Floor Statements

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, the Book of Matthew, chapter 23, verses 11 and 12, reads:

The greatest among you will be your servant. For those who

exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble

themselves will be exalted.

I rise today to recognize five of Montana's greatest servants--five Montana heroes.

Our State has faced severe flooding, unrelenting flooding for the past several weeks. As water levels rise, Montanans across the State are stepping up to help. This is the essence of what it means to be a Montanan: stepping up to help fellow Montanans, ordinary folks doing extraordinary things for their friends and neighbors. We are all in this together.

That is why I have begun calling attention to the Montana heroes going above and beyond the call of duty in the floods we are experiencing in our State today.

I want to recognize Pastor Cathy Moorehead of the United Methodist Church and Father Daniel Wathan of Saint Benedict's Church of Roundup. Last week, Cathy and Daniel showed me the flood damage caused by rising waters from the nearby Musselshell River. Most of the town of Roundup has been underwater for days.

I remember many times I had gone to the Busy Bee Cafe in Roundup. Never in my wildest dreams did I ever think that restaurant might be underwater. A few days ago, it was. The floods have come back again. It is not entirely underwater, but so much of it is, it is virtually destroyed.

Cathy and Daniel took it upon themselves to make sure their neighbors had a hot meal, a dry place to sleep, medical care, and a shoulder to cry on--and it is food not only for those displaced by the floods but also for the National Guard so the National Guard does not have to eat all those rations they otherwise would have to eat.

I have talked to the Guard. They are so appreciative that they do not have to eat the food they otherwise had been given. Ask anyone around, and they will tell you Cathy and Daniel's outstanding efforts continue to be indispensable.

Floodwaters have returned to Roundup, and our prayers are with them all today.

This month, the Crow Indian Tribe also faced devastating floods. Rising water has severed food and water supplies. There is no drinking water. Rushing water has swept away bridges and streets.

As soon as the floodwaters struck the Crow Reservation, Crow Tribe member April Toineeta got to work. April worked with the Red Cross to set up shelter for flood victims. She made sure the Indian Health Service had the latest information about where medical care was most urgently needed. She was universally recognized as the go-to person for help. April. April Toineeta. April has been working 18-hour days, sleeping on the floor of the Crow Housing Authority, doing whatever it takes to help her community. April's hard work inspires all of us to help each other through the floods in any way we can.

When Box Elder Creek burst its banks, floodwaters destroyed the Harris family home north of Mill Iron, just outside of Ekalaka. Neighbors Charlie and Gail Brence hopped on four-wheelers and went to rescue the Harris family of seven. When they arrived, the Harris home was under 6 feet of water, rapidly rising. They offered the Harris family a warm and safe place to stay, a shoulder to cry on, and a helping hand as they worked to save their cattle and salvage personal belongings from the destroyed home. Gail Brence said: ``We're Montanans. This is what we do.''

Pastor Cathy, Father Dan, April, and Charlie and Gail are the best of the

best Montana has to offer. They represent our can-do attitude, our willingness to help our neighbor. Our belief is that when times are tough, we know we are the strongest when we work together.

There are hundreds of other unsung heroes across Montana. I am calling on all Montanans to share their stories of ordinary folks doing extraordinary things for their friends and neighbors, whether on Facebook or call my office. We want to hear these inspiring stories. We want to share them.

You know, some folks in our State say--and it is somewhat true--that Montana is really one big town. We tend to know each other. We are big in area, few in people. But we tend to know each other, about one or two degrees of separation. We are really one big small town. We are there to help each other.

In closing, I wish to share a humble thank-you for all Montana's heroes back home. I do not know what we would do without you. Thank you for your service.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise to express my strong support for S. 782, the 5-year reauthorization of the Economic Development Administration, which I am proud to have cowritten.

Abraham Lincoln said:

The legitimate object of government is to do for a

community of people whatever they need to have done but

cannot do at all, or cannot so well do for themselves, in

their separate and individual capacities.

That is what the Economic Development Revitalization Act of 2011 will do. It authorizes and funds the EDA, a Department of Commerce agency, in order to help Americans achieve what they ``cannot so well do for themselves.''

EDA is the only Federal agency charged solely with job creation. Each

dollar of EDA funding leverages nearly $7 in private sector investment.

From 2005 to 2010, during the administrations of Presidents from each political party, EDA awarded $1.2 billion in construction-related and revolving loan fund projects. According to estimates, more than 314,000 jobs resulted from those investments.

EDA programs are critical to my home State of Montana, a State with lower per capita income but great 21st century potential. When the timber industry in the western part of the State suffered setbacks, we paired Federal EDA funding from the 2009 Recovery Act with State dollars to create an $11.7 million revolving loan fund. We enabled 34 companies to continue operating and supported nearly 2,000 jobs despite the economic downturn.

