Floor Statements

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

Mr. President, our country is unique in the world because it was established on the basis of an idea, an idea that we were all endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights--in other words, rights that were conferred not by a king or a President or a Congress, but by the Creator himself. The State protects these rights but it does not grant them. What the State does not grant the State cannot take away. That is what this week's debate on a particularly odious outcome from the President's health care law has been about.

Our Founders believed so strongly that the government should neither establish a religion nor prevent its free exercise that they listed it as the very first item in the Bill of Rights, and Republicans are trying today to reaffirm that basic right. But apparently our friends on the other side do not want to have this amendment or debate. They will not allow those of us who were sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution to even offer an amendment that says we believe in our first amendment right to religious freedom.

Frankly, this is a day I was not inclined to think I would ever see. I have spent a lot of time in my life defending the first amendment but I never thought I would see the day when the elected representatives of the people of this country would be blocked by a majority party in Congress to even express their support for it, regardless of the ultimate outcome.

I yield the floor.

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

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I want to make a couple of observations this morning about the bipartisan support that exists for extending a payroll tax holiday. I will start with the obvious: Republicans strongly support extending this tax cut for the rest of the year. Americans have suffered long enough as a result of this President's economic policies. They do not need to suffer more because of his failure to turn the economy around 3 years into his administration.

But the fact is any solution requires both sides to engage in good- faith negotiations. When my friend, the majority leader of the Senate, comes to the floor and says that Republicans in Congress are only willing to extend this tax cut if they are allowed to poison Americans' drinking water, then I think it is pretty safe to say it is time for fewer partisan attacks and more efforts to finish the job.

When a tax hike that has been rejected repeatedly by Members of both parties over the past year is the opening bid in a negotiation, I think it is safe to say that Democrats are more interested in scoring political points than in scoring a tax cut that millions of middle- class Americans are counting on.

When the majority leader of the Senate suddenly announces he is working on a proposal of his own to extend this tax cut, even as the conference committee is in the midst of negotiating a bipartisan solution that everybody can support, I think it is pretty obvious where the problem lies. It is with the Democratic majority and a President who we thought were elected to lead.

I think most Americans would expect that at a moment such as this, when a solution to a pressing problem is sought, the majority party bears the responsibility to find it. It is worth noting that in the House, the majority party did its work and passed a 1-year extension. Yet all we get from the Democratic majority in the Senate are exaggerated claims, ad hominem attacks, and false accusations aimed at delaying a solution rather than achieving one.

So I would remind my friend the majority leader that the particular piece of legislation he railed against yesterday as an effort to poison people has broad bipartisan support, including 12 Democratic cosponsors here in the Senate--and rightly so in the midst of a jobs crisis. We should seize every opportunity we have to help job creators at a time when more than 13 million Americans are looking for work and can't find it.

The only thing controversial about this proposal--the only thing controversial about this proposal--is the idea of opposing it.

I would also remind the majority leader that the Federal pay freeze received more than 300 votes in the House, and that he himself already agreed to spending cuts during negotiations this past fall that would cover the cost of extending this payroll tax cut for the remainder of the year.

So let us allow the conferees to finish their work and get this payroll tax cut extended for the rest of the year. That is what Republicans want. That is what the President says he wants. And there is no reason we shouldn't be able to get this done. The Democratic majority of the Senate should be leading that effort, not rooting for its failure.

I yield the floor.

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

Madam President, throughout my Senate career I have spent a lot of time defending the first amendment. Most of it I spent defending one particular clause of that amendment, the one relating to the right of free speech, but recent events have shown quite unexpectedly the urgent need to defend another clause in the first amendment. I am referring, of course, to the right of free exercise of religion.

Make no mistake, the Obama administration's decision to force religious hospitals, charities, and schools to comply with a mandate that violates their religious views is abhorrent to the foundational principles of our Nation. No one in the United States--no one--should ever be compelled by their government to choose between violating their religious beliefs and being penalized for refusing. Yet that is precisely what this mandate would do.

One out of six patients in America is treated at a Catholic hospital. Catholic Charities is the largest provider of social services to poor children, families, and individuals in America. The Catholic Church runs the largest network of private schools in this country. These institutions have thrived because they have been allowed to freely pursue their religious convictions in a country that, until now, respected their constitutional right to do so. But this ruling should send a chill up the spine of people of all religious faiths and even of those with no faith at all because if the state--in this case, the Federal Government--is allowed to violate the religious rights of one religion, then surely it can violate those of others. If the rights of some are not protected, the rights of all are in danger. Isn't that what history clearly teaches? Isn't that what the Constitution is all about?

