Floor Statements

Mr. President, today, the Children's Health Insurance Program turns 13. But instead of facing the difficulties of adolescence, CHIP is enjoying the advantages that come with being one of the most popular programs in the country.

I would like to take this moment to reflect on the history of CHIP and to think about the role that CHIP will play in the future.

Prior to 1997, kids of the working poor had nowhere to go to get health insurance. Their parents' employers didn't offer health insurance benefits, and the individual market offered only low-quality insurance options at unaffordable prices.

Without health insurance, kids couldn't see the doctor for a checkup, couldn't get a prescription for an earache, and couldn't get treatment for common chronic conditions like asthma. Unhealthy kids can't run and play, can't do well in school, and can't grow into healthy and productive adults.

In 1997, Congress took action to address this problem by establishing the Children's Health Insurance Program. And today, we celebrate 13 years of success--expanding high quality coverage to kids all across the country.

I would like to remind my colleagues of CHIP's history--its bipartisan roots and its tremendous success in achieving what we created the program to do: cover low-income, uninsured kids.

Congress enacted the Children's Health Insurance Program as a bipartisan compromise back in 1997, with leadership from Senator Rockefeller, Senator Hatch, and the late Senators Kennedy and Chafee. At that time, Members of Congress wanted to address the rising number of children without health insurance.

The Finance Committee reached a compromise that allowed States to set up Children's Health Insurance Programs that would meet their unique needs. CHIP is optional for States, but within just 2 years of its creation, all States decided to participate to address the health care needs of our country's most vulnerable children.

I am proud to have helped write and pass CHIP 13 years ago. It has been a tremendous success.

In its first decade, CHIP cut the number of uninsured children by more than a third. Today, more than 7\1/2\ million children get the doctor's visits and medicines they need to have a healthy childhood, enabling them to become healthy and productive adults.

After 10 years of success, CHIP came up for reauthorization in 2007. In the summer and fall of that year, Congress worked hard to pass a bipartisan reauthorization package. But President Bush vetoed it twice. Ultimately, we had to settle for an extension.

In January of 2009, with two of our former colleagues in the White House, I was thrilled to get started on a CHIP reauthorization bill as soon as possible. Finally, the stars had aligned--President Obama was looking forward to signing the CHIP reauthorization bill, and the Congress was prepared to act. We were finally able to deliver what Americans had asked for--reestablishing kids' coverage as a national priority.

President Obama signed the bill on February 4, 2009. The new law maintained coverage for all children in the program at that time and started on a path to reach more than 4 million additional uninsured, low-income kids.

We had a couple of goals in mind as we drafted the CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2009.

We kept CHIP focused on low-income kids. We prioritized coverage of the lowest-income kids, but without limiting State flexibility in designing CHIP programs. We set up parameters to transition adults out of CHIP and into Medicaid or other appropriate coverage. And we also encouraged States to improve their outreach practices and streamline their enrollment procedures in order to reach all eligible kids.

We maintained State flexibility. We gave States the option to cover legal immigrant children and pregnant women during their first 5 years in America and receive the corresponding Federal match. We also created a State option that allows States to designate CHIP funds to offer premium assistance, helping families afford private coverage offered by employers or other sources.

And we improved the quality of care. The CHIP Reauthorization Act launched a substantial new initiative to improve children's health quality. This initiative invested $45 million a year for 5 years to develop national core measures for children's health quality, improve data collection in CHIP and Medicaid, and promote the use of electronic health records.

The CHIP Reauthorization Act I helped to craft allowed us to cover as many uninsured low-income kids as possible. I made sure that we respected our budgetary limits, and made compromises in good faith with my Republican colleagues. In committee, further compromises were made which I hope strengthened the act even more.

The only disappointment that came out of the 2009 CHIP Reauthorization Act was that we weren't able to come to agreement with Senators Grassley and Hatch, two colleagues that worked tirelessly to reauthorize CHIP in 2007. But I'm proud to say that CHIP's bipartisan reputation has not been marred.

Senators on both sides of the aisle continue to support CHIP and have even used it as a model for other programs. And I have continued to work with Senator Grassley and all Senators on the Finance Committee overseeing the implementation of the CHIP Reauthorization Act.

A year and a half after enactment, more than half the States have taken advantage of the new coverage options in the CHIP Reauthorization Act, including 15 States that expanded income

eligibility levels for CHIP or Medicaid to cover more kids. States have also taken advantage of the enrollment simplification options--making it easier for kids to get enrolled and stay covered.

In health reform, we extended CHIP for an additional 2 years, ensuring that kids will have a stable source of coverage as we expand coverage to other groups. In 2015, Congress will revisit CHIP in a new context. CHIP has been instrumental in providing children with access to care where none existed before, but it may need to take on a different role as health reform is implemented.

