Floor Statements

Reserving the right to object.

That is fine. Thank you.

I thank my colleagues for allowing a 10-minute discussion today by unanimous consent on an important issue the Congress is taking up today.

On the House side, debate on the Keystone Pipeline is starting, and I understand there could potentially be a vote as early as tomorrow. I am so pleased to have been one of the spark plugs that helped to get us moving not in the next Congress but in this lameduck session of this Congress.

The American people spoke loudly and clearly not only in my State of Louisiana but around the country, wanting us to work together to get the job done.

I was very pleased that the Republican leadership brought to the floor the early childhood education bill that Senator Lamar Alexander has been leading. It is a very important bill. I, frankly, don't think it is more important than the Keystone Pipeline, however. So I was pleased yesterday to come to the floor and offer, as chair of the energy committee, my own priority list of what I think is most important. I say that with sincerity because I actually support both very strongly.

I have several amendments to Senator Lamar Alexander's bill which have not been adopted and which I understand, unfortunately, will not be allowed for debate. So I don't know if I will be able to vote for cloture on his bill, although I strongly support it. My record is as strong as anyone's in this Chamber. So I will be interested to see if amendments to the Lamar Alexander bill will be allowed on the floor. I am hoping they will. If I can get at least a vote on the amendments I have pending to that bill, I will absolutely--whether my amendments pass or fail--vote for it because it is the will of the body and we must do something. We must invest more money. We must have more quality programs for early childhood education. It is an absolute cornerstone of strengthening and building the middle class.

In my State, that is what we are focused on, and I can't go anywhere without people telling me: Senator, thank you for your fight for education. Senator, thank you for your fight for early childhood education. Senator, thank you for fighting to take student loans down from 11 percent--the rate on student loans--to 3 percent.

On almost every day of this last election cycle, that is what I was talking about at home, and I know Members who were in elections or even not in elections heard clearly from the American people, during the time we were home working, how much what we do in Congress can matter, can make a difference in their lives. They don't want government intrusion, but they do want government to function so they can get a good college education, so they can get good job training, so they can start businesses that can grow profits for themselves and their communities.

I look forward to that debate, and I am very happy the Republican leadership rushed to the floor to put down a bill on early childhood education because I think they heard from the American people that just talking about tax cuts for the wealthy, tax cuts for people making over $1 million a year, and tax policy--yes, it is important, but what is very important is fighting for the middle class.

I say congratulations to Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee. That is the first bill the Republicans have put down in this lameduck, and I look forward to working with him.

But the first bill that we put down and I put down as chair of the energy committee--unusual for Democrats because we don't have our whole caucus supporting it, but we have a good strong part of our caucus supporting it--is a bill that is going to actually create immediate high-impact jobs for this country today, soon, as it is being built. As soon as this bill passes and as soon as the President signs it into law, there will be an immediate, dramatic push from the oil and gas industry and

from the energy industry broadly--alternative energies, wind, solar, coal, and clean coal technologies--because the vote on Keystone and the President's signature on Keystone is a signal, a strong signal, it is a green light that America is ready to go, that we are following the science, that we are following our process, that we are respecting private property rights. And, yes, we are respecting States in their views of where these pipelines should be sited. No State--not Nebraska, not West Virginia, and not Louisiana--wants to be told by the Federal Government where pipelines are coming through on private property. No State. So Nebraska does have an issue that has to be resolved. They have an issue that has to be resolved about where that pipeline should be laid, and the Republican Party should most certainly respect States rights on where that pipeline should be laid.

The bill Senator Hoeven and I have acknowledges that process. It also acknowledges private property rights, and it says it is time to build the Keystone Pipeline.

This was not a last-week election wake-up call; I have been working on passing the Keystone Pipeline before I was the chairman, all during my chairmanship, years ago, as a senior member of the committee, and now as chair. I have not stopped and came very close to getting a vote on this floor before the election. Frankly--and the reporters should know this--it was really held up by the politics of both sides. That is not what is said, but that is the actual truth--the politics of both sides. I see Senator Manchin on the floor, who is a strong supporter, and he might talk a little bit about that. Both sides have some blame as to why we couldn't get to a vote, but I will let the record speak for itself.

This is the pipeline. This is what has to be built. As you can see, it doesn't come into Louisiana, but it most certainly impacts my State. It impacts the entire country.

These are already pipelines that we have in America. This is just another important pipeline because it connects Canada--our greatest ally and our great economic partner--with the refining strength of America, which is not only in Louisiana and Texas but primarily in Louisiana and Texas. It begins to move a great product, produced with the highest environmental standards in the world, approved by this administration's environmental department saying it meets the environmental standards of transportation, et cetera, and it meets the standards of this administration's State Department when it comes to, is it in America's interests. They said yes, it is in America's interests. That standard has been met. So let's build the pipeline.

I came to the floor yesterday. The Republicans brought their early childhood education bill to the floor. I am so proud they did. I brought Keystone Pipeline. Because I did, it seemed to have moved lots of things, which I am pleased about, and I think the Senator from West Virginia may wish to comment. But it seemed to have shaken up a few things and moved a few things, and that is good because Senators who are energetic and motivated and can build coalitions--like Senator Manchin and I do every day when we are here--can actually get things done.

I yield to the Senator from West Virginia for a question.

Mr. President, how much time do I have remaining?

I ask unanimous consent for 1 minute to close.

I think the Senator pointed out some key points--not only how important this pipeline is for the middle of America but for the economy of the whole country.

The pipeline and the supplies that are coming and the workers to build this pipeline come from all over the country. The businesses that supply the gadgets, the widgets, the steel, the trucks, the forklifts, the equipment, the cranes that come to build this pipeline come from all over the country.

But more important than the pipeline itself, which is going to move hundreds of thousands of barrels of crude oil from Canada--which we would much prefer to deal with and trade with, than, let's say, Venezuela or some other countries that don't share our values. More importantly than that, it is going to transport it in the safest way.

Without this pipeline, this oil will be produced. We cannot stop Canada from producing it. They are going to produce it, and it is going to be moved east and west by rail or moved south by truck. We cannot put any more trucks on our highways, and we can't crowd our rails.

I know there are people, like my good friend from Massachusetts, Senator Markey, who is going to surely speak against this pipeline and why, from his perspective, it is not the right thing to

do. And I respect those views. I strongly disagree with him, but I respect him. I strongly disagree with his arguments--and we will have this debate in the coming days--and I respect him.

But the point is this. Whether you support the Senator from Massachusetts' or you support the Senator from Louisiana's views, the point is we need to vote. That is the process. I believe we have the 60 votes on this floor to pass this bill. I believe we have always had the votes to pass this bill, if we can just get it to a vote.

Now, as is the process, the Senate has to pass the bill, it has to go to the House, and then it has to go to the President. He can sign it or he can veto it. I do not have at this date any indication that he will veto this bill. He could issue a veto warning on it in an hour, he could do it tomorrow, he could do it next week. That is not the point.

The point is the Senate must begin to be the Senate again. Let the President worry about being the President. Let the House worry about being the House. Let the Senate be the Senate.

I ask unanimous consent for 30 more seconds.

Let the Senate be the Senate. That is what my voters said. I think that is what voters in Tennessee said. I think that is what voters in North Carolina said, and I think that is what the voters in Massachusetts said. Let the Senate be the Senate.

We are the greatest deliberative body in the world. Let's debate. Let's vote. Let's get the work done. Let the chips fall where they may. The public can accept that. They cannot accept--and they should not have to accept--gridlock, game playing, and raw politics on the great floor of this Senate.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded and that I be allowed to speak for up to 5 minutes.

Mr. President, as you know--and many know--I have come to the floor now on several occasions since we arrived back here at 2 p.m. yesterday to talk about an important piece of legislation I have cosponsored with Senator Hoeven. I understand Senator Hoeven is going to be speaking about the Keystone Pipeline in a few moments, and the Republicans have reserved some time to speak this afternoon. I will only take 5 minutes and will stay as the discussion on the Keystone Pipeline goes forward.

Yesterday at 2 o'clock I came to the floor of the Senate when the Senate opened to say how important I thought it was that we listen and hear what the voters said not only in my State but in Kentucky, Texas, South Dakota, North Dakota, and all over the country. Regardless of whether the people were Democrats, Republicans, left or right or center, they want us to get our job done.

I think one of the most important jobs we have as Senators is to vote, and I have been frustrated, along with many Members on both sides of the aisle, about why we have not been able to vote on some very important pieces of legislation.

This is one of the most important pieces of legislation, and that is why I came down at 2 o'clock to claim time at my seat. I have been here for 18 years. This is Louisiana's seat. One of the things we have to talk about right now--not next year or not next week--is the Keystone Pipeline.

I know the Presiding Officer and other Members of this body, mostly on the Democratic side, are not strong supporters and have expressed that view. I understand it, I respect it, but I don't agree with it. It is time for us to have a vote.

Because of the advocacy yesterday when the Senator from West Virginia and the Senator from North Dakota, Senator Heitkamp--she has been a very strong and effective advocate. I wish to give a shout-out to both of my colleagues from West Virginia and North Dakota. They have been tireless in their effort to try and build a 60-vote margin.

In the old days we could pass bills with just 51 votes, and some people want to go back to that. I have mixed feelings about it, but it would be great if we could pass things by a simple majority. But the rules of the Senate which we operate under--and have not requested to change, and I don't believe will change any time in the near future-- requires us to have 60 votes.

We worked and worked and worked to try to get 60 votes. Since May, if we could just get this vote to the floor, I believe we have the 60 votes to pass it. It looks like that is going to happen, and I could not be happier. I could not be more grateful to the House of Representatives for taking up not their bill but Senator Hoeven's bill and my bill. They are debating it right now, and I believe we will pass it.

I don't know how many Democrats will vote for that bill, but I think there will be some Members who will vote for that bill. I don't know how many, but I believe there are 60 votes in this Senate to pass the Keystone Pipeline bill and send it to the President's desk.

What President Obama does with it, I don't know. I am urging him to sign it. Seventy-five percent of the people in our country want this Keystone Pipeline built. There are jobs at stake. It is

a signal that America is ready to be energy independent.

When I say ``energy independent''--to my good friend, the Presiding Officer from Massachusetts--I, of course, mean more oil and gas. I am from an oil-and-gas State. We have coal States, but we also have States that have solar and wind and drop-in fuels and new technologies.

This pipeline is a symbol that America is ready to do what it takes to become energy independent and to use our resources so we can create jobs for the middle class.

I see the Republican leader, and I appreciate that signal. So I will just conclude with my statement, but I do wish to be a part of this colloquy today, if allowed, so I may continue to talk about the importance of this issue.

I am happy the House has taken up the Hoeven-Landrieu bill--the exact language of the bill. We can call it whatever they want. They can put any name they want on the bill as long as it gets passed because that is what we need to do for the American people.

I yield the floor.

I have a question, if I could ask the Republican leader.

Madam President, I most certainly have enjoyed this colloquy and have been down on the floor most of the day. I am extremely disappointed I could not get any Member of the other side to recognize me for questions. I see the minority leader leaving the floor now, although he knows I have many questions for him that he does not want to answer. But that is his prerogative. You know, I thought we came here to work together. I am standing here. I have worked with Senator Hoeven on this bill. Before Senator Hoeven leaves the floor or Senator Barrasso or Senator Murkowski, if they would stay, I would like to thank Senator Hoeven for his extraordinary leadership on this bill.

