Floor Statements

Madam President, I rise today to pay tribute to one of Louisville, KY's oldest and most renowned locally owned businesses, a true treasure of my hometown that adds to the River City's charm. I am speaking of Heimerdinger Cutlery, a family-owned business that celebrates 150 years as a Louisville institution this month. Heimerdinger was first listed in the Louisville city directory in 1861 as ``A. Heimerdinger: Cutler and Sewing Machine Repair.''

In the 150 years since, Heimerdinger Cutlery has become one of Louisville's premier shops for kitchen and pocket knives, scissors, shaving needs, sharpening stones, magnifiers and many other items as well as a first stop for learning about blade quality. It is one of the oldest family-owned cutlery stores in the Nation.

Heimerdinger Cutlery celebrated its 150th anniversary with a special ceremony and ribbon cutting earlier this month in Louisville, kicking off a week-long celebration event for its customers. This celebration included a special promotion honoring America's servicemen and women.

Residents of the Louisville area were also able to meet and learn from one of the editors of Knife World Newspaper, who came to Heimerdinger Cutlery to assess the value of older, collectible knives and sign books. Heimerdinger Cutlery also celebrated its anniversary with products from another Louisville institution, Louisville Stoneware.

Heimerdinger Cutlery is currently owned and operated by two proud Louisvillians, Carl and Glenna Heimerdinger, who carry on the family business started in 1861 by Carl's great-great grandfather August Heimerdinger, originally born in Germany. When August started the company, he focused on scissors, butcher knives and sewing machine repair.

Over the years, Heimerdinger Cutlery expanded into barber and beauty supplies and secured the original patent on grass shears. In 1996, to celebrate their 135th anniversary, Heimerdinger Cutlery had a ``Hanging of the Shears Day,'' and placed a 6-foot-long, 70-pound, working pair of shears on display in their store.

I congratulate Carl and Glenna Heimerdinger for the success of their Louisville institution. Businesses like theirs are the reason the city of Louisville and the Commonwealth of Kentucky will continue to thrive and grow. Here's hoping for many more years of success to Heimerdinger Cutlery of Louisville.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, there has been a lot of debate in the past week about the latest proposals coming out of the White House, about whether the President's latest stimulus bill or the tax hikes he is proposing will help or hurt the economy. But based on what we are hearing from the White House this week, it is hard to see the point in having any debate at all.

I am referring, of course, to a comment by the White House Communications Director who told the New York Times on Monday that the President had entered what he referred to as a new phase--a new phase. He said the President may have worked with Republicans to avert a government shutdown last spring and to raise the debt ceiling this summer, but ``that phase is behind us.'' In other words, the White House isn't interested in actually accomplishing anything anymore. It is more interested in making a point than making a difference.

So here is my question: How do you explain to the 14 million Americans looking for a job right now that you are more interested in motivating campaign supporters than in motivating businesses to hire?

For the past week, the President has been running around the country trying to set a record for the number of times he can say pass this bill ``right away'' in a 5-minute stump speech. Meanwhile, his communications director is telling people the President doesn't expect the bill to pass. And the Democratic majority leader in the Senate is treating it like a legislative afterthought. My friend the majority leader said yesterday he might take up this supposedly ``urgent'' bill next month after he has had a chance to deal with a Chinese currency bill and a few others. As for the other Democrats in Congress, well, they are not exactly rushing to get it in the queue either.

This so-called jobs bill seems to be about as popular as Solyndra, and I am just talking about among Democrats. Yet the President is out there acting as though somebody is actually putting up a fight. So this whole thing is a charade, and I think the American people deserve better. I think they deserve a President who realizes that governing involves working with a situation as it is, not as you would like it to be. President Obama may think the best way to distract people from the challenges we face is to stand near a bridge in a swing State and pit one group of Americans against another and hope his critics look bad if they don't go along with him, but I don't think he is fooling anybody. I don't think all the campaign stops in the world are going to convince most Americans that the real cause of our problems lies anywhere other than with the policies that are coming out of Washington these days or that the single greatest obstacle to job creation in America today is policies that punish the risk takers and the entrepreneurs and that stifle investment and private enterprise, rather than rewarding it.

