass muster, but they deserve an up-or-down vote on the floor of the greatest deliberative body in the world, the U.S. Senate. That is not happening.

I note that some of my colleagues pointed out two cases where Judge Thompson from Rhode Island for months was stalled on the Executive Calendar. There was no reason given. When she was finally brought to the floor, there was a 98-to-0 vote, a unanimous vote. What was the problem? Why couldn't she be confirmed earlier?

With Judge Keene from the State of the Senator from Virginia, we had to have a cloture vote to bring her to the floor--4 months. She was approved 99 to 0. There was no objection expressed to her sitting on the circuit court. This is senseless. This is absurd.

In Colorado, we have had two vacancies on our district court for many months, going on years now. That bench is undermanned right now. Those judges are appealing to Senator Bennet and me to get two more judges for reinforcements so that docket can be reconsidered. Those district court judges are not being moved on the floor of the Senate so that we can advise and then, hopefully, consent.

We have a Federal attorney whom we need to see confirmed. There has been no movement there as well. So for me, the Senate is not keeping faith with the people of our respective States and not keeping faith with the people of the United States.

I know we can do better. I know the American people, when they look here to Washington right now, wonder why we are behaving like children. Children

have an excuse, don't they, Senator? They are children. We are not. We have greater responsibilities. I hope we can set aside our differences, bring these nominees to the floor, across the board, and have an up-or- down vote.

I would suggest that perhaps we ought to bring a block of nominees to the floor under a unanimous consent request. They have all been vetted. The President needs to have a full complement of people in his administration to do the work of the American people.

Again, I thank Senator Warner. We will continue to beat these drums until these nominees have had a chance to be voted upon. This is crucial to me and to the challenges our country faces here today.

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

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Casey.) Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. President, I listened intently to the Presiding Officer's remarks just before I took the floor, and I, too, wanted to add my congratulations to Bill George and associate myself with his remarks.

I was particularly moved by the comments the Senator made about often organized labor in this country works on behalf of all Americans, all working Americans, and organized labor often does not receive acknowledgment. Sometimes it receives absolutely the opposite, slings and arrows that are often sent toward organized labor.

There is much that organized labor has done over the years that we take for granted in the workplace, everything from workplace safety to pension protection to the 40-hour workweek. Children do not work in our factories anymore because of what organized labor did for many decades.

So, again, that was very moving for me to hear. I salute Mr. George. I also took note of the mention of the six-time world champion Pittsburgh Steelers. In my State we have a two-time world champion football team, the Denver Broncos. It always seemed, though, we had to go through Pittsburgh. Often we fell short, but on two occasions we were able to make it to the Super Bowl itself. We also had to pass the test that the Steelers presented.

(The remarks of Mr. Udall of Colorado pertaining to the introduction of S. 3201 are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

I want to close and take advantage of another minute or two to speak on a separate note but a related note.

I wish to talk about Sean Durkin. He was a soldier from Fort Carson whom we just lost from wounds that he suffered in Afghanistan in a roadside bomb attack. Those are the most casualty-ridden attacks that our forces have faced over and over, not only in Afghanistan but in Iraq.

Last week, Army SGT Sean Durkin died at Walter Reed because of his wounds. He had been one of three Fort Carson soldiers who were presented a Purple Heart from President Obama when he visited Kabul and went to the military hospital when he was there.

On his Facebook page, he included a quotation from an unnamed marine. This quotation said:

This is my charge to you. Tell everyone of the heroism of

the soldiers who lost their lives and of the soldiers who are

fighting to recover what they have lost.

I wanted to tell everyone here, everyone listening, everyone watching of Sergeant Durkin's heroism and ask that we keep in our prayers and our thoughts all of our service men and women and their families as they serve us all over the world.

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

Mr. President, I rise to speak about health insurance reform. I wanted to remind all of us that last month we successfully passed health insurance reform, upon which I think we will have a very strong foundation to build, improve, and strengthen access to health care all across America.