Although the other side does not acknowledge any of the leaders over here, such as the Presiding Officer or Senator Manchin or Senator Baucus, who is no longer here but was a strong voice for Keystone many years ago, or some of the other Democratic Senators, I want to personally thank Senator Hoeven for his leadership and thank Senator Murkowski for her extraordinary leadership on this issue.

The Senator has been a real partner to me in the truest sense of the word and in the greatest spirit of bipartisanship. Of course, she had an experience that not many Senators have. She was defeated by her own party in her own State. They chose someone else and ran against the Senator, which is unusual, and did not support her in her reelection, even though the Senator and her father have chaired, on and off, the energy committee for years. I have been a strong partner not only with Lisa, the Senator from Alaska, but with her father Frank.

But the Republican Party did not support the Senator in her last election. So the Senator had to sign in on an Independent ticket. I was one of the first people to call her and say: Go, girl. Let's get it done. She did. So I have the utmost respect for Senator Murkowski. I have the utmost respect for the Senator's father. I have the utmost respect for Ted Stevens. I stood with Ted Stevens until the end, even though my party went against him. I would fight for him to this day if he were here, because some of us actually believe in bipartisanship. Lots of people around here talk about it, but that is really it.

The evidence I am going to give--I am sorry the Senator from Kentucky is not here to defend himself. I want the quote he wrote down. He might come back to the floor when he hears what I am going to say. I am going to speak for 1 hour.

The Senator from Kentucky, who will be the majority leader, has not left his partisanship in Kentucky because you just saw it on display here. He cannot help himself. He cannot speak for 3 minutes without mentioning the President. He had his back turned the whole time, would not even acknowledge anyone over here. So he does a lot of talking about bipartisanship. But his statement just yesterday was, ``I am confident Dr. Cassidy will use his position to succeed where Senator Landrieu failed.''

I do not necessarily think this is failure to get a vote on the Keystone Pipeline. I think this is a great victory. I want to share this victory with Senator Hoeven who is a leader. I also want to have printed in the Record--the Senator from Kentucky had a lot to say about everybody else not doing their job. I want to say that on at least one occasion, he did not do his either. On March 16, there were 15 Senators--March 16 of 2011, not 2012. I mean not 2014, not 2013, not 2012, but 2011. I think that was before the Presiding Officer was here. On March 16, 2011, when Secretary Clinton was still the Secretary of State, there were 16 Members of the Senate who signed a letter to her asking her to approve the Keystone Pipeline. I am going to read those names because I think it is important. My name is first, amazingly. I am very proud of that, didn't even remember it. Mary Landrieu. Orrin Hatch circulated a letter with me. Max Baucus. Kay Bailey Hutchison, my dear friend from Texas. Pat Roberts from Kansas, another dear friend. Mike Enzi from Wyoming. Lisa Murkowski--of course her name would be on here--from Alaska. Senator John Cornyn from Texas. John Barrasso from Wyoming. Mark Begich from Alaska who just unfortunately lost his race because of several reasons, one of which is that people talk a lot about bipartisanship who do not really honor it. Nobody better than Mark Begich has shown a willingness to work across party lines. He is no longer with us, but he signed this letter. Roy Blunt from Missouri. John Hoeven from North Dakota, and Ron Johnson.

But you know a signature that is not on this letter is Mitch McConnell's. Maybe Mitch McConnell was too busy to sign this letter. But his name is not on here. Now am I saying Mitch McConnell has not been a supporter of the Keystone Pipeline? Absolutely not. Senator McConnell has supported this project. But what I am saying is that Senator McConnell has not been truthful with the American people about actually how this has always evolved. To support that claim, which is a strong one, on May 7, 2014, Senator Reid offered a vote on the XL Pipeline. Senator McConnell objected. On May 12, 2014, Senator Reid offered a vote on the Keystone Pipeline. Senator McConnell objected. On May 12, I offered a vote on the Keystone Pipeline. Senator Flake objected for Senator McConnell. On June 24, Senator Shaheen offered a vote on the XL Pipeline. That, of course, I believe, was connected with the energy efficiency bill with Senator Portman. Senator Inhofe objected. Senator McConnell did nothing to help. Then on June 25, Senator Reid offered a vote on the XL Pipeline. Senator McConnell objected.

I want to underscore this. I am not saying Senator Reid is a supporter of the pipeline. He has never been. He is not a supporter of the pipeline, but he has asked for a vote on Keystone a number of times and Senator McConnell has objected.

Senator McConnell will come to the floor and show a list such as this when he has asked for votes on the Keystone Pipeline and Senator Reid has objected. That is the truth of the Congress. The saddest thing about this is I have believed for over 1 year that if we could actually get a vote, we have the 60 votes to pass it.

I have said that on any number of occasions. I believe we have the 60 votes to pass Keystone. I believe the coalition of oil and gas and energy and manufacturing companies that are very strong, with the coalition of the strongest labor unions and organizations that represent working people, and with the vote in this last election, and with the people of the United States--mostly because of the people of the United States asking us to do our jobs, I, on faith, and with strong evidence that I have--but on faith in what is right, what is true, and what is best--we have the 60 votes on this floor. That is why I came to the floor yesterday--on that faith.

I said that I believed that it was time to vote on the Keystone Pipeline now. The most important reason is to show the American people that we are willing to put partisanship aside. I called Senator Hoeven--the first thing I did.

The Senator has left the floor because I am not really sure anyone wants to debate me on this. But that is OK. I am used to it. I don't have anybody to debate at home in my election because my opponent won't show up. So I am very used to debating all by myself. So they have all left the floor.

But when I arrived in Washington, the first thing I did was to call Senator Hoeven. I spoke to him because I have done that on any number of occasions. I said to him: John, I think this is a very good time, and there are several reasons why. I think the politics are cleared up. I think the people spoke--cleared up, not meaning me. It is not about my politics, but it is about the politics of some people who lost and won.

Some people who were opposing the vote have lost. Some people who supported having the vote are here. I have said it looks to me as if this is a perfect opportunity to do two things--to get done something that you and I have wanted to do now for over 1 year.

This letter most certainly suggests that there were a number of us-- not many. There were only 15 of us who signed the letter to Secretary Clinton asking her to push forward on the pipeline. Other people were either too busy to sign it or didn't think--whatever--but it is a bipartisan letter and it was very good.

So I called the Senator, and he said that he didn't think that it would happen until the next Congress.

So I said: Well, let's try. Maybe we could get it done. He said that he would talk to his leadership, and that was the last conversation I have had with him.

I came down to the floor yesterday just thinking: Well, maybe I will just kick it up a little bit, and sure enough, I did. It got kicked up pretty high. I was actually here around 2 o'clock because I have been around here enough to know that if you show up early you actually might get something done. Don't show up late; don't be late. My dad taught me to be on time, so I was here at 2 o'clock.

I was very interested to see what Majority Leader Reid would say and Minority Leader McConnell would say, and the Senator from Texas, who is usually always with the Senator from Kentucky, what they would say about what we should do.

I sat here fully expecting the minority leader from Kentucky--soon to be the majority leader--to say OK, the people have spoken; let's get on with a bill that is very important. Everyone in the country--not everyone, but many people--many people in this country, in all regions, support the Keystone Pipeline--not everyone. There are strong feelings against it, but every poll I have seen shows people from many different areas of the country, many different political persuasions. This is not as if only Democrats are against it and only Republicans are for it. There are many Democrats in my State that have supported it--poor people, rich people, black people, white people--Democrats who support the Keystone Pipeline. I am certain that is true in the State of the Presiding Officer, North Dakota. I am sure that it is not even a party issue in the State of North Dakota. This is just a commonsense issue to get the Keystone Pipeline bill.

At approximately 2:15 yesterday I sat on the floor, ready to go. I had called my leader and John Hoeven. His name is first on this bill. I could have asked for my name to be first on the bill because I actually chair the committee, but I was trying to be bipartisan, gracious, and a team member. It hasn't gotten me very far, but I just used it as an example.

I said: John, this means the world to you, although it means the world to me, put your name first. So it is called the Hoeven-Landrieu bill. I called him since it is his bill and asked him what he thought. He said he thought we could do it in the next Congress. I said, I actually think we can do it now. He said he didn't think so. So I just came to the floor.

I waited for Mitch McConnell to say something. This is what he said:

Mr. President, last week the American people sent a strong

message to Washington. They voted for a new direction. They

called for a change in the way we do things in the Senate,

and they sent a new team to Washington to carry their wishes

forward, and we plan to do just that.

But several items remain for the outgoing Congress to

consider and that is our immediate focus.

So I am sitting in my chair thinking OK, here we go. I am ready. I have been ready since we started, but definitely my staff can't find anything before that which I can show for any evidence, other than this letter. So I can just say I think I was for it since I heard about it. But since I can't prove it, let's go back to March 16, 2011, because my signature is the lead on this letter. So that is some indication that I have been leading at least since then.

I get a tremendous amount of credit, of course, from my own caucus because they understand that even though most of my caucus doesn't agree with me and thinks I have been--and I have really pushed them on this issue and will continue to, because that is what good Senators do. We don't represent our caucuses. We represent our States, and we fight hard for what we believe is right. I have, for the longest time, felt this was the right thing to do. So that was that letter.

I was sitting and thinking: Here we go. But this is what the minority leader went on to say:

In the weeks that remain in this Congress, we should work

to accomplish the essential task [not of building the

Keystone Pipeline] of funding the Congress and preventing

retroactive tax increases.

I thought he could say the essential task of funding Congress--which I will put first, although a lot of people don't think we should fund ourselves because we are not doing a very good job--but I will give him that.

The second I would put--and let's show the people that we mean business by passing a bipartisan bill, the Keystone Pipeline, and moving it to the President's desk. But he said:

. . . preventing retroactive tax increases. We must address

the expiring authority passed earlier this session for the

Department of Defense to train and equip a moderate, vetted

Syrian opposition [I agree that is very important] and we

must continue to support the efforts to address the Ebola

crisis [equally important].

But then something interesting happened. They brought to the floor a childhood bill--the majority and minority together. The leadership brought a bill that has bipartisan support--but so does Keystone. But the majority leader and the minority leader didn't think Keystone could get votes or couldn't pass or maybe they didn't want to pass it.

But as long as I am a Senator--I hope to be for many years to come--I am going to continue to fight for what is right and do it in as gracious a manner as possible to give credit where credit is due, to honor the Members on the other side and on my side who work very hard and just don't talk about bipartisanship but actually work at it every day.

I am sorry that it doesn't seem possible for the minority leader-- soon to be majority leader--to do that. When he finished speaking, I just sat here because I can't get leader time because I am not the leader of the caucus. Then I thought well, maybe Senator Cornyn will say something.

Senator Cornyn spoke at approximately 2:30, the record says. He spoke longer than the majority leader. He also talked about dysfunction, but he never called for a Keystone vote either. So I thought that was strange.

He said: ``We will pass a budget next year--something our friends across the aisle have failed to do . . . ''

He said: ``I know Republicans and Democrats will continue to have policy disagreements.''

He also said:

So last week's election will not change some of the

fundamental policy differences we have between political

parties on ObamaCare, on what we need to do to preserve and

protect Social Security and Medicare and the like . . . but

it will give us a chance to make some steady incremental

progress on issues where we do agree.

He talked about Ted Kennedy, the lion of the Senate. He talked about Mike Enzi and how Mike Enzi, who is a wonderful Senator--someone I have worked with very closely--said: Let's work on the 80-20 rule.