In the eastern part of the State, we experience outmigration where the problem is both people and jobs leaving the area altogether, which EDA can help us address in a new provision under this bill.

A key feature of this bill is the increased Federal share for areas that demonstrate unusually severe economic distress and unique circumstances.

For instance, in the event of a federally declared disaster, the Federal share is to be increased for 18 months. This applies to a nonweather event such as the September 11 attacks or a natural disaster such as we have experienced in Montana where we currently face severe flooding conditions.

Areas like Roundup, Lodge Grass, Harlem, Fort Peck, Rocky Boy's, Lewistown and elsewhere are confronted with a crisis of biblical proportions. I was in Montana last week witnessing the challenges that confront us. And I am working very hard to ensure that Federal resources will be available for those most in need, which is a legitimate object of government, as Lincoln observed. This Federal share provision is one more way to do that.

Also, we have established a minimum 75 percent Federal share under this bill to help Indian tribes lacking sufficient resources to provide the typical matching share--as is often the case in my home State of Montana.

I want to thank Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member Inhofe for their leadership and for working with me on this bill. I also commend and thank EDA Administrator John Fernandez for coming to Montana to meet with my constituents in Missoula and Butte last September to discuss opportunities that would help our State and the country.

In closing, this is a good bill with backing from both sides of the aisle. I urge my colleagues to support it. We talk a lot about helping job growth. Here is an opportunity to do so.

I yield the floor.

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

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 5 minutes as in morning business.

Mr. President, I rise today to call for a change of course in Afghanistan. On May 1, a targeted strike by U.S. forces achieved a central goal of the war that began in Afghanistan nearly a decade ago.

The death of Osama bin Laden by no means ends the threat posed by al- Qaida or other terrorist groups. However, bin Laden's death provides an opportunity for Congress and the White House to assess a new strategy for keeping America safe and defending our interests around the world.

Today, I am calling for three changes to our strategy in Afghanistan. First, we must begin handing responsibility over to Afghan forces and bring most of our troops home by the end of next year. Second, we should focus on fighting terrorism, not nation building. Third, our efforts to keep America safe from terrorism should center on where most terrorist threats come from, Pakistan.

The United States should not be doing the work the Afghans should be doing for themselves. The Afghans need to stand up and take responsibility for the security of their own country.

The President has announced this July will mark the beginning of a transition of security responsibility to Afghan forces. However, in my view, the transition plan is too slow. We need to begin handing responsibility of security to Afghan forces immediately and aim to have most U.S. combat troops out of Afghanistan by the end of next year.

We should leave behind only a small force necessary to hunt down and kill terrorists in Afghanistan and help the Afghan military perform their duties.

We Americans are fortunate to have the best military in the world. These brave men and women continue to do everything we ask of them. They have spent almost 10 years fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. Many of our troops have spent multiple years deployed overseas, hiking over frigid mountains, traversing hot deserts with heavy loads on their backs, and spending years apart from their families. But we don't hear these troops complain. These Americans continue to serve and to fight and to die for a country we all love.

Seeing these troops in action during my visit to Afghanistan last year was truly remarkable, very impressive. Their unwavering commitment has come, however, at a great price. As of today, 1,219 troops have been killed in Afghanistan, 11,411 have been wounded, 9 Montanans have died, and 50 Montanans have been wounded fighting in Afghanistan.

These Montanans hail from small towns such as Hungry Horse, Darby, Shepherd, and Troy. Behind each of these fallen warriors are dozens of broken hearts in their families and communities. Thousands more will suffer their entire lives with post-traumatic stress disorder or traumatic brain injuries that have thus far gone undetected.

These brave troops continue to fight because we ask them to and because they love their country. I receive letters from their families all the time, like this one from Janice Roberts from Malta, MT. Janice writes:

Our 27-year-old son is being sent on a third combat

deployment to Afghanistan. This is his second ordeal in less

than a year. Our son has not even recovered emotionally or

mentally from the last two deployments. Truthfully, the only

people who care about what is happening to our young troops

are the military families.

This letter is a reminder we have a sacred obligation to our troops and their families. Any mission we ask them to accomplish must be vital--absolutely vital--to America's national security.

It is time we demand the Afghans shoulder more of the load. Afghan police forces stand at 285,000. In 2010, the Afghan National Security Force grew by 70,000. We have spent 10 years training them. It is time for the Afghans to do the job we have trained them to do.

As we draw down in Afghanistan, the Afghans will have to step up. As we withdraw, they will have the task of governing their own country. The Afghans will develop Afghan solutions to Afghan problems, and that is the way it needs to be.

