Floor Statements

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time during the quorum call be equally divided between both sides.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I thank my colleague, Senator Mikulski, and all of the women who are out on the floor today to talk about this critical issue because the rising cost of health insurance is hurting women and it is hurting our country.

For the millions of women across this country who open the mail each month to see their premiums rising dramatically, who cannot get preventive care, such as mammograms, because the copays are too much or they work part time or for a small business that does not provide insurance for them and their families, who cannot get covered for prenatal care or who are forced to stay in an abusive relationship because if they leave, their sick kids will lose their health care coverage, we are their voice.

I remember a similar debate such as this on this floor almost 16 years ago. Senators in this Chamber were debating legislation that would allow 35 million Americans to stay home to take care of a newborn or sick child, a parent or spouse, without fear of losing their jobs. I came to the floor then and I told the story about a woman I knew whose child was sick at the time and who was not allowed to take time off from work to care for him as he was dying because she would lose her income and the health insurance that covered him.

At the time, as a new Member of the Senate, I spoke passionately about that. I told the story. As I was walking off the floor, one of our colleagues came up to me and said: You know, here in the Senate, we don't tell personal stories. I remember well what I said to him: I came here to tell the stories of the people I represent. They deserve a voice in the Senate.

Those stories impacted that debate, and we passed the family and medical leave law.

I am back today to tell the story of a woman whose child was sick. I want to tell every one about the story of this little boy, Marcelas Owens. I met him at a health care rally in Seattle. He was 10 years old and his two sisters who we see in this picture as well have been through a lot. Two years ago their mother Tifanny, who is not in this picture--that is his grandmother--lost her life because she was uninsured, 27 years old.

How did that happen? Tifanny was a single mom who felt strongly about working to support her family. She worked as an assistant manager at a fast food restaurant. She had health care coverage for her family. But in September of 2006, she got sick and missed some work. Her employer gave her an ultimatum: Make up the lost time or lose your job. Because she was so sick, she physically could not make up the time, and she did lose her job.

When she lost her job, she lost her health insurance. Without the coverage and care she needed, in June of 2007, Tifanny lost her life, and Marcelas and his sisters lost their mom.

Our health care system is broken. It is broken for moms such as Tifanny who work to provide for their families and do the right thing, and for men who lose their health care in this market we have today. It is broken for women we have heard about who have been denied coverage or charged more for preexisting conditions such as pregnancy or C sections or, tragically, domestic violence. It is broken for their families and for little boys such as Marcelas who will never get back what he lost.

Enough is enough. The time is now. The status quo that is being defended by the other side is not working. For women across this country, for their families, for our businesses, for our Nation's future strength that as mothers we care about so much, we have to get this right. We have to remember these stories. We need to be their voice. That is why we are here today and why we are going to keep fighting to make sure that we reform the health care insurance system in this country finally and do it right.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I have been troubled recently by some of the claims I have heard about health insurance reform legislation that we have been working on in the Senate. When I spoke on the floor earlier this July, I said all you had to do was look at a newspaper, turn on cable news to see that the rhetoric on health insurance reform was heating up.

Unfortunately, as is often the case, the debate has not gotten any better, but it certainly has gotten louder. I know there is a lot of concern out there, and there is a lot of bad information going around.

The latest outrageous claim about reform is it would hurt America's seniors. I am here to tell our seniors and their families: That claim is false. I wish to make this perfectly clear: We are not proposing, here in the Senate, to cut Medicare benefits or to do anything to negatively affect the health of those who are receiving Medicare.

When you hear rumors about how reform will affect seniors, consider the source. Listen to some of the inflammatory quotes. A Republican Member of the House of Representatives said: ``Let me tell you here and now, it is socialized medicine.''

Another Republican Congressman said: ``We cannot stand idly by now as the Nation is urged to embark on an ill-conceived adventure in government medicine, the end of which no one can see, and from which the patient is certain to be the ultimate sufferer.''

Those are not quotes about the current health insurance reform effort. Those statements were made in 1965, when Republicans were opposing the establishment of Medicare. Their position has not changed. Republicans have voted against Medicare almost 60 times in the last 10 years. Now, all of a sudden, Republicans are claiming Democrats support cutting Medicare benefits.

That is why last Sunday the New York Times said Republicans are: ``Obscuring and twisting the facts and spreading unwarranted fear.'' Scoring cheap political points does not do anything at all to help Americans get affordable health insurance. Our families, and especially our seniors, deserve better.

You do not have to go back too far to find a perfect example of this Senate's history on that subject. Just last year, Democrats overcame a Republican filibuster and a veto by then-President Bush to pass the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act. That bill prevented physicians from suffering cuts in the rate at which Medicare reimburses them for providing care to seniors.