He said: What is that? He said: Let's work on the 80 percent that we can agree on and the 20 percent we cannot.

Then he went on to say:

That strikes me as eminently practical and a way for us to

begin to get back to work again.

When I talk about the easy stuff we can do, I am referring

to the bipartisan majority

that supports things such as the Keystone XL Pipeline

authorization . . .

I want to repeat that:

When I talk about the easy stuff we can do, I am referring

to the bipartisan majority that supports things such as the

Keystone XL Pipeline authorization . . .

So I thought he would call for us to see what we could do in this lame duck. We are going to vote on an early childhood education bill. Most certainly we would have the time to vote on a jobs bill.

Now I believe early childhood education in the long term is the best jobs bill we can do. I have said that over and over, and my life has been committed to early childhood education, good schools, excellence in education, and accountability. I am not saying this to diminish the bill the Senate is poised to pass, which is for early childhood education. But if we started today with 2 year olds, it will literally take us 20 years until they are 22, and the American people want jobs yesterday. They want jobs now. They don't want jobs in 22 years.

So I was hoping the majority would see that there is a clear path for the Keystone Pipeline to pass--a clear path. You can see it. You don't need a magnifying glass. You just need a brain in your head, an understanding of what happened in the election, and the votes that are here. It is--yes, what happened in the election, not only that the American people spoke, but that some Members who were opposed to it and who didn't want to vote have lost their elections.

The votes are here to pass this bill. It was clear to me; I thought it should be clear to the majority leader. So people are going to have to go ask the majority leader. He left the floor, and he will not answer this question, but I am going to continue to ask it until I get an answer from him because I think the people of the United States deserve it. Why didn't he? He has been talking about it incessantly every day, not only beating up on Democrats, even though about 15 of us--maybe more--will vote for it, but he has been beating up on the President incessantly, every day. And when he had the microphone, when he had the chance, when he was elected overwhelmingly in his State, he walked to the floor and didn't say a word about the Keystone Pipeline. Not a word. He didn't even refer to it.

Then the Senator from Texas, who I thought, well--because they do their scripts together, they coordinate them very well. I thought maybe the Senator from Texas was going to give the signal. The Senator from Texas didn't give the signal, either.

So as all Senators here who are elected have the right to stand up at their desk and ask for recognition--it is about as simple as that. I didn't even have a script. I was just sort of thinking that they were going to do it. That is why I was here, because I thought at least I would like to say I agree with it, and I am prepared to do what I have done to rally our side to get the votes.

So neither one of them said anything. And we can read it for ourselves. It is very clear. The Senator from Texas said we should do easy stuff like the Keystone Pipeline. We will do that. Next time we will work on workforce training. He said: No. 4, we can work on infrastructure; No. 5, he said we should discourage abusive, costly litigation; No. 6, we are going to repeal ObamaCare, particularly restore the 40-hour workweek; repeal the medical device tax; and No. 8, we are going to abolish the Independent Payment Advisory Board under Medicare. Each of these things I have mentioned has bipartisan support. If we can pass these measures, we will send them to the President for his signature. So starting with the easy stuff we have already identified that has bipartisan support.

Well, I lead the bipartisan effort on the Democratic side, and I am proud to say that I lead it with the Senator from North Dakota who is presiding, who has been an equally ferocious and sometimes more effective, I will admit, champion than I have been, and the Senator from West Virginia, who has also been an absolute bulldog on the issue.

There are other Senators. Max Baucus was a strong supporter of Keystone. Senator Tester. Is it impossible for Republicans to utter the words? Senator Tester. Senator Heitkamp. They don't have to say my name. I am clear about why they are not doing that, but they could at least be gracious enough to recognize the leadership of the other Senators here who have worked hard.

When we start this next Congress--and I am going to do everything I can to be a part of it--I really hope the reporters in this Chamber and people who are following this will start reporting what really happens here instead of what happens at press conferences, instead of what people say in press releases, instead of what people say when they buy staged television ads. If the reporters would actually just report what happened, I think that would be a good start.

Sometimes they are going to say: This is what Senator Landrieu did, and I disagree with her. This is what Mitch McConnell did, and I disagree with him. But at least they would report what actually happens.

So when they finished speaking, I stood up and said I think the votes are there. I have reason to believe they are. I worked for a couple of days last week just calling around because I am the chair of the committee, and my job is to pass legislation. I passed some significant pieces of legislation even before I was the chair of the energy committee, although you would not believe that listening to some people. We passed the RESTORE Act. I led the pushback against Biggert- Waters, although I didn't put my name on it because I knew if I did, it would never pass because they wouldn't have allowed it under any circumstance. So Senator Menendez and Senator Isakson were gracious to step up, and they led the effort, and I just kind of organized behind the scenes--it is clear that happened--and we passed it. I am grateful to this day that I didn't put my name as the lead because they never would have passed it in an election year, and we would have had 5 million people in this country literally turning their homes back to the banks or telling their children: The home that I built and that we built together that has $300,000 or $400,000 of equity--I am just telling you we are bankrupt.

I am so glad that didn't happen. I am thrilled.

So we did that bill. We did the RESTORE Act. I passed early in my career a revenue-sharing bill that is going to serve the State of Louisiana and the gulf coast beautifully for years to come.

Harry Truman offered us a portion of offshore oil and gas revenues even before I was born. When I got through college and read about it, I thought: Geez, that was a good idea. I liked Harry Truman's idea, and so I filed a bill and passed it as a junior member of the committee--I remind people, over the objection of my own chairman, who was a Democrat at the time, the Senator from New Mexico, Jeff Bingaman, who was adamantly opposed, adamantly fought every day, not just voted against me but lobbied against me, fought against me, spoke against it--not me personally but the bill. He just didn't believe in it--not me personally but the bill. I passed it over his objection, which is a very hard thing, for a junior member of the committee to pass it over the objection of their own chairman. But the reason I did it is because I figured out the votes, and we drafted it in a way that could secure the votes and passed it. That is the truth.

So I am happy tonight. I am not sad. I am happy tonight that the House of Representatives is again--because this is like the third time this has happened in my career. It is a great honor for a House that I haven't spent 2 minutes on the floor of--I mean, I know my delegation, but I haven't spent any time in the House. I wasn't even a Member of the House. This is the third time in my career that the House of Representatives has actually taken a Hoeven-Landrieu, Landrieu-Hoeven bill, stripped their bill--and I didn't even ask them to do it--and put my bill over there and passed it, and then they are going to move it over here. I could not be happier because we need to get the Keystone Pipeline done. They did sort of the same thing with revenue sharing, the RESTORE Act--well, four times--and the Biggert-Waters bill.

So I could not be happier that I was here at 2:00, that I listened to my father, who is listening now--he should be happy to say: Show up on time. You might not ever figure out what could happen if you aren't there on time.

So I was, thinking absolutely they wouldn't put the early childhood vote

on the floor, they would put Keystone on the floor because they talked about it every single day--every single day in my State, in Alaska, in North Carolina, in Georgia, and in Kentucky. Every single day.

What was wrong with yesterday? What was wrong with yesterday? It was a good day. I am going to let that question sit because there are a lot of people around here who know the answer; I don't have to tell it to them. What was wrong with Tuesday? So when they didn't mention it, I thought that I would because, as is the truth, I have been leading it since 2011. I am not going to stop until we get a vote on the Senate floor, for as long as I am here as chair, as ranking member--which I will be, and not as happy as being chair but thrilled to be able to work with the Senator from Alaska. If I had to pick one person in this body on that side of the aisle to work with, it would be Lisa Murkowski without a doubt, not only because she is a woman but because she is an independent woman. She is strong. And since I was raised by one, I cotton to them.

So I am a happy camper. It does not bother me because, as I have said, I have now worked here long enough to have worked in the majority and in the minority. I have worked with Republicans. I have worked with Democrats. I have worked with three Presidents of different parties and six Governors. Why would I be sad? This is kind of like somebody said to me: This is the gig you signed up for. Yes, it is. It is strange to many people, and I don't blame our constituents for getting aggravated, but it is a gig I signed up for because my dad signed up for it, my brother signed up for it, and my sister signed up for it because it is what we do, and we do it well. And every single member of my family-- and my husband signed up for it, and his mother signed up for it. I think it is worth signing up for, is why I am here.

Other people can have their opinions about the people who are here. I think they are some of the best people in the world. Maybe the institution is dysfunctional--it is. It is dysfunctional at this moment, but the people are not. The individual people who are here on both sides are not dysfunctional individuals; they are some of the most extraordinary people on this planet. I know I am going to get criticized for that statement because people will say: There she goes, just talking about politicians. But I have served long enough to know there are really some extraordinary human beings who serve in this Senate--smart, capable, caring--on both sides of the aisle, and I am proud to be a part of it.

I was not proud of the minority leader from Kentucky on Tuesday. I was not proud of him today. I was not proud of the Senator from Texas today. I was very disappointed in the Senator from North Dakota. But they are my friends. We will get through it, and we will work forward together.

I am glad the House is debating and voting. I look forward to being back here on next Tuesday, where our vote will occur, and I am very hopeful we will have and I believe we will have not 60 but probably 61 votes for the Keystone Pipeline. What the President does is a different matter, and I would like to challenge the Senators on Tuesday to just focus on the Senate.

Let the Senate's will work. Let us pass this bill. We will then send it to the President, and under the Constitution--which is read to us on a frequent basis--the President has the right to sign it or to veto it. If he vetoes it, it is going to take 67 votes to override his veto. Mine will be one of them if he vetoes this bill. If I am here, my vote will be there to override his veto. I don't believe there are 67 other votes in the Senate to do that. There might be. I don't know what mindset people will have, but let's cross that bridge when we get there.

Stop talking about the White House and talk about the Senate. If the Senate can function, then maybe the House will do a little bit better, maybe the White House will do a little bit better. My mother taught me if you want to criticize others, start with yourself first. Get yourself straight before you start criticizing everybody else. All I hear around here is what this one didn't do and what that one didn't do and what the President didn't do. Let us work as a Senate. Let us show the American people how the Senate works.

The House is going to do their job on Keystone. We are going to do our job on Keystone, and that will break the gridlock, which we desperately need on a significant--not an easy bill, not an easy bill-- but easier, such as early childhood education. Who could be opposed to that? But let's break the gridlock on a tough bill that is hard on our Members to vote on. There are Members here who think it is the worst thing in the world. I understand that. I think there are things that have passed here that I thought were the worst things in the world and I didn't like them, but voting is important. Senator Durbin has said this and others have said this over and over again; Senator Leahy, who has been here a long time. Let us vote and let us stop criticizing everyone else, and do our job, and I am proud that I helped to get us moving in that direction.

I am going to ask--Senator Carper is seeking to speak on another matter. I understand my hour of postcloture is about to expire. I don't need any additional time. I note that Senator Carper is here, but before that, Senator Heitkamp, I would respectfully say to the Chair, I think may have some comments she would like to make, and I yield the floor, but if Senator Heitkamp could go now.

Mr. President, I would like to speak for up to 10 minutes.

Mr. President, I was hoping to catch the Senator before he left the floor because I wanted to ask him--and I am not sure he is going to slip back in here, but I was going to ask him if he thought maybe--because I agree with him that that new approach to bipartisanship could start today. I do not think we have to necessarily wait until January. There are some of us who have been ready, who have worked in a bipartisan way, literally for years, getting very important things done for our Nation. I am

sorry the Senator slipped away. I am sure he has some other pressing business. I wanted to ask him--and I absolutely agree with him on the priorities he just laid out. I think he just said the American people want us to act and to act together in their interests.