Throughout the long and critically important debate on how best to fix our system, I came to the floor on many occasions, as did the Presiding Officer and a lot of my freshman Senators, to discuss the need for reform. I believe the bill that President Obama signed into law will help struggling Colorado families and hopefully our struggling economy as well.

So I think you and I agree there is a lot of work left to be done, and no bill of this magnitude and importance is perfect. To implement this new law is a major undertaking that will require us in the Congress to revisit and improve upon what we have already done.

In that spirit, I come to the Senate floor to introduce a bill that I believe is a great way to start making those improvements. I thank Senators Begich and McCaskill for working with me to develop a bill, and Senator Mikulski for her hard work and energy and support as well.

Our legislation is entitled ``The TRICARE Dependent Coverage Extension Act.'' It would help fulfill this important goal of the health insurance reform that the Presiding Officer and I support; that is, giving young adults the opportunity to remain on their parents' health care plan until the age of 26.

Young adults across our country are struggling to enter the job market as we get our economy back on track, and this legislation will ensure that the families of our military servicemembers are not left behind when this benefit goes into effect later this year for millions of civilian families and their children.

Currently, the TRICARE Program, which provides health insurance for military servicemembers, retirees, and their families, covers children up to the age of 21, or in some cases up to the age of 23 if they are full-time college students.

The TRICARE Dependent Coverage Extension Act will give young adults of these military families who have not been able to find health care insurance through an employer the opportunity to pay a reasonable premium and remain covered until their 26th birthday on their parents' plan.

Health reform, I think we agree, is meant to ensure that all Americans have access to affordable health care coverage. I cannot think of any of our countrymen more deserving of the peace of mind envisioned by this new law than members of our Armed Forces and their families.

They, in countries all over the world, make tremendous sacrifices every day for our Nation. I think it is over 60 different countries that we have servicemembers serving around the world. They deserve benefits that will keep them healthy and secure.

In addition to the three Senators I mentioned, Begich, McCaskill, and Mikulski, there are 19 of our Democratic colleagues who have also joined in supporting this legislation. I think this outpouring of support on short notice is indicative of how beneficial the bill will be for the families of our armed servicemembers.

Now, we have had our disagreements with the other side of the aisle on how best to reform our health care system as a whole. But I think there are certain areas of common interest we can still find and come together on to improve the lives of the people we are here to serve. I think this is one of those instances, and I want to offer my hand to our Republican friends and hope they will join a group of us in cosponsoring this important piece of legislation.

I sit on the Armed Services Committee in the Senate, and I served on the Armed Services Committee in the House. I would like to think I learned how to spot a good deal for our Nation's soldiers and their families, and this is a good deal.

Again, I would encourage all 100 Senators to consider joining us in this important, straightforward, cost-efficient idea that I am presenting today.

Mr. President, I rise to speak about health insurance reform. I wanted to remind all of us that last month we successfully passed health insurance reform, upon which I think we will have a very strong foundation to build, improve, and strengthen access to health care all across America.

Throughout the long and critically important debate on how best to fix our system, I came to the floor on many occasions, as did the Presiding Officer and a lot of my freshman Senators, to discuss the need for reform. I believe the bill that President Obama signed into law will help struggling Colorado families and hopefully our struggling economy as well.

So I think you and I agree there is a lot of work left to be done, and no bill of this magnitude and importance is perfect. To implement this new law is a major undertaking that will require us in the Congress to revisit and improve upon what we have already done.

In that spirit, I come to the Senate floor to introduce a bill that I believe is a great way to start making those improvements. I thank Senators Begich and McCaskill for working with me to develop a bill, and Senator Mikulski for her hard work and energy and support as well.

Our legislation is entitled ``The TRICARE Dependent Coverage Extension Act.'' It would help fulfill this important goal of the health insurance reform that the Presiding Officer and I support; that is, giving young adults the opportunity to remain on their parents' health care plan until the age of 26.

Young adults across our country are struggling to enter the job market as we get our economy back on track, and this legislation will ensure that the families of our military servicemembers are not left behind when this benefit goes into effect later this year for millions of civilian families and their children.