When it comes right down to it, I think most Americans care more about results than about rhetoric. Let's be honest. The results of this President's economic policies speak for themselves. After 2\1/2\ years of government spending, here is what we have: record deficits, chronic unemployment, median incomes going down, poverty rates going up, and the first ever credit downgrade. This isn't exactly a record to be proud of. So I can understand the President wanting to change the topic. It might make him feel better. It might energize his strongest supporters. But here is something it won't do: It won't create jobs.

Look, if we can solve our jobs crisis and revive the economy by passing the hat at Warren Buffett's annual shareholders meeting, we would have done it by now, but we can't. Why? Because that is not a real solution. It is a campaign slogan.

The President said the other day the tax hikes he is proposing aren't class warfare. He said they are math. Well, we can do math too, so let's do the math. According to the IRS, if you doubled--doubled--the tax burden on everybody in America who earned more than $1 million in 2009, you would cover the cost of about 3 months of deficit spending around here. If you doubled the tax burden on everybody in America who earned more than $1 million in 2009, you would cover the cost of about 3 months of the deficit we are running around here. If you confiscated every dime of taxable income from those the President refers to as millionaires and billionaires--take it all--you wouldn't even cover a single year of deficit spending in Washington right now. Spending more money in Washington won't solve our spending problem, it will enable it.

How about the stimulus? One of the programs is the stimulus was supposed to create 65,000 jobs. So far, it has created 3,500 at nearly $11 million per job--$11 million per job. Solyndra was supposed to create thousands of permanent jobs. Two years later, more than 1,000 Solyndra employees are out of work altogether, and the American taxpayer is on the hook for more than $\1/2\ billion in loans to the company.

But here is the most important calculation: Not a single new job will come about as a result of the tax hikes the President proposed this week--not one new job. As the National Federation of Independent Business puts it:

New tax increases on America's biggest job creators are the

last thing this economy needs to get back on track.

What else do we need to know?

Republicans are ready to work with the President on turning this economy around. We know what would work, and after the past 2\1/2\ years, we have certainly seen what won't work. So my suggestion to the President is the same now as it has been for months. Put aside the political playbook and work with us on policies that will actually solve the problems Americans care about the most. Let's work together on policies that are aimed at motivating job creators, not your political base. It is time to change course.

Mr. President, I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, everyone knows the top issue on the mind of most Americans right now is jobs. What I have said is that the one thing we could all do right now to help spur job creation is to pass the three free-trade agreements with Panama, Colombia, and South Korea. Republicans in Congress have been urging the President to pass these agreements for nearly 3 years. Yet they have languished on his desk for no good reason. It is time to send them up so we can act. At a moment when 14 million Americans are looking for work, it is indefensible for the White House to demand a vote on trade adjustment assistance as a condition for action.

Still, I and others have agreed to allow it so we can finally move ahead on these vital trade deals. It is my expectation, based on the understanding I have with the administration, that the President will stop dragging his feet soon and submit all three of them for a quick approval. At long last, U.S. businesses that want to expand here at home but which have been held back by the President's refusal to act will be able to compete on a level playing field in these markets, and it will create jobs in the process. These agreements, while helpful, are not enough.

In order to create the kind of jobs we need, we need more trade deals than these three. That is why I have been a strong advocate for granting this President the same trade promotion authority every other President has enjoyed since 1974. Also known as fast track, TPA creates expedited procedures for congressional consideration of trade agreements that the administration negotiates with our trading partners. TPA has long had bipartisan support and led to numerous trade agreements with 17 new countries during the Bush administration, including the 3 we hope to consider shortly.