Whatever happens in 2015, I am confident that CHIP will continue to be an important part of our health system. CHIP is tried and true, and things just keep getting better and better in the program. As we celebrate CHIP's 13th birthday, we can be proud of everything Congress has done to provide low-income kids with high quality, affordable coverage.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on August 5, 2010, at 9:30 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on August 5, 2010, at 10:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing entitled ``The Obama Administration Manufacturing Agenda.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on August 5, 2010, immediately following the 11:20 a.m. vote on the Senate floor, in the President's Room, S-216 of the Capitol.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on August 5, 2010, at 10:30 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate to conduct a business meeting on August 5, 2010 at 9:30 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on August 5, 2010, at 10 a.m., in SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct an executive business meeting.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on August 5, 2010, at 9:30 a.m. to conduct a markup on pending legislation. The Committee will meet in room 418 of the Russell Senate Office Building beginning at 9:30 a.m.

Mr. President, today I pay tribute to a great Montanan who led a remarkable life. Joe Reber was deeply involved in public service and the communities he called home in Montana; he passed away on July 23 at the age of 91. Joe lived life to the fullest and I feel lucky to have had him as a dear friend for so long.

Joe was born in Butte in 1919. He grew up in a working class family and is a great symbol of the Montana spirit of hard work and overcoming adversity. His first job as a youngster was selling newspapers on the street in Butte to help support his family. Although Joe never finished high school or went to college, he was a successful businessman and community leader whose experiences gave him many stories to tell over his 91 colorful years.

Joe served his country honorably during World War II. He volunteered in the Merchant Marine and the Coast Guard, serving as a staff officer in the Pacific theater.

Despite his humble upbringing in the Mining City, Joe became a successful entrepreneur. He started his own plumbing company in Helena, which he later expanded into electrical and general construction. He then went on to form the Reber Realty and Development Company and the Capitol Wholesale Plumbing Supply Company, among other businesses he owned. Even with all this success Joe never forgot his working class roots, growing up the son of a miner in Butte.

Joe was very active in public service on a local and national level. He served as treasurer for the Montana Democratic Party, was a State senator, was chairman of the Montana Board of Natural Resources, served on the State Board of Investments, and was a delegate to a United Nations World Food Program conference. One of his proudest accomplishments was passing legislation in the State legislature that created a vocational education program. Joe recognized the importance of education and knew how vital the program would be for economic development and to provide meaningful opportunities for young people across Montana.

Over the years Joe got to know and befriend some very important folks. He hosted John F. Kennedy at his Helena home during the 1960 Presidential campaign. He also accompanied Ted Kennedy at the Eastern Montana Fair in Miles City in 1960 where Ted took his famous ride on a bronc. He met many other Presidents, dignitaries, and celebrities along the way. These and many other stories are recounted in Joe's autobiography, ``The Paperboy,'' which he published in 2007.

Joe shared his experiences with his wife of 37 years, Rosalyn, who passed away in May. Today I send my heartfelt condolences to Joe's children--Joe, Bobbie, Dianna, Bryant, and Susie--and the entire Reber family for their loss. They can truly be proud of the life their father lived and take comfort in knowing that he helped so many others along the way.

I have always enjoyed visiting with Joe over the years and working with him on issues important to Montana. I will miss his friendship as will folks all across Big Sky country.

I object unless--it is off his time. Fine. I do not object.

Madam President, I know other Senators have risen before me, so I will be very brief. I will take a minute. The Senator from Washington is next. I thank her for her indulgence in letting me take 1 minute.

This is very clear: The American people want us in Congress to do their work. They want us to do something that is reasonable and makes sense. Most Americans are not way off on the left side, and they are not way off on the right side. They are basically in the middle and do a good job.

Most Americans would want us to help small businesses in a good way, in a solid way--maybe not in the exact way each American would want but in a good, solid way. This bill clearly does that. It does what the American people want.

Small businesses generate jobs. They are the small engine of growth. We need to help small businesses. This bill does that. It cuts taxes for small businesses. It gives lending authority for small businesses. There are many other provisions I do not have time to explain that help small businesses.

This is not some small Band-Aid bill. This is a bill that makes sense for small businesses. It provides certainty to small businesses. It helps them. We cannot solve all the world's problems in one bill, but we can certainly help small businesses in this bill.

I can say--and I am pleading, frankly, with a few Republican Senators who have not quite decided how they are going to vote on this cloture vote--this is a good bill, a solid bill, a start in the right direction. Let's pass it. Let's not get hung up on who said what to whom, caught up on debating points, and come across like kids in a sandbox. Let's pass this bill. It is a good bill. It is good for America.