The Obama administration has crossed a dangerous line. The Founders knew that the right of religious belief is inviolable. They gave this God-given right the pride of place they knew it deserved, right there in the first amendment, so that Americans would never have to fear its loss. Unfortunately, because of the actions of this administration, Americans now do.

This is a huge mistake that I hope the administration is currently reconsidering, and if they do not, Congress will act. The first amendment rights of the American people must be protected. Those of us who recognize the fundamental importance of religious freedom to our Nation will see to it that it is respected by this government and restored in full.

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

Madam President, today I rise to mourn the loss of a great American veteran and a musical legend in Kentucky's own signature genre, bluegrass.

Mr. Kenny Baker of Letcher County passed away in July of 2011. He was 85 years old. Although Mr. Baker is no longer with us, his monumental contribution to the musical world will remain for many years to come.

Mr. Baker was most widely known for his innovative style of fiddle playing that many have referred to as ``long bow fiddling.'' He would use every inch of the bow, from tip to tip, to produce a sound unlike any other in the world of bluegrass music. Mr. Baker picked up the fiddle at the young age of 5 years old and went on to write an astonishing 92 musical numbers throughout his lifetime.

He enlisted in the U.S. Navy during World War II and was assigned to a destroyer escort ship in the Pacific theater. But once the Navy learned of his musical ability, he was quickly transferred from his station to entertain troops in the South Pacific. After honorable service to his country in the Armed Forces, Mr. Baker returned to Letcher County and found work in the coal industry of eastern Kentucky but his musical journey was far from over.

Kenny Baker started playing the fiddle professionally in 1953 and played in the company of musical greats such as Don Gibson, Bobby Osborne, Josh Graves, and famous bluegrass innovator Bill Monroe. After taking a few years to get acquainted with the world of the music industry, he finally settled down and found a permanent home in the band Monroe's Blue Grass Boys.

On Mr. Baker's extensive musical journey, he regularly played at the Grand Ole Opry, recorded hit albums, played numerous concerts, and even had the distinct honor to play the fiddle for President Jimmy Carter at the White House. However, his greatest achievement came when he was named to the International Bluegrass Music Hall of Honor in 1999.

Mr. Baker spent his final years teaching children the value and importance of music in their lives. His generosity and love for music and music education will be greatly missed, not only by his wife Audrey Baker; his sons, Johnny Lee and Kenneth Junior; and many other beloved family members and friends, but also by generations of fans and fans to come of bluegrass music, as well as the residents of the great Commonwealth of Kentucky.

So, Mr. President, I would like to ask that my Senate colleagues join me in honoring Mr. Kenny Baker not only for his service to our country but also for his great contributions to the creative field of music. The Lexington Herald-Leader recently published an article recognizing Mr. Baker's incredible life. I ask unanimous consent that the full article be printed in the Record.

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

Mr. President, I think it is pretty clear at this point that there is broad bipartisan support for legislation that provides greater transparency in Congress. The more important question at this point is whether the executive branch is willing to play by the same rules. I mean, I think a lot of people out there want to know why a venture capitalist who raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for the President, only to end up overseeing the administration's green energy loan program, should not be held to the same high standard as others. Shouldn't the President's Chief of Staff be held to the same standard as a legislative director to a freshman Senator?

Let's be honest, people are equally, if not more, concerned about the kind of cronyism they keep reading about over at the White House and within the executive branch agencies such as the Department of Energy that it controls. There is no question that Congress should be held to a high standard, but if we are going to pass new standards here, the same standards should apply to the White House and to the executive agencies that spend hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money at the President's direction.

That leads to a larger point, which is this: As long as the White House and the agencies it controls continue to play favorites, this economy will never fully recover and the playing field won't ever be level. As long as Washington has this much say over the direction of the economy, people won't ever feel they are getting a fair shake. So, yes, let's hold Congress to a high standard, but the White House must be held to the very same standard.

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

Mr. President, later this morning President Obama is scheduled to speak in Virginia on the economy. I have not seen the speech, but I expect he will not be talking about the negative impact his health care bill is already having on job creation, and I guarantee he will not be talking about one provision in particular, the CLASS Act, which the House of Representatives is voting to repeal today.

