Floor Statements

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Wednesday, June 25, 2014, at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, DC.

The purpose of this hearing will be to hear testimony on the following measure:

S. 1971, 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.

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

For further information, please contact Sara Tucker at (202) 224-6224 or John Assini at (202) 224-9313.

committee on health, education, labor, and pensions

Mr. President, I wish to announce that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions will meet on June 26, 2014, at 10 a.m., in room SD-430 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``Sexual Assault on Campus: Working to Ensure Student Safety.''

For further information regarding this meeting, please contact Aissa Canchola of the committee staff on (202) 224-2009.

Mr. President, Senator Vitter and I wish to recognize and honor Charlie McBride, a native son of Louisiana who has given so much of his time and energy towards the goal of educating this Nation's youth in civic and community responsibility. Through his service and commitment to the Close Up Foundation, Charlie has led an organization that for the past 43 years has significantly impacted and provided citizenship education to nearly 800,000 high school and middle school students and educators from around the country and U.S. Territories. On behalf of the Senate and the State of Louisiana, we, as former Close Up participants applaud Charlie for his devotion to Close Up and the civic education of our youth.

Charlie McBride is no stranger to public policy. He worked for 12 years on personal and committee staffs in the Senate and the House of Representatives. Since then, as a government relations and business consultant, he has represented a myriad of clients in virtually every policy field, for which he is known and well-respected by our colleagues. His experiences have instilled in him a strong appreciation of the need for knowledgeable and thoughtful citizens, particularly in our legislative processes. For this reason, he has enthusiastically embraced Close Up's efforts to develop an informed, effective, and responsible citizenry among this Nation's youth.

We are proud that Louisiana students and teachers have participated in Close Up programs since the organization's inception and that a good friend and fellow Louisianan has contributed so much time and effort to this great organization. Thanks to people like Charlie, students are provided the unique opportunity to learn about our government by meeting lawmakers, representatives of public interest groups, journalists, and people from all branches of government, and to understand how they can make a positive contribution through participation in our democracy. Charlie's presence at Close Up will be sorely missed. We are privileged to formally recognize Charlie's commitment and efforts to this great endeavor.

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing

will be held on Thursday, June 19, 2014, at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

The title of this hearing is: how to harness a game-changing resource for export, domestic consumption, and transportation fuel.

Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record may do so by sending it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510-6150, or by e-mail to [email protected].

For further information, please contact, Jan Brunner at (202) 224- 9201, or John Assini (202) 224-9313.

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 Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The business meeting will be held on Wednesday, June 18, 2014, at 10:30 a.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, DC.

The purpose of the business meeting is to consider the five nominations and eight bills listed on the attached agenda.

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 hearing record should send it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by email to [email protected].

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

Mr. President, I thank my colleague for sharing this moment with me on the Senate floor and allowing me to work closely with him to present this bill to the Senate today. He has worked on this for several years, and I am pleased to join him for any number of reasons.

One thing I wish to mention before I share the reading of this prayer with him is that the official World War II museum happens to be located in New Orleans, LA. It was initiated by the great historian Stephen Ambrose. It has been promoted by an extraordinarily stellar group of civic and political leaders in our Nation. Former Senator Stevens and Senator Inouye joined arms together as brothers in the Senate and helped us to establish this official museum. It is almost complete.

On the eve of D-day, it is particularly striking that the two of us would be here to remember this prayer and to say to the country that this prayer, in our view, should be on the memorial here in DC.

I am also hoping, just as a suggestion, that it will be placed somewhere significantly in this fabulous, extraordinary, beautifully designed and beautifully executed museum that tells the story of the war--not how it was won but why it was fought. Why it was fought is the most important lesson for our country and the people of the world to know. Some of that is expressed in this prayer. More of that is expressed in the museum itself.

The Senator from Ohio would want to know that hundreds of citizens from New Orleans and Louisiana are actually on their way by boat to Normandy, and, of course, many of our elected officials, including the President, will be celebrating the 70th anniversary.

The reason this museum is in New Orleans is because the Higgins boats were actually built in New Orleans, and it is unusual that such a small city would have contributed so much. Eisenhower himself said that without these landing craft, we never could have gotten to the Normandy beach. They were built by an entrepreneur who had a small factory at the time that then grew, with 43,000 people employed. Men, women, African-Americans, and disabled workers were all being paid the same.

There is a remarkable story about the boats themselves that landed at Normandy, but this effort today is about a memorial prayer that I think we should remember and be reminded of.

I will begin by reciting this prayer which was given by President Roosevelt, and he asked the American people on that day to join him in this prayer.

He said:

Almighty God: Our sons, pride of our nation, this day have

set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our

Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free

a suffering humanity.

Lead them straight and true; give strength to their arms,

stoutness to their hearts, steadfastness in their faith.

They will need Thy blessings. Their road will be long and

hard. For the enemy is strong. He may hurl back our forces.

Success may not come with rushing speed, but we shall return

again and again; and we know that by Thy grace, and by the

righteousness of our cause, our sons will triumph.

They will be sore tried, by night and by day, without

rest--until the victory is won. The darkness will be rent by

noise and flame. Men's souls will be shaken with the

violences of war.

For these men are lately drawn from the ways of peace. They

fight not for the lust of conquest. They fight to end

conquest. They fight to liberate. They fight to let justice

arise, and tolerance and goodwill among all Thy people. They

yearn but for the end of the battle, for their return to the

haven of home. Some will never return. Embrace these, Father,

and receive them, Thy heroic servants, into Thy kingdom.

Amen.

Mr. President, let me join my colleague in asking for unanimous consent for this particular individual bill to pass by unanimous consent. It would be lovely if we could do this today because of the timing of our D-day celebration tomorrow. For the information of our colleagues who have other bills pending that are called lands bills, we are still working on a smaller package in addition to this. But we felt that this has such significance and importance and it is so timely today that it would really be important for us to do this.

So I hope our staffs can clear this on both sides and we can get this done before close of business today.

I thank the Senator from Ohio.

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Tuesday, June 3, 2014, at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, DC.

The purpose of this hearing will be to hear testimony on S. 2379, the Klamath Basin Water Recovery and Economic Restoration Act of 2014.

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

For further information, please contact Sara Tucker at (202) 224-6224 or John Assini at (202) 224-9313.

I thank you, Madam President.

I thank the courtesy of the chairwoman from California and for her really extraordinary leadership to bring such an important infrastructure bill to the floor of the Senate.

Without her dogged determination, we would not be here today and Louisiana and so many other States that are benefiting from the projects authorized and green-lighted in this bill would simply still be waiting, with jobs not being created, people not being employed, and the future looking a lot less bright than it does today. I thank the Senator so very much.

Not only has she given attention to her home State of California, but she has been very mindful of several other States in the Union that have particularly difficult water challenges. Louisiana would be one such State. Louisiana is not our largest State. It is not small. It is in the medium size. It has 4.5 million people. But yet our State is positioned geographically in the country, in the Lower 48, that we drain almost 50 percent of the continent. The water of this continent comes through this extraordinary delta almost without peer on the planet. It is the seventh largest delta on Earth.

