Floor Statements

Mr. President, I bring to the attention of the body a bill called the Protecting Adoption and Promoting Responsible Fatherhood Act of 2012. I introduced this bill on behalf of myself and Senator Inhofe, with whom I have worked with so closely on many issues involving adoption and the protection of children who are outside of family care, both here in the United States and abroad. I thank Senator Inhofe, the senior Senator from Oklahoma, for being an original cosponsor of this legislation. I also thank Congresswoman Laura Richardson for introducing a companion piece of this legislation in the House today.

We just celebrated Father's Day this past weekend. I know my father and my husband and men all over the country celebrated with their children and their families. We honor the extraordinary fathers in the world.

Parenthood is the ultimate gift. It is also an incredible responsibility. Many of us have benefited from really wonderful fathers who care for and support families and support children through their young years, their adult years, and even into their older years. When fathers are absent, when they abandon their responsibility to their children, they can make the mothers of their children and their children more vulnerable. Sometimes women will make a decision to place a child for adoption if they are unmarried, unwilling, unable--just at a vulnerable time in their life and not able to raise a child. Adoption can be a very positive option. There are some Members of our Congress who have adopted children and have adopted grandchildren, so we know the blessings of adoption.

This bill will help to facilitate and clear up some legal quagmires that occur until many States clear the way for women of any age to make a decision for adoption. There are many of us, across party lines, who have supported more domestic infant adoption, more domestic adoptions for children of all ages, and particularly adoption of special-needs children.

This bill really affects infant adoption. It sets up a voluntary registry that tracks what 38 States have already done. Any person, any male who has the intention of supporting and raising a child can register on this registry, and their will and wishes will be taken into consideration. But in the situation that often happens where this man is not interested in being the kind of responsible father he should be, then this registry helps to expedite, without a lot of legal quagmire but with protection to both the father and the mother, to expedite adoption.

It has gone through a vetting process with any number of outside organizations. I thank the American Bar Association. I want to particularly thank the Association of Adoption Attorneys, which helped to draft this important piece of legislation.

I wanted to come to the floor to introduce it. We will, of course, bring it up when the leadership allows us that opportunity. It may have to go through a committee process. We may be able to clear it with the support of both Republicans and Democrats, as is shown by the support of Senator Inhofe and myself. Hopefully we can get it done in a short period of time and provide a clear path to promote adoption in the United States.

Mr. President, I bring to the attention of the body a bill called the Protecting Adoption and Promoting Responsible Fatherhood Act of 2012. I introduced this bill on behalf of myself and Senator Inhofe, with whom I have worked with so closely on many issues involving adoption and the protection of children who are outside of family care, both here in the United States and abroad. I thank Senator Inhofe, the senior Senator from Oklahoma, for being an original cosponsor of this legislation. I also thank Congresswoman Laura Richardson for introducing a companion piece of this legislation in the House today.

We just celebrated Father's Day this past weekend. I know my father and my husband and men all over the country celebrated with their children and their families. We honor the extraordinary fathers in the world.

Parenthood is the ultimate gift. It is also an incredible responsibility. Many of us have benefited from really wonderful fathers who care for and support families and support children through their young years, their adult years, and even into their older years. When fathers are absent, when they abandon their responsibility to their children, they can make the mothers of their children and their children more vulnerable. Sometimes women will make a decision to place a child for adoption if they are unmarried, unwilling, unable--just at a vulnerable time in their life and not able to raise a child. Adoption can be a very positive option. There are some Members of our Congress who have adopted children and have adopted grandchildren, so we know the blessings of adoption.

This bill will help to facilitate and clear up some legal quagmires that occur until many States clear the way for women of any age to make a decision for adoption. There are many of us, across party lines, who have supported more domestic infant adoption, more domestic adoptions for children of all ages, and particularly adoption of special-needs children.

This bill really affects infant adoption. It sets up a voluntary registry that tracks what 38 States have already done. Any person, any male who has the intention of supporting and raising a child can register on this registry, and their will and wishes will be taken into consideration. But in the situation that often happens where this man is not interested in being the kind of responsible father he should be, then this registry helps to expedite, without a lot of legal quagmire but with protection to both the father and the mother, to expedite adoption.

It has gone through a vetting process with any number of outside organizations. I thank the American Bar Association. I want to particularly thank the Association of Adoption Attorneys, which helped to draft this important piece of legislation.

I wanted to come to the floor to introduce it. We will, of course, bring it up when the leadership allows us that opportunity. It may have to go through a committee process. We may be able to clear it with the support of both Republicans and Democrats, as is shown by the support of Senator Inhofe and myself. Hopefully we can get it done in a short period of time and provide a clear path to promote adoption in the United States.

Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 2321.

Mr. President, I don't believe there is any opposition to this amendment, but I would like a minute to explain. Under current law, any rural development project is automatically excluded from even applying for a loan under current law. That was not the intention of the farm bill, but it was put in the farm bill, the last one. I would like to remove that language so small rural communities of 20,000 or less can apply to build a hospital, fire station, et cetera.