Second, we need to invest more in killing terrorists and less on nation building. The raid that killed bin Laden relied on years of perseverance by intelligence officers, expensive surveillance technology, and the best special operations forces on Earth. We need to continue to make investments in these capabilities to see that other terrorists face the same fate as bin Laden.

As we invest more in counterterrorism capabilities, we do so knowing full well we are facing enormous challenges at home. The U.S. Government's total debt exceeds $14 trillion.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to proceed for another 5 minutes, and I will not ask for another extension.

I thank my good friend for being so helpful.

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, ADM Mike Mullen, described the U.S. debt as the ``biggest national security threat.'' Since September 11, 2001, we have spent over $1.2 trillion in Iraq and Afghanistan. Just think of that--$1.2 trillion. Every month we spend $10 billion in Afghanistan. This is roughly $1 out of every $7 we spend on defense. This level of spending is simply not sustainable. We should focus on the core mission that led us to Afghanistan to begin with, and that is keeping America safe from terrorism.

Finally, and most important, our fight against global terrorism must begin to focus on Pakistan. In 2008, then-CIA Director Michael Hayden said:

Let me be very clear today. Virtually every major terrorist

threat that my agency is aware of has threads back to the

tribal areas of Pakistan.

A State Department report last summer reiterated this assessment and found that ``al-Qaida's core in Pakistan remained the most formidable terrorist organization targeting the U.S. homeland.''

We have invested enormous sums to build an effective partnership with Pakistan to fight terrorism. Since 2002, the United States has provided over $18 billion in foreign assistance to Pakistan--the highest of any other country in 2009 except Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet it is no secret that Pakistan plays a double game. Osama bin Laden's hideout location raises serious questions.

I recently called upon Secretary of Defense Gates and Secretary Clinton to

take a hard look at whether Pakistan is doing enough to find and kill terrorists in its own country. I will not support providing funding to Pakistan until I view this assessment. I am gravely concerned about the commitment of Pakistan's military intelligence services to fighting terrorism.

During a visit to Pakistan last year, I made it clear to President Zardari and General Kayani that Pakistan must do more to eliminate safe havens within their own borders. We cannot accept excuses; we need results. Without progress in Pakistan, we cannot succeed in Afghanistan. But the sad irony is that our large troop presence in Afghanistan actually makes it harder to press Pakistan to crack down on terrorists and militants.

Most of the fuel, food, and ammunition for our troops in Afghanistan is imported through Pakistan. As long as we depend on the Port of Karachi for our supplies, we have limited leverage on Pakistan to force an end to this deadly double game. To effectively defend our Nation against terrorism, we need to begin withdrawing from Afghanistan and focus more on Pakistan.

Our military can do almost anything we ask it to do, but it can't do everything. To meet the growing challenges around the world, we need to start bringing our troops home from Afghanistan this July and complete the withdrawal by the end of next year. We need to work together to make the 21st century the American century--to focus on jobs, improving education, rebuilding roads and bridges, and making the American economy the best place to do business in the world.

The death of Osama bin Laden marks a turning point in history. We must take advantage of this opportunity to chart a new course in Afghanistan. I salute the brave men and women who made this day possible and who continue to serve overseas.

My thoughts are with the hundreds of Montanans serving in the Armed Forces. May God bless America and may He keep our brave troops safe.

Mr. President, I again thank my friend for yielding me time, and I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I understand the wealth and opportunity represented by our Federal offshore petroleum and natural gas resources. We are blessed in this country with an abundant public estate. Montana, too, is abundant with natural resources and relies heavily on these resources for jobs and economic stability. I support efforts to develop these resources with commonsense safeguards that reduce our exposure to volatile foreign energy resources. I have supported onshore and offshore drilling in the past, and will continue to do so long as it is done responsibly.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, the Finance Committee has a long history of working together in a bi-partisan fashion in the interest of children in Montana and across the Nation. I am happy to have you as a partner on child welfare issues. The Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 was a first step on the road to reforming the child welfare system. Today, with the introduction of the State Child Welfare Innovation Act, we take another step on the path toward making lives better for the children we serve.

As the authors of this legislation, we build on the successes of waivers since they were first authorized in 1994. Since that time, these waivers have given States the flexibility needed to focus on new practices that prevent abuse and neglect and encourage permanency for children in our child welfare system.

It is important for us to understand that the goal of reauthorizing child welfare waivers is not simply to develop and test new service delivery models, but to put in place sound practices that state innovation has determined to be effective in increasing positive outcomes for youth in the system.

Our March 11 hearing entitled ``Innovations in Child Welfare Waivers'' continued a productive conversation and helped us to craft legislation to address some of the issues facing our Nation's most- vulnerable youth. I was happy we were able to welcome two graduates of the foster care system to share their perspectives. In our conversations with youth, service providers and local government officials, we have noted the successes of the program in spurring innovative new practices while listening to the concerns regarding the challenges that they have faced in the implementation of these waivers and in the system overall.