While some States are struggling to find water, we normally have too much of it in the wrong places--or at times we have too much of it in the wrong places, such as when Lake Pontchartrain breached the drainage project program. The project collapsed and two-thirds of the city of New Orleans went under water--some neighborhoods 14 feet. When Isaac hit or Ike or other hurricanes, we had really been bombarded with tremendous challenges to the southern part of the United States.

Every region has their challenges. But the southern part of the United States, what I like to call America's energy coast--Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama--has particular challenges that need addressing in this

bill. I thank Senator Boxer for addressing some of them, particularly as it relates to Louisiana's challenges because our challenge is not only to keep commerce open for everyone so the entire country can benefit--especially when the Panama Canal opens; larger ships are going to be moving across the oceans into our ports. The Mississippi River port system combines all the four southern ports of the Mississippi River, and it is the largest port system in the world--not second; the largest port system in the world--so we have a responsibility to make sure this commerce continues to move.

So we have to have rivers and bodies of water that are open for commerce but protected with the right kinds of levees that protect the people who live there so we do not drown every time it rains heavily. We are not talking about category 4 and 5 hurricanes. We are talking about highways that go underwater in a heavy rain because the delta is sinking due to several factors. The waters are rising due to several factors. This WRRDA bill is one of the only answers to build a resilient and sustainable coast. That is why the Louisiana delegation fights so hard for it, why we are so anxious for this bill, why we do not like to wait 7 years for a WRDA bill, because we need new authorizations every 2 to 3 years.

In fact, we need a whole new way of funding some of these projects, which is a work in progress. I look forward to continuing to work with Senator Boxer. As an appropriator, I am very anxious to find a new, more expedited way. I have proposed revenue sharing and will continue to propose revenue sharing as a way for not only Louisiana but coastal States to redirect a portion of offshore oil and gas revenues to come back to the coastal communities, America's energy coast, America's working coast, and build the infrastructure that helps our economy continue to grow, create jobs and, most importantly or equally importantly, protect the people that have to live close to the water for those jobs and for those jobs to be made real and for the economy to benefit.

Not everybody can live in Vail, CO, and commute to the coast every day to work. It is not going to happen. We have to live along these rivers, and we have been living there an awfully long time--300 years as far as Natchitoches, Baton Rouge, and New Orleans. They will be celebrating--just three cities in our State--their 300th birthday.

We did not move there in the 1980s to sunbathe. We have been down there for hundreds of years building the economy of this country. We are proud to do it. We are happy to do it. But we need help every now and then. This bill helps us. The WRRDA bill is important.

There are a couple of projects--I am going to finish in about 3 or 4 minutes, and turn it back over to Senator Boxer. First, there is Morganza to the Gulf, which was originally authorized over 20 years ago. That is going to provide levee and flood control protection to one of the fastest growing, most dynamic cities in this country--Houma, LA. It is an energy epicenter. It is an energy powerhouse for the people of Houma, the fabrication, the supply companies--such as in North Dakota-- which is really one of the fastest growing communities in our country.

The Presiding Officer can appreciate this. We are like that on the coast, except that when the hurricanes come, it literally threatens to wash away the whole place because there are no levees around Houma.

The Presiding Officer had terrible flooding in her State, so she can appreciate what happens when the levee system fails. But we are not only along rivers, we are also along the coast, and we are also a strong energy center. It is not just the people and the companies, which range from very small mom-and-pop businesses to some of the largest international energy companies in the world, but it is international fabricators that have billions of dollars of infrastructure along this coast that are at risk.

So this Morganza project, it was not originally in the House bill. I fought very hard to make sure that it was in the Senate version. I want to give Senator Vitter a good bit of credit for his leadership on the committee. I do not want to underestimate the role that he played in securing all of these projects. But we worked together as a team to make sure that Morganza to the Gulf was included.

I am very proud that it was in the final conference report, a $10.3 billion authorization. The Louisiana coastal area for $2.1 billion is also included. It is one of the only new starts in the President's budget. It is authorized at a higher level in this bill. Again, we are going to have to find some additional funding, which is where revenue sharing comes in. I hope to convince my colleagues to move in that direction for the benefit of not just our State but for many coastal States in the country.

Building this coastal protection for Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, Alabama, and Florida is critical, but so are the east coast and the west coast in great need as well. One of the projects--and I have two more to talk about that I am particularly proud of--is the authorization for us to get about the work of dredging the New Iberia port. I have tried to explain it on this floor because we only think about ports such as the traditional big cargo ports.

You think about Long Beach, you think about the Port of Seattle or you think about New York and New Jersey. That is what people think when they think ports. Those are big cargo ports and big container ports. They are very important. But also tucked along our coasts are energy ports that people completely forget about. They do not even know what an energy port looks like. I am very proud to be taking Secretary Moniz to his first energy port next week in Louisiana. These energy ports are not bringing in big containers and big cargo ships, but they are bringing in liquefied natural gas, or taking it out, or they are bringing in oil imported from the rest of the world or exporting--when we can export. But right now they are bringing crude oil in. They are manufacturing the huge platforms and fabricating the huge platforms that go out into the Gulf of Mexico.

Without the proper dredging of those ports, without the proper security of these ports, America cannot be an energy powerhouse. We just cannot do it. We have to have that port infrastructure. So one of my big pushes since I have been a Senator is to try to get the Federal Government to understand that one size does not fit all. There are certain projects that work well for these big container ports and big cargo ports, but there are other important ports in our country, particularly along America's energy coast, which is the Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama coast, the only coast that allows offshore oil and gas drilling, to allow that industry to continue to grow, so that the country prospers and all the States are benefited by the work that goes on there.

So the New Iberia port channel will be dredged deeper. Fabricators will be able to have more projects domestically here and not have to do so much work in Korea and other places around the world. We can produce using American steel, American workers, American fabrication techniques to create jobs right here at home.

Finally, Senator Boxer was so helpful in pressing for the Inland Waterways Trust Fund, to authorize the trust fund, to basically say that moneys that are collected will stay in the trust fund and be used and authorized to help our dams and inland waterways around the country.

Senator Casey and I have an amendment pending on the floor that would make sure that the increases in user fees could potentially be applied this year so that it is not just an authorization but so there is actually funding in the trust fund to pay for these projects which are so important to keep our maritime industry moving and growing, which is a real feather in our cap right now.

The maritime industry is expanding. It pays much above the average wage. They are really high-paying jobs. Instead of stymieing their growth, we need to be expanding that part of our economy.

So this WRRDA bill, because of Senator Boxer's leadership, first of all, has gotten to the floor for a vote. It never would have happened without her dogged determination. There are wonderful projects, necessary projects for the whole country, but particularly for Louisiana, a State that has an awful lot of water. We are happy to have it, but it has to be directed correctly or it

can cause many disasters and much heartache and pain.