I think I heard him say that on the top of his list, what he is particularly anxious to work on is the Keystone XL Pipeline, the expedited export of natural gas. I think he said it was important for jobs in America, helping to strengthen the middle class, sending a very positive signal to them that we heard them in this election; that he was troubled about the falling median household income and wants to do something to raise it. And I think I heard him say he was concerned or that he was--how shall I say it?--he was thinking that some of these things would really push Putin back on his heels. I have been one of the ones sanctioned by President Putin, and there are a few others who are on that list, so I have been of that mind for a while.

I think he also referred to Ted Kennedy, one of our dear friends who mentored many of us--not just Democrats but Republicans as well--with his straightforwardness, his honesty, his passion, his capacity for extraordinary work, and his willingness to work across party lines. As the Senator from Texas pointed out, there was a great partnership between Senator Kennedy and Senator Enzi, and he talked about the 80-20 rule; let's agree on 80 percent. ``We might not agree on everything, but let's move forward'' I think were his words on the 80 percent on which we do agree.

So I want to come to the floor today to ask Senator Cornyn from Texas particularly and Senator McConnell and Senator Reid and others if they will join me in moving forward on the Keystone XL Pipeline.

This has been a project that has lingered far too long. It is clearly supported by 60 or more Members of this body. It is a piece of legislation that has been endorsed by the new to-be majority leader, as a cosponsor and a leading cosponsor of the legislation.

There are a significant number of Democrats on that legislation. I believe with a significant push in the next few hours we could actually get the votes we need to pass the Keystone Pipeline. In an hour or so, at the request of the minority, I am going to wait for about an hour and then I am going to propose a unanimous consent to do exactly that-- to set up 2 hours of debate tonight after the vote and then have a vote on the Keystone Pipeline tomorrow. I believe it is the time to act.

I believe we should take the new majority leader at his word and stop blocking legislation that is broadly supported by the American public and has been for quite some time. I want to say yes to the new majority leader Mitch McConnell. The time to start is now. The public has clearly spoken. I believe we can move forward on several important pieces of legislation.

Senator Reid mentioned the Marketplace Fairness Act. That is another very important piece of legislation that I believe needs to be moved through. With a little push right now, it could get done. It would be a significant boost to businesses and retail that are being hurt every day by our inaction. My comments are going to be about the Keystone Pipeline because I am chair of the energy committee for the Senate. I am going to do everything in my power, here and at home on the campaign trail where I am still in a runoff, as you know, to get this project moving forward.

One of the extraordinary facts about the Keystone Pipeline is not what it is. I am going to talk about that in a minute and what it does. One of the most extraordinary pieces of argument for why we should pass it is the unprecedented coalition that supports it. There are other bills that have a longer list of supporters. There are bills that have pages and pages of lists. This particular bill has a relatively short list of organizations, but they are extremely powerful and diverse, which makes it compelling and I think it makes us--or should make us-- want to understand and respond to this coalition.

I am going to read their names. I have some time to do this before I call for unanimous consent to pass the original Hoeven-Landrieu Keystone bill, which is a stand-alone Keystone bill as originally introduced with 45 Republican cosponsors. Every Member of the Republican caucus is already a cosponsor of this bill, and we have on that bill about 12 Democratic cosponsors. I am confident we have the additional votes necessary to pass it.

The American Chemistry Council, the American Concrete Pipe Association, the American Exploration and Production Council, the American Highway Users Alliance, the American Petroleum Institute, the American Road & Transportation Builders, American Truckers Association, Associated General Contractors of America, Association of Oil Pipelines, Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute, Distribution Contractors Association, Independent Petroleum Association of America, Industrial Minerals Association of North America, Institute for 21st Century Energy, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Laborers International Union of North America.

Let me stop there and make a point. Many bills passed here or attempted to pass here either have a list of all business organizations or all labor organizations or all environmental organizations or all highway contractors.

This bill has such an extraordinary, diverse group of some of the strongest business leaders in the country. I want to underscore to my Democratic colleagues who are supporting this piece of legislation, tremendous support from labor unions because labor unions, like business leaders, want jobs. They want profits. They want success. They want more investment in business, creating good middle-class jobs. The difference between the oil and gas industry, which I have been pleased to be a strong advocate for in many different facets, is that industry does produce the kinds of jobs Americans truly want, not minimum wage jobs, not just slightly above minimum wage but jobs that in my State-- the Senator knows this because he is well aware of this--start at $60,000, $70,000, $85,000 for a young man or a young woman coming out of high school or trade school, let alone college.

These are very important jobs. That is why labor unions are represented here. Along with Portland Cement Association, the plastics industry, the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry, the Business Roundtable, American Supply Association, American Iron and Steel Institute, National Association of Manufacturers, National Electrical Contractors Association, National Roofing Contractors.

Why would roofing contractors be supporting the Keystone Pipeline? There are no roofs on a pipelines, but there are thousands of roofs over workers needed to build a pipeline. All along the route of this pipeline will be increases in populations of housing, industrial sites, retail, residential, supporting over 40,000 workers to build this pipeline. The North American Die Casting Association, the National Utility Contractors--again, associated businesses--the U.S. Oil & Gas Association and, finally, Steel Manufacturers Association and Western Alliance.

This is an extraordinary coalition that has come together to support the Hoeven-Landrieu bill. The bill I am going to call up in a few minutes for unanimous consent to pass because I believe what the new majority leader has said. I believe what Senator Cornyn has just said. I believe what the current majority leader said, soon to be minority leader in the next Congress, that we need to work together and that we can work together, and we need to begin to do that today--not tomorrow, not in January, not in February, not in March, not around the corner, not next week but today. That would send the most positive signal. I am not asking to have unanimous consent on 10 bills that are controversial. I am not asking us to do the impossible. I am not asking us to do something that just came up last week. I am asking us to move forward on a bill that has labor support, business support, general contractor support, and most importantly the American people. The latest polls on the Keystone Pipeline, not just in my state--I see my colleague from West Virginia--and not just in West Virginia but polls in this country from California to New York, to Michigan, to Pennsylvania, to Ohio,

to Florida, and to Texas. Overwhelmingly Democrats, Republicans--not everyone--but there is overwhelming support to build the Keystone Pipeline because Americans want jobs. American families deserve good- paying jobs. In addition, Americans are tired of bowing to Mideast powers or to Russian dictators about what our future is going to be. Americans are proud. We want to stand proud. We believe the Keystone Pipeline is an important first step. It is a signal. It is a symbol that represents American energy power. It is a symbol moving past gridlock. It is a deliverable on promises we have all made. Yes, we will work together. Yes, but that will start later. Yes, we will work together, but it will be next year. Yes, we will work together, but it will be in the spring. Yes, we will work together, but we can't pass Keystone unless we pass these 10 other things.

There is always going to be tomorrow. There is always going to be 10 other things. Let's act today, tomorrow. We can do this. We can pass the Keystone Pipeline and answer the frustrations of the American people so they can rest next week and say: Oh, my gosh. The Senators of the United States of America have ears. They have brains. They have hearts. They heard what we said and we can do this. We have a bill that is on the calendar.

I have also passed a similar bill through my committee, but I am not even asking you to pass the bill I passed through my committee, which I think is slightly better than the one on the calendar, but we can all compromise here. I am also the cosponsor of the bill, lead sponsor of the bill, that is on the Senate calendar. It doesn't have to go through a committee. It basically technically already has. It is ready for a vote. We have the 60 votes to pass it.

I am going to recognize in just a minute the Senator from West Virginia. I will ask the Senator a question because only the Chair can recognize, but I would like to ask the Senator from West Virginia, does any of this make sense to him. I don't know if he was down here. Although I am sure he was in his office listening to the comments of the majority leader, the soon-to-be majority leader, and the good Senator from Texas saying now is the time to work together. I don't know if the Senator heard that. Does the Senator think that maybe this bill would be the bill to start moving us from gridlock to doing the job for the American people?

The Senator from West Virginia is so right in focusing this debate at this moment on the subject of national security because Veterans Day was just celebrated by all of us yesterday. We all participated in Veterans Day events.

So it pains me to say this, but I am going to give us all of the facts--and the Senator knows this--that this country imports 340 million barrels today. Iraq exports 340,000 barrels of oil per day. That is Iraq--blood and treasure. We have left men and women--not left them on the battlefield--but they have died there, and we have many soldiers here at home.

Canada--which is a friendly country, an ally of ours--with the Keystone Pipeline, would bring in 870,000 barrels into the United States. So the American people sit here and think: OK, what is wrong with this picture? We could be taking oil from our friend, Canada, creating jobs in North America--good-paying jobs--not only building the pipeline but maintaining the pipeline.

This pipeline doesn't come to Louisiana. I fought for it like a tiger, and the pipeline doesn't even come to my State. It goes to Texas. Now, I have refineries in Louisiana, and Louisiana most certainly and the companies in Louisiana will benefit. This pipeline doesn't connect Canada and Louisiana; it connects Canada and Texas.

I am sorry that the majority leader and the Senator from Texas had to scamper off the floor. I am sure he had a meeting to go to. But this is really about refineries in Texas that are waiting for this oil and about moving this oil, as the Senator knows, through the most safe means possible to these refineries--off of the highways, off of the railroads, and supporting a relationship with Canada as opposed to countries in other parts of the world that don't always share our values and that we have to spend a lot of our defense money protecting.

So this makes no sense, and that is why I think this pipeline has such overwhelming bipartisan support across the country.

Everyone benefits.

Absolutely.

This morning, to prepare for offering this unanimous consent request--which I will do in a very short period of time and ask for a couple of hours of debate tonight and then tomorrow--I spoke to the leader of the building trades council for the United States of America. He was very strong in his words to me about how disappointed he has been with some Members who have not stood up for building trades.

These are men and women who work in every State. All they want to do is go to work and have jobs. He was extremely disappointed in the gridlock over this piece of legislation, and that is exactly what he said to me. He said: Senator, we are about fed up with elections and politics because what my members want are jobs. That is what their families want, and they are tired of fooling around with some commonsense projects that would bring so much wealth to middle-class families.

I know that the majority leader on our side is concerned about the flat line of middle-class income in this country, and I know his heart is working toward increasing income for all families. This is the first step. Not only is the project itself going to generate huge amounts of jobs and economic activity--and I am going to put that amount in the record. It is estimated to be $20 billion. It is slightly less than the size of the entire State of Vermont's GDP. This one project is like the output of one of our States--albeit a small State--but Vermont is an important State. I have never in my life seen a project with so much economic benefit.

I have never seen an infrastructure project supported from a broader base--from the left to the center to the right. I have never seen labor and business come together in my life as they have on this issue. I have never seen so many Senators cosponsor a bill and yet--because of something I can't quite put my finger on--we haven't yet passed. We can do that now, today or tomorrow, and that would send a very positive signal that we have heard the voters, that we do understand this cry for breaking the gridlock, moving forward together, and getting the job done.

I could not think of a better bill that symbolizes what we are trying to do in terms of jobs, economic security, energy security, and looking to the future in our country than this bill. It would build this pipeline, get this oil--which is going to be produced anyway--off of the rails, off of our highways, and into refineries.

May I say, as the Senator from West Virginia knows, and the Senator from North Dakota, who is my right hand with the Senator from West Virginia, we have additional pipelines to build because we have to build these east-west. The real need for the supply is the west coast and the east coast.