In this legislation, we continued to focus the waivers on producing improvements in three important areas: the prevention of abuse and neglect; safety for children at home and in placements; and permanency outcomes. We have also asked States to focus on increasing the quality of care for kids in the foster care system. We heard from youth about what is important to them, including knowing what your rights are and understanding how to reconnect with biological parents in a healthy way. I am so pleased we were able to work together to give States the opportunity and incentive to address these concerns.

I am happy to introduce this legislation with my partner on the Senate Finance Committee, the Ranking Member of that Committee, Senator Hatch. I look forward to a new chapter in our work together that helps put our Nation's child welfare system on the pathway to reform.

Mr. President, the Finance Committee has a long history of working together in a bi-partisan fashion in the interest of children in Montana and across the Nation. I am happy to have you as a partner on child welfare issues. The Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 was a first step on the road to reforming the child welfare system. Today, with the introduction of the State Child Welfare Innovation Act, we take another step on the path toward making lives better for the children we serve.

As the authors of this legislation, we build on the successes of waivers since they were first authorized in 1994. Since that time, these waivers have given States the flexibility needed to focus on new practices that prevent abuse and neglect and encourage permanency for children in our child welfare system.

It is important for us to understand that the goal of reauthorizing child welfare waivers is not simply to develop and test new service delivery models, but to put in place sound practices that state innovation has determined to be effective in increasing positive outcomes for youth in the system.

Our March 11 hearing entitled ``Innovations in Child Welfare Waivers'' continued a productive conversation and helped us to craft legislation to address some of the issues facing our Nation's most- vulnerable youth. I was happy we were able to welcome two graduates of the foster care system to share their perspectives. In our conversations with youth, service providers and local government officials, we have noted the successes of the program in spurring innovative new practices while listening to the concerns regarding the challenges that they have faced in the implementation of these waivers and in the system overall.

In this legislation, we continued to focus the waivers on producing improvements in three important areas: the prevention of abuse and neglect; safety for children at home and in placements; and permanency outcomes. We have also asked States to focus on increasing the quality of care for kids in the foster care system. We heard from youth about what is important to them, including knowing what your rights are and understanding how to reconnect with biological parents in a healthy way. I am so pleased we were able to work together to give States the opportunity and incentive to address these concerns.

I am happy to introduce this legislation with my partner on the Senate Finance Committee, the Ranking Member of that Committee, Senator Hatch. I look forward to a new chapter in our work together that helps put our Nation's child welfare system on the pathway to reform.

Mr. President, President George Washington once said ``The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive the veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciated by their nation.''

President Washington's words are a serious reminder of our obligation to all of the brave men and women serving our country overseas. We have a solemn obligation to our veterans when they return home. And the unemployment numbers among veterans make it clear that we have a long way to go.

The unemployment rate among veterans who have served in the military since September 2001 far exceeds that of their nonveteran peers. The unemployment rate for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans hit 13.1 percent in April. This is roughly 3 percentage points higher than the previous year. The unemployment rate among Montana veterans has more than doubled since 2005. This is a serious problem. We should be greeting our veterans with quality health care and our eternal gratitude, not an unemployment check.

Yesterday, I was proud to stand with my friends and colleagues, Senator Patty Murray and Senator Jon Tester, as we introduced the Hiring Heroes Act of 2011. The bill will take a number of important steps to help our brave veterans find work when they come home from war.

If a soldier serves as a truck driver or a medic in the military, there shouldn't be excessive red tape to become a truck driver or serve in a hospital as a civilian. That is why this bill requires the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, and the Secretary of Labor to study how skills learned in the military can be more effectively translated to meet the qualifications required for civilian jobs back home. The legislation would also initiate a new program aimed at eliminating the barriers between military training and civilian licensure or credentialing.

The Hiring Heroes Act would require the Department of Labor to reach out to and assist recently discharged veterans receiving disability payments. The bill would also extend the VA's authority to provide rehabilitation and job training for severely wounded troops. Without this extension, only veterans separated from the military could take advantage of these critical employment services. Helping veterans requires close cooperation between the VA and veterans service organizations. That is why the legislation would authorize $4.5 million in grants for nonprofit organizations that help veterans find work.

The Hiring Heroes Act of 2011 compliments the legislation that Senators Tester, Grassley, Senator Burr and I introduced earlier this year: the Veteran Employment Transition Act of 2011. This legislation will reward employers that hire veterans who have recently completed their service in the military with up to a $2,400 tax credit under the work opportunity tax credit. I am proud that 17 of my colleagues in the Senate--Republicans and Democrats--have cosponsored this legislation. The House companion has 54 cosponsors.