So getting our rivers dredged correctly, getting our levees built so they do not fail, and continuing to be diligent in helping our people live safely along the coast is something that I know Senator Boxer shares with me. The people of California have some similar challenges that she is well aware of in the Sacramento Valley. So I want to thank Senator Boxer. I appreciate her help and her several visits to Louisiana, particularly after the storm, helping to make a firm imprint on her about the importance of this. I am excited about looking into the Netherlands for a possible partner with building even stronger infrastructure using really first class technology for our States.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, the Senate is about to proceed to several votes on important nominees, and I wanted to put in a strong word of support for James Walter Green, who has been nominated by the President to serve as U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Louisiana.

I was very pleased to recommend Mr. Green to the President for his consideration. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote with me to confirm him today. He has served our country in a variety of capacities, most notably 20 years of military service. He has been involved in multiple deployments, is the recipient of numerous military awards, including the Defense Meritorious Service Medal, the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal, the Combat Action Ribbon, and the Iraq Campaign Medal.

Not only is he a strong patriot who has been of extraordinary service to our country, he has also served for an additional 15 years in a variety of capacities in this office and supported their work through Republican and Democratic administrations.

He comes highly recommended by a broad cross section of individuals in my State, and I am pleased I was able to recommend this kind of high-caliber person to continue to serve in the full capacity as U.S. attorney.

Mr. Green will bring a wealth of legal experience to his role as U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Louisiana. He has served in a variety of roles within the U.S. Attorney's office in both the Baton Rouge and Las Vegas offices, including as a trial attorney, trial section supervisor, acting criminal chief, acting administrative officer and first assistant U.S. attorney.

He is currently the acting U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Louisiana and a member of the U.S. Marine Corps Reserves.

I have every confidence that James Walter Green will be exceptional in his role as the chief Federal law enforcement official in the Middle District of Louisiana.

I thank Senator Durbin for his courtesy. I wanted to put in a strong word for this nominee. He is supported by both Senator Vitter and myself, and I hope to get a strong vote on him today.

I ask that the time be equally divided between the majority and minority.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, 26 years ago Members of Congress decided to designate May as National Foster Care Month. Since then, the U.S. Congress, the Children's Bureau at the Department of Health and Human Services, and the National Foster Parent Association have worked together to recognize the work of foster families, social workers, faith-based and community organizations, and others who are improving the lives of foster youth across the country and to encourage all Americans to participate in efforts to serve these children throughout the year.

I have come to the floor today, alongside my esteemed colleague and cochair on the Senate Caucus on Foster Youth, to recognize the foster parents, social workers, and advocates from my home State of Louisiana and around the country who play an essential role in the lives of children in foster care throughout the United States. I also want to acknowledge the leaders of the House Caucus on Foster Youth-- Representative Karen Bass, Representative Tom Marino, Representative Michele Bachmann, and Representative Jim McDermott--who already have or will soon speak on the floor, as well, to commemorate National Foster Care Month.

Each day 691 new children enter the foster care system because of abuse or neglect. Each week 4,852 children find themselves on the beginning of their journey through ``the system.'' Over 79,000 children will call this system home for more than 3 years, and more than 23,400 young adults will ``age out'' of the system without a safe, permanent family. Of those that age out, studies indicate that only 25 percent have a high school diploma or GED, less than 2 percent finish college, over half experience homelessness, and nearly 30 percent have been incarcerated.

As I have long said, governments do many things well, but raising children is not, and will never be, one of them. Our foster care system should be temporary--it is a temporary place where children should go to be protected and nurtured until they can be returned to their birth family, be placed with extended family, or be connected with an adoptive parent or parents. Unfortunately, all too often this is not how it happens. Forty percent of those eligible for adoption will wait over 3 years in foster care before being adopted. Even worse, 23,000 youth--25 percent of those eligible for adoption--``age out'' or emancipate from the system each year. We cannot rest until our Federal and state governments are 100 percent successful at connecting these children--who have been placed under the government's care due to no fault of their own--with permanent, safe, and loving families.

It is our responsibility to find homes for the huge numbers of abandoned and orphaned children in the United States. For this reason, I created a new pilot grant in the fiscal year 14 Omnibus to enable States to initiate intensive and exhaustive child-focused recruitment programs, proven to increase adoptions out of foster care 3 to 1. The $4 million dollars that I secured for this program will enable States to move foster youth eligible for adoption into permanent families at a much higher rate than traditional recruitment strategies. This is because these grants will provide social workers with the resources, time, and mandate to actually open up the file of youth in care and identify the names and contact information of parents, relatives, caregivers, and other significant adults in that child's life. This intense review, often called ``case mining,'' is key in locating a caring adult able to commit to reunification, adoption or legal guardianship for foster youth.

There are many other strategies that our government can implement to increase permanency for foster children. Just last week the Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute, led by executive director Kathleen Strottman, hosted a policy focused briefing to educate congressional staff about how postadoption services are cost- effective and enormously beneficial alternatives to children reentering foster care or having their adoptions dissolved. The Federal Government spends an average of $27,236 annually for each child in care covered by Federal funding--and much more for those in group homes or residential treatment centers--compared to $5,043 for a child receiving adoption assistance covered by Federal funding adoptions. There currently is no Federal funding stream dedicated exclusively to postadoption services. We as legislators must consider ways in which we can increase the overall resources dedicated to post-adoption.

As I have stated, it is our responsibility to invest in initiatives that are proven to be successful in finding permanent solutions for our nation's foster children. I encourage my colleagues to cosponsor S. Res. 442, ``Recognizing National Foster Care Month as an opportunity to raise awareness about the challenges of children in the foster care system, and encouraging Congress to implement policy to improve the lives of children in the foster care system.''

I yield my time to my esteemed colleague and co chair of the Senate Caucus on Foster Youth, Senator Chuck Grassley from Iowa.

Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. President, I come to the floor to speak today about the foster care system and the impact the system has on the lives of far too many children, young adults, and families.

Currently, more than 400,000 children across the United States are in the foster care system. From its inception, the foster care system was designed to be a safe and temporary place of transition for kids who have nowhere else to go. Of those currently calling the foster care system home, 79,000 will stay in foster care for more than 3 years. More than 23,400 will age out of foster care without finding an adoptive family or a permanent place to call home.

Furthermore, youth who age out of the foster care system experience unique struggles that extend beyond the usual anxieties of trying to establish a life after high school. In fact, only one quarter has earned a high school diploma or GED, while less than 2 percent finish college. Worse yet, more than 50 percent will experience homelessness and nearly 30 percent will have spent time behind bars.

That is why we recognize May as National Foster Care Month. Senator Landrieu and I have introduced a resolution to shed light on the many young faces that seek a permanent home and family. We also set aside a moment to recognize the countless number of people who work tirelessly for youth in foster care.

Stability comes from a much larger community than just a family. Stability comes from the teacher who sees the student at the desk near the back of the classroom who needs a little extra help and guidance. Stability comes from the friends and neighbors who take it upon themselves to invite the new face in the neighborhood to join in a game of basketball or swimming. Stability comes from the social workers who work tirelessly to help resolve the issues at home foster youth face or, if necessary, they help find a permanent home that will offer warmth and happiness. And most importantly, stability comes from the families who are willing to take a child or group of children into their home, to provide a safe and nurturing environment so that they have a chance to grow and thrive.