We can deal with other issues, such as the expiring tax cuts, another time in the future. But right now this is small business. It is solid. It is getting done. It is going to help people. That is what people want us to do. They want us to do the right job. I urge us to pass this bill.

I yield 5 minutes to my good friend from Washington.

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

Mr. President, I ask the time be yielded back so we can proceed.

I ask unanimous consent Senator Landrieu be recognized to speak for up to 1 hour at 12:30 p.m. today and that the Republican leader or his designee then be recognized following Senator Landrieu.

Mr. President, the Senate once again has before it the small business jobs bill. We have created this bill to help move the economy toward recovery. We have crafted this bill to create jobs. We have crafted this bill to strengthen capital investment.

Over the course of the great recession, small business capital investment has fallen dramatically. Since 2005, the percentage of small businesses that made a capital outlay in the previous 6 months fell by nearly 30 percent. Capital investments are an integral part of getting the economy back on track. We need to make sure that businesses, and especially small businesses, have the opportunity to make these investments so they can improve and expand.

Our small business jobs bill includes two accelerated cost recovery provisions. These incentives would lower the cost of capital and they would help businesses to make capital investments. One accelerated cost recovery provision in this bill would increase the amount of capital investment that a business could expense under section 179 of the Tax Code. Section 179 is one of the most widely used tax benefits available to small businesses.

We all hear of this constantly from our small business constituents in our home States. This year business owners may purchase and write off up to $250,000 in equipment for use in their trade or business. This tax benefit phases out for expenditures between $250,000 and $800,000, but in 2011, under current law, the $250,000 threshold will decrease sharply to $25,000, and the $800,000 ceiling on the benefit will decrease to $200,000. The bill before us today would increase the thresholds to $500,000 and $2 million in 2010 and 2011.

Expensing is an important tool for small businesses because it is the most accelerated type of depreciation. With expensing, a business can deduct the complete cost of an asset such as equipment or software in the same year the business buys the asset. With expensing, businesses do not have to wait for years to recover these costs as they do through traditional forms of depreciation.

In this weak and uncertain economy, the ability to deduct the cost of assets in the same year provides an immediate benefit for businesses. These immediate benefits strengthen the investment practices of a business, and that strengthens the economy as a whole. An increase in the thresholds for section 179 expensing effectively decreases the cost of newly purchased equipment, and that makes it more economical for a business to invest. These investments can help a business grow with relatively simple acquisitions.

For example, a business could boost productivity by updating office technology. This provision will also increase cashflow for businesses, and businesses that invest in new equipment put money back into the larger economy with their purchases. Take, for example, Brown's Automotive in Billings, MT. Brown's Automotive specializes in transmission repairs. Those repairs require significant equipment investments, such as lifts and scanners. Business has been down lately as few people are able to afford expensive transmission repairs these days. When business is slow, purchases of heavy equipment can put a major strain on cashflow. But section 179 expensing and the 50 percent bonus depreciation extension in this bill make a huge difference for Brown's Automotive. Brown's can now write off a portion of the cost of new equipment, and that helps them maintain their cashflow and encourages them to make further capital investments.

Because of provisions like 179 expensing, Brown's has retained all 43 of its employees despite the recession.

This bill also allows taxpayers to expense up to $250,000 of certain real property within the newly expanded thresholds in 2010 and 2011. Currently, taxpayers can expense only tangible personal property. Tangible personal property includes things such as machines or equipment. Expanding section 179 expensing to include some real property greatly increases the value of this provision to small businesses. This provision means a business could expense the improvements to the property itself.

For example, a small business owner with a retail clothing store may expense improvements that were made inside the store, such as built-in cabinets to better stock clothing or lights to brighten the fitting rooms. Allowing a retail owner to expense these improvements immediately lowers the owner's costs, and ultimately this will help the retail store owner to run a better business. This expansion also applies to qualified restaurant property and qualified leasehold improvement property.

A second accelerated cost recovery provision in this bill is bonus depreciation. Bonus depreciation also helps Brown's Automotive and many other small businesses. This bill would extend bonus depreciation through the end of this year. This important provision would quickly spark investment, increase cashflow, and help to create jobs.

Bonus depreciation especially helps businesses that need to make large capital expenditures but that may not be able to take advantage of accelerated depreciation under section 179. Currently, businesses are allowed to recover the cost of capital expenditures over time. As a result of the great recession, Congress temporarily allowed businesses to recover the cost of certain capital expenditures more quickly by increasing the writeoff to 50 percent of the cost of property placed in service in 2008 and 2009.

This bill would extend the additional depreciation to property placed in service in 2010. This additional depreciation makes property more affordable. The business can use the savings it receives to reinvest in the business and to hire new employees. This provision benefits immediate investments that can strengthen the economy now. We do not have to wait to see the benefits of this important provision.