The bill also cuts the redtape that generally exists under the work opportunity tax credit. Rather than having to go through the tax credit's current certification process, qualified servicemen and women who have been recently discharged will only need show their discharge documentation that was provided by the Department of Defense. This includes those men and women who were activated by their states as members of the National Guard.

Enacting this legislation would just be the first step. The tax credit will not work unless veterans and small businesses across the country know about it. That is why I am working with the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, Veterans of Foreign Wars, and other Veteran Service Organizations to help get the word out about this tax credit once we pass the legislation.

Briefly, I thank my Defenders of Freedom Fellows, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans and Montana-Natives Charlie Cromwell and Troy Carter. As legislative fellows in my office, Charlie and Troy worked hard to draft and advance this bill. I created the Defenders of Freedom Fellowship so that Montana veterans could work on legislation that helps their fellow veterans. They would be proud of this legislation.

I encourage all interested Montana veterans to contact my office for more information. It will take this kind of teamwork to provide the support our veterans need when they come home from war. It is an honor to introduce this legislation and I look forward to its quick passage this legislative session.

Mr. President, Mike Mansfield once said, ``Knowledge is essential for acceptance and understanding.''

This statement is all too true for the students and educators residing in rural areas. While rural education is becoming an increasingly large and important part of the U.S. public school system, the unique challenges and circumstances within these rural communities are often misunderstood or overlooked. According to the Digest of Education Statistics reported annually by the National Center for Education Statistics, the number of students attending rural schools increased by over 11 percent, from 10.5 million in 2004 to nearly 11.7 million by 2008. Rural students now comprise almost \1/4\ of the Nation's public school enrollment. And nearly one-third of all schools in the nation are located in rural areas.

Rural is also becoming increasingly diverse. According to NCES, the increase in rural enrollment between 2004 and 2009 was disproportionally among students of color. And in the 2007-2008 school year the national average rate of student poverty in rural school districts, as measured by the rate of participation in federally subsidized meals programs, was almost 40 percent.

Yet despite the significant percentage enrolled in rural schools, the importance of rural education is often obscured by the fact that rural students are, naturally, widely-dispersed, located in small, geographically isolated school districts. The size, diversity, and complexity of rural education support a greater policy focus on the unique challenges and solutions for rural education.

Montana is the fourth largest state by land mass, totaling over 147,000 square miles. More than half of Montana's 830 schools enroll less than 100 students. From Eureka to Ekalaka, from Scobey to Darby, these small schools dot the landscape, providing not only a learning environment but often a community center.

Montana's rural communities are doing an excellent job educating Montana's next generation. Overall, Montana graduation rates are higher than the national average. Montana students taking the National Assessment of Educational Progress, NAEP, in 2009 scored higher than the national average in both reading and math.

But despite the success of Montana's rural schools, these schools face a unique set of challenges that their urban-centric peers may not even comprehend. In 2004, the U.S. Government Accountability Office released a report highlighting the needs and distinctive challenges of rural schools and districts across this nation.

For example, rural schools report greater difficulties in recruiting and retaining qualified teachers, due to inability to offer competitive salaries, geographic isolation, and for some, severe weather. Rural districts often have fewer personnel. The district superintendent is often also the high school principal. He or she may also be the Title I coordinator, math curriculum specialist, and sometimes also the head of transportation services! In isolated areas, schools face challenges in providing professional development and training for teachers and principals. Small rural districts are often located long distances from other districts, towns, and universities, drastically reducing opportunities to partner or collaborate. Additionally, the long distances students must travel between school and home make it more difficult to participate in traditional remedial services, mentoring, and after school programs.

I commend the Secretary for efforts he has taken to try to address concerns of rural areas. However, these efforts have fallen short, and in some cases, even good intentions have created adverse consequences. Most recently, the Investing in Innovation, i3, competitive grant program provided ``competitive preference points'' for applicants serving at least one rural district, in an effort to encourage and support rural applicants. However, the department's lack of guidance and independent scorers' lack of understanding of rural areas still left authentically rural programs at a clear disadvantage. The Rural School & Community Trust highlighted in its report Taking Advantage that this ``rural preference'' instead had the effect of inducing

urban applicants to include minimal rural participation merely in order to gain the additional scoring points for primarily urban projects.

I am joined today by my colleague from West Virginia, Senator Rockefeller, in introducing the Office of Rural Education Policy Act. This bill will establish the Office of Rural Education Policy, housed at the Department of Education's Office of Elementary & Secondary Education. This office and its director will be tasked with coordinating the activities related to rural education and advising the Secretary on issues important to rural schools and districts. The legislation requires the department to consider the impact of proposed rules and regulations on rural education and to produce an annual report on the condition of rural education. The Office of Rural Education Policy will be tasked with establishing a clearinghouse for collecting and disseminating information related to the unique challenges of rural areas, as well as the innovative efforts under way in rural schools to tackle these challenges.