I call upon my colleagues to support S. Res. 442 recognizing National Foster Care Month as an opportunity to raise awareness about the challenges of children in the foster care system and encouraging Congress to implement policy to improve the lives of children in the foster care system. The resolution also recognizes foster youth throughout the United States for their courage and resilience as they move through their personal trials and challenges. We also seek to applaud the youth who have moved on from the foster care system but remain active to serve as advocates and role models for those who remain in the system.

However, while we seek to applaud and commend those who continue to be a beacon of hope for these youth, the resolution is also intended to reaffirm the need to continue to improve the outcomes for all children in the foster care system. Every child deserves the stability and certainty that a loving, permanent home and family can provide.

Congress has been working to improve the lives of all those touched by the foster care system. That has included providing support to vulnerable families, with the hope of safely keeping families intact while they work through difficult times. We have promoted policies that encourage reunification of families when they successfully address issues that make homes safe and nurturing for children. We have helped create incentives to promote adoption when reunification isn't possible. For those who age out of the foster care system without a permanent place to call home, we have been working to make the transition to adulthood more certain.

That is why in 2009 Senator Landrieu and I launched the bipartisan Senate Caucus on Foster Youth. The caucus works to provide an outlet for Members and staff to provide educational opportunities in order to help shape meaningful policy that works to bring children and families together.

The caucus has created a gateway for grassroots coalitions of families, foster youth, child welfare advocates, court representatives, and social workers to locate policymakers who are actively fighting and supporting tools to improve the lives of all children and families. The caucus has created an avenue for all stakeholders to help identify barriers that block foster kids from finding a permanent, loving home either through adoption, guardianship, or reunification with their birth family.

The caucus is currently offering a series of opportunities designed to introduce Members and staff to the issue of child welfare financing. The meetings have been designed to provide a collegial environment to build a base of knowledge for those less familiar with the issue and to help those who have been working on the issue for many years.

So far this spring, we have had a chance to hear from specialists and experts about the early history of child welfare and how it has developed into the programs that we see today. We are studying how the current system is structured, how we can improve it, and how we can better incentivize States to find permanent placements for foster youth.

In the past, we have studied and acted to improve the educational stability of the students. There are numerous cases of children who move from school to school within a given year. Just as they have an opportunity to form a series of friendships, they are ushered on to another school to begin the process yet again. Beyond the problems of building meaningful relationships, many foster youth have to worry about how their credits transfer from one school to the next. Many students are required to take a class numerous times in multiple schools because of varying requirements. Oftentimes, this creates a gap that extends the amount of time it takes a student to fulfill the requirements to complete school.

Another issue that comes up is sex trafficking. Youth in the foster care system can be susceptible to domestic sexual predators who offer them financial assistance and emotional bonds.

Just recently, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, rescued 18 minors from forced prostitution around the time of the Super Bowl. Of the 18 minors, 3 were from the foster care system. I sent a letter to the FBI to ask the agency to explain how underage victims are treated once they are rescued from forced prostitution. From my inquiry so far, it seems the FBI has taken positive steps, including making clear that those who are forced into prostitution are victims, not criminals. The FBI also has a coordinated effort that has recovered a number of juvenile victims. But it is important to track what happens to victims after rescue. Are they getting the protections and services they need to stay safe or are they ending up back in dangerous situations? If they came from foster care, did the system fail to protect them?

The Senate Finance Committee approved a bipartisan bill in December to improve the foster care system. The bill seeks to protect foster youth and to encourage officials to better prevent, identify, and intervene when a child becomes a victim of trafficking.

Our caucus has taken a lead in educating the public about this issue. We heard from two incredibly brave survivors of trafficking who had beaten the odds, escaped ``the life,'' and are now working as mentors with other girls who have been trafficked or are at risk of being trafficked.

The caucus has raised a number of other important issues, and we have invited youth to share their personal experiences. They are the experts, and we can learn from them.

I am glad to report the caucus is gaining strong support from across party lines and regional areas of the country. I am glad that we have had nine new members this year, including Senators Crapo, Scott, Kaine, Warner, Klobuchar, Inhofe, Wicker, Heitkamp, and Johanns.

We will continue working to keep the national spotlight on the challenges confronting foster youth. Every child deserves the stability and certainty that a loving, permanent home and family can provide. I thank my colleagues for their support in this endeavor.

Mr. President, it is with great pleasure that I wish to pay special tribute to an invaluable public servant, Mrs. Linda Papp. Coast Guard first lady, career educator, mother, and grandmother--Linda has tirelessly worked for more than 39 years to improve the lives of Coast Guard military families.

Linda is a native of East Lyme, CT, and is the oldest of Frank and Doris Kapral's six daughters. Her father, Frank, is a retired Coast Guard captain and fondly known throughout the service as ``Coach Kapral'' for his two decades leading the Coast Guard Academy football team. Linda holds a bachelor's and master's degree in education, and is the proud mother of three children, Lindsay, Caitlin and Jillian, and two granddaughters, Penelope and Ruby.

As the wife of the 24th Commandant, ADM Robert J. Papp, Linda serves as the Coast Guard's Ombudsman-at-Large and regularly travels to meet with Coast Guard families. She advocates on behalf of families to the First Lady of the United States, Members of Congress, Department of Defense, and other Federal, State and local leaders to improve the quality of life for thousands of servicemembers. She relentlessly focuses on improving military housing, member and family access to quality health care, and the Coast Guard's Ombudsman Program.

Of her 39 years as a military spouse, she spent 14 of those years watching six different Coast Guard cutters pull away from the pier. She understands that the strength and resilience of family members on the home front provides critical support to all of our Coast Guard men and women who stand the watch. She supports our men and women in uniform and those who keep the home fires burning and who every day face the unique challenges of a military lifestyle. They will always have a special place in her life, and in her heart.

I ask my colleagues to join me in paying special tribute to Mrs. Linda Papp. Our Coast Guard and our country are served well by honorable and giving military spouses like Linda who truly care about the health and well being of those who serve. We wish Linda, Admiral Papp, and their family all the best as we honor one of our dear friends.

Mr. President, I understand there are several Senators on the floor who wish to speak on several important subjects. I would like to talk for about 5 to 7 minutes on the vote that just occurred and to give some concluding remarks on the Keystone Pipeline and the failure of the Senate to take the opportunity presented today to move forward in a bipartisan, cooperative fashion and adopt two important and significant steps toward building a more aggressive, a more dynamic, and a more comprehensive domestic energy policy for the United States of America.

It is a shame that after all of the hard work that has gone into this, it has basically ended in a draw tonight. Senators Shaheen and Portman could not have worked harder together to produce a bill that creates thousands of jobs for our country. They brought their bill, as is the order, to the Senate energy committee. Senator Wyden served as chair of that committee for the last several years. I just stepped into the chairmanship in the last 8 weeks, but I have committed to both these terrific leaders and the former chair that I would try to advance one of the important bills that came out of our committee.