Unfortunately, Democrats and their union allies allowed TPA to expire in 2007. This President has made no effort whatsoever to revive it. Without TPA, the United States will likely never agree to another deal. The unions will make sure of that. We have seen what happens next. After the North American Free Trade Agreement passed in 1993, TPA expired, and in the 8 years that followed the United States did nothing, while other countries moved ahead integrating themselves in the global economy. We cannot let that happen again. We cannot miss more opportunities to compete in foreign markets with U.S.-made products just because unions do not want to.

Consider this: According to the Business Roundtable, while our trade agenda has lapsed, the European Union is negotiating 16 trade agreements with 46 countries. Japan is negotiating 7 agreements with 38 countries, and even China is negotiating 11 agreements with 18 countries.

What about the United States? We have signed none since this administration began, and we are actively negotiating only one, a pact that will open opportunities to American businesses and workers across the Pacific Rim. I and many of my colleagues and many of our allies overseas want to know what is the President's plan to enact that one deal if he does not ask for, has not received, and does not even seem to want trade promotion authority; is he ready to watch all these opportunities vanish? We cannot allow these opportunities for American jobs to simply drift away.

We must reauthorize TPA, along with TAA. Historically, TPA and TAA have moved together; in 1974, when TPA was created; in 1988, when it was reauthorized; and again in 2002, when TAA was expanded to its current prestimulus levels. That is why I am offering an amendment that will grant this President trade promotion authority through 2013. It is the same term the Democrats are insisting we reauthorize trade adjustment assistance. My amendment builds into it the same accountability to Congress and the need to consult with Congress that previous TPAs have had. It is based on legislation offered by a bipartisan pair of trade leaders, Senator Portman and Senator Lieberman.

We are going to hear Democrats arguing we have not had enough time to carefully consider this expansion of trade promotion authority and work on the negotiating objectives we generally include in the bill. I would remind them I first called for TPA last May. Since that time, I have heard nothing from my Democratic colleagues or the White House about their interest in renewing this authority. There has been zero outreach. When I suggested I would be willing to support an extension of TAA if we could reauthorize TPA, there was nothing.

In my view, if the White House will not show leadership on this issue, if they are too worried about owning other free trade agreements or as being seen by some of their allies as promoting them too aggressively, it is my view we ought to help them get there. That is why I am offering this amendment to show the world some in Congress are ready to move forward and lower the barriers that keep American goods out of foreign countries and which American consumers all benefit from our integration into the world economy.

With 14 million Americans out of work and thousands of Americans looking for opportunities to sell American-made goods around the world, we cannot afford to wait, as we did on these three free-trade agreements, while the administration makes up its mind that American jobs are more important than appeasing their union allies.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I would say to my friend of 40 years that even though there are a number of colleagues on the Senate floor, I am confident we all agree this is not a eulogy in which we are about to engage. Really, I have a great sense of relief that my friend is going to run again in 2014 and continue to make an extraordinary contribution to the Senate and to America.

When I first met Lamar he was at the White House. I had just come here as a legislative assistant to a newly elected Senator. He had already accomplished a lot. He had been elected Phi Beta Kappa at Vanderbilt and graduated from New York University Law School. He had clerked for a well-known circuit judge, been involved in Howard Baker's first campaign, had helped him set up his first office, and that was before I met him.

Since I have met him, as many of my colleagues are already aware, it is hard to think of anybody--it is hard to think of anybody--who has done more things well. He went home in 1970 and ran a successful campaign for, I think, the first Republican Governor of Tennessee elected, certainly, since the Civil War. He ran for Governor himself in a very bad year in 1974. It didn't work out too well. But one of the things we know about our colleague Lamar is that he is pretty persistent. So he tried it again in 1978. He was elected Governor, reelected Governor in 1982--a spectacular record.