The strong list of supporters of this bill further solidifies the need for an Office of Rural Education Policy. We have received strong support from: American Association of Community Colleges, American Association of School Administrators, Alliance for Excellent Education, Association of Educational Service Agencies, Center for Rural Affairs, Coalition for Community Schools, Council for Opportunity in Education, Montana School Board Association, Montana State Superintendents Association, Montana Rural Education Association, National Association of State Boards of Education, National Association of Development Organizations, National Association of Elementary School Principals, National Association of Federally Impacted Schools, National Education Association, National Congress of American Indians, National Farmers Union, National Indian Education Association, National Rural Education Association, National Rural Education Advocacy Coalition, National School Board Association, Organizations Concerned about Rural Education, Public Education Network, Rural School and Community Trust, and Save the Children. I want to thank all the supporters of the bill, and want to particularly thank the efforts of the Rural School and Community Trust for its steadfast commitment to this proposal.

Mike Mansfield was right. ``Knowledge is essential for acceptance and understanding.'' I look forward to working with my colleagues here in the Senate to move this legislation, to bring about greater knowledge of rural schools and ensure they are both accepted and understood.

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

Mr. President, Mike Mansfield once said, ``Knowledge is essential for acceptance and understanding.''

This statement is all too true for the students and educators residing in rural areas. While rural education is becoming an increasingly large and important part of the U.S. public school system, the unique challenges and circumstances within these rural communities are often misunderstood or overlooked. According to the Digest of Education Statistics reported annually by the National Center for Education Statistics, the number of students attending rural schools increased by over 11 percent, from 10.5 million in 2004 to nearly 11.7 million by 2008. Rural students now comprise almost \1/4\ of the Nation's public school enrollment. And nearly one-third of all schools in the nation are located in rural areas.

Rural is also becoming increasingly diverse. According to NCES, the increase in rural enrollment between 2004 and 2009 was disproportionally among students of color. And in the 2007-2008 school year the national average rate of student poverty in rural school districts, as measured by the rate of participation in federally subsidized meals programs, was almost 40 percent.

Yet despite the significant percentage enrolled in rural schools, the importance of rural education is often obscured by the fact that rural students are, naturally, widely-dispersed, located in small, geographically isolated school districts. The size, diversity, and complexity of rural education support a greater policy focus on the unique challenges and solutions for rural education.

Montana is the fourth largest state by land mass, totaling over 147,000 square miles. More than half of Montana's 830 schools enroll less than 100 students. From Eureka to Ekalaka, from Scobey to Darby, these small schools dot the landscape, providing not only a learning environment but often a community center.

Montana's rural communities are doing an excellent job educating Montana's next generation. Overall, Montana graduation rates are higher than the national average. Montana students taking the National Assessment of Educational Progress, NAEP, in 2009 scored higher than the national average in both reading and math.

But despite the success of Montana's rural schools, these schools face a unique set of challenges that their urban-centric peers may not even comprehend. In 2004, the U.S. Government Accountability Office released a report highlighting the needs and distinctive challenges of rural schools and districts across this nation.

For example, rural schools report greater difficulties in recruiting and retaining qualified teachers, due to inability to offer competitive salaries, geographic isolation, and for some, severe weather. Rural districts often have fewer personnel. The district superintendent is often also the high school principal. He or she may also be the Title I coordinator, math curriculum specialist, and sometimes also the head of transportation services! In isolated areas, schools face challenges in providing professional development and training for teachers and principals. Small rural districts are often located long distances from other districts, towns, and universities, drastically reducing opportunities to partner or collaborate. Additionally, the long distances students must travel between school and home make it more difficult to participate in traditional remedial services, mentoring, and after school programs.

I commend the Secretary for efforts he has taken to try to address concerns of rural areas. However, these efforts have fallen short, and in some cases, even good intentions have created adverse consequences. Most recently, the Investing in Innovation, i3, competitive grant program provided ``competitive preference points'' for applicants serving at least one rural district, in an effort to encourage and support rural applicants. However, the department's lack of guidance and independent scorers' lack of understanding of rural areas still left authentically rural programs at a clear disadvantage. The Rural School & Community Trust highlighted in its report Taking Advantage that this ``rural preference'' instead had the effect of inducing

urban applicants to include minimal rural participation merely in order to gain the additional scoring points for primarily urban projects.