There have been 300 bills filed this Congress in the energy committee. There have been 13 that have passed. This would have been the 14th. I thought it was important to pair it with the Keystone Pipeline because while there is strong support for the efficiency bill on the Democratic side and significant support on the Republican side, the Republican leaders wanted to build--and many of us, including myself--the Keystone Pipeline. In fact, Senator McConnell said on April 29--not too long ago--that Keystone ``would produce significant economic benefits.'' On May 6 Senator Thune said that we ``will have shovel-ready jobs associated with it.'' On May 7 Senator Cornyn said, `` build this pipeline so we can safely transport oil.'' Senator Alexander said that ``after 5 years of delays, there is simply no reason not to let the Keystone XL Pipeline move forward.'' On April 29 Senator Enzi said, ``How many times have we been through this?'' Senator Inhofe: `` . . . no longer have a valid reason to stall.'' Senator Toomey said, ``It is time for Congress to step up and do what the President hasn't--authorize this pipeline.'' We had an opportunity just a few minutes ago for these Senators to do exactly that, but they chose to have an issue as opposed to having a pipeline, and that is very disappointing.

The efficiency bill that came out of the committee, contrary to what has been said on this floor over and over again--that the problem was that Harry Reid would not allow amendments--was amended in committee several times before the bill came out. There are Republican and Democratic members of the committee, and it came out of the committee on a vote of I think 19 to 3.

When the bill was brought to the floor approximately 6 or 7 months ago, Senators Shaheen and Portman allowed 10 additional amendments--10 additional amendments--by Members on the Democratic and Republican side. I am going to read those amendments into the record so that nobody can report or continue to say that the reason we are here is because there weren't amendments that were offered.

This bill was well negotiated. For the record, the first amendment was added by Senator Collins and Senator Udall on energy-efficient schools--Senator Collins, a Republican from Maine. No. 2 was a better- buildings amendment by Senators Ayotte and Bennet--a Republican from New Hampshire. There was a data center amendment--the fourth amendment added to the base of this bill--by Senator Risch, a Republican Member. The fifth amendment was again a Collins amendment--low-income housing retrofits. That was a Collins-Whitehouse amendment. The ENERGY STAR third-party testing was an amendment I offered along with Senator Wicker, a Republican from Mississippi. Another was the Wicker-Landrieu- Pryor amendment--Federal green buildings adjustment so that some of our products that are used to promote energy efficiency would not be disqualified. It was a very important amendment, and Senator Shaheen and Senator Portman agreed to that. Senator Hoeven, a Republican, offered an amendment creating an exemption for thermal storage water heaters. That amendment was put in. And then there was a Hoeven- Manchin-Isakson-Bennet amendment--energy efficiency in Federal residential buildings. That amendment was put in the base bill. Finally, the 10th amendment was by Senator Sessions and Senator Pryor requiring DOE to recognize voluntary independent certification programs.

So this argument that the reason we can't have a vote on the Keystone Pipeline is because Democrats will not allow amendments is completely bogus--completely bogus--and anyone following this debate knows that.

Senators Shaheen and Portman compromised. And as the new chair of the committee, I thought that if the Republicans wanted a vote on Keystone, we could at least offer that, and I thought that was a big step--I mean, a big step. I guess it was so big they decided they didn't want to take it, because they could have had a vote on Keystone. They can't take yes for an answer. I thought that was a big step forward, a big improvement over where we were about 6 months ago where we had 3 Democrats--we now have almost 11, and the number is growing--who supported Keystone.

And it is not because people are not respectful of the President's position. He is entitled to have his own position. Some of us just strongly disagree with it. The studies are in. The environmental studies are in. This is a rounding error when it comes to increased carbon emissions. And it is a hugely important impact for safety to get oil transported by the safest route possible--pipeline--as opposed to these tankers rolling alongside our children and schoolbuses on our highways or rolling through our communities on rail. We have already seen a number of horrific accidents.

So here I am, the new chair of the committee, and I thought, well, this could be possible. We have an efficiency bill Democrats like, and we have Keystone, which the Republicans really want to get done. Why don't we just offer them together? It makes perfect common sense to everyone in America--cooperation and common sense--but that is in short supply here in the Senate, and it is very disappointing.

I know it is an election year. I am reminded about that every day by my colleagues. But I thought this was bigger than the campaign. It is about jobs, it is about middle class, it is about strengthening domestic energy, and it is about being balanced in our approach. I know if Democrats were completely in charge they would write an energy bill one way, and if Republicans were completely in charge they would write it a different way. But this isn't fairyland. This is Washington, DC, and we have a split Congress. So I thought bringing an efficiency bill that has over 200 organizations, from the Environmental Defense Fund to the chamber of commerce--and Senator Shaheen and Senator Portman have put together an absolutely magnificent coalition--not seen very often around here, to tell the truth. And the Keystone Pipeline has won over its critics. There were a lot of critics in the beginning. There still are very loud critics, but I think the evidence is showing the importance of building this Keystone Pipeline.

As chair, I intend to be as fair as I can be with both parties, and putting things on this floor we can be proud of together, where everybody takes a little and gives a little and we move forward. But, no, that is not enough for

the Republican leader. The Republican leader wants an issue; he does not want the pipeline. I hope the people of Kentucky will remind him how important the pipeline is.

So I am going to ask unanimous consent--I am going to read this into the Record, all this formal language, but I want people to know what my consent request really is. I am going to ask unanimous consent that at sometime before May 22, which would be about 2 weeks from today, or a week and a half, this Senate have a straight-up vote after 3 hours of debate on the Shaheen-Portman bill that already has 10 Republican amendments included in it and that 3 hours later or at some certain time later, we have a straight-up vote on the Keystone Pipeline.

That is what this unanimous consent request I am going to read into the Record says, but it is a little bit confusing when you hear it, so I want people to know really clearly what it is I am asking.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that sometime before May 22 there would be a vote straight up on Keystone and on the efficiency legislation, which already has 10 Republican amendments--bipartisan amendments led by Republican Members--included in the bill, and I ask for that now with a 60-vote threshold.

So I ask unanimous consent that with respect to S. 2262, the pending motion to commit and amendments be withdrawn, with the exception of the substitute amendment; that at a time to be determined by the majority leader, after consultation with the Republican leader, the Senate resume consideration of S. 2262, that the substitute amendment be agreed to; that there be no other amendments, points of order or motions in order to the bill other than budget points of order and the applicable motions to waive; that there be up to 3 hours of debate on the bill, equally divided between the two leaders or their designees; that upon the use or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to vote on passage of the bill, as amended; that the bill be subject to a 60- affirmative vote threshold; that if the bill is passed, the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 371, S. 2280--which would be Keystone--at a time to be determined by the majority leader, after consultation with the Republican leader, but no later than Thursday, May 22, 2014; that there be no amendments, points of order or motions in order to the bill other than budget points of order and the applicable motions to waive; that there be up to 3 hours of debate on the bill, equally divided between the two leaders or their designees; that upon the use or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to vote on passage of the bill; that the bill be subject to a 60-affirmative vote threshold.

Given Senator Boxer's comments, I am unable to modify my request. I hope we can move forward at some time with a vote on the energy efficiency bill and on the Keystone Pipeline.

Mr. President, could this be a 10-minute vote?