As the Senator knows, you could produce all the oil and gas you want or all the energy, and produce and generate the power, but if you can't move it to the places where it needs to be, it is as if you haven't produced it.

I know something about this subject as chair of the energy committee. So after we do Keystone, which we are going to do tomorrow, we have to build some other pipelines that go east and west.

This is only to take 10 percent of North Dakota's supply. North Dakota has become the leading supplier of oil and gas in the country. I wish to talk about North Dakota for 1 minute. I can't do it justice, such as Senator Heitkamp can do it, but I heard her give this speech enough to be able to repeat it, and it is worth repeating.

The Senator from Texas just came to the floor and lamented: Oh, my gosh, what can we do to lift the middle class? How can we lift their economic outlook?

The Senators, all three of them, came and asked that question. I gave them an answer: Build the Keystone Pipeline. Do they know what is happening in North Dakota? It might be a sparsely populated State, but it has now surpassed every State in the production of oil.

The other thing they do is they took their energy production, No. 36 on a scale of 1 to 50--they were the poorest State. The Senator from West Virginia would know where they are today. Do we know where they are in 4 years? They have moved from 36 to 6. Think about that. I want to let that sink in for just 1 minute. North Dakota moved their number from 36 out of 50 to 6 out of 50 in 4 years.

Now, I challenge any Senator from any part of this country or any political leaning to come down to this floor in the next 24 hours and show me one piece of legislation, one tax cut, one jobs bill that could move a State in 4 years or a group of States from 36 to 6. That is the power of this industry, and we are standing in its way.

It is shameful, it is wrong, and it must stop today. If people want to hide, they are going to have a hard time.

I want everybody to hear clearly this is not a time to hide, not a time to sit down, and not a time to play games. It is a time to stand. We already have enough votes to pass this bill. We have 45--we have every single Republican, none of whom are on the floor now. Every single Republican of this Chamber is a cosponsor of this bill on which I am going to ask unanimous consent. So I would think very carefully before anyone objects because they are all cosponsors on the bill. Think hard before you do.

I agree with the Senator. I think he is absolutely correct. The Senator from Montana knows this as well. The Senator from Montana also has an issue that I will ask him to explain in just a moment--he knows it better than I do--about private property rights, because he negotiated the language in the bill.

But responding to the question of the Senator from West Virginia about the environment, that is what is so exciting about this project, so compelling for us to move forward. Not only did the international study that was done say it is in our international interests, of course, to trade with our best and most friendly trading partner closest to us that enjoys the same high quality standard of life that we do and even higher environmental standards, but the environmental study that came in, conducted by the President's own administration-- this wasn't done previously--came back and concluded this is the safest way to move it and it is the most environmentally friendly way to move it, and that is the record.

So the Senator is right. Not only does it have a compelling economic argument, but it has a compelling environmental argument from that perspective.

I would ask the Senator from Montana if he could explain the very important language that is in the Landrieu-Hoeven bill that is cosponsored by every single Republican and this chairman and that is about the language he negotiated on private property rights, because this is a very important principle for many Republicans but also for many Democrats, particularly in Louisiana, where we have a lot of private property. In West Virginia you have a lot of private property. In Montana you have a lot of private but also some public lands.

Would the Senator answer that question if he would.

Mr. President, I see the Senator from North Dakota has arrived, and of course she wants to speak and can do so beautifully because this pipeline comes through her State, as I said. But I do want to respond to a few things and thank the Senator from West Virginia.

I have heard colleagues, particularly my colleague from California, say this often, and she says it in committee and on the floor. And even though she and I are on opposite sides of this debate, we have worked together on some important legislation for our country, and I have such respect for her leadership on the RESTORE Act, which was an amazing piece of environmental legislation for our gulf coast States. Without her leadership it would not have happened. But I have heard her say over and over and over again that elections have consequences, and this one does, just as they all do. And one of the consequences of this election is that a clear path for Keystone has been opened up.

The reporters following this legislation, which they have followed very carefully, know exactly what I am talking about when I say a path for passage has been cleared. In my view, that path will never, ever be clearer than it is today. Now in order for the path to stay clear, and it is crystal clear today, politics must be set aside. Gamesmanship has to be set aside. We must come together to do what is right for the country, for the American people, and to vote.

There are strong feelings, I know, against this bill. There have been for many years. But the overwhelming majority of this body--60-plus Members--has indicated support for this legislation. And the Senate bill, from the perspective we just heard--from private property rights, for clarity, for simplicity--is far superior to the House bill that has been passed.

The House is very agile--very agile. They can do lots of things quickly that the Senate can't do. So the House may decide to take the language of this bill, pass it, and call it something else. I understand that. I don't know if that is what they will do, but there is a clear path for victory on Keystone. Whoever's name is on the bill does not matter to me as long as it gets done. I want to say that again. The name on the bill does not matter to me as long as this gets done. And it needs to get done right now--not in January, not in February, not in March.

It doesn't need to be combined with anything else. It needs to get done on its own, because it is standing alone. It will go to the President's desk as a stand-alone. I believe the President will have to make an important decision. I am hoping he will sign it. But if he doesn't, that is the process. I hope he will, and I will be urging him to do so because his administration--his State Department, his EPA, and his Transportation Department--has urged him to support this piece of legislation for the strength of our economy, a signal to our allies, and to strengthen America here and abroad. I would strongly urge him to sign it.

We have a job to do in the Senate, the President has a job to do, and the House has a job to do. But if everybody would stop playing games with this bill and think about what the American people said on election day and stop trying to push one philosophy or one person ahead of the other, we can get this done.

My name is not even first on this bill. Senator Hoeven's name is first. It is a Hoeven bill. I am the lead Democratic sponsor because I am the chair of the energy committee, and I will be until January 2. If my voters send me back, I will be here for 6 more years. That is why my name is on the bill, because I chair the committee. But if they want to take my name off, put somebody's else name on it and pass it, so be it. I didn't come here to see my name in lights. I came here to create jobs for my State and for this country, and I believe I have done an excellent job in the 18 years I have been here, through very difficult circumstances, and will continue should the voters want me to.

Today we need to talk about the Keystone Pipeline, and nobody can speak better of this than the Senator from North Dakota. I wish to line this up before she speaks, because she was traveling and she just landed. She might not have heard what all three leaders said when they came to the floor. Senator Reid, Senator Cornyn, and Senator McConnell said their No. 1 goal was to break gridlock, and they wanted to start now. Their second goal was to expand middle-class job opportunities and create wealth in America.

So I am hoping the Senator from the State that has created the most wealth in the shortest period of time of any State of the Union might express to the rest of us actually how that happened and why she thinks this Keystone Pipeline and other pipelines--because she and I agree, this is just the first of several we are going to have to lay down to make America a superenergy power. We don't become a superenergy power by just wishing it; we become a superenergy power by putting in the infrastructure that makes it possible. Even kids in second grade understand this. We have to put up windmills, we have to put up solar panels, we have to put in pipelines, we have to put in highways.

The Senator from North Dakota, who has a very sparsely populated State, understands the issue of this infrastructure I think better than any Senator in this body. So I am going to ask her if she would respond to that and maybe elaborate on the question: How did her State get so wealthy in the last few years?

My State is doing well. I am not here complaining. My State is doing beautifully. Our unemployment in south Louisiana is 3 percent, so we are blessed because we are an energy State. We are proud of it. We are creating jobs hand over fist. But there are places such as Detroit, there are places in Ohio, there are places in Pennsylvania and New York and New Mexico and other places where people are unemployed, begging for work, willing to work. Three leaders came to the floor and said: It is time to break gridlock. Here is a project that can do it. So I hope to see them sometime before close of business tonight.

Would the Senator expound on that?

I know the Senator from Tennessee is on the floor and I would like to take 2 or 3 minutes. I know we can go back and forth but I want to conclude a little bit of this debate we have had.

First, I want to submit for the Record--because I am going to remain on the floor and speak after the Senator from Tennessee--but I want to put into the Record the list of Republican cosponsors of S. 2280, the date they became cosponsors, and the name of every single Member, including the Senator from Tennessee, who is a cosponsor of the Hoeven- Landrieu bill that is pending on the Senate Calendar, S. 2280. I ask unanimous consent that the list be printed in the Record.

I also want to put into the Record the 35-plus very powerful organizations that range from business to labor to manufacturers that have been a strong and powerful and vocal coalition for over 5 years in their efforts to bring us together. They have come together. The question is whether the Members of Congress will come together. These groups have come together. It is not often that you see the laborers, pipefitters, boilermakers, and builders and trades all together sitting down with the Chamber of Commerce and the American Petroleum Institute, but they managed to find common ground at a common table, and America will be best served when the Members of this body and the House do the same.

I also want to put into the Record two short statements, and this is directed to those who are on the other side of this issue and who are wavering or are not sure. I want to put into the Record that the environmental review process has been conducted over 5 \1/2\ years. The review process has been thorough. Five studies have been conducted, as required by law, and are complete.

I want to repeat that. The five environmental studies that are required by law have been conducted. They are completed. I ask unanimous consent that material be printed in the Record.

In addition, the only other requirement is from the State Department, and I want to put this into the Record. But the bottom line is the last statement of the State Department finds ``there will be no significant impact on the environment from the [Keystone XL] project.'' I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the Record.

The path today is crystal clear. Today it is crystal clear. There is no guarantee that next week or next month or when the Republicans take the majority that the path could be as clear as it is today. Let us not miss this opportunity. Let us get our work done on the Keystone XL Pipeline, an important project in this country, and send a message that we have heard the voters and show that trust with us begins today on their behalf.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I have been on the floor now for a couple of hours urging some of our colleagues to take heed of one of the clear messages from this election. People all over the country voted and spoke, and spoke clearly and loudly to say let's get to work, let's work together, let's stop the gridlock and let's find common ground to move our country forward.

Two hours ago I came to the floor to see about one of the most important pieces of legislation, the Keystone Pipeline, as Chair of the Energy Committee in the Senate. I have had the great privilege of working in a bipartisan manner with the Members of the Republican Caucus on this bill led by Senator Hoeven. I am the lead sponsor on the Democratic side and there is a large group of my colleagues trying to convince this body to have a vote, and a strong 60-vote margin, which is required for passage on the Keystone Pipeline. The Senator from West Virginia has come down and the Senator from North Dakota came down to speak and the Senator from Montana joined me, and I want to announce we have just gotten great word from the House of Representatives. Evidently they heard us speaking, and they have introduced our bill in the House.

They have introduced our bill in the House, and the information we have gotten is that they plan to pass it tomorrow. Let me just say hallelujah. I will say it again--hallelujah--because their bill would never have passed this body and their bill would not have any chance of getting the President's signature because it is Keystone Pipeline plus--or it was--but now the House has introduced the exact same bill as the Hoeven-Landrieu bill. We now have an even clearer path to victory. I started 2 hours ago saying that I could see the path. I am not sure everybody else could, but it is clear to me now that everybody is starting to see it, and I could not be happier.

I don't have the actual number of the House bill. I was just told they introduced an identical bill, including the private property language, which is absolutely essential to secure the 60 votes required. That is why I drafted it in the bill, that is why Senator Hoeven insisted it be in the bill, and that is why we have it in the bill. I thank the House for keeping that language, which is important for its ultimate passage. To me, it looks as though just in the last 2 hours lots of people are paying attention, and this is wonderful because this is an important step.