I am joined today by my colleague from West Virginia, Senator Rockefeller, in introducing the Office of Rural Education Policy Act. This bill will establish the Office of Rural Education Policy, housed at the Department of Education's Office of Elementary & Secondary Education. This office and its director will be tasked with coordinating the activities related to rural education and advising the Secretary on issues important to rural schools and districts. The legislation requires the department to consider the impact of proposed rules and regulations on rural education and to produce an annual report on the condition of rural education. The Office of Rural Education Policy will be tasked with establishing a clearinghouse for collecting and disseminating information related to the unique challenges of rural areas, as well as the innovative efforts under way in rural schools to tackle these challenges.

The strong list of supporters of this bill further solidifies the need for an Office of Rural Education Policy. We have received strong support from: American Association of Community Colleges, American Association of School Administrators, Alliance for Excellent Education, Association of Educational Service Agencies, Center for Rural Affairs, Coalition for Community Schools, Council for Opportunity in Education, Montana School Board Association, Montana State Superintendents Association, Montana Rural Education Association, National Association of State Boards of Education, National Association of Development Organizations, National Association of Elementary School Principals, National Association of Federally Impacted Schools, National Education Association, National Congress of American Indians, National Farmers Union, National Indian Education Association, National Rural Education Association, National Rural Education Advocacy Coalition, National School Board Association, Organizations Concerned about Rural Education, Public Education Network, Rural School and Community Trust, and Save the Children. I want to thank all the supporters of the bill, and want to particularly thank the efforts of the Rural School and Community Trust for its steadfast commitment to this proposal.

Mike Mansfield was right. ``Knowledge is essential for acceptance and understanding.'' I look forward to working with my colleagues here in the Senate to move this legislation, to bring about greater knowledge of rural schools and ensure they are both accepted and understood.

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

Mr. President, John D. Rockefeller once said, ``I do not think there is any other quality so essential to success of any kind as the quality of perseverance. It overcomes almost everything, even nature.''

The hunt for bin Laden seemed to battle against the force of nature itself. And the perseverance of those that hunted bin Laden--our brave troops, our intelligence officers, and countless other Americans--was essential to their success.

The brave Americans that hunted bin Laden battled a vast expanse of ungoverned territory across Afghanistan and Pakistan, central Asia's frigid mountains, endless villages in the most remote part of the globe. Their mission at times seemed impossible.

But the perseverance of America's bin Laden hunters helped them conquer these challenges: perseverance; hard work; quiet dedication to duty. So many Americans worked so hard for so long to make this possible. I am so grateful to all those that serve, these quiet professionals have made all Americans very, very proud.

Today, we must pause to reflect on what this means. We remember the suffering of the families who lost loved ones on 9/11. We remember the sacrifice by our troops serving in harm's way to keep us safe.

It is fitting that bin Laden lived long enough to witness the utter failure of the strategy he masterminded. From his hideout, he saw a peaceful revolution in Tunisia. He watched as millions of young Egyptians peacefully and proudly demanded change. He learned of peaceful protesters embracing democracy, refusing violent extremism in every corner of the Middle East--without bombs, without violence, using their intellect, their courage, and their pride, these young protesters took a path bin Laden had failed to imagine--a path of peaceful, democratic change. The future of the Arab world is now in their hands.

The success of these young democrats stands in stark contrast to the ideology of hate and violence that bin Laden dedicated his life to. How fitting it is that he saw this Arab spring with his own eyes; that he could witness such a thorough defeat to violent extremism.

We must work hard in the coming years to see that the young demonstrators in Tahrir square and across the Middle East succeed. Their success will erase the narrative that radical Islam seeks to write. These peaceful demonstrations must lead to change and violent extremism must continue to fail.

Looking forward, we face great challenges across the Middle East and Central Asia. Osama bin Laden's hideout location raises serious questions about our relationship with Pakistan.

Since 2002, the United States has provided over $18 billion in foreign assistance to Pakistan. In 2009, Congress authorized up to $1.5 billion a year for civilian assistance to Pakistan from 2010 through 2014. U.S. economic and military assistance to Pakistan was the highest of any other country in 2009 except Iraq and Afghanistan.

In spite of these massive investments, the U.S.-Pakistan relationship continues to fray. We seem to be near a breaking point. The Pew Research Center found that in 2010 the ``favorable rating'' of U.S. among Pakistanis hit 17 percent, the lowest opinion of the U.S. among any population on earth.

During a visit to Pakistan last year, I made it clear to President Zardari and General Kayani that Pakistan must do more to eliminate safe havens within their own borders. We cannot accept excuses. We need results.

Without progress in Pakistan, we cannot succeed in Afghanistan. American troops continue to serve bravely

under the most difficult conditions every day, without weekends or holidays, carrying heavy loads over mountain passes, hunting down the Taliban and protecting villages.