Then he did something very unusual. I remember knowing about it at the time. I kept up with him since we had met years before when we were in Washington. He took his entire family and went to Australia for 6 months. He put the kids in school there and actually wrote a book called ``Six Months Off,'' which I read then. I don't know how many books Senator Alexander sold, but it was a fascinating review of basically just taking a break, going somewhere else, doing something entirely new before getting back on the career treadmill that we, of course, knew he would do.

So once the Australian experience was over, this extraordinarily accomplished and diverse individual became president of the University of Tennessee. That was back when they used to play football, and then- President Bush 1 asked him to become Secretary of Education. So he was a Cabinet member.

Oh, by the way, I think I left out that at his mother's insistence he became quite proficient at piano. He is a fabulous piano player and musician. My mother let me quit. That was the only mistake she made in an otherwise perfect job of raising me. But Senator Alexander's mother, by insisting that he continue to take piano, gave him that dimension as well.

So here we have a guy who has been Governor, president of his university, a member of the Cabinet and, as if that were not enough, he went into the private sector and started an extraordinarily successful business, which did very well. I expect our colleague from Tennessee thought his public career was over, but then Fred Thompson decided he wanted to go do something else. All of a sudden he was in the Senate-- not just in the Senate but then became a leader in the Senate in a very short period of time.

We have had an opportunity to get to know our colleague. It is hard to think of anybody more intelligent, more accomplished, as well as more likeable than Lamar Alexander.

So I must say to my good friend from Tennessee, I am relieved he is not leaving the Senate. This is not a eulogy, but it is an opportunity for those of us who have known and admired the Senator from Tennessee for a long time to just recount his extraordinary accomplishment during a lifetime of public service. It has been my honor to be his friend, and I will continue to be his friend, and I am glad he will continue to be our colleague.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 626, which is at the desk.

I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, let me add to the remarks of the distinguished majority leader and say congratulations to our brandnew Senator from Nevada for his outstanding inaugural address. He is off to a very fast start representing the people of Nevada and doing a wonderful job. I congratulate him again for an outstanding address.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, my amendment on which we are about to vote would grant to the President something no President has had since trade promotion authority expired back in 2007. Without trade promotion authority, there will be no other trade agreements. We all know that. If America wants to be the leader of the world in trade, we have to have trade agreements.

What I have done here is offered trade promotion authority--what we used to call fast-track--as an amendment to trade adjustment assistance. They have been historically linked going back to 1974. I think it is a big mistake for our country, even if we provide trade adjustment assistance, to just operate as if there are not going to be any more trade agreements in the United States. We used to be the leader in world trade.

My party does not occupy the White House. I want the President of the United States, whoever that is, to have trade promotion authority because I would like to see us have an opportunity to have trade agreements in the future. All of our competitors have taken advantage of the fact that we have not had a trade agreement for years.

These three agreements were actually negotiated by the previous administration. So if we would like for this President or the next President--because this would extend TPA to the end of 2013, so it will grant this authority to the next President, whoever that is, in addition to this President--if my colleagues think we ought to have another trade agreement sometime in the future for the United States of America, I urge them to support my amendment.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I rise today to recognize one of Kentucky's most successful educational institutions, Southeast Kentucky Community and Technical College, SKCTC. Beginning last year, SKCTC celebrated its 50th anniversary of providing higher education in southeastern Kentucky across five full-service campuses. To commemorate the event, SKCTC's Pineville campus held an open house for over 500 high school students from the area. To highlight the school's success over the years, President Dr. W. Bruce Ayers gave a presentation of SKCTC's history to all who attended.

SKCTC's Pineville campus was originally launched in the early 1960s as a nursing school. Over the years, the school expanded its buildings and curriculum and has become the main location for many of SKCTC's medical programs.

The campus is home to about 50 percent of the school's allied health students, who are enrolled in programs such as respiratory therapy, radiologic technology, surgical technology, clinical lab technology, or one of several nursing programs to become a licensed practical nurse or a registered nurse. As a whole, SKCTC holds a remarkably high pass rate on licensing exams for graduated students--some of the medical programs maintain a pass rate of 100 percent. As a result, the majority of SKCTC students leave the school with a medical license of some kind.