They do not have to be given the permit. They still need to get the wetland permit from the Corps of Engineers, but this removes an automatic prohibition. The agriculture department supports it. I do not believe there is any opposition, and I thank the Chair and ranking member.

Mr. President, today I wish to ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Mr. Angelo Roppolo and extending my appreciation for his extraordinary accomplishments and dedication to the city of Shreveport and the State of Louisiana.

Mr. Roppolo is a modest man who seldom takes credit for his achievements and is known throughout his community as someone who avoids the spotlight. He has an unwavering loyalty to his family and friends and has never been known to abandon his core beliefs and principles.

Mr. Roppolo stands for righteousness and justice, and he has never hesitated to support a candidate who has challenged the norm. Mr. Roppolo has played integral roles in many landmark political events in Louisiana. He was involved in organizing and planning the campaigns of the first African American judge to be elected in Shreveport and in Caddo Parish, along with the campaigns of the first female judge in Caddo Parish and the first female judge on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. Mr. Roppolo also served as the north Louisiana campaign chairman for Governor Kathleen Blanco, who was the first female to be elected as Governor of Louisiana.

Along with his love for the political process, Mr. Roppolo is also a strong supporter of entrepreneurs in Shreveport. He was a founder of the South Shreveport Business Association, an organization dedicated to the success of businesses within the rapidly growing area of his community. He has also helped many individuals gain financing for their endeavors and has seen many of these ventures grow and prosper into successful businesses.

Mr. Roppolo is a kind and caring man who has always given praise and gratitude to the men and women in the armed services who serve and protect this country. Mr. Roppolo is a source of inspiration for all who know him. He is beloved throughout his community and the city of Shreveport, where his family and friends alike respect and admire all he has done for those around him.

It is with a special measure of sincerity and heartfelt commendation for the mark he has left of the State of Louisiana that I ask my colleagues to join me along with Mr. Roppolo's family in honoring and celebrating the life of this most extraordinary person.

Mr. President, as cochair of both the Congressional Coalition on Adoption and the Senate Caucus on Foster Youth, I wish to congratulate the Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption on the occasion of its 20th anniversary.

The foundation was established in 1992 by Dave Thomas as a public charity with one primary goal: to help every child in foster care find a loving, permanent family. Throughout its history, the foundation has set forth on a mission of dramatically increasing the number of adoptions of waiting children.

For 20 years, the Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption has committed itself to finding permanent families for the more than 100,000 children waiting in the United States foster care system.

The Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption awards grants to public and private adoption agencies all across the country. Last year, these grants totaled more than $8 million and focused on supporting adoption professionals who implement proactive, child-focused recruitment programs targeted exclusively on moving the longest waiting children from foster care into adoptive families. This signature program is called Wendy's Wonderful Kids, WWK, and today exists in all 50 States, DC, and four Canadian provinces.

The results from an empirical 5-year case study on WWK were released in October 2011. The research showed that children in the program are up to three times more likely to be adopted.

The foundation also supports employers through the Adoption-Friendly Workplace Program, is a founding member of National Adoption Day, and is a proud partner of the annual television special, ``A Home for the Holidays.''

The foundation is an accredited charity of the Better Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance, Standards for Excellence certified, and has received the highest possible rating on Charity Navigator. The foundation has helped more than 3,000 children find their forever families and provided information and support to tens of thousands of potential adoptive families.

For these reasons, I am proud to applaud the Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption and its dedicated staff for their extraordinary contributions to the people of my district and throughout the United States for the last 20 years.

Mr. President, let me begin by acknowledging the leadership of the Senator from Maryland and the other Senators who have come to the floor this morning to speak on behalf of a bill whose time has come and, some might say, a bill whose time has passed. It has been almost 50 years since the original gender equity in the workplace bill was passed, and it has not been modernized in over five decades. So, in large measure, this is really a bill whose time has come, and we hope to make that law happen in the next few weeks. With support from both Democrats and Republicans and by putting common sense and heart and compassion and good business sense, might I say, before political talking points, this, in fact, could be done.

The reason this bill is so important is because 50 years ago women were not major breadwinners in families. As the Presiding Officer knows, there was tremendous hiring discrimination against women and minorities. Happily, that seems to be passing and fading. There are women now at the highest ranks of corporate America. We have had women serving in the highest positions here in Washington, DC, and around our country. While there still is a gap that can be recognized both in the private and public sector, the ability for women, with the right credentials and the right background, to get hired is easier today and is happening more than ever before.

The problem is that when we look at the wage gap, unfortunately, it still persists. With women now in many instances being the major breadwinners in their families, this is really a family issue. It is paying some families much less than others based on the fact that there is a woman as the breadwinner instead of a man. That is hurting families throughout America. It is not fair, and it should not be tolerated. That is why this bill, introduced by Senator Mikulski and cosponsored by many of us, is important.