Madam President, I wish to honor Louisiana Gray Day, this Friday, May 9, and the thousands of Louisianians and Americans with brain cancer and their families. Brain cancer is one of the most incurable forms of cancer and has an average survival period of only 1 to 2 years. It does not discriminate--striking men, women, and children of any race and at any age. Over 688,000 Americans are living with a primary brain tumor and each year over 69,700 people are diagnosed with primary malignant and nonmalignant tumors. Brain tumors are the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in children under age 20, the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in males ages 20 to 39, and the fifth leading cause of cancer-related deaths in females ages 20 to 39.

More so than any other cancer, brain tumors can have life-altering psychological, cognitive, behavioral, and physical effects. To help increase awareness and advance medical research for the various forms of brain cancer, the month of May is recognized nationally as brain cancer awareness month. My State has adopted May 9 in particular as the day when the citizens of the State are encouraged to wear the color gray to raise brain cancer awareness.

Brain cancer has unfortunately affected many in my State. Today I

share just one of these stories to increase awareness around this devastating disease. Gary Leingang was diagnosed with glioblastoma, an aggressive form of brain cancer, in June 2008. At the same time Gary was fighting his cancer, his wife Mona was battling breast cancer. Gary stood by her side and took care of Mona when she was on chemo and recovered. Unfortunately, Gary's fight with brain cancer ended on March 9, 2010. Before he passed, he said he wanted to make sure something good come out of his cancer. So, in his honor, his wife and children have shared his story to advance scientific research and increase awareness within the medical community in supporting patients, their families and caregivers afflicted with brain cancer. Last year, Mona worked with Louisiana lawmakers to establish Louisiana Gray Day on May 9--Gary's birthday.

It is my hope that in recognizing May 9 we will honor Gary's legacy and all help to bring greater awareness for all those affected by brain cancer, and perhaps even prevent some brain cancer-related deaths in the future.

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on Tuesday, May 13, 2014, at 10 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, DC.

The purpose of the hearing is to consider the nominations of Dr. Suzette M. Kimball, to be Director of the United States Geological Survey; Mr. Estevan R. Lopez, to be Commissioner of Reclamation; and Dr. Monica C. Regalbuto, to be an Assistant Secretary of Energy, Environmental Management.

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

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

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a Field Hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Saturday, May 17, 2014, at 10:30 a.m., at the Cypress Bend Conference Center in Many, LA.

The purpose of the hearing is to examine steps the federal government can take to increase the economic benefits of the Toledo Bend Project to the Northwest Louisiana region.

Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record may do so by sending it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by e-mail to [email protected].

For further information, please contact Dan Adamson at (202) 224-2871 or Afton Zaunbrecher at (202) 224-5479.

Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on Tuesday, May 20, 2014, at 10:15 a.m.. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, DC.

The purpose of the hearing is to consider the nominations of Ms. Cheryl A. LaFleur and Mr. Norman C. Bay, to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

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

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

Mr. President, I wish to speak about the debate which has gone on the last 2 days on this floor about two very important issues related to a stronger energy policy for America.

As I said earlier in the week, and I was proven to be correct, it is unlikely we would develop an energy policy in the next 4 days in open debate on the floor of the Senate. Lots of people came down and talked about things they thought should be in it. Many of those things I agree with, but there is a process we go through, and we are working through--not as quickly as some people would like, but we are making a lot of progress.

Right now on the floor of the Senate are two very important pillars or two very important cornerstones or two very important first steps which could be taken in the building of a stronger, more vibrant, more commonsense, more middle-class-friendly, more job-creating energy policy than the one we have right now.

The saddest thing about watching this debate or speeches which sort of parade as if it is a debate, but it is not really--pretend that it is a debate but it is not--the speeches we have heard are not outlining the truth to the American public about what is going on.

We have the opportunity the next time the Senate gathers early next week to have a cloture vote on an energy efficiency bill. That means bring debate to an end and vote on an energy efficiency bill which will create hundreds of thousands of jobs, supported by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Chemistry Council, and the Environmental Defense Fund. Hundreds of organizations have come together across the political spectrum looking here for common sense and cooperation, and they are not finding much of either.

These coalitions have spent an enormous amount of time lobbying Members of the House and the Senate to pass an efficiency bill led by Senator Shaheen and Senator Portman, two very respected Members of this body--one Republican with strong conservative credentials, one Democrat with strong progressive credentials but both demonstrating in their career the ability to work together and find common ground, exactly what the American public is asking for. We can ask any Republican, any Democrat, any Independent, and they say: Can't you all work together and find a way forward?

So Senator Portman and Senator Shaheen did. They brought a bill to committee. I wasn't the chair. I can't take credit for this. Ron Wyden is the chair and Lisa Murkowski is the ranking member. They can take credit for this. They came up with a fantastic bill which creates jobs, saves a lot of energy, and is our best source of energy through efficiency. It creates jobs right here in America. It is the cleanest energy we can produce.

So these two terrific Senators come and bring us a bill. It is debated in public, in committee, and amazingly comes out of committee I think on a vote of 19 to 3, a very important piece of building an energy policy.

Even as chair of this committee now--and I hope to remain chair for many years to come. There is an election between that and that aspirational goal, so we shall see. I would like to remain chair. But I can promise it is not going to be one bill which comes out of the energy committee that builds an energy policy.

First of all, part of the bills have to come out of the Finance Committee. They are about tax policy related to the generation of all sorts of different kinds of electricity not even in my jurisdiction. There are some issues that have to come out of the commerce committee, which has jurisdiction and authorization over pipelines. There are other committees that are going to have to contribute to strengthening and building an energy policy where America can be independent and secure, where we can have partnerships with Canada and Mexico, producing the cleanest fuels possible and generating electricity in the cleanest way possible, abundantly and affordably and reliably for our people, that will make manufacturing soar in this Nation, that will give opportunities for more domestic drilling both onshore and offshore.

The people I represent want this so badly, and they know it can happen. I am not sure why more Senators don't understand this can happen, but it is going to take cooperation. It is going to take a little give-and-take. I guess that is too much to ask and that is so sad. I guess it is too much to ask for a little cooperation and a little give-and-take.

So this energy efficiency bill comes to the floor, and it is held up because many Members want other pieces of the energy plan. They most certainly have good ideas. Most certainly there are good ideas out there on both sides of the aisle, but there is one idea that is very powerful. To say how powerful it is, I am not going to read my words about it. I have already spoken about it is time to build the Keystone Pipeline now. It is time to stop studying now.

I respect the President's review of the situation. I disagree with the length of time he has taken and with the decision he made last week to continue to study. I have said respectfully to him: Mr. President, the time for studying is over. The time for building is now. The process has run its course over 5 years, five studies. Every one of them has come down on the side of building it for jobs, for security, and it is better for the environment to transport this product, these oil sands, from one of our best friends, Canada, by pipeline than by either rail or truck.

Everyone in this country knows how dangerous and crowded the highways and railways are. One does not need to serve on the transportation committee of the Senate or House to understand that issue. Every mother, every father, every 17-year-old with a driver's license--in our State it is 16, and maybe in some States it is 20--understands how scary it is to drive on highways with big trucks filled with, unfortunately, sometimes dangerous things.