Bonus depreciation also helps the business that sells the equipment. It helps manufacturers and suppliers retain and hire employees as their businesses rebound. The more purchases that are made, the more other businesses are helped. This double benefit makes bonus depreciation a cost-effective way to strengthen business investment.

Section 179 expensing and bonus depreciation encourage investment and creates jobs. There is no doubt about it, and very significantly, I might add, with this bill, we can help put the American economy back on track.

This bill would provide continued support to our small businesses on the path to economic recovery. The bill increases access to much needed capital, encourages entrepreneurship, and promotes equity. The small business jobs bill includes incentives to strengthen capital investment.

I urge my colleagues to support the small business jobs bill. I might add that today we are working to reach an

agreement on consideration of amendments to this legislation. We hope we will have more to announce later as we reach that agreement. I very much hope that can be done very expeditiously so we get this bill passed and get the needed assistance to our small businesses.

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

Mr. President, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt once said:

The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people

tolerate growth of private power to a point where it becomes

stronger than their democratic state itself.

This statement is all too true, as we are faced with the Supreme Court's disappointing decision in Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission earlier this year. In a 5-to-4 ruling, the Supreme Court overturned years of congressional work to limit corporate spending and corruption in the political arena. As a result, corporations and labor unions are now free to spend unlimited dollars from their general funds to make independent expenditures at any time during an election cycle, including directly calling for the election or defeat of a candidate.

This ruling will have far-reaching implications for the electoral system on a Federal, State, and local level. In his well-reasoned dissent, Justice Stevens noted:

Lawmakers have a compelling constitutional basis, if not

also a democratic duty, to take measures designed to guard

against the potentially deleterious effects of corporate

spending in local and national races.

Over the years, Congress and State legislatures have done just that. In 2002, Congress found that without regulation, corporations spend money on political elections in extremely large amounts. Spending at those levels created a corrupting influence on legislative actions.

In response to what Justice Stevens called a ``virtual mountain of research'' on the potential for corruption within the election process, Congress passed the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, commonly known as McCain-Feingold. With an eye on prior Supreme Court rulings, Congress shaped McCain-Feingold to properly address concerns over evidence of corruption in the electoral system.

The Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United is bad for my State of Montana, it is bad for America. Montana history shows that corporations are eager to influence elections. As Montana attorney general Steve Bullock previously testified, during the turn of the century, wealthy copper kings of Montana's mining industry leveraged their corporate power to effectively buy elections.

In 1912, Montana voters spoke out, passing some of the strongest laws in the Nation prohibiting corporations from acting to influence Montana elections. The law has withstood the test of 98 years without failing. Yet, because of Citizens United, Montana's strong campaign finance laws are now also in jeopardy. In Montana, the ruling is likely to have a significant impact on State and local elections. The use of corporate money will drown out the voices of individual Montanans. The cost of advertising in Montana is very low. This, however, will make it easy for large out-of-State corporations to dominate Montana markets in an effort to sway Montana races.

When it comes to corporate spending, we are talking about a significant amount of money. Let's look at what corporate America is spending on political advertising. In 2008, the automotive industry spent over $30 billion in advertising. Just in the first quarter of this year, Wall Street firms spent $2 billion. The tobacco industry averages $12 billion in advertising nationwide each year. That is political advertising. When you start adding up these numbers, you start to get a sense of the magnitude of the impact Citizens United can have on our electoral process. Corporations will now have free rein to spend this kind of money to now call for the election or opposition of specific candidates, Federal, State, or local.

The impact of Citizens United goes well beyond merely changing campaign finance law. This decision will impact the ability of Congress, as well as State and local legislatures, to pass laws designed to protect its constituents--individual Americans--when such legislation comes under fierce objection by large corporations. Corporations are now free to spend millions targeting individual lawmakers. Lawmakers' ability to pass laws such as consumer safety or investor protection now faces even greater challenges when such laws merely threaten the corporate bottom line.

Congress and the American people must respond swiftly and firmly. The Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United has severely altered Congress's ability to limit corporate spending in our electoral process.

I support legislative efforts such as those to enhance disclosure and increase shareholder say on corporate campaign spending, and I commend my friend from New York, Senator Schumer, for his efforts on this front. However, it is clear that the surest way to address the Supreme Court's disappointing decisions is a constitutional amendment that will clarify Congress's authority to regulate corporate political spending.

The resolution I am introducing today proposes a constitutional amendment that will restore Congress's authority to regulate political expenditures by corporations and labor organizations in support or in opposition to Federal candidates. It also preserves Congress's ability to regulate political contributions to these candidates.