Wage discrimination is against the law and it has been for 50 years, but the consequences and the actions individuals can take if they feel as though they are being discriminated against are, in effect, different and not where they need to be. So this law updates the Equal Pay Act that was passed in 1963 to basically put the final nail in the coffin of wage discrimination.

In 1967 women only earned 58 cents to every dollar a man earned in an equal--in an exact--position. That was grossly unfair, but it is still unfair today that women in the same job are still making only 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. It is not right, and it must be corrected. We can correct it by passing this law that gives people who believe they are being discriminated against better access to the court and, might I say, it also gives businesses that potentially are the ones being sued--even small companies or large companies--more protections in this bill than other businesses have in similar discrimination cases. In other words, frivolous lawsuits will not be allowed, and if a case is not strong, there is a screen that is tighter in this bill than in other pieces of legislation.

I realize there is some opposition from the business community that contends that this bill will simply usher in more controversy or more courtroom time. But the fact is that is exactly the way our system was created. Congress passes laws and enforces equal pay for equal work. If people feel as though they are not being treated fairly under the law, they are supposed to try to modify that behavior out of court, and if they can't, then we ask them--we, in fact, want them--to go to court to try to get it settled. That is the American system. We don't want people to overuse courts or to abuse courts, but we most certainly want people who feel as though they are not being treated fairly under the law to have access to a court system.

Might I say that despite the fact that our court system is regularly criticized, I would much prefer to show up in a court here than in Iraq or in Egypt or in Afghanistan or even in some places in Europe or most certainly some countries in Africa. America has a very transparent, fairly sophisticated and modern judiciary system, and it really is a model for the world.

Sometimes I think we overlitigate in some areas, but where are these women supposed to go? What are they supposed to do--have an appointment with their Congressman, show the Congressman their paycheck? No. Congressmen don't do that. Judges do. And when they get their day in court, they can show their pay stubs, and they can then demonstrate that they have been doing the same job as the man next door but they have been getting paid 77 cents on the man's dollar. That is why this bill is important.

I don't know for the life of me why the chamber of commerce is opposed. I think there are a lot of women in the chamber of commerce as business owners and as women who used to work for other businesses before they owned their own. I had hoped they would stand and speak for women everywhere, that when a woman shows up early in the morning and works until late at night, they deserve to be paid the same as a man doing that exact job.

According to the American Bar Association, in the 50 years since its passage, the Equal Pay Act has become outdated, ineffective, and wage discrimination remains persistent, widespread and pernicious.

I ask unanimous consent for 30 more seconds.

In my home State of Louisiana, wage discrimination based on gender is particularly problematic. According to the Joint Economic Committee Report, women in Louisiana do not earn 77 cents, they earn 69 cents for every $1 paid to men, which is significantly less than the national average.

At the same time, women make up almost half--48 percent--of the Louisiana workforce, and 24 percent of married, employed mothers in Louisiana are their family's primary wage earners.

This bill is the next step. It is the right step. It is the commonsense step to fight against wage discrimination, and I am proud to join my colleague from Baltimore, from the State of Maryland, in championing this particular bill.

Again, I thank the Senator from Maryland and I look forward to working with her and my colleagues to try to get this bill to the President's desk in the next few weeks. This is an economic development issue, as the Senator from Maryland knows.

I yield the floor.

Yes, I will.

Absolutely. And it is not. That is why I stressed, I say to the Senator from Maryland, that in this bill, which the Senator has so ably

sponsored and written, the screen to get into court is tighter than in other wage discrimination laws on the books. That is for the protection of all businesses, small and large, so they are not clobbered with frivolous lawsuits.

But as the Presiding Officer knows, many women are employed in small businesses--I mean between 1 and 5 employees or 1 and 10 employees. They need to be protected in the workplace. Hopefully, we have created a balance between the owners of the business and their employees, whether they are union or not.

Mr. President, as National Small Business Week is coming to a close, I come to the floor today to make a strong commitment that the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship will not lose momentum on our relentless push to help America's small businesses grow, thrive, and excel. So today, along with the senior senator from Maine, I am introducing the Expanding Access to Capital for Entrepreneurial Leaders Act, or the EXCEL Act. This legislation will enhance the already successful Small Business Investment Company, SBIC, program at the Small Business Administration, SBA, that has helped over 100,000 small businesses. The best part of our bill is that the EXCEL Act should not cost the taxpayer anything.

The SBA runs a venture capital program by guaranteeing money borrowed by qualified investment funds who invest in small businesses. The qualified funds, or Small Business Investment Companies, SBICs, are privately owned and operated, but licensed and regulated by the SBA. Using a combination of private investments and the loans guaranteed by the SBA, typically at a ratio of $2 in guaranteed funds for every $1 of private capital, SBICs make long-term investments in American small businesses. In order to participate in the program, funds pay licensing fees which serve to cover all SBIC program costs. As a result, the core SBIC program, Debenture SBICs, not only boasts a strong success rate, but also incurs no cost to the U.S. government. Since the program's inception, over $50 billion has been invested in over 100,000 small businesses.