The people of southeastern Kentucky are privileged to have such a reputable institution that continues to provide future generations of Kentuckians with a quality education year after year. To help celebrate this landmark occasion, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that an article describing the anniversary celebration at SKCTC--Pineville be printed in the Record.

In a ceremony at the White House this afternoon, SGT Dakota Meyer of the U.S. Marine Corps will become the first living Marine recipient of the Medal of Honor, our Nation's highest award for valor, the first recipient in 41 years.

The Medal of Honor is awarded for conspicuous gallantry and bravery at the risk of one's own life, above and beyond the call of duty.

Every American can be proud of Sergeant Meyer, age 23, for his exceptional valor in combat in Afghanistan. I am particularly proud that Sergeant Meyer is a Kentuckian. I am honored that heroes like him come from the Bluegrass State. Sergeant Meyer hails from Columbia, KY, and is a 2006 graduate of Green County High School where he played on the football team. On September 8, 2009, his unit assignment was with Marine Embedded Training Team 2-8, Regional Corps Advisory Command 3-7, operating in Kunar Province, Afghanistan. That day he was sent to aid a group of marines, soldiers, and Afghans trapped under heavy enemy fire from three different sides. ``We're surrounded,'' one of them broadcast over the radio. ``They're moving in on us.''

Air support to assist the Marines was unavailable, as the fighting was too fierce for helicopters to land. Then-Corporal Meyer requested permission to enter the zone of fire to come to their aid four times, and four times his request was denied. After four denials he decided to go anyway, in an armored vehicle mounted with a .50-caliber machine gun with one other marine as a driver. Twice they attempted to reach their comrades and twice were forced back by bullets, rocket-propelled grenades, and mortars. A bullet hit the vehicle's gun turret, striking Corporal Meyer's elbow with shrapnel. Ignoring his injury, he left the vehicle and charged ahead alone to rescue his fellow fighters. Under intense enemy fire, he reached a trench where helicopter pilots had reported their position. There he found his three fellow marines and a Navy hospital corpsman all dead from gunshot wounds. Still under fire, Corporal Meyer carried their bodies back to a humvee with the help of Afghan troops and escorted them to a forward-operating base about 1 mile away. He was determined to fulfill the Marines' credo, to never leave a marine behind. Corporal Meyer and the three marines whom he refused to abandon all knew each other well and worked together in the same four-man training team. He considered them close friends.

In addition to the four Americans Corporal Meyer pulled out of the firefight, a U.S. Army soldier and at least eight Afghan troops plus an Afghan interpreter were killed in the attack. They had faced more than 50 enemy insurgents armed with machine guns, assault rifles, and rocket-propelled grenades during a 6-hour firefight.

Now a sergeant, Meyer combines his great heroism with great humility. He said:

This isn't about me. If anything comes out of it for me,

it's for those guys.

He left Active-Duty service in June 2010 and currently serves in the Inactive Ready Reserve of the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve.

I know my colleagues join me in saluting SGT Dakota Meyer for his extraordinary display of selfless valor, for which he will be awarded the Medal of Honor at a White House ceremony this afternoon. He may not think of himself as a hero, but his country certainly does. His heroism and meritorious service has already been recognized in the many awards, medals, and decorations he has received, including the Purple Heart Medal, the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal with ``V'' Device for valor, the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal, the Good Conduct Medal, and the Combat Action Ribbon.

His fellow Kentuckians and an entire grateful Nation thank him for his service. Brave men and women like him honor us and our country and make us proud that America boasts the finest Armed Forces in the world.

It has been 1 week now since the President unveiled his second stimulus. Today, 1 week later, White House aides are expected to hold a briefing to explain it all to the Democrats who do not understand the details.