Why would we want this for our children? Why can't we add to the 2.9 million miles of pipeline we have and build a pipeline with Canada? We are not talking about building a pipeline with Cuba or Venezuela. We are talking about Canada--our best ally, our greatest trading partner, and our partner on the frontlines of wars, in the research labs we partner with them--to build a pipeline to safely move oil they are going to produce one way or another because they need it for their economy and the world needs it. They have the highest environmental standards in the world.

Our highways are crowded. Our trains are crowded. Trains are colliding all over the country. Every morning in some section of the country there is another train that has run off the track with horrible materials being spilled into waters and rivers. I think Democrats are upset about that, Republicans are upset about it.

There is one very big idea, very big amendment to the efficiency bill I think the Republicans would truly like; that is, to have a vote on the Keystone Pipeline. As the chair of the committee, I know that is their strong feeling. I am a supporter of the Keystone Pipeline. So I think to myself: Let's see if we could maybe make this work.

The Republican leadership has been saying for months they want a vote--not a resolution, not a sense of the Senate, which we have already had, but a straight up-or-down vote on a directive to build the pipeline.

So I think to myself: This seems to be fair, a little give-and-take. Democrats aren't happy--not everybody--with the Keystone Pipeline, not all Republicans are happy with the efficiency, but the business community is broadly supportive of both and so are labor unions. So we have labor unions, the business community, and the environmental community which is strongly in favor of efficiency.

Of course many of the strongest voices are not for Keystone and I understand that. We have a different view. I respectfully disagree with their position, but this is a big country. It is a democracy, and we represent that democracy right here at these desks.

So I think to myself in my Louisiana way: Maybe if every side gives a little bit, we could get two very important things done, when nothing much is getting done in the energy sector, which is what we need to move our economy forward, to get labor unions working, to get people who aren't in labor unions working, to create jobs--hundreds of thousands, millions of jobs. Everybody is talking about that in their campaigns.

It is upsetting to me to know how many people are running for reelection in this Chamber who go home and talk about jobs and then turn around and come here and vote no. They talk about jobs at home and vote no in the U.S. Senate--no for efficiency jobs, no for the Keystone Pipeline.

It is very interesting. I am going to read what some of the Republican leaders have said about Keystone. Maybe they have changed their minds since they have said these, and over the weekend maybe the press could ask them if they have had a change of heart.

Senator Wicker said on January 25, 2013:

Many Americans understand the economic importance of moving

forward with the Keystone pipeline and what that means for

job creation and energy security in the United States. It is

imperative that we continue to press the Administration to

approve this critical project.

So next week on Monday or Tuesday, my friend, the Senator from Mississippi, is going to have an opportunity to vote to press the President on Keystone and to vote for a bill that he is a cosponsor of--the energy efficiency bill. Again, he is going to have a chance to press the President of the United States to build the Keystone Pipeline, using all the power he has as a Senator from the State of Mississippi to do that, and to vote on the energy efficiency bill. I hope he will follow his words and his promise.

Senator Chambliss and Senator Isakson, in a letter to President Obama on February 11, 2014, said:

By any reasonable standard, the Keystone Pipeline is

clearly in our national interest. Keystone will greatly

advance our energy security interests by establishing a

reliable supply of oil from one of the most stable trading

partners and closest friends, and will lead to economic

growth and help create good jobs, sustainable jobs for U.S.

workers.

I would like to add my name to this. They might not want me to, but I would like to add my name so it would say that Senator Isakson, Senator Chambliss, and Senator Landrieu believe in this. I couldn't have said it better myself.

So I wonder what they will do next week when we have a chance to vote on the efficiency bill and on the pipeline.

Senator Cornyn, the minority whip, on May 7, said:

It might be better to build this pipeline so we could

safely transport oil from Canada down to refineries in my

State where it can be converted to gasoline, aviation fuel

and the like, and the process will create an awful lot of

jobs.

May 7 floor statement from Senator Cornyn.

This pipeline connects to refineries in Texas. So I wonder, the Senators from Texas--Senator Cruz, Senator Cornyn--are you going to vote for an up-or-down vote on Keystone and vote on the efficiency bill? You can vote no, you can vote yes on the efficiency bill. Energy efficiency may not be important to people in Texas. The chambers of commerce in Texas may not have a position. I think they are very supportive, from what I have looked at, and the national chamber of commerce is on board. Maybe that is not important to them, but I think it is.

I spend a lot of time in Texas. It is a neighboring State. They have a big economy. I do a lot of work for their coastal restoration. People tell me that even though jobs are plentiful in Texas, thank goodness-- not in every community but in many communities and in Louisiana--we can always use more. Building and construction jobs are local in nature, putting our architects and engineers to work. The engineers were in my office last week saying: Senator Landrieu, some of our engineers are busy, but some of them aren't, and we could put a lot of engineers to work on this energy efficiency bill.

So if Senator Cornyn wants to actually build the pipeline and press the President to build it, he is going to have a chance to vote up or down on whether he wants to do that, and the opportunity is to do it in conjunction with an up-or-down vote on an energy efficiency bill. Democrats get a little bit of what they want, Republicans get a little bit of what they want, and what the country gets is cooperation and a chance for jobs, which is all they want, really--good jobs.

Senator Inhofe:

President Obama and the administration no longer have a

valid reason to stall the final stages of the pipeline.

Approving the Keystone Pipeline is one thing the President

can do today with his pen that will create thousands of jobs.

The President said he is not going to do it. The question is, Will Senator Inhofe join with enough of us to pass a bill that presses him to do it? I think if we could get the vote on the floor, we might be able to get our 60 votes. I have never said we were guaranteed--there is no guarantee, but we are very close. We have 11 Democratic cosponsors, including myself, on a bill with 45 Republicans. We are just three or four short. I think that would be defined as ``pressing.''

Senator Burr said this in January 2012:

Today I join 43 other Senators in introducing a bill to

continue construction on the Keystone XL Pipeline, a project

that will take great steps towards improving our energy

security as well as create jobs for thousands of American

workers. Despite claims that promoting energy security and

creating jobs are top priorities, President Obama has

rejected the permit earlier this month.

Senator McConnell said:

The Keystone Pipeline--a good example of something that

would create jobs for the American people.

As Senator McConnell knows, there might be quite a few people from Kentucky who are out of work who could travel not too far. It is better to work at home and be with your family and kids--I understand that-- but lots of times people have to travel distances to work. Sometimes people want to travel those distances because the jobs available to them at home are minimum wage, and if they travel and get out, they can make handsome sums--working tough hours and long hours, but people have been doing it for decades. I know there are people in Kentucky who would like jobs. So I am hoping that next week when Senator McConnell has some time to think through this as the minority leader, he can come to the floor and say: You know what, this isn't such a bad deal after all.

Senator Shaheen and Senator Portman have presented a bill that is supported by the Chamber of Commerce and the Environmental Defense Fund and so many business organizations that depend on me and Senator Reid to help them create private sector jobs in America.

This isn't a government program. This is creating private sector high-paying jobs, saving energy. We have been working on it for 5 years. This is not a new idea. This is not something Senator Shaheen and Senator Portman are doing in an election year.