The Ranking Member of the Small Business Committee and I conducted a roundtable with 14 participants from the SBA, SBICs, investors in SBICs, and small businesses to elicit suggestions on enhancing the program. Out of that was born the EXCEL Act.

The EXCEL Act is a bipartisan effort encompassing much-needed changes that will allow the SBIC program to meet growing demand and will make improvements so that more small businesses can access capital.

The first thing the EXCEL Act does is raises the SBIC program authorization level from $3 billion to $4 billion and pegs it to inflation. This change is long overdue--the ceiling has been at $3 for some time, despite inflation and the impressive growth in the SBIC program. To illustrate: the program grew 50 percent in FY2011 alone. In order to meet demand, we need to give the program room to grow.

Secondly, the EXCEL Act will encourage successful investors by raising the limit on ``families of funds.'' Family of funds refers to a team of SBIC fund managers who operate several funds. These are currently limited to $225 million of SBA-guaranteed debt. However, SBIC fund managers who manage more than one fund generally see better investment results. The EXCEL Act will encourage that kind of success by giving families of funds a higher limit of $350 million, which will be indexed to inflation.

Next, the EXCEL Act improves transparency and accountability in the program. The legislation requires that

the SBA make public how effective individual SBICs are in their small business investments, guaranteeing that SBA-backed money is being used responsibly.

Finally, the EXCEL Act promotes outreach, thereby ensuring that the maximum possible number of small businesses can benefit from the SBIC program. The legislation encourages outreach to community banks and other lenders, states and municipalities, and asks the SBA to make their SBIC website more user-friendly.

The EXCEL Act contains a number of common sense provisions supported across the aisle, and is sponsored by the Chair and Ranking Member of the Small Business Committee. It enhances a program with proven success in providing capital to small businesses, and does so with the expectation that it will not add a dime to the deficit. Let us get this bill passed. Let us help small businesses excel.

Mr. President, as National Small Business Week is coming to a close, I come to the floor today to make a strong commitment that the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship will not lose momentum on our relentless push to help America's small businesses grow, thrive, and excel. So today, along with the senior senator from Maine, I am introducing the Expanding Access to Capital for Entrepreneurial Leaders Act, or the EXCEL Act. This legislation will enhance the already successful Small Business Investment Company, SBIC, program at the Small Business Administration, SBA, that has helped over 100,000 small businesses. The best part of our bill is that the EXCEL Act should not cost the taxpayer anything.

The SBA runs a venture capital program by guaranteeing money borrowed by qualified investment funds who invest in small businesses. The qualified funds, or Small Business Investment Companies, SBICs, are privately owned and operated, but licensed and regulated by the SBA. Using a combination of private investments and the loans guaranteed by the SBA, typically at a ratio of $2 in guaranteed funds for every $1 of private capital, SBICs make long-term investments in American small businesses. In order to participate in the program, funds pay licensing fees which serve to cover all SBIC program costs. As a result, the core SBIC program, Debenture SBICs, not only boasts a strong success rate, but also incurs no cost to the U.S. government. Since the program's inception, over $50 billion has been invested in over 100,000 small businesses.

The Ranking Member of the Small Business Committee and I conducted a roundtable with 14 participants from the SBA, SBICs, investors in SBICs, and small businesses to elicit suggestions on enhancing the program. Out of that was born the EXCEL Act.

The EXCEL Act is a bipartisan effort encompassing much-needed changes that will allow the SBIC program to meet growing demand and will make improvements so that more small businesses can access capital.

The first thing the EXCEL Act does is raises the SBIC program authorization level from $3 billion to $4 billion and pegs it to inflation. This change is long overdue--the ceiling has been at $3 for some time, despite inflation and the impressive growth in the SBIC program. To illustrate: the program grew 50 percent in FY2011 alone. In order to meet demand, we need to give the program room to grow.

Secondly, the EXCEL Act will encourage successful investors by raising the limit on ``families of funds.'' Family of funds refers to a team of SBIC fund managers who operate several funds. These are currently limited to $225 million of SBA-guaranteed debt. However, SBIC fund managers who manage more than one fund generally see better investment results. The EXCEL Act will encourage that kind of success by giving families of funds a higher limit of $350 million, which will be indexed to inflation.

Next, the EXCEL Act improves transparency and accountability in the program. The legislation requires that

the SBA make public how effective individual SBICs are in their small business investments, guaranteeing that SBA-backed money is being used responsibly.

Finally, the EXCEL Act promotes outreach, thereby ensuring that the maximum possible number of small businesses can benefit from the SBIC program. The legislation encourages outreach to community banks and other lenders, states and municipalities, and asks the SBA to make their SBIC website more user-friendly.

The EXCEL Act contains a number of common sense provisions supported across the aisle, and is sponsored by the Chair and Ranking Member of the Small Business Committee. It enhances a program with proven success in providing capital to small businesses, and does so with the expectation that it will not add a dime to the deficit. Let us get this bill passed. Let us help small businesses excel.