If those cuts had happened, many doctors would have been forced to stop treating patients with Medicare, severely limiting seniors' access to health care. Democrats wanted to make sure there were enough doctors to go around, and we did.

That bill also made commonsense fixes to Medicare, including requiring that Medicare cover cardiac and pulmonary rehabilitation programs, lowering seniors' copayments for mental health services, and preventing cuts to vital oxygen equipment and wheelchairs.

That bill should not have been controversial. It was vetoed by President Bush. When the Senate had a chance to pass the bill over that veto, it was only the Republicans, almost 60 percent of those in the Senate, who sided with President Bush and said no to our seniors.

Actions speak louder than words. So do not be fooled when Republicans tell you Democrats do not want to protect Medicare or that health insurance reform will not be good for seniors.

The truth is, the Democratic proposal will help our seniors get the care and coverage they need and have earned. This should come as no surprise to anyone. After all, Democrats have had a long history of working to improve the health and general well-being of seniors. Democrats created Medicare over the objections of Republicans because we recognized that no American should go without health care, especially once they reach retirement age.

The American people know it has been Democrats who have been protecting Medicare for seniors since we created the program 44 years ago. Nothing has changed. Today, it is still Democrats who are fighting for better, more affordable health care for everyone, especially our seniors. Specifically, our plan moves toward closing that doughnut hole in prescription drug coverage and provides access to more affordable generic drugs. If you have Medicare, our plan makes recommended preventative services such as colonoscopies and mammograms free.

It will ensure that if you have Medicare you get a free physical every year, not just when you enroll in the program. Our plan will aggressively attack the fraud and abuse that raises Medicare costs for seniors and for all of us as taxpayers.

One thing that has been too often missing from this discussion is what will happen to Medicare if there is no reform. It is now projected that as early as 2017, if we do not make changes, the money Medicare spends on benefits and services will be greater than its income. At that point, seniors would have to pay a greater portion of their health care costs or receive fewer Medicare benefits. That is unacceptable.

Our current system is unsustainable. That is one of the reasons the nonpartisan AARP supports reform this year. They know, like we do, that we must protect Medicare for our seniors over both the short term and the long term. Our plan will prevent cost increases and overpayments to insurance companies in order to keep Medicare out of the red. Now is the time to act on health care. Let me be clear. Under the Republican plan, insurance companies can dump you for preexisting conditions because you are a woman, because you are getting older, because you get sick, and Medicare will face bankruptcy.

Under our plan, if you like what you have, you keep it. If you don't we will provide affordable choices for you. We are going to protect Medicare. We will not raise taxes on the middle class, and we will not add a dime to the deficit.

Every day 14,000 more Americans lose their health insurance. That has to stop. This is not only about those who don't have coverage. The cost of treatment for the uninsured is passed on to every taxpayer. It is estimated that a family of four pays a hidden tax of

$1,000 every year in premiums to help pay for those who don't have coverage. We will help remove that burden from all working families. We will provide stability and choice to families and businesses. We will return health care decisions back where they belong, in the hands of patients and doctors, not insurance company bureaucrats. Rumors and misinformation and scare tactics about Medicare should not prevent us from passing meaningful health insurance reform legislation this year.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the majority leader be authorized to sign any duly enrolled bills and joint resolutions for the remainder of today, Wednesday, September 30.

I thank the Chair.

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

Madam President, in a few short minutes we are going to be going to a series of votes, including a number of them on the transportation and housing bill that has been before the Senate for a week now. I want to take a few minutes to remind all of our colleagues about the importance of this bill that we will be passing here shortly this afternoon. This is a bill that has broad bipartisan support because it addresses some very real housing and transportation needs of families in every region of this country. We worked very hard with our colleague, Senator Bond, my ranking member, who has been amazingly great to work with this week. We faced some real challenges with our bill this year but together we made some important infrastructure improvements, including providing over $75 billion for the Department of Transportation to support continued investment in our transportation infrastructure.

It includes $11 billion for public transit and $1.2 billion to invest in inner-city and high-speed rail.

This bill also supports the FAA's efforts to develop its next- generation air transportation system to support projected growth in air travel in coming years. It also invests $3.5 billion for capital improvement at airports across the country.

The bill provides nearly $46 billion for the Department of Housing and Urban Development, including $100 million for HUD's housing counseling program that will help families who are facing foreclosure today to stay in their homes. The bill also provides more than $18 billion for tenant-based rental or section 8, including an increase of over $1 billion for the renewal of section 8 vouchers.

It also provides increased funding for the operation of public housing for a total level of $4.75 billion, to make sure our Nation's low-income families, which are also, as we all know, among the hardest hit in these tough economic times, continue to have access to safe, affordable housing.