I thank Senator Shaheen for her great leadership. She started working on this when she was Governor, before she even got to the Senate of the United States. She is an expert on energy efficiency. I can remember when former-President Clinton came to our caucus several years ago. Senator Shaheen was one of the first to stand up and ask him several important and very timely questions and say: Mr. President, you have given us a way forward here on a piece of energy legislation that I think both Republicans and

Democrats can support. I am looking forward to leading it.

This was years ago. This isn't an election-year ploy; this is a half a decade of work.

So my question to my Republican friends is, Do you want to build the Keystone Pipeline or do you want an issue to talk about? Because it seems to me that we can get a vote on the efficiency bill and on the Keystone Pipeline, so we actually are doing what you all say you want to do, which is to press the President.

That is all our power is. I know it is hard for people to realize this, but our powers are limited by the Constitution. We are Senators; we are not Presidents. We have equal power to the Presidency, not more and not less. So while some people might want to run around and convince people in their hometowns that they have more power than the President, they do not. They have equal power. So let's exercise it. Let's press, which is what our job is--pressing the administration. Sometimes administrations don't want to do what Congress does, so Congress presses forward. But we don't want to press, I don't think. I think they want to talk or have an issue to talk about.

I would like to have a vote. I would like to separate the wheat from the chaff, clear the fog. This is not complicated at all.

You have heard a lot about amendments, amendments, amendments. There is one thing that is more important than all the amendments--more important than Senator Vitter's amendment, Senator Barrasso's amendment, more important than any amendments on our side--that is, are we going to vote to build the Keystone Pipeline? Right now, 70 percent of the people of the United States support building the pipeline. Right now, the studies have been completed. Right now, the evidence is in.

I know there are people on this floor who disagree, and I want to be as respectful as I can. There is no one on the floor here debating this now, but if you did come, I would most certainly appreciate you talking about it if you are opposed. I know there are people who still feel as if Keystone is not the right thing to do, but the evidence is in on that, and we should build it. It is important to secure America's domestic production. It is important for America to not rely on outsiders--particularly those who aren't our friends--for the energy we need to keep our economy growing and strong.

It is very disheartening for me to read the headlines every day--and I know from my constituents that it is for them, too--and see what is going on in Ukraine and watch Europe not being able to be as strong as I know Europe wants to be. I know they want to be stronger, but because they depend so much on Russia for their gas and they are not energy independent, they have to be careful about what they do to come to the Ukraine's aid. Anybody can understand that. It doesn't take a diplomat to explain what is going on.

Does America ever want to be too weak to stand up to Russia? I don't think so. Does America ever want to be too weak to stand up to China? No. Do we ever want to be too weak to stand up to India if we have to, or Venezuela? No. So build the pipeline. We have already built 2.9 million miles of pipe. I have 9,000 miles of pipeline in Louisiana. We have been building them a long time. Yes, sometimes they have not been laid correctly. Yes, Federal agencies and State agencies have failed the people in many instances in making sure the environment was as protected as it should be. But we know how to build energy infrastructure. And I will tell you that the people of Louisiana would much rather build infrastructure than put uniforms on our sons and daughters and send them halfway around the world so we can get gasoline in our cars.

Let me put it plainly. I lost 44 men in Iraq and Afghanistan. Gone. I have hundreds of wounded soldiers. When you ask me what the price is-- build the Keystone Pipeline or continue to have wars over oil--I don't know, it is pretty easy for me.

I am not going to let people come down to the floor here and get away with talking about these amendments because it is not about amendments. It is not about process. It is about whether this Senate wants to press this legislation. Press. That is all we can do. We can't make the President do anything unless we can override the veto if he vetoes it, and that has happened before--not often, but it has happened--but that is what the Constitution says.

So let's take it one step at a time. Let's press on to build the pipeline, get an up-or-down vote. Let's move forward on an energy efficiency bill that the House has actually, amazingly, passed a good version of. Think about it. Not only has a Democratic-controlled Senate passed an efficiency bill with seven Republican cosponsors and at least a dozen more who I know would vote for the bill if allowed to by their leader, Mr. McConnell, but the Republican-controlled House has already passed an energy efficiency bill. So we would just go to conference with these two bills and work out the details, and all of these organizations that have lobbied and spent money and time to try to explain this to us--``Please, can you all help us create jobs we need right here at home? We would be so happy and encouraged that the Democratic process is working''--showing them that we are hearing them and listening to them would be a really terrific step forward.

Finally, you will hear some Republican leaders say: Well, Senator, that sounds great, but you have to deliver us 60 votes for Keystone.

No, I never said I could deliver 60 votes for Keystone. I said I would try to deliver 60 votes. That is all I can do.

I said I would try, and I have tried my best. We had three Democrats last year. We now have 11 Democrats. I am not doing this by myself. Senator Heitkamp has been extraordinarily helpful, Senator McCaskill has been wonderful, and Senator Tester has been helping, as has Senator Donnelly. So many of our colleagues have been working very hard over here. We are so close. It is not about amendments, it is about Keystone. That is the amendment, Keystone.

If we can have a separate vote on Keystone and a separate vote on energy efficiency, we can press the House to act and get those two matters, hopefully, to the President's desk. That is the best we can do. What the President decides to do after that, I don't know. He has a responsibility, and we have a responsibility. He will exercise it as he sees fit, but we need to do our job. We can't worry about doing his job. He needs to do his job.

It is time to build the Keystone Pipeline.

I will submit for the Record the dozens of comments made by my Republican friends about how important it is to build the pipeline. They didn't say: Let's build the pipeline and also pass three other important pieces of legislation. They didn't say: Let's build the pipeline, but we don't really want to build the pipeline until we can get votes on X, Y, and Z. They said the most important thing we can do--and 70 percent of the American public supports it, and it is growing every day--is to build this pipeline. Labor and business support it. A broad range of people supports it, with the exception of Nebraska, which has not made its final decision. Our law allows for Nebraska courts to make the final decision about where that pipeline will be laid because the people of Nebraska did not want it laid in one of the largest water aquifers in North America, so they moved the line, which is appropriate, and so that is being worked out. Other than that, we are ready to go.

I particularly hope the people of Kentucky will ask Senator Mitch McConnell if he is ready to build the Keystone Pipeline and if he is ready to vote to press the President to build the Keystone Pipeline, which is within the limits of our power. Our powers are limited, but we could exercise them to the fullest. I hope we will do that, and I hope next week we will get a straight-up vote on the efficiency bill Senator Portman and Senator Shaheen have worked so hard on that is supported by a broad range of coalition members, and I hope that coalition will generate and get its members activated between now and Tuesday.

I hope those in America who want to build this Keystone Pipeline will also activate their phones, their emails, and contact their legislators, particularly our two leaders Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell, who will ultimately be responsible for whether these votes occur.

All we can do is do our best. I think I have demonstrated a real effort to get

this done, and I thank my colleagues over here who have been extraordinarily helpful. We hope we can find common sense, common ground, and do what the Senate of the United States can do, press forward to create jobs for the American people.

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