Currently, the TRICARE Program, which provides health insurance for military servicemembers, retirees, and their families, covers children up to the age of 21, or in some cases up to the age of 23 if they are full-time college students.

The TRICARE Dependent Coverage Extension Act will give young adults of these military families who have not been able to find health care insurance through an employer the opportunity to pay a reasonable premium and remain covered until their 26th birthday on their parents' plan.

Health reform, I think we agree, is meant to ensure that all Americans have access to affordable health care coverage. I cannot think of any of our countrymen more deserving of the peace of mind envisioned by this new law than members of our Armed Forces and their families.

They, in countries all over the world, make tremendous sacrifices every day for our Nation. I think it is over 60 different countries that we have servicemembers serving around the world. They deserve benefits that will keep them healthy and secure.

In addition to the three Senators I mentioned, Begich, McCaskill, and Mikulski, there are 19 of our Democratic colleagues who have also joined in supporting this legislation. I think this outpouring of support on short notice is indicative of how beneficial the bill will be for the families of our armed servicemembers.

Now, we have had our disagreements with the other side of the aisle on how best to reform our health care system as a whole. But I think there are certain areas of common interest we can still find and come together on to improve the lives of the people we are here to serve. I think this is one of those instances, and I want to offer my hand to our Republican friends and hope they will join a group of us in cosponsoring this important piece of legislation.

I sit on the Armed Services Committee in the Senate, and I served on the Armed Services Committee in the House. I would like to think I learned how to spot a good deal for our Nation's soldiers and their families, and this is a good deal.

Again, I would encourage all 100 Senators to consider joining us in this important, straightforward, cost-efficient idea that I am presenting today.

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

Madam President, I rise today to discuss President Obama's proposed fiscal year 2011 budget and the proposed path forward for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration which we all know as NASA. Even though Colorado doesn't have a NASA facility, this proposed budget and the major changes to NASA's direction included in it have major implications for thousands of Coloradans. I was the chairman on the House side of the Space Subcommittee and I know what space means to Colorado and I know what it means to our Nation.

Yesterday, Senator Bennet and I had the opportunity to meet with former General and now NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden to urge him to reevaluate the decision included in the President's budget request for NASA to terminate the Constellation Program. This program is developing the successor to the retiring space shuttle known as the Orion capsule and Ares rocket. Those two technologies will be teamed up in the planning that was brought together.

We had a frank and productive discussion with Administrator Bolden. Senator Bennet and I impressed upon him the importance of this program--especially the development of the Orion capsule--to thousands of jobs in Colorado and, frankly, to America's leadership more broadly in space. General Bolden assured us that he wants to be flexible and work with Congress on this NASA budget and that he is committed to human space flight. In other words, the President's budget request is the beginning of a long process, and I was pleased to hear General Bolden is set on working with Congress to chart a future course for NASA and America's leadership in space. I look forward to working with General Bolden as this unfolds.

If I might, I will take a few moments to describe the aerospace community in Colorado. Although we don't host a NASA facility, Colorado has the second largest aerospace economy in the Nation, behind only California. We have a talented and educated workforce and our colleges and universities have deep ties to NASA, private aerospace companies, and Federal research laboratories. We have many businesses that partner with NASA and the military to provide launch services and satellite development as well as a number of startup companies that are pushing the boundaries of what is possible in privately financed access to space. We can also in Colorado boast of the two key military space commands--NORAD and the Air Force Space Command--and three Air Force bases with strong space missions: Buckley, Peterson, and Schriever.

In short, Colorado's aerospace enterprise brings together the government and commercial sectors as well as the military and civil sectors. For all of these reasons, I pay close attention to NASA and to the administration's vision for the agency, and the significant changes in the President's fiscal 2011 budget request demand an especially hard look. I know many of my Senate colleagues feel the same way.

I have been reviewing the President's NASA budget since it was released in February and, as I noted earlier, Senator Bennet and I shared our concerns with General Bolden yesterday.