Mr. President, I come to the floor today during National Small Business Week to discuss a strong, widely-supported bill that I filed today with the help of Senators Lieberman, Kerry, and Harkin. Over the past several months, as Chair of the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I have held three roundtables focused on strengthening the entrepreneurial ecosystem in the United States. We heard from entrepreneurs, small business owners, academics, local and Federal officials, and regulators, and we built quite a long list of strong ideas that we can implement or facilitate legislatively. I have converted many of these ideas into legislative proposals that I will file this week and markup soon in my Committee.

We have included several of such proposals in Today's Entrepreneurs are America's Mentors Act, or what I refer to as the TEAM Act. The TEAM Act addresses the domain of ``Mentorship'' in our entrepreneurial ecosystem. Its four provisions aim to nurture young Americans' innate entrepreneurial skills from the elementary school classroom through postgraduate business school and onward. We want to create jobs, and for posterity's sake we must begin with our young entrepreneurs. This bill will strengthen America's entrepreneurial ecosystem by empowering the Small Business Administration's, SBA, Office of Entrepreneurial Education, OEE, and invigorating students of all ages, entrepreneurs and mentors throughout the country. We want you to join the TEAM.

President Bush created the SBA OEE administratively in 2008. Currently, the OEE receives $131,000 in annual funding. This OEE funding sustains its oversight of the successful SCORE nonprofit association, comprised of 11,500 volunteer business counselors throughout the United States. The TEAM Act will formally authorize the

Mr. President, I come to the floor today during National Small Business Week to discuss a strong, widely-supported bill that I filed today with the help of Senators Lieberman, Kerry, and Harkin. Over the past several months, as Chair of the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I have held three roundtables focused on strengthening the entrepreneurial ecosystem in the United States. We heard from entrepreneurs, small business owners, academics, local and Federal officials, and regulators, and we built quite a long list of strong ideas that we can implement or facilitate legislatively. I have converted many of these ideas into legislative proposals that I will file this week and markup soon in my Committee.

We have included several of such proposals in Today's Entrepreneurs are America's Mentors Act, or what I refer to as the TEAM Act. The TEAM Act addresses the domain of ``Mentorship'' in our entrepreneurial ecosystem. Its four provisions aim to nurture young Americans' innate entrepreneurial skills from the elementary school classroom through postgraduate business school and onward. We want to create jobs, and for posterity's sake we must begin with our young entrepreneurs. This bill will strengthen America's entrepreneurial ecosystem by empowering the Small Business Administration's, SBA, Office of Entrepreneurial Education, OEE, and invigorating students of all ages, entrepreneurs and mentors throughout the country. We want you to join the TEAM.

President Bush created the SBA OEE administratively in 2008. Currently, the OEE receives $131,000 in annual funding. This OEE funding sustains its oversight of the successful SCORE nonprofit association, comprised of 11,500 volunteer business counselors throughout the United States. The TEAM Act will formally authorize the

Mr. President, I was not here to hear all of my colleagues' remarks. I know there is a lot of concern about the end of the year and what might happen to try to balance our budget and give us a solid platform on which this economy could grow. But one of the things that is holding us up is the Republicans' refusal to put any new revenues on the table. They have been adamant and wrong and hardheaded and stubborn.

They have been very obstructionist in this way--by not being willing to put a penny of new revenue on the table. As a result, we have come to a standstill because the income coming into the Federal Treasury to support this government is at the lowest level since President Eisenhower was President. So they can come to the floor all day long and criticize the President, criticize the Democrats, but in the last 2 years Democrats have put over $2 trillion of cuts and reductions to some very important programs on the table.

Some of us have even been willing to say, yes; we know we have to reform Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid. We have also been willing to speak those words which are not easy. Yet not one single Republican leader, not one on either side, the House or the Senate, not one has come to this floor in public. Now, I have heard them say it in private. I have been in meetings when they have said it. But not one has come to this floor to say: We are willing to put revenues on the table so we can match the cuts and move this country forward.

So I am a little tired of hearing them beat up on either President Obama or the Democrats when they are more to blame for the situation we are in. The American people are getting tired of it too because they can understand it is not 100 percent President Obama's fault. In fact, when he took office, the Titanic had already hit the iceberg because they had run right smack into it with the economic philosophies and policies they had. The ship was already sinking. But all they want to do is--either Mitch McConnell or Jon Kyl, one day the Senator from Arizona or the Senator from Kentucky--every day come to the floor and talk about how it is the President's fault there is no way forward, there is no sure path forward, when they are the ones who have put boulders in the way every day.

So I hope the people can see through it. I came to the floor to talk about something else, but I am getting a little tired of hearing it myself. So I am sure everyone else is as well.

Again, Democrats have put $2 trillion of cuts before this body, and we have implemented some of them already. But we cannot run a government on 14 percent of the GDP. The average has been about 20 to 21 percent. So until they are willing to put some more revenues on the table, we are not going to get anywhere, and we are not going to be able to extend the tax cuts that cost people money.