The bill includes $75 million for a very important program I worked on with Senator Bond, the joint HUD Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Program. This is extremely important to our Nation's veterans. It will provide an additional 10,000 homeless veterans and their families with housing and supportive services.

The bill also addresses the needs of some of our most vulnerable citizens, by providing increased funding to support affordable housing for the elderly, disabled, those suffering from AIDS, and the Nation's homeless.

Finally, the bill provides almost $4 billion for the Community Development Block Grant Program to support investments in public infrastructure, housing rehabilitation, and public service, assistance that is critical to our States and our local governments right now.

In summary, this bill provides assistance to those who need it most, and it directs resources in a responsible and fiscally prudent way. It will help our commuters, it will help owners, it will help the most vulnerable, and it will help our economy.

I hope all Senators will support the bill when we move to the final vote here shortly this afternoon, after we consider several amendments. Before I close, I do wish to take, again, a moment to thank my partner and friend, Senator Bond, whom it has been a pleasure to work with throughout this process, as he and I go to conference now to work hard to make sure we find the differences and fix the differences between us and the House so we can get this bill to the President.

I most importantly wish to thank all our staff, from the floor staff who have been so generous with their time and help as we have worked through this, to all the staff who worked on the transportation and housing subcommittee, including John Kamarck, Ellen Beares, Joanne Waszczak, Travis Lumpkin, Grant Lahmann, Michael Bain, Dedra Goodman, and Alex Keenan, our new staff director on transportation who has done an excellent job, and especially Matt McCardle and Mike Spahn for all their efforts during floor consideration.

I am pleased we were able to consider and debate so many amendments and have produced a strong bill. But I would be remiss if I did not single out and thank two members of our staff, Meaghan McCarthy and Rachel Milberg, for all the outstanding efforts they made over the past several months under very trying circumstances late at night working so diligently.

I wish to especially thank them for all the work they have done to assemble this bill and write the report. I know it was a daunting challenge. I am so grateful to them for all the extra effort they have had to go through under some very trying circumstances. They have done an excellent job. They are a delight to work with.

With that, I see that my ranking member is on the floor. I wish to, again, thank him for being a great partner and for all his help and support to get this bill to the floor today.

I yield the floor.

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

Madam President, it is my understanding that this amendment is accepted on both sides. I urge a voice vote.

I move to reconsider the vote.

Madam President, this amendment would deny housing assistance to any New Orleans household with a member of a criminal gang or someone convicted of certain drug offenses. Public housing authorities already have the ability to deny or terminate housing assistance to persons who have committed drug-related and violent crimes under current law. This amendment does far more than that. It extends to all forms of housing assistance. It is a permanent prohibition. If anyone in the family has committed these offenses ever, then that entire household would never be able to receive HUD assistance, including homeless assistance or even an FHA loan.

I am concerned that this amendment is targeted to one city, New Orleans. We should not be targeting one city or dictating housing policy city by city under this bill.

Importantly, the underlying bill provides funding to help our Nation's homeless veterans. Many of those veterans have struggled with substance abuse. If this amendment passes, those veterans will not be allowed to get assistance.

I ask my colleagues to vote against the amendment.

Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Madam President, if I could have the attention of all Senators, a number of Senators have come to me and said they want to move quickly through the amendments this afternoon. We can't do it if Senators are leaving. I ask all Senators to please stay on the floor as we move through these last amendments.

With that, I believe the next amendment is in order.

Madam President, have the yeas and nays been ordered?

Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote.

I move to reconsider the vote.

Madam President, the bill in front of us provides critical resources to the Departments of Transportation and Housing and Urban Development for investments in transit, rail, airports, and public housing. This is important for investing in jobs in our economy.

The funding in this bill has a direct impact on every community across the Nation. We should not delay this important piece of legislation.

I urge my colleagues to vote no.

I urge a ``no'' vote, Madam President.

I move to reconsider the vote.

I am pleased to discuss this issue with my colleagues. Pipeline safety programs are very important in my State and help ensure that tragic accidents can be prevented. I understand that the pipeline safety programs at PHMSA are funded almost exclusively through user fees.

I agree with my colleagues and would like PHMSA to produce such a report. I thank Senator Cochran for bringing this issue to the attention of all Senators.

I would be pleased to enter into a colloquy with the Senator.

The Senator is correct. The table included in the committee report is illustrative and does not direct the actual distribution of the funds provided under this bill.

I agree that the table the Senator refers to reflects the Federal Highway Administration's current estimate of how Federal- Aid Highway Program funding included in this bill would be distributed under current law.

Madam President, we are now on final passage. I urge all of our colleagues to vote yes.

I yield back our time and ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote and lay that motion upon the table.

The motion to lay upon the table was agreed to.