I believe I am also a cosponsor of Senator Alexander's bill. No Senator has worked harder in either party, and that is saying a lot because Senator Murray and Senator Mikulski have worked hard on this issue. Senator Alexander--a former Secretary of Education--has been ceaseless and tireless in his effort on behalf of early childhood education. He and I worked together when President Bush was President. I believe and I hope I am a cosponsor of his bill, and I look forward to helping him move that piece of legislation forward for a vote. There might be a few things in there other Members disagree with, but that is our process. This is a critical issue for education and job creation as well. We have the Keystone Pipeline on one end, which is as concrete as steel, and then we have the soft issues, which are also important issues, such as economic development, which begins with early childhood education. I am so proud to be an advocate of both bills, and I thank the Senator for his leadership.

I urge my Members, who I believe have been very supportive on this issue--as have the Republican Members--to give cloture on his bill.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I was on the floor earlier today. I have been on the floor since we convened back into session--our first session since the election--and I am very heartened by what I have heard from colleagues such as the Senator from Hawaii, who just spoke, our colleague from Montana, who just spoke, our colleague from Tennessee, who spoke; as well as the leadership particularly, including Leader Reid, majority leader-to-be Mitch McConnell, and the Senator from Texas, Mr. Cornyn, all of whom came to the floor and said they heard the message of the American people. The message is that now is the time to stop the bickering, stop the fighting, stop the gridlock, and take action on issues the American people know are the right answers for our country, focusing on building jobs and economic hope for the middle class, in large measure because of this extraordinary opportunity for an energy renaissance that is underway as we speak-- energy jobs, petrochemical jobs, manufacturing jobs.

Our unemployment rate in south Louisiana is 3.5 percent. Our general unemployment rate is much lower than the national average and has been for many years. But even in my State, with these very positive numbers, middle-class families are seeing their incomes stagnate, their way of life not progressing, and their economic progress not moving forward as it should.

So while people are happy and doing well in some parts of the country--every leader came to the floor and said, we heard the American people. We want jobs. We want economic opportunity. We want the middle class put first. We want gridlock put last, and we want you all to roll up your sleeves and get the job done. That was the message.

So I came to the floor at 2 o'clock, the first minute we opened, to claim the floor to say let's begin with trusting each other, moving forward, and passing the Keystone Pipeline which is a bill that has enjoyed bipartisan support and has the 60 votes on this floor for passage.

There is strong objection from the 40 Members who have been opposed. Of course they have a right to be opposed. We debated this for 5 years, but the process is let's vote and let the process move forward. I am very encouraged that in the 2 hours 15 minutes I have been on the floor that the House of Representatives has actually heard this call and has decided to introduce--the Rules Committee will be meeting tonight. I understand they want to introduce the identical bill to the Hoeven- Landrieu bill which will give a clear path. It is a stand-alone Keystone only with private property rights language that is very important to the Republican base but it is also very important to Democratic Members, for me, personally, and my State, but for many rural States on the Democratic side. We cannot allow international companies to expropriate our properties here without due process. It cannot happen. I am the strongest advocate of building pipelines everywhere, but there are private property rights that have to be followed.

The language carefully drafted by Senator Hoeven and myself respects the private property rights of American citizens. I understand the House is going to take that language and the straight-up, no attachments, no riders, no anything--except for the Keystone language as it is written in this file that is pending and pass that out of the House.

We have already made some progress in getting the Keystone project built or moving forward. I want to put into the record a couple of headlines of magazines and articles that I think help to underline or underscore what I am trying to say.

The ``Science'' magazine editor-in-chief says, ``Time to move forward on Keystone Pipeline.''

LABI: ``Twenty Louisiana Chambers of Commerce support Keystone Pipeline.'' This is the Louisiana Association of Business Industry. It is a recent headline.

The Washington Post: ``On the Keystone XL pipeline, put policy ahead of politics.'' That is what we are doing today.

Illinois Review--this is one of the most important. ``AFL-CIO says Keystone XL is not just a pipeline but a life line.''

The largest labor unions in our country have rolled up their sleeves. They are in this fight. They are telling us, Democrats and Republicans, but mostly to the Democratic Caucus, because they are part of our base, vote for the pipeline. This is jobs for average middle-class working people that we need. We deserve them, they say, in States such as yours, Mr. President, Ohio, Illinois, Pennsylvania, and in States such as Colorado, New Mexico, New York. I could go on and on. In West Virginia.

Remember, my State--not that we don't need good jobs but our unemployment rate is very low. We have jobs and opportunities pouring into Louisiana and Texas, the energy coast of America. We are proud of it.

We are proud not only to produce these jobs and this energy but we are helping to fuel a renaissance of manufacturing in the Midwest. We are exceedingly proud of this. We are not just creating jobs for ourselves, we are creating jobs for the Midwest, for the manufacturing renaissance of America.

We are allowing for the expansion of the economy on the east coast and providing help for the west coast. It is what we do. It is what America's energy coast does. No coast does it better than we do.

We are connecting to a partner, Canada, which is better for us in many ways than Venezuela or even some of our friends in the Mideast, and we don't--not every friend is our friend in the Mideast. We are getting oil from our best friend, our best trading partner, our best ally, that has equal economic standards as we do and even some higher environmental standards than we do to create economic opportunity for our country.

I wanted to submit this for the record. There are no other Senators to speak. I am going to yield the floor in a minute.

We are still in a time of morning business until votes at 5:30.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following the leader's remarks on Tuesday, November 18, the Senate proceed to consideration of Calendar No. 371, S. 2280, a bill to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline; that there be up to 6 hours of debate equally divided between opponents and proponents; that upon the use or yielding back of time, the bill be read a third time and the Senate proceed to vote on passage of S. 2280; that no amendments, motions, or points of order be in order to the bill prior to the vote on passage; that the vote on passage be subject to a 60 affirmative-vote

threshold. And I will include something. I ask that unanimous consent as in legislative session.

Reserving the right to object.

I thank the Senator from Texas engaging on this matter today. I appreciate it. Most importantly, I appreciate the comments he made earlier on the floor about rolling up our sleeves and getting to work. He was one of the first speakers this morning when our Senate convened, and I was here when he spoke. I wish to thank him for his very insightful and courageous words that said we should roll up our sleeves and get to work.

He knows very well that I, and about 12 to 15 Members on our side, have been working very hard with him and his leadership and all the Members of the Republican side to move the Keystone Pipeline bill forward.

I think the Senator also knows the bill that Senator Hoeven and I drafted respects this process, wanted to see the process complete, and acknowledges that the process is now complete and it is time to move.

So because the House heard these words today and has decided to introduce the identical language in the Hoeven-Landrieu bill--and I think the Senator will agree with me it is good news--it looks to me as if they are prepared to pass it. I can see no reason to object to what the Senator from Texas is asking for, and I consider it extraordinary progress.

I am very happy that I came to the floor at 2:00 p.m. to get the ball rolling and that I was here in time to hear the Senator's remarks: Let's get to work.

So let's get it done. We can get it done in the lameduck session, and I will accept the Senator's counter.

I will clarify. I want the record to reflect my remarks. The Senator from Louisiana has absolutely no objection to the House of Representatives taking the exact language from my bill with Senator Hoeven and passing it. Why would I object? I have been working on this for 4 years. Why would I object to that? The record should reflect that. The Senator from Louisiana has no objection whatsoever-- and I am encouraged that the House is taking the exact language of the bill that I carefully drafted with Senator Hoeven. He is the lead on this bill. I am not. It is his bill. He is the lead. I am just the Chair of the energy committee.

I wish to thank Senator Tester and others who helped to craft a bill that the House would accept, and so I have no objection to that.

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public, that a business meeting has been scheduled before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The business meeting will be held on Thursday, November 13, 2014, at 3 p.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Building.

The purpose of the Business Meeting is to consider the following legislation:

1. S. 2638, a bill to amend the Natural Gas Act to provide

certainty with respect to the timing of Department of Energy

decisions to approve or deny applications to export natural

gas. (Mr. Hoeven)

2. S. 2379, a bill to approve and implement the Klamath

Basin agreements, to improve natural resource management,

support economic development, and sustain agricultural

production in the Klamath River Basin in the public interest

and the interest of the United States, and for other

purposes. (Mr. Wyden)

3. S. 1784, a bill to improve timber management on Oregon

and California Railroad and Coos Bay Wagon Road grant land,

and for other purposes. (Mr. Wyden)

4. S. 2602, a bill to establish the Mountains to Sound

Greenway National Heritage Area in the State of Washington.

(Ms. Cantwell)

5. S. 182, a bill to provide for the unencumbering of title

to non-Federal land owned by the city of Anchorage, Alaska,

for the purposes of economic development by conveyance of the

Federal reversion interest to the City. (Ms. Murkowski)

6. S. 776, a bill to establish the Columbine-Hondo

Wilderness in the State of New Mexico, to provide for the

conveyance of certain parcels of National Forest System land

in the State, and for other purposes. (Mr. Udall of New

Mexico)

7. S. 841, a bill to designate certain Federal land in the

San Juan National Forest in the State of Colorado as

wilderness, and for other purposes. (Mr. Bennet)

8. S. 1419, a bill to promote research, development, and

demonstration of marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy

technologies, and for other purposes. (Mr. Wyden)

9. S. 1971, a bill to establish an interagency coordination

committee or subcommittee with the leadership of the

Department of Energy and the Department of the Interior,

focused on the nexus between energy and water production,

use, and efficiency, and for other purposes. (Ms. Murkowski).

10. S. 398, a bill to establish the Commission to Study the

Potential Creation of a National Women's History Museum, and

for other purposes. (Ms. Collins)

11. S. 2031, a bill to amend the Act to provide for the

establishment of the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore in

the State of Wisconsin, and for other purposes, to adjust the

boundary to that National Lakeshore to include the lighthouse

known as Ashland Harbor Breakwater Light, and for other

purposes. (Ms. Baldwin)

12. S. 1750, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the

Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture to enter into

agreements with States and political subdivisions of States

providing for the continued operation, in whole or in part,

of public land, units of the National Park System, units of

the National Wildlife Refuge System, and units of the

National Forest System in the State during any period in

which the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of

Agriculture is unable to maintain normal level of operations

at the units due to a lapse in appropriations, and for other

purposes. (Mr. Flake)

13. S. 1966, a bill to provide for the restoration of the

economic and ecological health of National Forest System land

and rural communities, and for other purposes. (Mr. Barrasso)

14. S. 2104, a bill to require the Director of the National

Park Service to refund to States all State funds that were

used to reopen and temporarily operate a unit of the National

Park System during the October 2013 shutdown. (Mr. Flake)

15. H.R. 1526, an Act to restore employment and educational

opportunities in, and improve the economic stability of,

counties containing National Forest System land, while also

reducing Forest Service management costs, by ensuring that

such counties have a dependable source of revenue from

National Forest System land, to provide a temporary extension

of the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination

Act of 2000, and for other purposes. (Rep. Hastings)

16. H.R. 885, an Act to expand the boundary of the San

Antonio Missions National Historical Park, and for other

purposes. (Rep. Doggett)

17. S. 1328, an bill to authorize the Secretary of the

Interior to conduct a special resource study of the

archeological site and surrounding land of the New

Philadelphia town site in the State of Illinois, and for

other purposes. (Mr. Kirk and Mr. Durbin)

18. H.R. 1241, an Act to facilitate a land exchange

involving certain National Forest System lands in the Inyo

National Forest, and for other purposes. (Rep. Cook)

19. S. 1437, a bill to provide for the release of the

reversionary interest held by the United States in certain

land conveyed in 1954 by the United States, acting through

the Director of the Bureau of Land Management, to the State

of Oregon for the establishment of the Hermiston Agriculture

Research and Extension Center of Oregon State University in

Hermiston, Oregon. (Mr. Wyden)

20. S. 2873, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the

Interior to acknowledge contributions at units of the

National Park System. (Mr. Coburn)

Because of the limited time available for the Business Meeting, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the business meeting record should send it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, 304 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by email to [email protected].