I hope we can do something so we can extend some tax cuts to small businesses, which I came to talk about--and you, Mr. President, know this well. Instead of giving some of the biggest tax breaks to companies that are the biggest in the world and put all of their jobs overseas, I wish the Republicans would start talking about tax relief to businesses right here at home on Main Street. That is what I want to talk about today.

(The further remarks of Ms. Landrieu are printed in today's Record under ``Morning Business.'')

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs' Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 21, 2012, at 2:30 p.m. to conduct a hearing entitled, ``A National Security Crisis: Foreign Language Capabilities in the Federal Government.''

We have submitted a resolution, because it is Small Business Week, on behalf of myself and Senator Snowe, Senator Pryor, Senator Lieberman, Senator Enzi, Senator Kerry, Senator Brown, Senator Cantwell, Senator Ayotte, Senator Risch, Senator Cardin, and Senator Hagan, a very good representation of our Small Business Committee and others that submitted a resolution this week, again, as we have done every year since 1953. We have done so every year since 1953 to recognize this week, or 1 week in the year, as Small Business Week. So that is what our resolution, which was submitted earlier today, does.

I hope Leaders McConnell and Reid will take up this resolution and pass it so we can honor the 28 million small businesses that exist today in America. We have been doing everything we can, and I am very proud, as the chairman of the Small Business Committee, that we have worked in a bipartisan fashion for the most part trying to give our businesses, first of all, the recognition that 9 out of 10 new jobs created were created by a small number, a very small number, of small businesses that are fast growing. They are the new job creators. These are the businesses that are going to be putting this recession behind us. These are the businesses that are innovating and adapting and changing and being more strategic and smarter, looking for those opportunities in all areas and in all geographic parts of our Nation.

Over the past few months my committee has held three very special roundtables to explore strategies, tools, and methods to strengthen what I like to call the ecosystem of entrepreneurship. Much like a rain forest or desert or much like the ocean itself, that is an environment where many creatures or organisms have to live and interact. The same is true of our financial ecosystem, the political ecosystem. Society itself is an ecosystem where small businesses have to function.

In order for them to be healthy, there have to be the right nutrients, if you will, present. So we have explored in our committee what--we know the United States does this well. We do it better than any country on Earth. That is one of the great strengths of America; we foster that entrepreneurship, free but fair markets, well regulated, not too lightly, not too heavily. Sometimes we go a little overboard and we need to pull back. Sometimes we do not regulate enough and we need to step up. But that is what we have been exploring.

In fact, we have broken our roundtables into domains: Do our small businesses have enough access to capital? Do our small businesses truly have access to grow global markets? What did we learn this year? We learned that less than 12 percent of all small businesses in America export. With the market growing overseas and only the small percentage of the world market being now in the United States--we were at one time the biggest market, when China was closed, when communism was reigning in the Soviet Union, and the Arab world was in darkness. I mean the market was in the United States.

But that is no longer the case, as these countries and areas have emerged and created markets and opportunities of their own.

So one thing we learned is that the ecosystem needs to be stronger by helping small businesses to export. They do not have the back office or the expertise of 10 accountants and a Chinese specialist and a South American specialist. But we can, by being smart, help. Through the Commerce Department, the Small Business Administration, or maybe even through some of our research and development arms of some of our departments, we can be the back office for small businesses.

We are excited about what is happening there. So access to capital, access to global markets, access to counseling, mentoring, technical assistance and education. I have had so many small businesses come before our committee and say: You know, Senator, getting the loan from the bank was the first step. But if so-and-so had not shown up in my office from the Score Chapter or if I could not have reached out to my local university or my small business center there, I would never have been able to make it because they told me what to do to save me from making a fatal mistake and got me on my way or helped me to rethink my market during the recession.

How one lady put it before our committee, they helped her remarket her business so now it is growing faster than ever. I think also access to strategic partnerships is important. No man is an island. We do not accomplish anything by ourselves in the world. That is true of individuals, that is true of small businesses. So we asked ourselves: Who are the partners, strategic partners for small businesses? Cities are doing some creative things.

Madam President, you were a county executive. You know the things you did as a county executive. Your reputation is well known in that regard.

States can be strategic partners to their small businesses. We explored those opportunities. Access to government contracting--you know, the Federal Government, state governments, and local governments are some of the biggest spenders and biggest businesses--if they were businesses, which they are not; there are clear differences--but if we were a business, the Federal Government would be the largest business in the world. It buys more goods and services than others. We do not have to do all of that just with the big businesses such as IBM, GE, ExxonMobil. We can contract with small businesses. It takes a little more time, takes a little more energy, takes a little bit different approach, but we most certainly can buy some of the things we need from the small business right down the street.