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

Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, we are now here on our fifth day of considering the transportation and housing appropriations bill. We do have a number of amendments that have been offered. The Senator from Oklahoma is here. He has the first 30 minutes under the previous order. I have the following 10 minutes. I would like all Senators to know that if all time is not used, we intend to yield back and we expect that these votes may occur as early as 11:30.

Mr. President, the Senator from California will be here shortly to respond to a number of these amendments, since they fall into the jurisdiction of her full committee.

The Senator from Oklahoma has offered three amendments to this bill that are related to transportation. Each of those amendments would limit the ability of States and local governments to spend their highway grants on activities that are eligible for funding under the Federal aid highway program.

Those limitations would not only apply to funds that have been earmarked in this bill. I think Senators should understand they would also apply to the formula grants that go to our States and local governments, which plan their own transportation investments.

The Senator's amendments would take away funding from transportation enhancement, especially streetscaping, bike and pedestrian paths, and the mitigation of highway runoff pollution.

Today, all of these activities are eligible for funding under the current highway authorization law, the SAFETEA-LU Act. Under that act, communities are required to prepare and provide comprehensive transportation plans in order to receive their Federal highway and transit grants. Those plans have to include the communities' plans for bike and pedestrian pathways, because those transportation plans are meant to be comprehensive, and our national policy, which has been debated on the floor of the Senate and the House, has been to recognize bike and pedestrian paths as one component of a complete transportation system. They cannot constitute the largest part of the system but a plan that ignores that element is incomplete.

When we provide bike paths and walkways, we help keep our families and our neighbors safe. Without these paths, many more bicyclists, pedestrians, people who commute to work that way would compete with vehicle traffic. Everybody on a bike or footpath is vulnerable when they are mixed in with heavy traffic. But school-age children are the most vulnerable.

When we debated this policy under SAFETEA-LU, we determined that bikeways and walkways are an important part and are components of our transportation system for people who cannot afford a car and have to walk to work. People who walk to school are impacted by the Senator's amendment.

I don't believe that this bill--the current transportation appropriations bill--is an appropriate time that we should be debating and changing our highway policy, which is so important to all of our communities across the country.

The chairman of the appropriate committee is on the floor. I know she wants to respond. I yield the floor to her at this time.

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

Mr. President, I have talked with the Senator from Oklahoma, and two of the amendments he has offered, No. 2374 and No. 2377, are amendments the committee agrees to. I ask unanimous consent that both of these amendments be adopted.

Mr. President, what is the pending amendment?

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

I yield my 1 minute to the Senator from Delaware.

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, I would let all fellow Senators know, we have two more votes remaining. If the Senators would allow the speakers to speak, we will be able to move through these expeditiously.

I ask unanimous consent that the remaining amendment votes be 10 minutes in length.

I would ask all our Senators to pay attention to what we are being asked to vote on. We did vote on a similar amendment during the budget debate. But these amendments are very different. The amendment to the budget resolution never put Amtrak's funding at risk. That amendment would have only prohibited an extra reserve fund from going to Amtrak if it did not allow firearms.

The amendment we are now considering does something much more drastic, it will put at risk Amtrak's appropriations. In order to receive any Federal funding under this amendment, Amtrak would have 6 months to build a process for checking and tracking firearms, it would have to find the manpower necessary to screen and guard firearms, and would have to purchase the equipment necessary.

There is nothing in the underlying appropriations to pay for any of that. So this amendment is going to put a severe burden on them, and if they do not comply, Amtrak will shut down.

I think it is very important that we be careful what we are voting on. I ask my colleagues to oppose the Wicker amendment.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendment No. 2376

The Senator from Louisiana is offering an amendment that would require continued enforcement of public service for people who live in public housing. I oppose this amendment for two reasons. First, it is current law. Secondly, I am concerned, in this economic downturn, when we have a lot of families struggling, the most struggling families, we are putting this requirement on them. Therefore, I am going to oppose this amendment and will be voting no.

I yield the floor.

I move to reconsider the vote and I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Madam President, we have made great progress on the transportation and housing appropriations bill, and I thank all Senators for working with us. We have several amendments left to do.

I now ask unanimous consent that Senator Landrieu be given 5 minutes to speak on amendment No. 2365, followed by Senator Gregg with 20 minutes equally divided on amendment No. 2361.

Madam President, at this time, then, we will move to those two amendments. We have several other Senators who have notified us they wish to offer amendments.

For the information of all Members, we hope to have votes on at least the two amendments I have just spoken of, the Landrieu and Gregg amendments, at 2:30. If there are other amendments we are able to move at that time, we will then vote on those as well. But, again, we are making great progress. We have a few amendments left, and I urge any Senator who has an amendment, you have a few hours left to get it to us so we can work it out.