One would think they would want to be briefed on details before the President demanded they pass it right away, not after. Then, again, the White House probably expected stronger support from Democrats than it has gotten so far. After all, this bill's top selling point, according to the President, is that both parties should like it. Yet so far the only thing both parties in Congress seem to agree on is there has to be a better way.

Earlier this week, after several of us suggested the President would have a hard time convincing Members of his own party to support this plan, a number of them have proved us right. While the President was in Ohio insisting over and over that Congress pass the bill, it seemed as though the only Democrats who were even willing to talk about it on Capitol Hill were tearing it apart. We had the Democratic majority leader basically treating it like a legislative afterthought. One freshman Senator called parts of the bill frustrating and unfair. Another Democrat called a central part of the bill terrible. One veteran Democrat was tamping down expectations of it passing in one piece. Another veteran Democrat suggested a completely different approach to jobs. I know the President and his advisers are keen on this idea of making Republicans look bad, but from what I can tell, he has a big problem at the moment lining up supporters in his own party.

That brings me to the real issue. The truth is, the President has a problem that no amount of political strategizing can solve: His economic policies simply have not worked. Yet he and his advisers seem to be the only folks in Washington who are not ready to admit it. We are in the middle of a crisis. The average length of unemployment is at an alltime high. Median income is going down instead of up. Poverty levels are higher than they have ever been in two decades. Millions of Americans cannot find work. The numbers just keep getting worse and the President's solution is to demand another Washington stimulus bill. Is that because the first one worked out so well?

The first stimulus is a national punch line: turtle tunnels, sidewalks to nowhere, and now we are hearing reports that the White House fast-tracked a $\1/2\ billion loan to a politically connected energy firm that their own analyst said was not ready for prime time. This place, this energy firm, was supposed to be the poster child of how the original stimulus would create jobs. Now it is bankrupt and most of its 1,100 employees are out of work. And they want another stimulus?

Even if we do not know about any of the waste or the alleged cronyism, here is the bottom line: 2\1/2\ years after the President signed the first stimulus, there are 1.7 million fewer jobs in this country. That is 1.7 million fewer jobs after borrowing and spending $825 billion to create them. What more do we need to know than that? We have done that. We have gone down that road before. Shouldn't we try something different? How about we do what just about every job creator in America is telling us they need in order to create jobs? Tax reform. Loosening the grip of government regulations and free-trade agreements. That is how we will create a better environment for jobs in our country. It might mean the President doesn't get his tax hikes, but it would mean more jobs.

I know some people sometimes get attached to a single idea, and this President seems to have come into office with one big idea; that there is not a problem we have in this country that bigger government cannot solve. At a certain point, we have to take stock. We have to check the results and see how we are doing. I think it is pretty clear to most people what the results suggest. It is time to change course.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to bid a fond farewell to a man who has been a fixture in the Senate for 33 years. Mr. Tim O'Keefe of the Senate Disbursing Office is retiring today after more than three decades of service to this body and his country. Known to many as a loyal friend and well liked by nearly everyone he has met in these halls--including most of my colleagues and thousands of Senate staffers--he will be greatly missed.

Tim began his career with the disbursing office, and in the Senate, in 1978. Every Senate employee becomes familiar with that office early in their tenure because that is the office in charge of the Senate payroll as well as everything relating to an employee's compensation, payroll deductions, retirement, life and health insurance, and other benefits. The disbursing office used to be located in the Capitol when Tim started. In fact, it was located in S-233, which is now part of the Republican leader's office. During Tim's early years on the job, staffers and Senators alike would line up in the hallways on payday to receive their paychecks. Maybe that is how Tim became legendary for never forgetting a face or a name for so many members of this very large Senate family, and always having a kind word for every one of them.

The disbursing office moved in 1980 when my predecessor, Howard Baker, expanded the Republican leader's suite of offices. That is how Tim and his coworkers ended up in their now familiar location on the first floor of the Hart Building. Tim has kidded me about that a few times over the years. So on behalf of the Republican leader's office, let me take this opportunity to apologize to him for being booted from his perch.