Like so many of his policies, the CLASS Act has not turned out the way the American people were told it would. At the time of its passage, Americans were told it would be a long-term care cost saver. Proponents of the CLASS Act said it would account for nearly half of the deficit reduction they claimed the health care bill would somehow miraculously bring about.

More recently, however, the administration has admitted that government officials knew their projections about the CLASS Act could not possibly be true. They knew it would not work as advertised. Yet the Obama administration went ahead with it anyway.

In 2009, the Chief Medicare Actuary wrote that, based on his 36 years of actuarial experience, he believed the CLASS Act would ``collapse in short order, and require significant Federal subsidies to continue'' and that it would lead to what he called an insurance death spiral since only the sickest people would sign up, making it impossible for the program to remain solvent. Another health care policy official said that the program ``seemed like a recipe for disaster.''

So last October the Obama administration was finally forced to admit what they refused to admit when the health care bill first passed: that the CLASS Act was indeed unsustainable. As HHS Secretary Sebelius put it, there is no viable path forward for the program. Yet for some reason the President is unwilling to follow through on that conclusion by his own administration. He opposes today's vote over in the House.

Most people would conclude that the administration would support repealing a portion of the health care bill that they now acknowledge is not financially viable, but they would be wrong. Despite admitting this program is doomed to fail, the Obama administration refuses to take it off the books. This refusal is all the more remarkable given the fact that President Obama has repeatedly said he is willing to listen to critics of his health care bill if they come up with ways to improve it. When it comes to the CLASS Act, the President does not even appear to be willing to listen to himself.

Well, it should be obvious what is going on here. The President is so determined to distract people from his own legislative record that he does not even want to have a conversation about it. He is so determined to convince people that the ongoing economic crisis is someone else's fault that he is acting as though the first 3 years of his Presidency never even happened. He refuses to admit the central role his policies have played in prolonging the economic mess we are in. Instead of leading, the President is biding his time, hoping the public will blame someone else for the jobs crisis. Instead of acknowledging the effects of his own policies, he is hoping he can change the subject. The problem is, the longer we wait to tackle these problems, the harder they will be to solve. And, frankly, most Americans think the President should be leading that charge, not avoiding it.

In 2009, President Obama said that rising health care costs were the most pressing fiscal challenge we faced as a nation. Yesterday, the Congressional Budget Office said government health care costs will double over the next decade. So the verdict is in. The administration looked at an area that both parties agree was in critical need of reform, and they made it worse, and now they will not even admit it. Why? Because it interferes with the President's reelection strategy. If it is about him or his policies, he does not want to talk about it. And when it comes to the CLASS Act, it is easy to see why.

So I would encourage our friends over in the House in their efforts today. I hope they send this bill over to the Senate with a strong bipartisan vote. If the President will not listen to his own advisers, let's hope he listens to Congress on the failures of his health care bill and in particular the failures of the CLASS Act.

If we are going to replace the President's health care bill with the kind of commonsense reform that the American people want, repealing the CLASS Act is a good place to start. As the House is showing today, if the President refuses to act on this important issue, Congress will.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise to send my best wishes and gratitude to a good friend of mine and a loyal public servant to the people of

Kentucky for many years, Ms. Phyllis Causey. After nearly 2 decades working for the Representative from Kentucky's 2nd Congressional District--first Congressman Ron Lewis, then Congressman Brett Guthrie-- she has chosen to embark on a well-earned retirement.

As a field representative for Congressmen Guthrie and Lewis, she has made a huge impact on the lives of countless Kentuckians. Her dedication and hard work has set a standard for all who enter public service. She made many friends across the Commonwealth in her 18 years as a House staffer, and I am proud to be one of them.

Phyllis graduated from Hopkinsville Community College in 1970 and earned her bachelor's degree at Western Kentucky University in 1972. She also worked for Western Kentucky University for 23 years.

Before going to work for Kentucky's Second District, Phyllis was the vice chairwoman of the Warren County Republican Party. It was in that capacity she met Ron Lewis, who was exploring a run for Congress. A lot of people did not give Ron much of a chance at the time--after all, the previous holder of that district's Congressional seat, a Democrat, had held it for almost 40 years.

Well, Ron Lewis surprised a lot of people when he won that race. After winning, one of his first decisions--one of his best decisions-- was to hire Phyllis Causey. And one of Brett's best decisions was to retain her.