Madam President, I yield the floor.

Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I say to the Senator, he doesn't need to ask unanimous consent. We are happy to work with his staff so as to modify it with the intent of what he was trying to do. I will not object.

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

Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, we are about to set up a series of votes to occur shortly. We will make that unanimous consent agreement in the next few minutes.

In the pending time, I will speak against one of the amendments that will be considered; that is, the one that was offered by the Senator from Nevada. It is a motion to recommit and reduce spending for our transportation and housing bill.

I would like to point out to all our colleagues, the funding levels that are contained in this bill are consistent with the budget resolution this entire Senate agreed to in the spring and are $1.2 billion below the level of funding that was requested by the President in his request.

The majority of the funding increases that are contained in our bill support our Nation's vulnerable citizens and the needs of the communities. Those increases include funding to support rental assistance for low-income families, elderly and disabled tenants who use Section 8 vouchers, living in project-based housing or those who live in public housing.

The funding provided ensures that families receiving assistance will maintain that. This is critical because, without assistance, these individuals and families would be at the risk of homelessness, at a time that all of us know that many of our citizens are struggling today.

We have increased funding for homeless programs, which will help prevent more families from becoming homeless. Last year we should all note there was an increase of 9 percent in family homelessness in this Nation.

We have increased funding to support our States and our local communities to address their housing needs and support economic activities ties through the Community Development Block Grant Program. We increased funding in our Nation's infrastructure that will both improve the safety of our Nation's roads and bridges and create and sustain critical jobs.

We have increased funding for safety inspectors at the Federal Aviation Administration, as well as funding for a new program to invest in railroad safety technologies such as positive train control.

In comparison, there are drastic consequences, we should note, to freezing funding for this bill at last year's level. Funding frozen at the fiscal year 2009 level could result in tens of thousands of people who currently hold vouchers to lose their housing. During this economic crisis, we should not be putting our low-income families at risk and out on the street.

In addition, a funding level frozen at the 2009 level would put at risk our critical funding for air traffic controllers. My colleague from Missouri has talked about the importance of increasing the air traffic controllers, and we know the Federal Aviation Administration is facing a shortage of experienced air traffic controllers. We cannot afford to ignore the safety needs of the aviation system.

This subcommittee carefully weighed the merits of all programs before us. We cut programs below the President's request and achieved additional savings. Further reductions now requested by this amendment would seriously undermine critical transportation safety activities. I ask colleagues to reject the amendment when we vote.

We should have a unanimous consent agreement shortly to have votes begin in the next several minutes.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the following amendments and motion in the order listed; that no amendments be in order to the amendment or the motion prior to a vote; that prior to the stacked votes in this sequence there be 2 minutes of debate equally divided and controlled in the usual form; that after the first vote, the succeeding votes be limited to 10 minutes each: the Gregg amendment, No. 2361, and the Ensign motion to recommit.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, regular order.

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, we have one more vote right now. We expect to be debating several amendments over the next hour or so. I believe there are about four or five amendments left. We want to finish this bill this afternoon. If you have any issues, please bring them to the committee during this vote or when this vote is over so that later this evening or early this evening, I hope, we can move to the final votes on this bill.

With that, I believe the motion to recommit by the Senator from Nevada is in order.

Motion to Recommit

Mr. President, for the information of my colleagues, the funding levels contained in the bill are consistent with the budget resolution the Senate passed and agreed to this Spring. We are $1.2 billion below the level of funding requested by the President.

We worked very hard to balance the important safety, transportation and accounting needs of this Nation. We urge you to defeat this amendment.

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

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

I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business for 10 minutes.

Mr. President, 2 weeks ago, the World Trade Organization handed down a ruling in one of our Nation's most important trade cases to date. The ruling was in a case that the U.S. Government, through our Trade Representative, brought against the European Union for providing market-distorting subsidies for the European aerospace company, Airbus. It was a case brought against the EU not because of minor trade infractions or insignificant manipulation of the international market. It was brought because of decades of playing outside the rules, billions in government subsidies, and repeated warnings by the United States to end the unfair practice of providing a damaging subsidy called launch aid. What the WTO ruled by all accounts is very clear. Launch aid is illegal. It creates an uneven playing field. It has harmed American workers and companies. It needs to end.

For me, this is an important decision that is long overdue. That is because in my home State, the State of much of our country's aerospace industry, the consequences of competing with the treasuries of large European governments has been very real for a very long time. It has been felt in communities, in local economies, and in lost jobs. That is why, as my colleagues know, I have been speaking out against Europe's market-distorting actions in commercial aerospace for many years. I have raised my concerns with other Senators, with foreign leaders, and administrations of both parties.