Let me start by saying there is much to like in the President's budget. First, it supports an extension of the International Space Station until 2020 and possibly beyond. Completing this station has been a long time coming and I am pleased to see that this administration's commitment to fully utilizing it past the previous end date of 2015.

Second, the budget includes important new investments in science and aeronautics research. My goal is to balance each of NASA's four mission priorities: earth science, space science, space exploration, and aeronautics. The President's request for nonexploration priorities represented a farsighted investment that should pay large dividends.

Also, the budget includes an additional $6 billion over 5 years, which is especially notable at a time when many agencies are seeing flat or declining budgets. Much of this investment will go toward developing transformative technologies and propulsion systems that will help NASA cross into new frontiers.

However, the elephant in the room is understandably the proposed cancellation of the Constellation Program, which is to be supplanted by commercial development of human space flight. A purely commercial approach to human space flight may be the future, but I am concerned that it also runs the risk of diminishing American leadership in space. If that happens, that would be a great shame. It would be penny wise, but I fear it would be pound foolish. Let me be frank. This move would hit Colorado especially hard. Well over 1,000 Coloradans work directly on one aspect or another of Constellation. In addition, the Jefferson County Economic Council estimates that work on Constellation supports nearly 4,000 additional Colorado jobs and $300 million worth of economic activity in the Metro Denver area. As the Presiding Officer can imagine, those kinds of numbers give me real pause. They are especially worrisome in today's economic conditions.

The budget proposal leaves broader questions unanswered as well. After the planned retirement of the space shuttle next year, the United States will be without the capacity to launch humans into space, including to the International Space Station. At that point, we will be forced to purchase access to space on Russian Soyuz spacecraft. Constellation was supposed to minimize the gap in our ability to access Low Earth Orbit, otherwise known as LEO, and now the President is proposing to rely on the commercial sector to minimize the gap instead.

I strongly support development of commercial launch capabilities and space services, and I look forward to the day when the commercial sector can provide these services for NASA to focus on development of new exploration technologies and human missions beyond Low Earth Orbit.

I am confident that day will come. However, I have not seen sufficient proof from the administration that day is close at hand. The commercial sector has yet to prove it can safely put a human into orbit.

Should the commercial sector fail to deliver human access to space, America will be reliant on Russian-procured launch services to the space station and LEO for the foreseeable future. In my opinion, that is an unacceptable position for our Nation.

The United States and Russia have enjoyed a very productive partnership in space. It has been good for our country and good for space exploration. We should cooperate and share resources wherever possible. But I am concerned about what an indefinite reliance on Russian launch services will mean for our leadership in space.

Cancelling Constellation has other important implications for our national security. NASA is a prime customer for the U.S. space launch industrial base, which we rely on to sustain our strategic deterrence mission and to ensure access to space. These issues are especially important to me, as I sit on the Armed Services Committee.

Department of Defense officials have stated that Constellation's cancellation could increase the current price of propulsion systems for our launch vehicles. The Department of Defense is looking at the cost impacts, but we will not have clear answers until this summer. Congress needs this information before deciding whether to approve the President's budget request.

I do not want to appear naive about the problems this administration faced in crafting a NASA budget and direction for the future. The Constellation Program, as currently resourced, is clearly ``unsustainable,'' in the words of the Review of Human Spaceflight Plans Committee--more commonly known as the Augustine Committee. The committee went on to say that we are ``perpetrating the perilous practice of pursuing goals that do not match allocated resources.'' That is simply not a recipe for U.S. leadership in space either.

In the midst of crafting this budget for NASA, the administration also faced the worst economic conditions in a generation. I can appreciate the difficulty of designing a sustainable plan for NASA with today's fiscal constraints.

We cannot and should not ask NASA to do more with less. Transferring routine space operations to the commercial sector appears to be an attractive, potentially money-saving alternative.

I know I am not alone in believing that Congress should not support this budget based on what we know now. Terminating Constellation does not make sense. But we should be open to restructuring the program in a way that preserves American leadership in space and protects jobs.