In her retirement, Phyllis has said she hopes to be able to spend more time with her husband, Larry, and also care for her mother. As so many people have stepped forward to wish her well upon the news of her retirement, Phyllis has humbly said, ``All I can hope is that I have made a difference.''

I certainly think it is safe to say she has. I value her friendship and wish her the best in her future endeavors. I know my colleagues in the U.S. Senate join me in honoring Ms. Phyllis Causey upon her retirement and thanking her for her many years spent in public service.

The Bowling Green, Kentucky-area publication The Daily News recently published an article highlighting Phyllis Causey's life and career. I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, today I wish to recognize a distinguished Kentuckian who has worked tirelessly and selflessly in public service for over 25 years. I am sad to report to my colleagues today that Mr. Ken Harvey, the longest serving tourism director for any county in the Commonwealth, is retiring today.

Ken has worked since 1986 as the executive director of the London- Laurel County Tourist Commission in southeastern Kentucky. During his tenure, tourism growth in the area has tripled, the number of motels in the area has more than doubled, and the number of restaurants has doubled. Ken's coworkers, friends, and neighbors know that such a feat would not have been possible without Ken's endless energy and enthusiasm in his work.

When Ken moved to London, KY, with his wife Cheryl many years ago, he was working for Kmart and was sent to Kentucky for a temporary assignment. But, in Ken's own words, London ``just felt like home.'' It is to the rest of the town and county's benefit that Ken and Cheryl decided to put down roots and make London their home.

In addition to his long tenure as executive director of the London- Laurel County Tourist Commission, Ken keeps busy with many other pursuits. He is a longtime board member of the Southern/Eastern Kentucky Tourism Development Association and has served as that organization's president. He has been a board member of the Kentucky Tourism Council Federation and served that group for several terms as chairman or vice chairman. He has served with the Kentucky Festival Association and the Kentucky Main Street Board. Ken is also an avid historian who has volunteered for the Kentucky Civil War Trail and helped coordinate Civil War reenactments.

Ken is also a member of the Optimist Club, the Laurel County Rotary Club, and a Leadership Tri-County graduate. He was named Laurel County Man of the Year by the News Leader in 1990. And I would certainly be remiss if I did not mention what many believe to be Ken's greatest achievement as tourism director--for many years he has been the driving force behind the World Chicken Festival.

The World Chicken Festival brings over 200,000 visitors to Kentucky each year for what has become one of the top 10 festivals in the Southeastern United States. It offers entertainment, talent shows, art exhibits, carnival rides, and of course food--particularly chicken. It has been noted for exhibiting the world's largest stainless steel skillet. Lasting 4 days, taking up 10 square blocks, and free to visitors, I am sure my colleagues will understand when I say that under Ken's leadership, the World Chicken Festival is one of Kentucky's most ``egg-citing'' events.

Ken's retirement will be Kentucky's loss but certainly his family's gain. I understand he is looking forward to spending more time with his 6-year-old grandson. On behalf of the people of London, Laurel County, and all of Kentucky, I want to thank Mr. Ken Harvey for his many years of service. He will be missed, and I certainly wish him all the best in his well-earned retirement.

Mr. President, a recent article printed in the Laurel County area publication the Sentinel Echo highlighted Mr. Ken Harvey's many achievements. I ask unanimous consent that said article be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, let me also add some words about Alan Frumin. For those who are not aware of what the Parliamentarian does around here, he is sort of like an umpire in a ball game calling balls and strikes. It should not surprise anyone to hear that we have not always agreed on those calls. But it is not an easy job to be an umpire for 100 Senators. It is not easy to keep up with 200 years of precedents. And to Alan's credit, he never hesitates to admit when he thought he got something wrong.

Alan has a deep love for the Senate and the people who make it work. From the elevator operators and the cooks to the most senior Senators, he keeps up relationships with all of them. He cares a lot about this institution, and he has the service to show for it.

As the majority leader indicated, Alan has been here since 1974-- longer than all but just a handful of us. So he has really seen it all. We will miss his devotion and his intellect. We are glad he has been able to spend more time with his wife Jill and his daughter Allie. I know they love to travel. Hopefully they will be able to do more of that.

Thank you, Alan, for four decades of service to this institution we all love and admire, and good luck in everything that lies ahead.