In 2005, I helped pass a unanimous resolution in the Senate on the need to level the playing field for fair global aerospace competition. In that same year, after the European Union mocked our efforts to negotiate in good faith by continuing to provide launch aid, I urged the Bush administration to move forward with this WTO case. Make no mistake about it, I understand the value of healthy competition in the international marketplace. But I also believe that competitors must abide by the same set of rules.

One reason I have fought so hard to end illegal subsidies is because I know there is a fundamental difference in how our country and Europe view the aerospace industry and fair competition. For us in America, commercial aerospace is seen as a private business. Some companies will win; some companies will lose. But we allow the marketplace to decide. American aerospace companies, such as Boeing, take tremendous financial risks when they develop and market a new aircraft. Their workers and developers and researchers put their jobs and billions of dollars on the line each time. They literally bet the company with each new plane they develop. But in Europe, aerospace is a jobs program. To fund that program, they use billions of dollars in what is called launch aid. So they are not quite as concerned when Airbus loses money. In fact, they don't even require Airbus to repay that launch aid, if the aircraft they develop is unsuccessful. It is no risk, all reward.

But as the WTO has now ruled, it is also a violation of international trade rules and fair competition. The plain truth is that these illegal subsidies have cost American jobs. The commercial aerospace industry employs well over half a million Americans with family-wage salaries. But in the past 20 years, as Airbus has continued to grow, thanks to billions in subsidies, we have lost hundreds of thousands of American aerospace jobs. These are scientific and technical jobs. They are jobs that keep the economies of communities large and small stable in States all throughout the country. They are jobs that support families to pay mortgages and create other jobs. They are jobs that are increasingly precious at a time when we are facing double-digit unemployment.

American innovation led to the birth of the aerospace industry over 100 years ago. Since that time, we have made air travel safer and brought growth and innovation to our economy. Although we led in the first century of flight, unless we recognize the damages these subsidies pose and fight for our workers, we might not have a major role in the next century in aerospace. That is why the WTO ruling is so important. This ruling is much more than a confirmation that Airbus has been breaking the rules. It is a victory for American workers who produce the world's best planes and who have been forced to fight an uphill battle. It is a warning to other countries considering entering the aerospace marketplace that launch aid is the wrong example to follow. It reaffirms the spirit of free and fair trade in the international marketplace and reminds us that we have to be vigilant because this is certainly not the end of this fight.

In fact, there are already signs that the EU and Airbus will flaunt the will of the WTO. Already, very publicly, the Governments of France, Germany, and the United Kingdom have said they will move forward with plans to provide Airbus with nearly $5 billion in launch aid for the development of Airbus's latest generation of airplane, the A350, despite any ruling by the WTO. In other words, in the face of a clear condemnation of their practices, they said they will do as they please. That is why, on Monday, I wrote to President Obama urging him and his administration to take the strongest possible actions to prevent European governments from providing Airbus with an additional illegal trade-distorting subsidy. But it will be all of our responsibilities to ensure that the rules are followed, American jobs are not further endangered, and the future of the aerospace industry is protected.

Unless we wake up to the threat that continued illegal subsidies pose, we will lose an industry we created that is critical to our economic recovery and will help sustain our Nation's continued growth.

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

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment.

Mr. President, we have managers' amendments at the desk--amendment No. 2402, as modified; 2405, as modified; and 2415. I ask unanimous consent that the amendments be considered and agreed to en bloc, and the motions to reconsider be considered laid upon the table.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that except for the amendments provided for in this agreement, no further amendments be in order to H.R. 3288; that the following be the only first-degree amendments and motion to recommit remaining in order to H.R. 3288; that second-degree amendments which are relevant to the first-degree to which offered be in order but not prior to a vote in relation to the first-degree amendment; that the listed Kyl motion to recommit be the only motion to recommit in order, except motions to reconsider votes or motions to waive applicable budget points of order; that a managers' amendment that has been cleared by the managers and the leaders also be in order, and that if the amendment is offered, then it be considered and agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; Landrieu amendment No. 2365, which is pending; Vitter amendment No. 2359, pending and as modified; DeMint amendment No. 2410, pending; McCain amendment No. 2403, pending, as modified; Kyl motion to recommit with instructions, pending; that upon disposition of the amendments and the motion to recommit, the substitute amendment, as amended, if amended, be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; that the bill, as amended, be read a third time and the Senate then proceed to vote on passage of the bill; that upon passage, the Senate insist on its amendment, request a conference with the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses, and that the subcommittee and Senators Inouye and Cochran be appointed as conferees; further, that if a point of order is raised against the substitute amendment, it be in order for another substitute amendment to be offered, minus the offending provisions but including any amendments which had been agreed to prior to the point of order; that no further amendments be in order; that the new substitute amendment, as amended, if amended, be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; that the remaining provisions beyond adoption of the substitute amendment remain in effect; that on Thursday, September 17, following a period of morning business, the Senate then resume consideration of H.R. 3288 and proceed to vote in relation to the amendments and motion as specified above, with 2 minutes of debate equally divided and controlled prior to each vote, and that after the first vote in a sequence, the remaining votes be limited to 10 minutes each; further, that the cloture motion be withdrawn.