Madam President, where do we go from here? The President will be speaking later this week in Florida. It will be his first set of comments on the proposed NASA budget. I appreciate the fact that the President is tackling the problems with Constellation head on. However, he needs to explain his plan better.

I hope the President will begin to answer the questions that I and many of my colleagues in Congress have asked. I hope he will begin to articulate a plan for NASA that is, in the words of the Augustine Committee, ``worthy of a great nation.'' I do not believe we are there yet, but we will get there.

One of the lessons I learned as a mountaineer came on the 10th day of what was supposed to be a 7-day climb of Mount McKinley. At that critical moment in our climb, I learned that when you are all the way in, you will find a way. I believe the American people are all the way in with NASA. I know this Congress is.

NASA's mission of exploration resonates with each of us. That mission transcends programs, budgets, and politics. It has endured the end of Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo, and it will soon endure the end of the space shuttle.

Unfortunately, the history of NASA is littered with canceled programs with little to show for them. I don't want to see the same happen with Constellation, nor do I want to continue on an unsustainable course.

The challenge before us is to ensure that NASA's programs and budgets are worthy of its mission.

Over the coming weeks and months, I will be working with my colleagues in Congress and the administration to find the right way to further NASA's mission.

I believe there is a sweet spot to be found that includes many of the positive aspects of the President's proposal. But the American people deserve answers on the President's vision for our Nation's leadership in human space travel.

While some changes need to be made, I believe the Constellation Program has advanced an important mission. It would be highly disappointing to leave behind the significant investments we have made in Constellation without anything to show for them.

We will find a budget that works for NASA, for Congress, and for Colorado. We have to because we are in all the way.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to speak on behalf of the millions of Americans who know our Nation is desperately in need of health care reform. Traveling across Colorado this past year, a common theme surfaced as I spoke with families, health care providers, and businesses alike. They all want a health care system that tackles costs, improves quality, and puts their needs first.

I have heard, as I know the Presiding Officer has in his home State of Delaware, stories of Coloradans who paid a lifetime of health care premiums in order to provide for their families, all to have an insurance company drop their coverage because a wife or a husband or a child became ill.

Visiting with health care providers, I heard about the waste and abuse in our system. They have all pleaded with me to have commonsense reforms that get them back to the business they thought they were entering years ago--the business of caring for their fellow Americans beset by illness and disease.

I heard from small business owners who continue to see double-digit increases in insurance costs, in many cases for the ninth or the tenth or even more years in a row. These small business owners want to see relief, not for themselves but because they do not want to have to choose between laying off workers and leaving their workers vulnerable to medical bankruptcies.

Decade after decade, we see how the fine print of insurance company policies puts shareholder interests above those of American families and how partisanship has prevented the kind of progress everyone agrees is sorely needed.

I have good news. Despite all the ugly rhetoric, distortions, and misrepresentations we have heard, Coloradans and the rest of the country can finally rest assured that someone has put their interests first.

This week, I watched as President Obama signed into law the kind of reforms that will free Americans from the shackles of never-ending cost increases, dropped coverage, and unfair practices that put profits above the provision of care.

Throughout this past fall and winter, I joined you, Mr. President, and the rest of our freshman class in the Chamber repeatedly to talk about the urgent need for health care reform. We shot down false claims, challenged the phony reasoning that was out there, and pointed out where the rhetoric ends and reality begins.

Over the past few days, many more of our colleagues from this side of the aisle have compellingly and eloquently explained how important the new health reform law is to both the American people and the American economy. The fact is that this historic bill signed by the President saves lives, saves money, and it saves Medicare.

Bringing this long debate to a close, I wish to speak directly to the people of Colorado. It is important that they know how these health insurance reforms will benefit their families and the rest of our great State.

As a result of the President signing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act into law, the parents of Colorado's 1.2 million children can sleep easy starting this year knowing that insurance companies no longer have the right to deny their kids health care coverage because of a preexisting condition.