Similarly, this amendment provides States with the authority to regulate political contributions and expenditures in a way that works best for each State. This amendment does not modify the first amendment at all, and the language specifies that this does not affect freedom of the press in any way.

The Framers provided a series of steps required to amend the Constitution, and this process should not be taken lightly. This resolution requires the support of a two-thirds majority of the Senate and the House and subsequent ratification by three-quarters of the States. I recognize the challenges of that process, but I believe this is a discussion and debate that Congress and the American people should have.

We must act. We must act now to restore Americans' faith in our political electoral process. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. President, this afternoon, the Senate returns once again to the small business jobs bill. This bill would help steer our economy toward recovery. It would create jobs. It would do so by fostering creativity and ambition of the American entrepreneur.

Some of America's greatest firms were born in the midst of an economic crisis. In 1976, the U.S. economy was reeling from recession. America's unemployment hovered around 8 percent. That year, two guys named Steve started selling computer kits out of a garage in Palo Alto, CA. They founded a small business. An angel investor helped them with $250,000 in seed money. Today, we know that business as Apple. Last month, Apple became the largest technology company in the world.

It is not an unusual story. It is a story told again and again in America. Of the 30 companies that make up the Dow Jones Industrial Average, 16 were started during a recession or depression. Procter & Gamble, Disney, McDonald's, Microsoft, General Electric, Johnson & Johnson, and Costco all first opened their doors during economic downturns.

To foster entrepreneurship and create this recession's success stories we need to create the right conditions. This small business jobs bill will help do just that. American entrepreneurs of all kinds are a key driver of job creation.

Take, for example, Tiffany Lach. Eighteen months ago, Tiffany opened Sola Cafe in downtown Bozeman, MT, with the help of a Small Business Administration loan. When she opened her doors, she had 19 employees. Today she has 42 employees and loads of loyal customers. We need to support entrepreneurs so that small businesses, such as Tiffany's, can continue to grow and create more jobs.

According to a recent report, nearly all net job creation in America from 1980 to 2005 occurred in firms fewer than 5 years old. In fact, without startups, net job creation would have been negative almost every year for the past three decades. In 2007, more than two-thirds of the jobs created were firms between 1 and 5 years old.

As our economy emerges from the great recession, we need to ensure that American entrepreneurs have the resources, the financing, and the opportunities they need to create jobs and realize their dreams. This small business jobs bill will help American entrepreneurs gain access to the capital they need, especially by increasing the incentives for investors to purchase and hold equity in startups.

Under this bill, for the rest of 2010, any investor who invested in a small business and held that investment for at least 5 years would pay no income tax on the gains from the sale of that small business stock. The bill would also reward entrepreneurship by doubling the amount of startup expenses that an entrepreneur could immediately deduct this year. The bill would increase the amount from $5,000 to $10,000. This would free up capital that could be used to invest in other aspects of the business.

This bill will devote more than $5 million to the U.S. Trade Representative to expand opportunities for U.S. small businesses in foreign markets. This would help American goods and services to reach new customers around the world. This would create jobs right here in America. This would help the USTR to enforce our trade agreements to ensure that American startups can compete on a level playing field.

So I urge my colleagues to support this bill. Let's work hard to work out agreements so we can take it up and pass it. Let's do so to help America's entrepreneurs. Let's pass this bill to encourage the development of new American small businesses. Let's pass this bill to create jobs right here in America.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kaufman.) The Senator from Wyoming.

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

Madam President, today the Senate considers extension of economic sanctions against the Burmese regime. The Senate should pass this resolution.

Aung San Suu Kyi, the Nobel Peace Prize winner and democracy leader in Burma, said ``the people in Burma are like prisoners in their own country.''

Dr. Suu Kyi, herself, remains, quite literally, a prisoner. The Burmese regime has kept her under house arrest on trumped up charges for 14 of the last 20 years.

She persists in her dream of freedom and democracy for Burma. By extending economic sanctions against the Burmese regime, we hope to make that dream a reality.

The Burmese regime seems intent on keeping its people in chains. According to the State Department, the regime continues to conscript children into the military and engage them in forced labor. It continues to violate freedoms of expression, assembly, association, movement, and religion. It continues to use murder, abduction, rape, and torture against its opponents.

I have often questioned whether unilateral trade sanctions are the best path. But several trading partners--including the European Union, Canada, and Australia--have joined us in imposing sanctions against Burma. The State Department has found that these sanctions have made it more difficult and costly for the Burmese regime to profit from imprisoning its people.

Let us stand with the Burmese people. Let us seek to free them from their captivity, and let us renew these sanctions.

I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan resolution.

I yield such time as the Senator from California may use.