Mr. President, with that, I would like all Members to know that what we have just agreed to is the final amendments of this bill. If any Senator would like to speak on any of them, they are welcome to come to the floor to do so this evening. But with this agreement, all those amendments will be voted on tomorrow morning, as will be announced at the end of the session today.

Mr. President, just to let all Senators know, with this agreement, there will be no further rollcall votes tonight.

Mr. President, if there are no other Senators who wish to speak on that--I know a number of Senators are waiting to speak in morning business--I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to morning business, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. President, I wish to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the Safe Streets Campaign of Pierce County, WA.

Twenty years ago, Pierce County residents from all walks of life banded together to form the Safe Streets Campaign and to demonstrate the willpower and strength needed to take back their streets from a plague of drug- and gang-related violence and to improve the quality of life in Pierce County.

Over the next two decades, the Safe Streets Campaign has shown itself to be an effective citizen-led initiative to pressing community problems. It has organized over 250,000 residents throughout Pierce County to fight crime, substance abuse, and youth violence in partnership with local law enforcement, State and local government, community-based organizations, faith-based groups, businesses, Native American Tribes, schools, and youth.

For example, Safe Streets established the Youth Leading Change Initiative in Pierce County high schools to empower young people to lead efforts to address the problems of youth substance abuse and violence. These young people engage their peers and community members in a number of valuable ways. They march against violence. They work to reduce blight in high-risk communities. They engage in peer education on the dangers of youth substance abuse. And they work with Washington State lawmakers to craft innovative solutions to these social problems. I have met with many of these young leaders and been impressed with the work that they do.

The proactive community and neighborhood involvement by the Safe Streets Campaign and similar organizations improves the quality of life for families and helps provide a safe environment to raise and educate our children. Its work has led to lower crime rates, reduced 911 emergency calls, helped close thousands of drug houses, sustained ongoing graffiti removal, supported recovering addicts and healthy neighborhoods, and helped youth involved with gangs choose a life of hope rather than a life of crime.

Safe Streets is a shining example of citizen initiative where communities stand up for themselves and take their neighborhoods back from the control of drug pushers, gang members, and associated violence. It has been sustained over the past 20 years through a mix of State, Federal, and local government funding and corporate and individual donor support.

I commend the staff, founders, board of directors, and volunteers of the Safe Streets Campaign of Pierce County for the dedication that has fueled this community initiative from the beginning, and I congratulate them as they celebrate 20 years of commitment to safe communities.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 16, 2009, at 2:30 p.m., to hold a hearing entitled ``Exploring Three Strategies for Afghanistan.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 16, 2009, at 10 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 16, 2009, at 2 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, on September 16, 2009, at 10 a.m. in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``Oversight of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 16, 2009.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Science and Space of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and

Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 16, 2009, at 2:30 p.m. in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Madam President, again, we are on the floor of the Senate today considering the transportation-housing appropriations bill. This is a major appropriations bill with funding for States across the country. I have been talking with a number of Senators who have amendments they would like to offer. Again, this is now the fourth day we have been on the Senate floor. We started on Thursday, we were here Friday, and we were here yesterday. We are here again today. The majority leader would like us to finish this bill tomorrow. We have other appropriations bills that need to be done and conferences to be concluded in order to meet important deadlines for this fiscal year.

Again, I want all Members to know we need them to offer their amendments, if they intend to, so we can wrap up this bill by tomorrow. I expect a few Senators will be here shortly to offer amendments. If other Senators are going to offer amendments, if they could please let us know so we could get them up in order and get votes scheduled so we could move to conclusion on this important bill.

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

Madam President, I thank the Senator from Missouri for explaining very clearly why this amendment should be defeated by this body.

Senator McCain has come out and offered an amendment that would take away funding from every earmark in the bill and put it into the Federal Aviation Administration's NextGen program. That is our effort to modernize the air traffic control system--a very important effort. I will speak to that in a minute.

Let me speak to the earmarks. This is not a new debate. I have stood on this floor many times, as well as other Senators, to defend the right of every Senator here to identify priorities for their home States and to advocate for them. This bill includes earmarks because the Members of the Senate have gone home and identified needs in their communities and brought them to our committee, which we have put into consideration.