Also starting in 2010, almost half a million, 500,000 young adults in Colorado who would otherwise be kicked off their parents' health care policies can maintain that coverage through to their 27th birthday. This is particularly welcome to me, as I know it is for many Coloradans, because I have two college-age kids who fit into the category I just described.

We have 575,000 seniors in our Medicare Program, and for every single one of them, this new law will protect--I want to emphasize that--will protect their guaranteed benefits and immediately allow them to get preventive care with absolutely no copay or out-of-pocket costs. This added benefit, contrary to what we have heard, will increase their health care coverage under the Medicare Program so that our seniors can continue to live happy and healthy lives.

This new law goes to great lengths to help slow the growth of health care costs and, by doing so, it is projected that these lower costs will allow Colorado's employers to hire up to 6,500 new employees in our State. And for as many as 68,000 small businesses, health reform will begin providing millions of dollars in tax credits so they can afford to offer health insurance to their employees.

Yesterday, we sat here and cast 56 votes as Democrats to make final improvements to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. That reconciliation measure we passed yesterday will provide prescription drug relief as well for our Colorado seniors. More than 100,000 Colorado seniors, such as my friend Frank Blakely in Colorado Springs, will pay less for prescription drugs.

Right now, these seniors hit what we all know here as the Medicare part D doughnut hole, which means they have to pay thousands of dollars directly out of pocket for their medicines. But beginning this year, every one of these seniors will receive a $250 check to help them offset those costs, and we will begin to close the overall gap in Medicare coverage so that we completely fill this doughnut hole by the year 2020. I know this will be welcome relief to those on fixed incomes all across the United States, because it will free up scarce retirement dollars to visit family members, help pay a grandchild's college tuition or even to help, in some cases, put food on the table.

I think one of the overriding features of health reform is the freedom it will give to Coloradans and hard-working Americans--the freedom to change jobs, to launch a business, to even start a family while knowing that health care coverage will be there for them when they need it. Americans need to know their country won't leave them to fend for themselves when an insurance company denies or drops their coverage. They deserve peace of mind to know that someone is on their side.

Over the last few days we have heard a lot of the same misleading rhetoric that we did back in August by those who were dead set on levying accusations rather than working on real reform. Well, health reform has become the law of the land and the American people don't have to wait any longer for these important reforms. The legislation we passed will establish a sturdy foundation upon which we will build, improve, and strengthen access to health care in America. Will there be mistakes made along the way? I don't doubt it.

I am a lifelong mountain climber, and I know from experience that any difficult climb includes storms, and you make a mistake finding your route along the way. But what matters is that you dust yourself off and you move forward. I think there have been a lot of storms on this journey so far, and it hasn't been perfectly smooth. But it has been in the right direction. Despite our stumbles and twists and turns along the way, we kept our eye on the summit in front of us, where providing quality affordable coverage for every American is a reality.

Every successful expedition, in my experience, has a leader, and I want to take a moment to recognize our leader, Senate Majority Leader Reid. He has literally had the health and well-being of millions of Americans on his shoulders--some would say the weight of the world. That is a heavy backpack. But at the same time he has shouldered that load, been an unwavering advocate for reform, and he has exemplified the American resiliency which has helped make our Nation the greatest Nation on Earth.

I would also like to thank my staff, especially Jake Swanton and John Rayburn, who have worked tirelessly to fight for Colorado and make quality affordable health coverage a reality for millions of Americans.

As I close, I want to say how proud I am that the health care bills we passed this week will modernize our health care delivery system, increase much-needed choice and competition within the health insurance industry, and help put our economy back on track, while clearly improving the financial security of middle-class working families.

This has been an historic week for Colorado and for the American people. The victory, of course, isn't for the Senate or the House, or the President, or for our political parties, it is for the American people. I have certainly been humbled to have been given the opportunity to serve my great State during this unforgettable, long, and sustained debate, and I look forward to the important climbs that still await us as we implement this very important piece of legislation.

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