Tim is a native Washingtonian. He attended St. John's College High School and the University of South Carolina, which has a heck of a good football team this year. Just as Tim is loyal to the Senate, he is a loyal alumnus of both those institutions. He goes to Columbia, SC, every year to see South Carolina play football. Tim is also a great fan of the Washington Redskins who, amazingly enough, are off to a good start this year. He has season tickets, and has been attending their games since his boyhood. He loves to talk football, college or pro, with folks in the office, but be careful if you are a Cowboys fan.

Tim's father George O'Keefe was a distinguished veteran who fought in World War II. His mother Gisela O'Keefe worked for the District of Columbia school system at Alice Deal Middle School. I know they would both be proud to see how well liked and well respected their son has become. Tim also has a brother, Dennis, who lives in South Carolina, and Tim lives in Alexandria with his teenaged son Connor.

When the disbursing office held a retirement party for Tim a few weeks ago, he got quite the sendoff. It was the day of the historic earthquake, felt all along eastern North America from Quebec City to Atlanta and centered about 90 miles away in central Virginia. As Tim was opening his presents, the ground began to shake and the Capitol complex was soon evacuated. It is almost as if Washington, DC, itself was protesting that it did not want Tim to go.

Indeed, it will be hard for many to imagine the Senate with Tim gone. He has the longest tenure of anyone in the disbursing office today, and thousands of Senate staffers know him as the man who led them in the Federal oath of office they take on their first day on the job--the same oath the Vice President of the United States administers to Senators at the beginning of their 6-year terms.

In his retirement, Tim will have time to pursue his many interests, including his love of horse racing. He is particularly a fan of Lexington, Kentucky's Keeneland racetrack. And I would be

remiss if I didn't mention that today, the day of his retirement, is also Tim's birthday.

I know many on Capitol Hill, after hearing about his retirement, have taken a moment to say thank you and goodbye to Mr. Tim O'Keefe. I wanted to make sure I was one of them. He will be missed here in the Senate, and we are very grateful for his 33 years of service.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to recognize one of Kentucky's oldest and most respected local newspapers, the Hazard Herald of Hazard, KY. In July of this year, The Hazard Herald celebrated over a century's worth of news coverage by publishing a 100th-anniversary edition of its morning paper. The Herald is, and has been, the most trusted source of local and national news to the people of Hazard and Perry County for decades.

Founder and prominent lawyer and statesman Bailey P. Wootton, who eventually served one term as Kentucky attorney general in the 1930s, envisioned that the Herald would serve as the primary medium for progress and information for the local community when he began publishing the paper in 1911. Over the years, the Herald became the heart of the community, sharing in both the triumphs and sorrows of citizens of the county as it grew alongside them.

From the arrival of the first train to Hazard Depot in 1912, which a year later would pave the way for boosting the region's coal industry, to the decade-defining flood of 1927 that devastated the county, the Herald was front and center. In the 1930s the Herald followed Bailey during his campaign to be elected Kentucky attorney general, as well as the Hazard High School boys' basketball team as they were eventually crowned state champions.

World War II in the 1940s forced the Herald to begin printing daily to keep people informed with the war efforts in Europe, and it remained so until the mid-1950s when it then alternated to a biweekly publication. The paper mourned President Kennedy's death with the nation in the 1960s, and provided an in-depth account of President Bill Clinton's visit to Hazard in 1999--which was printed in color after the paper adopted color printing technology in the middle of the decade. Most recently, the Herald has adopted online publications and social media to keep pace with the technological advancements that define news and media today.

Perry County is fortunate to have such an established and trusted news source to inform the great people of Kentucky. In the 100th anniversary edition of the Herald, printed July 27, 2011, there is an article that highlights the paper's founding and first decade of printing. To help celebrate this landmark occasion, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the full article be printed in the Record.