Madam President, we are going to vote momentarily. In the meantime, I thank the Senator from California for her steadfast support to the cause of justice and for supporting this resolution and taking up the cause of Aung San Suu Kyi. I don't know of anybody else in this body--and Senator McConnell has been forthright in his support, but I want people to know how strongly the Senator from California has been an advocate for Aung San Suu Kyi, and I deeply appreciate it.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that all time be yielded back, both minority and majority.

I ask for the yeas and nays on the joint resolution.

Mr. President, at 2:30 this afternoon, the Senate will vote again on unemployment insurance. This bill is about jobs. This bill is about compassion. This bill would extend unemployment insurance for people who have lost their jobs.

This bill is about jobs because unemployment insurance goes to people who spend it immediately. That would increase economic demand, and that would help support our fragile economic recovery. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says that additional unemployment benefits would have one of the largest effects on economic output and employment per dollar spent compared with any other policy. A fancy term is the ``multiplier effect.'' Dollars spent on unemployment benefits have a much greater effect on the economy, a bigger bang for the buck than almost any other dollar expended by the Federal Government. It stimulates the economy. Unemployment benefits stimulate the economy, and clearly it helps the people who have lost their jobs. Of the 11 policies CBO analyzed, the Congressional Budget Office ranked increasing aid to the unemployed first. It is No. 1. CBO says it will create the most jobs per dollar of budgetary cost.

As I mentioned, this vote is really about compassion. As of this week, more than 2.5 million out-of-work Americans have stopped receiving unemployment insurance benefits because Congress has failed to enact this bill. That is more than 2.5 million people who are not getting a paycheck to pay the bills. That is more than 2.5 million Americans who are not getting any help from unemployment insurance to tide them over. These 2.5 million Americans are trying to get work. But there are still five people looking for work for every job opening-- five looking for every job available. They need to get help until they can find that job.

A woman from Helena, MT--the town I was born in--called my office and told us that unemployment benefits are keeping her family afloat. She was laid off when she was 8 months pregnant. She wants the Senate to know she has worked since she was a teenager. She wants to work. And she will work again.

For these 2.5 million Americans, this bill is about the roof over their heads. For these 2.5 million Americans, this bill is about keeping the electricity on. For these 2.5 million Americans, this bill is about food on the table. It is that simple. It is that important.

A Montana father with three small children was laid off after 18 years of service because the company could no longer pay his wages. Now he has no income. But he continues to look for work. His home is going into foreclosure. Unemployment insurance has been his only income. It is what puts food on the table for his family.

This is America. When there is an emergency, we in America do not leave people behind. Let's not leave the unemployed behind. We have stripped this measure down to the bare essentials. We simply must pass this bill. This afternoon, I urge my colleagues to vote for cloture and move this important bill.

Mr. President, this week the Senate also returns to the small business jobs bill. Small businesses are central to our efforts to create jobs. Unemployment insurance helps people who are out of work. We want to help create the jobs so people can get the work.

Small businesses employ half of America's private sector workforce. In my home State of Montana, small businesses employ more than 90 percent of all private sector employees. Over the past 15 years, small businesses have created two-thirds of Americans' new jobs. That is about 12 million new jobs.

Historically, during recessions, small businesses bear the brunt of employment losses. The great recession has been no exception. Over the course of the great recession, small firms have accounted for between 64 percent and 80 percent of net job losses. Plainly, to create jobs, we need to find ways to help small businesses.

Small businesses continue to face significant obstacles to expanding and hiring. One of the biggest obstacles is getting capital. A recent study by the National Federation of Independent Business found that only half of small businesses trying to borrow are able to get the capital they need. Nearly a quarter are not able to get any credit at all. Compare that to 2005. Five years ago, 90 percent of small businesses were able to get the capital they needed, and only 8 percent were not able to get any credit at all--a big change.

Small business lending has dropped. From the second quarter of 2008 to the third quarter of 2009, small business borrowing fell by more than $20 billion. A number of factors have contributed to this decline. Banks have tightened lending standards and terms for new credit. Banks have reduced risky assets to improve their capital positions. Falling real estate values have limited the ability of small business owners to use their own assets to guarantee or collateralize loans. And credit card terms have also worsened.

Over the course of the great recession, small businesses in my home State of Montana have faced many of these obstacles. For example, Grains of Montana--that is a restaurant and bakery based in Billings-- had trouble finalizing the terms of its SBA loan. This delayed the expansion of their bakery. And when a potential franchisee in Arizona was unable to secure funding, the deal fell through. Companies such as Grains of Montana need to get capital to grow and to hire new employees. We must act to get credit flowing. We must increase access to capital so small employers can begin hiring again. That is exactly what the small business jobs bill would do.