For further information, please contact Sam Fowler at (202) 224-7571.

Mr. President, I wish to recognize and honor Dr. James Meza, Jr., who has devoted much of his life to ensuring that all of Louisiana's students receive an excellent education. He currently serves as Superintendent of the Jefferson Parish Public School System and while he will soon retire from this role, he will be leaving behind an indelible mark of impressive leadership and results. On behalf of the U.S. Senate and the State of Louisiana, I applaud Dr. Meza as a champion of high quality education and for his devotion to Louisiana's public education system.

Dr. Meza's experience in education spans more than 40 years and crosses teaching and leadership positions both at the K-12 and higher education levels. As a champion of education reform, Dr. Meza developed many of the pioneering ideas in Louisiana that led to revolutionary reform movements across the Nation. In the devastating aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Gustav, Dr. Meza was instrumental in one of the most transformational endeavors of modern public education helping to establish the Recovery School District in New Orleans, LA, which is now 100 percent public charter schools and has experienced extraordinary progress in closing the achievement gap.

Dr. Meza served most recently as the Superintendent of Jefferson Parish Public School System, Louisiana's largest and most diverse school district, serving 46,000 students. Since becoming the head of Jefferson Parish Public School System in 2011, Dr. Meza has led a reform agenda that has transformed the school system from one in a downward spiral for achievement to one of Louisiana's most improved school systems. In 2 years, Jefferson Parish Public School System has improved its State performance rating from a letter grade ``D'' to ``B.'' In that same period, the number of ``A'' and ``B'' schools has increased dramatically, from 13 to 32. Jefferson Parish is home to 4 schools that are ranked in the top 10 in Louisiana.

Prior to becoming Superintendent of Jefferson Parish Public School System, Dr. Meza served as Professor and Dean at the University of New Orleans, UNO, for more than 21 years where he published more than 40 journal articles to study education reform, specifically focused on serving children of low-income families in Louisiana and nationwide. Dr. Meza is recognized nationally for redefining the role of colleges of education and their work with low performing schools. As Dean, he launched the UNO Charter School Network of four charter schools, as well as Louisiana's first Type 5--turnaround--charter school. His efforts were recognized by New Orleans City Business, which presented him with the ``Innovator of the Year'' award. He received the honor and title of Professor and Dean Emeritus from the LSU system, recognizing his years of scholarship at UNO.

Dr. Meza has served as the Executive Director of the Louisiana State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, BESE, and the Interim State Superintendent of Education for Louisiana. During this time, he was a pioneer in school accountability, launching Louisiana's educational quality and trust fund, 8G, and restructuring the Department of Education as Louisiana transformed the State Superintendent's position from an elected position to one appointed by BESE. Dr. Meza also has served as a faculty member at Nicholls State University, principal of Cabrini High School, and teacher at E.D. White and Isidore Newman High School.

Dr. Meza has received numerous awards and deserved recognitions for his transformational work in the education sphere. He is the recipient of The Weiss Award by the New Orleans Council for Community and Justice, which honors members of the Greater New Orleans community for civic and humanitarian contributions. He has also been recognized as a ``Super Hero'' by the national organization Stand for Children for his work in improving quality educational opportunities for children of poverty.

Dr. Meza currently serves on the Board of Directors of Holy Cross School and was a member of the Louisiana Serve Commission and the Southern University System Board of Supervisors. He is also a founding board member of Ben Franklin High School and Edward Hynes charter schools. Dr. Meza served 32 years in the Louisiana Army National Guard and retired at the rank of Colonel.

I am proud that Louisiana's students and teachers have had the strong leadership and guidance of Dr. Meza over

the years. Dr. Meza's leadership as the Superintendent of the Jefferson Parish Public School System will be missed; however, I have full faith and trust that he will continue to lead in improving the educational prospects and outcomes for Louisiana's students in whatever role he pursues next. Once again, I am privileged and honored to formally recognize Dr. James Meza, Jr. for his commitment and efforts to strengthen public education in Louisiana.

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

Madam President, it is my pleasure today to come to the floor of the Senate to honor some very special constituents from all of our States who are here for 3 days, and they are very special because they actually have wings. We call them angels, and I think the Presiding Officer has met her angels who are here this week. They are Members who have been honored or constituents of ours who have been honored by Members of the Senate and Members of the House for the extraordinary work these individual citizens and sometimes entities and organizations have done on behalf of orphans here in the United States and around the world. There are happily over 124 angels here with us, 124 Members of Congress--70 Members of the House and 54 Members of the Senate--who took the time to identify someone in their district or State who has really stepped up for orphans through either the domestic adoption and foster care system or our international adoption world.

I am proud of the Congressional Coalition on Adoption. I am one of the founders of the organization. About 16 years ago a group of about 20 of us came together to begin really focused work on educating ourselves first and then our colleagues across the aisle and in both Houses of Congress on the barriers that were keeping children from families, the barriers that were causing children to be left and abandoned, never to be reunited with their birth families or ever placed with new families who could adopt them. We struggled to learn and educate ourselves about why families break up and disintegrate and what is the proper approach after that happens to try to pull that family back together and if not, how we can place children in homes where they can be raised and nurtured and cared for.

You heard me say this many times: Governments do some things very well--some things not so well--but raising children is not one of them. Parents, responsible adults, raise children. It is the way we are wired. It is the way we are created. It is the only real way that ever works well. I believe our job at the Federal, State, and local level, both here in the United States and around the world, is for the government to get out of the way and let this happen or start leading and helping with the kinds of policies that help children reunite with birth families and if that is not possible, to move quickly--because time is of the essence in a child's development--to make sure that child and sibling groups are placed in a loving, supportive family and not in an institution--not necessarily with people who are paid to be parents, not necessarily in group homes, but in real families. Sometimes governments, nonprofits, and charitable individuals want to help with stipends to support that effort. We perfectly understand that. It is perfectly legal. But we really love children to be in homes where they feel they are being loved out of a gift of love, and that is our goal.

There is so much gridlock and arguing going on. This is one issue about which there is no gridlock and no argument. Republicans and Democrats have come together. Jim Inhofe and I are proud to serve as the leaders in the Senate with many Members who have been very active. The Presiding Officer has been extremely active. I wish to say thank you to the Senator from Wisconsin for her leadership on several pieces of important legislation. I would like to give a special shout-out to the Senator from Minnesota, Ms. Klobuchar, who has been remarkable in her leadership; Senator Gillibrand, who has been extremely helpful; Senator Shaheen; Senator Blunt; Senator Boozman; and I could go on. There have been 20 or 25 real champions this year in the Senate on issues that affect orphans and children in foster care. Senator Grassley, who leads the foster care caucus, has also been a very reliable advocate on behalf of these children.

To frame the challenge, there are about 500,000 children in the United States who are in foster care. About 100,000 have been deemed to be adoptable. Parental rights have been terminated due to gross neglect, abuse, et cetera. The courts have stepped in and said these children need a new home, new parents. That is a big number, 500,000, but it represents about one-half of 1 percent of all the children in America. From that standpoint, you can say America is doing pretty well with keeping all of our children in families, keeping them loved and supported. When families fail, the community, the government, and churches and places of worship need to step in and help and be supportive.

But we still have many problems. Some children are waiting too long. Some children are born in this country without birth certificates--I just met one in my office today, if you can imagine that--so their legal status has been compromised. There are millions of orphans around the world who don't have any advocacy and don't have the kinds of systems we have in the United States to help with their identification, their rescue, their placement, et cetera, so that is the work we do.

The Congressional Coalition on Adoption educates Members of Congress. We hold seminars for ourselves, educational opportunities. We hold an annual gala, and this year the Angels In Adoption gala is happening tonight in Washington. Angels are visiting Senate offices, telling their stories of adoption to our Members. Tonight we will be at the Ronald Reagan International Trade Center celebrating with almost 1000 people the work our angels are doing.

I wish to congratulate our three very special national award winners: adoptive parents Bill Klein and Dr. Jennifer Arnold, the stars of the TLC reality show ``The Little Couple.'' They are very famous in America and well-known around the world. People have watched them overcome the great challenges they face. They are very tiny but have great hearts and great minds, and by being on television, they have an extraordinary reach. We are all very familiar with their show. They are married and have proceeded to build a family through adoption. They adopted a little, little child from India and another little child from China and are building their family. They have just

been remarkable models for all adoptive parents, of which I am one. They share the joys and challenges of being adoptive parents of children with very special physical needs.

It has just been remarkable. We will be so touched by their story tonight. They just left my office and they will share their story with us tonight. I just wanted to thank them for their leadership.

Shonda Rhimes is not with us in Washington. She will be receiving an award. She is the executive producer of the hit shows ``Scandal,'' ``Private Practice,'' and ``Grey's Anatomy.'' She has been a tremendous advocate for adoption. She has written about some issues regarding adoption into her shows and has helped to educate the United States of America and the world about the needs of orphans and the great privilege of being adoptive parents.

Finally, our third national award winner is our Paul Singer awardee. Paul Singer is deceased, but he was a great leader in our corporate world and our organization gives an award every year to a corporate executive. This year our winner is Debra Steigerwaldt Waller, CEO of Jockey International. She founded an organization that really helps provide support with postadoption services because many of our adoptive families have adopted children with special needs and some have adopted teenagers or older children. There are all sorts of challenges that come with those adoptions, just as there are with infant adoptions, and those families need someplace to turn. She stepped up as a corporate leader and adoptee herself, and we are thankful for her leadership.

I wish to mention two other angels.

I see my colleague is on the floor ready to speak.

I ask unanimous consent for 5 additional minutes.

Madam President, I was proud to nominate Pastor Chad Hardbarger and his wife Marsha. They served as foster parents in Louisiana for over 9 years. Amazingly, the couple has cared for 14 children from the foster care system and have adopted 6 of those children out of foster care. They have a 19-year-old, a 14-year-old, an 11-year-old, a 9-year-old, an 8-year-old, and a 7-year-old. They are in the process of adopting a special infant named Amber. All of them are here in Washington and have had a great tour of the city today.

Monique, Chris, Bryce, Jordan, Bailey, Gavyn, and Amber are a wonderful family that was brought together and into the loving home of Pastor Chad and his wife Marcia. They are now working with their local church in Shreveport--in the northwest Louisiana area--to help advocate and get other churches and other families involved in fostering and adopting.

I was so pleased to present the award to the senior pastor of Emmanuel Baptist Church. He has established his own ministry, Fashioned for a Home, and he does so many great things to help our children.

These children don't have any fancy lobbyists or PR firms fighting for them. The pastors at home, their wives, and advocates are the ones who are doing a beautiful job. Congratulations to Chad Harbinger and his wife Marsha. I was so moved when I met Senator Wicker's angel at the pinning ceremony, and he was such an interesting angel that I wanted to put his story in the Congressional Record.