This July, the U.S. will begin to hand over security responsibilities to the Army and police force of Afghanistan. I urge the President to make this transition robust, orderly, and persistent until all of our troops come home. It is time for the Afghan government to step up and take responsibility for this mission. American troops should not be doing the work that Afghans should be doing for themselves.

Beyond Afghanistan and Pakistan, our world is rapidly changing. Popular movements are transforming the Middle East. Breathtaking Chinese growth rates are reshaping East Asia. New technology is bringing citizens across the globe closer together: to cooperate, and to compete.

Amid these these changes we are facing enormous challenges at home-- massive deficits, bitter partisanship, rising health care costs, high unemployment. We need to work together to make sure the 21st Century is the American century. We need to focus on improving education, rebuilding roads and bridges, and making the American economy the best place to do business in the world.

The death of Osama bin Laden marks a turning point in history. Today is indeed a great day for America. I salute the brave men and women who made this day possible. My thoughts are with the hundreds of Montanans serving our country overseas. May God Bless America and may He keep our brave troops safe.

Mr. President, today more than 47 million Americans rely on Medicare for their health care. For more than 45 years, seniors have had access to the affordable, dependable health care Medicare provides.

We all recognize the cost of health care. We know it is growing and growing too rapidly. The landmark health reform law we passed recently took bold steps to rein in costs, and I am eager to work with my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to further reduce health care costs, increase efficiency, and root out the fraud and waste.

Last week, the chairman of the House Budget Committee, Congressman Paul Ryan, proposed a plan that would end Medicare as we know it. Rather than providing affordable health care paid for by Medicare, as is the case today, under the Ryan plan, seniors would receive a voucher to purchase private health insurance--again, not health care benefits provided for under Medicare but, rather, receive a voucher to purchase private health insurance from private health insurance companies.

Unfortunately, this voucher would fall far short of covering health care costs for seniors. According to the independent Congressional Budget Office, under the Ryan plan, ``Most elderly people would pay more''--I might add, much more--``for their health care than they would pay under the current Medicare system.'' How much more? CBO says that under the Ryan plan, the average 65-year-old would have to pay $12,000 a year to receive the same level of benefits Medicare offers today-- $12,000 a year. That is more than double what a senior would have to pay under today's Medicare. So the Ryan plan would double the payments seniors have to make and the benefits would be reduced.

Under the Ryan plan, there would be no guaranteed benefits, which are provided under Medicare today. As a result, private insurance companies would dictate what care a senior received, ending the current doctor- patient relationship.

Our deficit, of course, is serious. It is very serious. It must be addressed. While we need to look for more ways to reduce our deficit, we need to do so in a balanced and fair way. For starters, we shouldn't balance the budget on the backs of seniors. We will not allow Medicare to be dismantled--not on our watch. Yesterday, Senator Bill Nelson and I introduced a sense-of-the-Senate resolution stating that ``Medicare should not be dismantled and turned into a voucher or premium-support program.''

Deficit reduction should not simply shift costs to seniors, and that is exactly what the vouchers in the Ryan budget would do. A voucher system does nothing to lower health care costs. It does not guarantee the benefits Medicare offers today. It does not provide access to affordable health care. Seniors deserve much better.

I listened closely to my colleague from Louisiana a few moments ago. Frankly, I am somewhat heartened. I heard from him that he wants to move forward and that he would, he said indirectly, vote to increase the debt limit if there is a credible plan to reduce deficits and our national debt. I think that is a proposal with which the vast majority of Members of this body agree. Of course, the proof is in the pudding. It is, what is that credible plan, what is that mechanism, what is that assurance that we are going to reduce the budget deficits prior to a vote to increase the debt limit?

It is very important that a vote to increase the debt limit occur without brinksmanship. We had far too much brinksmanship in the lead-up to the continuing resolution. It was just a matter of $2 billion or $3 billion in the last eleventh hour.

The vote to increase the debt limit is a far more important vote. The stakes are much, much higher. The dollar amount is much greater. The financial markets will be watching very closely. And we, as Members of Congress, working with the President, must find a way to get the debt limit increased but with assurance that we are going to get deficits down and the debt down in a credible way, in a proper period of time so we don't have to push up to that final moment, the final minute before the vote on the debt limit occurs.

As I listened to my colleague from Louisiana, I sensed that he wants to find some way--and I think we all do; that is our challenge; that is our charge over the next couple of months--find that mechanism, find that process that is credible, that makes sense, and that both sides can buy into, not knowing exactly what the final result will be but knowing we are starting down a road to get the budget

deficit under control in a balanced and fair way.

I do not mean to sound critical, but I don't think the Ryan budget proposal is balanced. I don't think it is fair. But I do think the vast majority of the Members of the Senate do want to find a fair and balanced solution, and it is up to us to find that before a vote on the debt limit occurs.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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