The small business jobs bill includes a provision that would completely eliminate the tax on the sale of certain small business stock purchased from the date of this bill's enactment through to the end of 2010 and held for 5 years. This proposal would provide a powerful incentive to invest in small entrepreneurial firms right now.

The bill also includes a provision for certain small businesses that expands the carryback period for general business credits determined this year from 1 year to 5 years, and our bill allows these general business credits against the alternative minimum tax.

Another provision would temporarily shorten the holding period required after a C corporation converts to an S corporation in order to avoid triggering a gain on assets. This provision would allow small businesses to increase their liquidity by selling assets that would otherwise be subject to an additional layer of tax.

All of these provisions free up business capital for expansion and job growth. In past recessions, small firms were the first to begin hiring again. We must ensure that this trend continues as we recover from the great recession. We can achieve this by helping small businesses get the capital they need.

I urge my colleagues to support the small business jobs bill.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following members of my staff be given floor privileges during the consideration of the small business jobs bill: Jamie Bedwell, Drew Colling, Emily Freeman, Chris Goble, Michael Grant, Nicole Marchman, Lindsay Novis, and Jim Zadick.

Mr. President, today I recognize the exemplary work of Allen Smith, Jr., of Helena, MT. This week, Al will be awarded the American Association for Justice Partnership Award in recognition for his work as the executive director of the Montana Trial Lawyers Association. I commend Al for all his work on behalf of the justice system and Montana's strong network of legal advocates.

The mission of the American Association of Justice is ``to promote a fair and effective justice system--and to support the work of attorneys in their efforts to ensure that any person who is injured by the misconduct or negligence of others can obtain justice in America's courtrooms, even when taking on the most powerful interests.'' I can think of no one that reflects this mission more than Al Smith.

Since joining the team at the Montana Trial Lawyers Association in 1997, Al has shown a commitment to promoting justice and fairness in our

country's legal system. His desire to serve MTLA comes from his respect for its members who, each day, work for justice by holding governments, corporations, and other powers accountable to individuals. As MTLA president Sydney McKenna wrote last year, ``[Al] articulate[s] in a compelling way why the courts are necessary, that causes and damages are part of justice, and that justice matters.''

During the past 13 years serving as the executive director of the Montana Association, Al has worked hard to represent the bar in both State and Federal matters. I have had the privilege of working with Al on a number of Federal initiatives and have always appreciated Al's thoughts on how Federal legislation could impact the rights of individuals in the legal system.

Al also serves on the boards of directors for the National Association of Trial Lawyer Executives and A.W.A.R.E., a private, nonprofit organization providing quality, community-based services for persons with disabilities. Al served as the executive director and attorney for the Montana Advocacy Program, which works to protect and advocate for the human, legal, and civil rights of Montanans with disabilities. In 2009, Al was awarded the Montana Trial Lawyers Associations Public Service Award. Al received the Annual Award for Advocacy from the National Association for Rights Protection and Advocacy in 1991. He received his bachelor's in political science from Montana State University and his juris doctor from the Hastings College of the Law at the University of California.

As a lifelong Montanan, Al has a deep appreciation for the State and all it has to offer. In his spare time, Al enjoys to hunt, fish, kayak, and climb Montana's beautiful mountains. Al is married to Marilyn, who was born and raised in Anaconda, and together they have two children-- daughter Kait and son Ben.

I again congratulate Al for his recognition by the American Association for Justice.

Mr. President, Winston Churchill once said:

A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an

optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.

The great recession has been a difficulty, to say the least.

Today we are looking for the opportunity.

One opportunity--and our first priority--is to create new jobs.

This is no easy task. Over the course of the great recession, more than 8 million jobs have been lost. But we must not shy away from this opportunity.

The first step Congress took to create jobs was to pass the Recovery Act in February of 2009. In their latest report on the Recovery Act, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reports that the Recovery Act has added 1.2 to 2.8 million people to America's payrolls.

And in March, Congress passed the HIRE Act. The HIRE Act includes a payroll tax exemption for new hires. That act will help to bolster job creation in the coming months.

These actions are working. In April, we learned that the economy added 290,000 jobs. And while we added fewer jobs than expected last month, May marked the fifth consecutive month of job growth. Since the beginning of 2010, the American economy has created more than half a million jobs.

We are also beginning to see economic growth. Just a year ago, in the first quarter of 2009, the economy was shrinking at a rate of 6.4 percent. In the first quarter of this year, however, the economy grew at a rate of 3.2 percent.

This was the third consecutive quarter of growth after four straight quarters of decline.

In just 1 year, the economy went from freefall to sustained growth.

These signs are encouraging. But we still have work to do.

Mr. President, 15 million Americans remain unemployed. The national unemployment rate is still near 10 percent. The Congressional Budget Office does not expect unemployment to reach its ``natural state'' of 5 percent until 2016.