Mr. President, last night the Senate voted to proceed to the STOCK Act--a bill, incidentally, that was coauthored by two Republicans. I am glad the majority leader is going to allow amendments for a change. Up until a few years ago, the Senate has been known as a forum for open-ended debate. The minority party may not have always gotten its way, but at least it knew it would always be heard. It is something we have not done nearly enough of in these past few years. I hope it does not prove to be a false promise. I expect Senators on both sides of the aisle will have a number of amendments to this legislation.

But one thing that stands out is the fact that the President is calling on Congress to live up to a standard he is not requiring of his own employees. So I think we can expect at least one amendment that calls on executive branch employees to live up to the same standards they would set for others. If the goal is for everyone to play by the same rules, that should not mean just some of us, and it certainly should not leave out those in the executive branch who, after all, have access to the most privileged information of all.

So the goal in the course of this floor debate will be to make sure the executive branch--those most likely to take advantage of insider information--is fully and adequately covered by this regulation.

But let's be clear. President Obama is not interested in this bill because it would address the Nation's most pressing challenges. Of course it will not. He is interested in it because it allows him to change the subject. The more folks are talking about Congress, the less they are talking about the President's own dismal economic record. Frankly, for a President who has presided over a 43-percent increase in the national debt in just 3 years and the stain of the first ever downgrade of America's credit rating, I can certainly understand why he would want to change the subject. I can see why he would rather be talking about Congress or the Super Bowl or the weather or anything other than his own failed economic policies. But the problems we face are too grave and too urgent, and every day the President spends time trying to change the topic instead of changing the direction of the economy is another day he is failing the American people who elected him.

Now, the President can pretend he just showed up. He can try to convince people, as he tried to do this weekend, that the economy is moving in the right direction, but he is not fooling anybody. Americans know we are living in an economy that has been weighted down and held back by legislation he passed with the help of a big Democratic majority in each House of Congress. Americans know we are living in the Obama economy now--we are living in the Obama economy right now--and they are tired of a President who spends his time blaming others for an economy he put in place. They want the President to lead.

I have yet to see a survey in the past year that shows Americans agreeing with the President on the direction of the country or the economy. The ones I have seen all say the opposite. Wide bipartisan majorities believe the country is on the wrong track.

For small business owners, the people we are counting on to create jobs in this country, the numbers are even starker. According to a recent survey conducted by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 85 percent--85 percent--of small business owners say the economy is on the wrong track. Eighty-four percent of them say the size of the national debt makes them unsure about the future of their businesses. Eighty-six percent worry that regulations, restrictions, and taxes will hurt their ability to do business. Just about three-quarters of them say the President's health care bill will make it harder for them to hire. In other words, it is a huge drag on job creation.

If I were the President, I would probably rather be talking about Congress too. I understand why he would rather be talking about what Congress may or may not do rather than what he has already done. He would rather be talking about what Congress may or may not do rather than what he has already done. But he has a job to do. He was elected to do something about the problems we face, not blame others for our problems. He was elected to take responsibility for his own actions, not pretend they somehow never happened.

Today the Congressional Budget Office will release an annual report on the Nation's finances. We do not know all the particulars, but I can tell you this: It will not paint a very rosy picture. Our fiscal problems are serious, and every day that the President refuses to address them, they become harder to solve.

So my message to the White House this morning is simple: It is time to lead.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise to submit to my colleagues a resolution that is very important to the history of the Commonwealth of Kentucky and the history of our Nation. This resolution, S. Res. 357, sponsored by myself and my friend Senator Paul, commemorates the 150th anniversary of the Battle of Mill Springs and recognizes the significance of the great clash of the Civil War that took place there.

On January 19, 1862, the Battle of Mill Springs spilled across Pulaski and Wayne Counties in southeastern Kentucky. It was the second- largest battle to take place in the State, and involved over 10,000 soldiers. More importantly, it was the first significant Union victory to happen in what was then considered the western theater of the Civil War. The Union's victory meant that the main Confederate defense line that had been anchored in eastern Kentucky was broken, freeing Union soldiers to move through Kentucky and into Tennessee.

One hundred fifty years later, this battle is still a vital story in our Nation's history. That is why our resolution also salutes the Mill Springs Battlefield Association, which has worked hard to preserve the historic site and educate the public about what went on there. The Mill Springs Battlefield Association has a visitors' center, provides tours, displays Civil War artifacts and maintains a Civil War library. More than 50,000 visitors have traveled to see the preserved battlefield.

So Mr. President, I am proud to submit this resolution to the United States Senate, and proud of the history we have preserved for posterity in Kentucky.