Madam President, last week President Obama came up to Capitol Hill to unveil a stimulus bill he is calling a jobs plan, and yesterday the White House explained how they would like to pay for it. The first thing to say about this plan is that it is now obvious why the President left out the specifics last week. Not only does it reveal the political nature of this bill, it also reinforces the growing perception that this administration is not all that interested in economic policies that will actually work.

But none of this is news. Over the past few days, press reports have made it perfectly clear that this legislation is more of a reelection plan than a jobs plan. It is an open secret which Democrats all over Washington have been acknowledging to reporters since the moment the President revealed it. They have said that despite the President's calls to pass this bill immediately, the real plan is to let it hang out there for a while so Democrats can use it as an issue on the campaign trail. What is more, the President knew as well as I did when he unveiled this plan that Democrats in the Senate had already scheduled a full slate of legislative business for the next few weeks. So unless the White House wants to admit that it has no regard for its own party's legislative business in Congress, the President's call for immediate action was clearly little more than a rhetorical flourish.

But the specifics we got yesterday only reinforced the impression that this was largely a political exercise. For one, they undermined the President's claim that it is a bipartisan proposal because much of what he is proposing has already been rejected on a bipartisan basis. The $\1/2\ trillion tax hike the White House proposed yesterday will not only face a tough road in Congress among Republicans but from Democrats too.

The central tax hike included in this bill, capping deductions for individuals and small businesses, was already dismissed by a filibuster-proof, Democratic-controlled Senate in 2009. Another idea floated by the White House yesterday, a tax on investment income, has been vehemently opposed by the No. 3 Democrat in the Senate, among others. A proposal to raise taxes on the oil and gas industry was rejected as a job-destroying tax hike by both Democrats and Republicans just a few months ago, and for good reason, since the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service tells us it would not only raise gas prices but, in addition to raising gas prices, would move jobs overseas. So claiming this bill is bipartisan may sound good if you are out there on the campaign trail, but surely the President could come up with some proposals that both sides had not already rejected.

Here is how one prominent left-leaning analyst put it yesterday: ``These aren't new policy ideas,'' he wrote. ``The Obama administration has been looking to cap itemized deductions since the 2009 budget. Nor are they bipartisan policy ideas. . . . ''

The specifics we got yesterday were disappointing for another reason as

well. Not only have they failed to attract wide bipartisan support in the past, even if they did enjoy bipartisan support they wouldn't create any jobs. The President knows raising taxes is the last thing you want to do to spur job creation. He said so himself. Yet that is basically all he is proposing: temporary stimulus to be paid for later by permanent tax hikes so that when the dust clears and the economy is no better off than it was after the first stimulus folks find themselves with an even bigger tax bill than today.

The President can call this bill whatever he wants, but in reality all he is doing is proposing a hodgepodge of retread ideas aimed at convincing people that a temporary fix is permanent and that it will create permanent jobs, and then daring Republicans to vote against it.

I think most people see through all of this. I think most Americans are smarter than that. I think they know our economic challenges are more serious than this and that they require serious long-term solutions. I think the American people realize we can do a lot better.

I have talked with a lot of job creators over the past few weeks, including many in my own State. It is no secret that they need to create jobs. Every one of them says the same thing. Yet the President refuses to do any of it.

If the President is truly interested in growing the economy and putting Americans back to work, then he will leave the temporary proposals and the half measures and the tax hikes aside. He will consult with both parties and work with us on a plan that indicates he has learned something from the failures of the past 2 years and which actually has a chance of attracting bipartisan support.

He could start with a permanent reform of our broken tax system, reducing out-of-control Federal regulations, and by passing the trade bills that have been sitting on his desk since Inauguration Day 2009. All of this is doable, all of it should attract bipartisan support, and all of it would actually create jobs. That would be a jobs plan worthy of the seriousness of the moment.

But make no mistake, what the President proposed so far is not serious, and it is not a jobs plan. After what we learned yesterday that should be clear to everyone.

I yield the floor.

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