It is important to note that there was abuse in the earmark system. We have now reduced earmark spending in this bill to 50 percent of what we had in 2006. In fact, the earmark spending in the bill is less than 1 percent of the total funding. But that funding is as a result of Senators who have gone home, worked with their constituents, identified projects, brought them to the committee, and we scrutinized them. Very few made it into the final bill because of the high caps we have. But they were brought to us by Senators with legitimate needs in their home States.

My concern over this amendment isn't just limited to the investments Senators have asked us to make in their States. I am greatly concerned,

as the Senator from Missouri pointed out, about what this amendment would actually do to the FAA's NextGen program, and I am a strong supporter of that. There is a need to modernize our air traffic control system. For that very reason, this bill now before us provides $865 million for programs that are essential to the NextGen effort. But in order for NextGen to succeed, the FAA has to do more than just put money into it. It needs, as my colleague from Missouri said, strong oversight. If we hand that agency a blank check now for well over a billion dollars, which this amendment asks for, that is not the right way for this body to do oversight or ensure the responsible use of the Federal dollars over which we have oversight.

The FAA has had a long history of budget overruns and schedule increases in its capital programs. Our subcommittee has held numerous hearings on the FAA's need to manage its capital programs more responsibly.

We have heard testimony from the Inspector General of the Department of Transportation on this very issue, and until only recently, the Government Accountability Office has identified this NextGen program as a high-risk management area.

I encourage our colleagues to oppose this amendment. It is not the responsible way to fund the FAA or the Department of Transportation.

Madam President, I yield the floor.

Madam President, I wish to thank Senator Coburn for doing what we have been asking him and other Senators to do and that is to come to the floor and get their amendments offered.

I will be talking with the Senator from Oklahoma, over the next short while, to figure out the order in moving to his amendments for votes, as he has requested. We do have another amendment that had been offered by Senator McCain, amendment No. 2375, which we would like to get a vote on before the caucus luncheons.

Amendment No. 2375

So I ask unanimous consent that amendment No. 2375 be made the pending business.

Madam President, we are currently working out with both sides to move to a vote fairly quickly, so I would advise Senators' offices to be ready for a vote shortly, and we will wait for that to occur here as soon as we can make that happen.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent at 12:24 today the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the McCain amendment No. 2375, with 2 minutes prior to the vote divided and controlled in the usual form, and that no amendments be in order prior to the vote.

Madam President, the bill before us contains 50 percent fewer earmarks than in 2006. Importantly, these are priorities of Senators who have brought them to us. They are less than 1 percent of the bill. Even more important, what the amendment before us does, and I am a strong supporter of NextGen, is it puts money to the FAA that they cannot spend.

This is a program that does need strong oversight. We have been told that in our committee time and time again by the IG and others before us. We want to move forward on the NextGen and we want to do it in a responsible way. This amendment will give them money that they will not be able to spend.

I urge our colleagues to vote against this amendment.

I yield all of our time, move to table the amendment and ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote and to lay that motion upon the table.

The motion to lay upon the table was agreed to.

Mr. President, in response to the Senator from California, the Senator from Oklahoma has offered a number of amendments. We are hoping to debate them this afternoon and vote on them tomorrow morning.

Mr. President, we will make sure, as we put together the order for tomorrow, the Senator can be heard before the votes occur.

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

The Senator from Louisiana offers an amendment that makes sure the community service requirement for people living in public housing remains in effect. This includes part of the existing law and is currently being enforced by public housing authorities. What the amendment of the Senator does is simply restate current law. I will be happy to accept it. If the Senator is willing, we can take it on a voice vote at the present time. I am willing to move forward with it.

Again, we are happy to accept the amendment right now. If the Senator wants to have a vote, if we can work out a time to do that, I am happy to do that as well.

Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Mississippi for his remarks. As ranking member and former chairman of this committee, he knows full well we work very hard to accomplish and complete these bills and to get them done in a timely fashion. We are working our hearts out to get that done.

To that point, the bill before us, the transportation and housing bill, has now been on the floor of the Senate Thursday afternoon and evening, Friday, Monday, all of today, and we will finish it tomorrow. So for any Senators who are sitting out there with issues, you need to come to the floor and get them resolved. We hope to start a series of votes tomorrow morning to get through a number of the amendments that are out there and finish this so we can move to the Interior appropriations bill tomorrow.

So, again, for the notification of all Senators, to the point the Senator from Mississippi raised, come to the floor, resolve your disagreements, or help us schedule a vote. We are going to finish this bill tomorrow.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Calendar Nos. 416, 417, 423, 424, 425, and 426; that the nominations be confirmed en bloc, and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table en bloc; that no further motions be in order; that any statements relating to the nominations be printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action; and that the Senate then resume legislative session.