So we are shaping policies to do that. Senator Cardin from Maryland has been particularly aggressive when it comes to contracting with minority and women-owned businesses, which make up a significant and growing area. It is very exiting as more women enter not just the workforce but decide they want their flexibility. They want to set their own hours. They want to be their own bosses. They want to establish businesses that allow them to also raise children at home, to be there when their kids need them. So they find that small businesses operating out of their homes are the answer to that dilemma. We want to give them access to government contracting when, of course, they are capable and provide the right price.

One of the big areas that we looked at is access to human capital. I think you probably heard, Madam President, many of our businesses saying: Why is it that we are bringing in some of the smartest people in the world, educating them at our universities, to where they are getting master's degrees and Ph.D.s in engineering, math, and science, and then we send them back to the country they came from so they can create businesses to compete against us? Why don't we extend visa privileges to these master's and Ph.D. candidates?

That is a good question, and we have bills to answer that. We also want to develop a skilled workforce in America. Access to human capital is what small businesses need to grow and to expand.

Finally, we need access to flexible regulation and smart tax policy. We are never going to live in a world where we do not pay taxes. It is just the nature of what we have to do to keep our government running and operating, with a government that serves the people--by the people, for the people.

But our taxes should not be too heavy, too burdensome, and our regulatory regime should not be either too light or too onerous. It should be just right. But it is hard to get that just-right approach. We are working at it every day. Senator Snowe has been working on regulatory reform. Senator Warner has been working very hard on regulatory reform--and other Members of this body.

The bottom line is that this is Small Business Week. We want to honor the small businesses that are helping us put this recession in the rearview mirror. I want to ask the leadership to pass this resolution-- a very straightforward, noncontroversial resolution by both Democrats and Republicans, recognizing this is Small Business Week.

I also wanted to bring to the attention of the body the conclusion, basically, of the three roundtables we have held and thank the Members who attended. We had good attendance, and we gleaned some excellent ideas about the brackets I have outlined today, and have been in the process of filing over the last week, and throughout this week, individual bills that reflect what we have learned in these roundtables. We have taken those ideas and turned them into legislation.

I am happy to say there is not going to be a big pricetag on this legislation. It is not just throwing money at the problem, but we do need additional resources. It is sharpening things, reforming some of our strategies, laws, rules, and regulations on the books, and encouraging, by granting some competitive grants, some of these strategic partnerships with counties, cities, and States. I look forward to seeing how this body responds to some of the new pieces of legislation we put out. I look forward to working with my colleagues through this week and the month of May, through the summer, and into the election, to keep focused on the No. 1 issue on the minds of the American people, which is jobs, economic hope, and economic opportunity for themselves and their families. Tom Friedman has been saying all over the world that when kids graduate from college, it is not a job they are looking for. They may not be able to find the job they are looking for. They need to create the job they want. They need to build a business, build a better mousetrap, think about a different way of delivering a product or a service or think about a business that is selling to a domestic market and taking it global. With technology and opportunities, many young people are doing just that.

In conclusion, I had the wonderful opportunity on Friday to be involved and took the opportunity Saturday morning to stop in at the Cambridge Innovation Center, the granddaddy of all small business incubators. It is across the street from MIT, Microsoft, and Google. There were some young and exciting college students in the building. You could either rent a cubicle that looked like a kindergarten with your name on it to get in the building or you could rent a space such as a bullpen where you could work or rent your own cubicle or private office; and thousands, literally, of young people were moving into that building--actually people of all ages, even retired executives who decided, I have always wanted to try out my idea, so let's see if I can get my business started. Even on a Saturday--and it was very quiet--I could feel the energy in that building, although it was virtually empty.

I have walked through incubators in New Orleans, and I hope the occupant of the chair did, and helped to create them in Delaware. That is what it is going to take, a strategic partnership between government and the private sector, letting the private sector do what they do best, but letting government do what it does best. That was a perfect example of what I saw in terms of taking research dollars that are spent at MIT, moving them out to the universities, and then on to these ideas, where they are literally being tested and commercialized to get out into the market to create wealth and opportunity for the United States and the world.

I am happy to be chair of the Small Business Committee. For small business and economic growth, it is National Small Business Week. I thank all the groups helping us to celebrate this week and, most important, I thank the entrepreneurs who literally risk everything to create their dreams and bring economic prosperity not just to themselves and their family business but to a Nation that relies on them every day. We want to make that burden lighter. I want to help them in every way we can in our committee in Washington and throughout our States, counties, and cities, and be the partner they can rely on to get the job done.

Madam President, I don't see anyone else on the floor. I urge my colleagues to adopt our resolution. I thank all of us who will be speaking today and this week on Small Business Week.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I appreciate the eloquent statement our colleague from Iowa has put into the Record and his passionate advocacy on behalf of this special group of children in America. From his position as senior member on the Finance Committee, both serving as chair and as ranking member, his support has been essential to their well-being. In a committee that has a lot of important issues, from tax reform to international trade, the Senator from Iowa, Mr. Grassley, never fails to keep the needs of foster care children and their families and the support community on the front of that agenda. I could not have a better partner, and I am very grateful for his partnership on this issue and his friendship.