Plainly, we must act. We must work to create jobs.

In America, the private sector is the backbone of innovation and job creation. And within the private sector, small businesses are the principal engine of job creation.

Over the past 15 years, small businesses have generated two-thirds of all new jobs. That is about 12 million new jobs.

But the great recession hit small business especially hard. Over the course of the recession, small firms have accounted for 64 percent of net job losses.

We need to focus on small business, as we seek to create jobs. When we help small businesses, we help to get Americans back to work.

The first way that we can help small business is by promoting access to capital.

Today, only half of small businesses seeking a loan are able to get the credit that they need, and nearly a quarter receive no credit at all.

Compare this to 2005, when 90 percent of small employers had their credit needs met, and only 8 percent were unable to receive credit at all.

It is clear that small businesses are facing major obstacles to getting capital.

That is why our small business bill includes a provision to completely eliminate the tax on the sale of certain small business stock purchased this year. This proposal would provide a powerful incentive to invest in small, entrepreneurial firms, right now.

We have also included a provision that would allow small businesses to carry back for 5 years their unused general business tax credits from this year. That is quite a bit. Current law is 1 year.

And we have included another provision that would allow certain small businesses to use these general business credits against the alternative minimum tax. These provisions would free up business capital for expansion and job growth.

And another provision would temporarily shorten the holding period of assets after a C corporation converts to an S corporation. This provision would allow small businesses to increase liquidity by selling assets that would otherwise be subject to an additional layer of tax.

We can also help small businesses by stimulating investment. Small businesses need to make capital investments to improve and expand.

One way to boost investment in equipment is by increasing the amount and types of property that small businesses can write off immediately, rather than expense over time. In this weak economy, the ability to deduct the costs of assets in the year that they are incurred provides an immediate benefit for small businesses.

Our bill also includes an extension of bonus depreciation. This provision would help small businesses that purchase equipment to write off those purchases more quickly. The proposal would also help the businesses that sell the equipment. Bonus depreciation sparks investment, increases cash flows, and creates jobs.

Our small business bill also includes two provisions to promote fairness and protect small businesses from costs that could slow business growth and development.

First, the act modifies the penalties for small businesses that unknowingly

invest in something that the IRS considers to be a tax shelter. Businesses can be subject to penalties of up to $300,000 for investing in a tax shelter. A penalty that large can severely jeopardize the success of a small business. Our bill would limit the penalty in relation to size of the investment.

Our bill also promotes fairness by allowing business owners to deduct against self-employment tax the cost of health insurance in 2010 for themselves and their family members. Current law does not permit the self-employed to deduct the cost of health insurance for themselves and their family members in calculating self-employment tax. But health care for employees receiving coverage through an employer is generally tax free. So our bill would put the self-employed on a more equal footing.

Our small business bill includes provisions aimed at promoting entrepreneurship. According to a recent report, from 1980 to 2005, nearly all net job creation occurred in firms less than 5 years old. In fact, without startups, net job creation would have been negative almost every year for the past three decades.

As our economy emerges from the great recession, we need to ensure that American entrepreneurs have the resources, the financing, and the opportunities they need to create jobs and realize their dreams. Our bill would help promote entrepreneurship by temporarily increasing the amount of startup costs that could be deducted. This would free capital that could be used to invest in other aspects of business.

Our bill would devote more than $5 million to the U.S. Trade Representative to expand opportunities for U.S. small businesses in foreign markets. This would help American goods and services to reach new customers around the world, this would create jobs right here at home, and this would help the USTR to enforce our trade agreements to ensure American startups can compete on a level playing field.

Our bill is all paid for. No deficit spending here--all paid for. Our bill would reduce the tax gap, promote retirement preparation, and close tax loopholes.

Today, we must find opportunity in a difficulty. The great recession has been a major difficulty for American workers and small businesses, but we can seize a major opportunity by helping small businesses and getting Americans back to work.

I urge my colleagues to support this important small business jobs bill.

National Flood Insurance Program

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

Mr. President, the Senator from Nevada, Mr. Ensign, spoke a few moments ago about the amendment we hope we can consider shortly, the Kerry-Ensign amendment on cell phones. That amendment deals with when an employer gives a cell phone to an employee. The question is, Is that compensation to the employee or is that an investment by the employer? Under current law, the IRS expects taxpayers to document how much they use the company's cell phone for business and how much they use it for personal use. I think most people don't keep these records. Frankly, most of my colleagues don't believe they should have to. This amendment says businesses should not have to bear this onerous recordkeeping burden anymore. It is a commonsense amendment. It has broad bipartisan support. I urge colleagues to support it at the appropriate time.

I yield the floor.