Senator Wicker nominated Mendell L. Thompson, who has been president of America's Christian Credit Union in Glendora, CA, serving more than 48,000 members and has more than $500 million in managed assets.

He serves as trustee and director of several different organizations. He received his award from Senator Wicker for designing a loan package at the credit union that would provide low-interest loans to families that were adopting, because sometimes the expenses can be overwhelming, particularly if you are adopting internationally but even if you adopt out of foster care. The foster care costs are minimal, but there are other costs when you adopt a child. Sometimes they have to add a room to the house or get a special vehicle if they have adopted a special- needs child. He has made over 1,000 loans to families that have adopted children.

I wanted to give a shout-out to Senator Wicker's angel, Mr. Mendell L. Thompson, and his board of directors at America's Christian Credit Union in California and thank them for believing that every child deserves a forever family and for taking an active role in crafting an affordable solution for America's adoptive parents. He has a passion at heart for the miracle of adoption and continues to promote this in California and around the country.

I thank the members for their participation. It is going to be one of our biggest events.

Before I take my seat, Madam President, I wish to speak on one more topic.

Tribute to Reverend Samuel R. Blakes

Madam President, I rise today to ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Rev. Samuel Raymond Blakes, pastor of New Home Family Worship Center in New Orleans, LA on his 19th pastoral anniversary. I was honored to participate in the recent anniversary celebration and worship alongside members of the congregation and friends.

Reverend Blakes is a graduate of St. Augustine High School. He attended Southern University at New Orleans and earned both a bachelors and master's degree in theology from Christian Bible College in Louisiana.

Rev. Blakes has devoted himself to New Home Family Worship Center where he has served as pastor since 1995. Through his leadership, the congregation of New Home has expanded to a membership of over 10,000 worshipers. Reverend Blakes remains committed to making a positive impact on the lives of all people through his weekly televised spiritual broadcasts, live radio show and ongoing community outreach.

Rev. Samuel R. Blakes is the youngest son of the late Prophet Robert C. Blakes, Sr. and Minister Lois R. Blakes, both residents of New Orleans for decades. Prophet Blakes was an outstanding community leader, spreading his ministry across Louisiana and into Texas.

I commend Reverend Blakes and his congregation for remaining vigilant, faithful and steadfast in his service to his community. I join his wife Stacey, daughter Sariah and the entire New Home Family Worship Center congregation in celebrating his 19th pastoral anniversary. I pray that Rev. Samuel R. Blakes will continue to be blessed with many more years as a spiritual leader.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public, that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources will hold a business meeting on Thursday, September 11, 2014, at 10 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to consider the nomination of Elizabeth Sherwood- Randall to be Deputy Secretary of Energy.

For further information, please contact Sam Fowler at (202) 224-7571, or Sallie Derr at (202) 224-6836.

Madam President, I come to the floor today in support of the State of Israel, our closest and most critical ally in the Middle East. The escalating violence between Israel and Hamas is extremely disheartening. At this time of extreme instability and conflict in the region, the clear and unyielding support of the United States for Israel is more critical than ever. While we all hope for a peaceful ceasefire and a return to negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, we cannot ignore the current situation.

For weeks now, Israel has been responding to Hamas militants in Gaza whose clear mission is to exact a civilian death toll. It is an often- used tactic of Hamas, a designated foreign terrorist organization, to launch rockets into Israel at civilian targets. In doing so, they not only harm innocent Israelis but put Palestinian civilians in danger as well. Hamas's exposure of their own population to danger is made worse when they use civilians in Gaza as human shields. When Hamas used cement for the construction of tunnels to attack and kidnap civilians instead of using it for the construction of peaceful infrastructure projects, they literally chose the path of conflict over the path of peace. Israel has the undeniable right to defend itself against these threats to their civilians, and we must stand by our friend and help protect innocent lives in any way we can.

One thing we can do to continue to support Israel is to continue to support the Iron Dome missile defense system. The United States has provided financial support for this state-of-the-art defense system for years, and I, and many of my colleagues from both parties have been strong and continual supporters since its inception. The technology is extraordinarily effective at stopping rockets fired at civilian targets in Israel from Gaza; according to some estimates, it has intercepted about 90 percent of rockets which otherwise could have hit major population centers in Israel. Ultimately, the Iron Dome protects innocent lives, and I shudder to think of what this conflict's death toll in Israel might be without it. I am reassured that the Senate Appropriations Defense Subcommittee doubled the administration's funding request for the Iron Dome recently, and I commend my colleagues for this tangible show of support for Israel.

I, along with many of my colleagues, am deeply committed to the security of Israel, and I am saddened by the loss of civilian lives on both sides of the current conflict. Too much innocent blood has been shed already.

Madam President, I wish to join my colleague, Senator Nelson, in expressing frustration over the Chinese Government's failure to remedy the damages to homeowners, businesses, and contractors caused by Chinese drywall companies.

Beginning some 10 years ago, drywall manufactured by Chinese companies was imported to the United States. A significant amount of the imported Chinese drywall proved to be defective. In my State, this drywall was mostly used in homes and businesses that had suffered substantial damages from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. In total, there were thousands of cases in the gulf coast area.

The drywall emitted sulfur gases, which caused physical damage to the homes and significant health problems for the residents. The sulfur gas severely corroded metals found in plumbing, electrical wiring, air- conditioning systems, and household appliances. Health issues included skin irritation, persistent cough, bloody noses, and asthma attacks. For many families who lived through these hurricanes, having to completely rebuild a home again was yet another obstacle to their recovery.

I have maintained that the Consumer Product Safety Commission should have served as the first line of defense in preventing this inferior product from entering the U.S. market. Nevertheless, manufacturers, no matter where they are located, have a responsibility to consumers harmed by defective products.

The homeowners sought relief in court, and most of the cases were consolidated in the Eastern District of

Louisiana, where the court identified two companies as the primary perpetrators; Knauf Entities and Taishan Entities. Knauf Entities participated in litigation and paid damages. Unfortunately, Taishan Entities has refused to appear to defend lawsuits in U.S. courts and will not negotiate with those harmed by the defective sheetrock.

The Honorable Judge Eldon Fallon of the Eastern District of Louisiana issued an order holding Taishan in both civil and criminal contempt on July 17, 2014. The order also enjoined Taishan and its affiliates from conducting business in the United States until it participates in the judicial process. Although this is a win for Taishan's victims, they deserve and require tangible compensation for their losses.

The Chinese Government has shown no willingness to hold this company accountable. Meanwhile, thousands of families are still waiting for justice. We cannot allow Taishan Entities to hide from the United States judicial process and further injure those who have suffered.

I urge this body to call on Taishan Entities to do the right thing and respect international law. Additionally, we should continue to pressure the Chinese Government to hold companies within its borders accountable for their actions.

Madam President, I wish to reiterate my longstanding support for employee stock ownership plans or ESOPs. During my time in the Senate, I have been dedicated to building on the lasting contributions of my Louisiana predecessors, including Senator Russell B. Long, who, as Chair of the Senate Finance Committee, championed tax provisions to encourage corporations to adopt ESOPs. Senator Long advocated for employee stock ownership as an ``issue that cuts across party lines in an attempt to bring out the best in our free enterprise system.'' He believed that ``it is only fair and right that those who work to make this economy succeed should have an opportunity to share in that success . . . [i]t is a matter of simple common sense and basic equity.'' I couldn't agree more.

Designed to expand employee ownership of firms through stock distribution to employees, over time, ESOPs have a proven track record of encouraging capital expansion and economic equality for American workers. The National Center for Employee Ownership estimates that 11 million people are employed by the roughly 12,000 companies that have adopted ESOP and ESOP-like plans and estimates that ESOP participants have about 2.5 times the retirement assets of individuals who do not participate.

Last year, as chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I convened a roundtable to provide small business owners, policy experts and other stakeholders an opportunity to express their views and to solicit their ideas on making tax reform work for small businesses. Participants argued in favor of a Tax Code that rewards employer and employee ownership as a means of providing continuity of business ownership and opportunities for employees of businesses to build wealth. Specifically, participants favored retaining the current Tax Code's ESOP provisions, noting that during the most recent economic downturn, ESOPs, which are predominately small businesses, were able to retain more employees as they weathered the crisis than conventionally owned companies.

Companies in Louisiana have embraced ESOPs and as a result have seen both businesses and their employees realize the benefits. One prime example is Acadian Ambulance, a Lafayette, Louisiana-based company, and the Nation's largest private, employee-owned ambulance service. Acadian Ambulance became a 30 percent-employee-owned company in 1993 and subsequently became a majority employee-owned company in 1998. Today, Acadian Ambulance is a thriving business whose employee owners have retirement security because of Acadian Ambulance's employee stock ownership plan. Its ESOP Committee has been recognized as one of the best in the Nation, having won 25 regional and national awards since 2001. Acadian Ambulance has grown to over 200 ambulances, a $180 million budget, and 2,000 employees who have retirement security.

Earlier this year, the New York Times published an article describing the research of three labor economists who have focused their work on promoting ESOPs as a ``new perspective on how to resolve the disparities in wealth and income.'' I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the New York Times article, dated February 11, 2014, and titled, ``Whatever Happened to `Every Man a King'?''. These experts, Dr. Joseph Blasi and Dr. Richard Kruse of Rutgers University, and Dr. Douglas Freeman of Harvard University, argue in their book, ``The Citizen's Share'', that policies promoting employee ownership date back to the era of the Founding Fathers and have garnered support from politicians and stakeholders across the political spectrum--from Ronald Reagan to Senator Bernie Sanders.

Quite simply, policies that promote ESOPs are policies that merit this Chamber's bipartisan support and I will continue the work of my Louisiana predecessors to ensure retirement security for working Americans.

Madam President, I wish to ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the illustrious life of Mrs. Irma Gene Hall DeTiege, who passed on July 1, 2014, after more than five decades of service in the Louisiana community.

Mrs. DeTiege was born in 1931 in Riverton, LA, which had a total population of 40, including livestock. From these humble beginnings, she learned lessons of humility and hard work that were embodied throughout her entire life. After moving to Monroe, LA and meeting the love of her life, Frank G. DeTiege, a graduate of Southern University who taught Industrial Arts at Carroll High School, Mrs. DeTiege rode the bus to Grambling College every morning. There she received a bachelor's of science degree in elementary education, which she would later use to become a teacher at Lincoln Elementary School. During her tenure, she created enduring changes in a wide breadth of programs that impacted and improved the lives of almost every individual who attended the school.

In addition to her efforts as a teacher, Mrs. DeTiege worked tirelessly as a newspaper editor, publisher, and columnist for the Monroe News Leader and the Monroe News Weekly before she and Mr. DeTiege founded the Monroe Dispatch in 1975. Mrs. DeTiege had a vision of providing the citizens of Monroe with access to accurate reporting at a time when important information in this community was too often overlooked. Throughout her career, she remained dedicated to ensuring that those in crisis and most in need always had an advocate in the community. In this and in all of her tasks, Irma fought for a community where people are taken care of, no matter their situation in life. She also worked continuously to provide for the prosperity of Louisiana citizens for generations to come. This level of devotion to her craft, the people of Monroe, and the State of Louisiana is indicative of her storied career of service.

Irma was a wonderful friend to me and my family. She was also an inspiration to all those who were impacted by her tireless efforts. It is with my heartfelt and greatest sincerity that I ask my colleagues to join me along with her son Frank and other family members in recognizing the life and many accomplishments of this incredible leader and her impact on so many people throughout Louisiana.