I also want to recognize some of our colleagues from the House: Representative Karen Bass, Representative Tom Marino, Representative Michele Bachman, and Representative Jim McDermott, who worked very closely with Senator Grassley and myself. As you can see, this is across party lines, across geographic lines, and across different political philosophies.

We want to say one thing very loud and clear to the country: Foster children are not criminals. They are not delinquents. They are children who are in desperate need of love and care and support. Our foster care system in many ways works beautifully and in some ways needs, of course, to be fixed, repaired, and strengthened. But overall the foster care system should, at all times, be temporary. It is a temporary place for children to go to be protected and healed and nurtured until they can be returned to their birth family or to their extended family with sibling groups intact or until they can be processed to a kinship adoption, which Senator Grassley has been a tremendous advocate for, or to a domestic adoption.

I cannot add anything to the very excellent and comprehensive statement the Senator made. I would like to add just a few points. Because of the work many of us have done--and we do not hear good news around here that often, so I want to share that in the last 20 years, because of the work that our group has done, and others in the Congress, we have doubled the amount of children being adopted out of the foster care system. That is a tremendous victory because of the legislation that has been passed, the focus across party lines.

In 1990 we only adopted 14,000 children out of foster care. In the last year of record, 2010, we adopted 53,000. It is a tripling of adoptions out of foster care.

I do not have the numbers in front of me for reunifications, but Senator Grassley and I know that number has increased as well. We are making progress in the bills we are proposing and passing, the appropriations that we are investing. It has not been a lot more money over the last few years. It

has just been a real strategic focus which I would like to believe our caucus and the adoption caucus as well, the foster care caucus, has helped to produce.

We have had more adoptions out of foster care. We have had more reunifications out of foster care. We have shortened the time that children are in foster care. But we have, and in this month of May still have, many challenges. That is why Senator Grassley and I urge our colleagues to join us in this resolution, S. Res. 462. Be a cosponsor. Step up and say by your cosponsorship that you care about this issue, that you want to help us continue to make progress.

I want to remember our former colleague, John Chafee, who, when he was in the Senate, was an extraordinary advocate for foster care children. We named the John Chafee Foster Care Independence Program in his honor. As Senator Grassley said, we are making progress with helping our children who age out when we failed to reunite them with their birth family, we failed to find them an adoptive home. They are aging out, but we are trying to give them more help and support. That is still a challenge.

Some of our Members are working on foster children and school choice. If children are brought into the foster care system and they are separated from their families, it is quite traumatic. Of course it is for their own good. Sometimes their families are being abusive. Sometimes their families are being grossly negligent. Unfortunately, in this day and age sometimes their families are deported and they are in the home alone. We want to make sure the children get to stay at least in the school of their choice. It is one thing to be pulled from your family; it is another thing to have to lose your family 1 day and your school the next day and all of your teachers, all of your friends.

There is legislation pending that would give foster children the opportunity to stay in the school they are in when they enter care, if that is their choice. That would be a great reform.

We also want to continue to promote kinship adoption, reaching out to the extended family, trying to keep children placed in their extended families who are willing and responsible to raise them--but not placing children with kin if the kin or the relatives are not responsible and not willing; that is not a solution.

Finally, we want to promote quality foster families. This is a problem that is easily solvable. It seems like it is a lot, this number, 450-some-odd thousand children. But it represents only one-half of 1 percent of all children in America. This is not a big number. It sounds like it when we say 450,000, but the percentage, one-half of 1 percent--we calculated it 1 day on just the back of a napkin. If one family for every four churches in America would say yes to taking in a foster child or to adopt a child out of foster care, there would be no more orphans in our country.

Again, if one family out of every four churches stepped up for the children available for adoption, we would have no more orphans in America. Then we could focus on recruiting quality foster families who can help these children to find their way--to find their way back to their biological families with their sibling groups intact or find their way to a new family who will love them and nurture them and protect them and support them forever.

That is what families do. We do not support our children until they are 18 and let them go on their merry way. We are with them until the last breath. That is what parents do. We are with our children forever. Every child in this world deserves a forever family.

Senator Grassley and I have come together. We work to strengthen our foster care system. We know it is broken in places. We know it can be fixed. We work on fixing it every day.

I thank our colleagues who have joined us in just recognizing Foster Care Month. As Senator Grassley said in his conclusion, and I will say in mine, we want to thank everyone who helps on this every month of the year, not just May. We want to thank the teachers who reach out especially to the foster children they know are in their classrooms. We want to thank the judges who process their cases quickly.

I particularly want to thank the CASA workers. I am a big believer in CASA, Court Appointed Special Advocates. I think it is a great organization for all the volunteers who worked to help make our foster care system in America better.

Again, this is S. Res. 462.

I would like to thank our counterparts in the House.

It has been a real joy and pleasure to work with Senator Grassley these many years on helping to promote the very best practices in the country on reforming our foster care system in America and trying to help who we can around the world.