Floor Statements

Mr. President, I wish to start off by giving a true and heartfelt thank-you to Senator Mikulski. There is no denying she is such a strong and steadfast leader on this issue, and we all so appreciate it. So I am very proud to come to the Senate floor this morning with her and many others to strongly support the Paycheck Fairness Act and to urge Republicans to join with us to pass this critical bill.

Over the past few months, many of us have stood together to fight back against partisan attacks on policies that impact women across America. We have not started these fights, but we were not going to stand by and watch as others tried to roll back the clock. But every time we stood up to defend women, our friends on the other side of the aisle would jump right up and say we were creating distractions or manufactured issues. They said we should be focused on the economy, as if we were the ones changing the subject and making the partisan attacks. Well, we are not going to stop standing up for women and families.

To those of our colleagues who claim to be so concerned about the economy and the middle class, now is their chance to prove to their constituents that they really mean what they say because the Paycheck Fairness Act is not just about women and it is not just about fairness, it is about the economy. When women are not paid what they deserve, middle-class families and communities pay the price.

In 1963 the Equal Pay Act marked one of the first steps toward narrowing the gap between men and women. In 2009 this Senate took another step by passing the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act to reverse the Supreme Court's Ledbetter v. Goodyear case which made it almost impossible for our workers who suffered from discrimination to seek justice.

Although we have made progress since we passed the Equal Pay Act almost 50 years ago, pay discrimination has not gone away. Women in my home State of Washington still earn 77 cents on the dollar. That is a pay gap that averages $11,834 in lost earnings each year. That is an extra 90 weeks of groceries or 179 tanks of gasoline. To women in Washington and to most women across America, that is certainly not a manufactured issue. It is very real.

This comes at a time when more and more families rely on women's wages to put food on the table or stay in their home or build a nest egg, their retirement, or help pay for their children's education.

The importance of women in the workplace has never been as critical as today, and this has become even more evident in this tough economy. The fact is that women are now participating in the workforce at higher rates than ever before, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. So it would seem most appropriate for this Senate to move our country once again toward eliminating pay discrimination and unfairness in the workplace.

The Paycheck Fairness Act that we are going to have a vote on today tackles pay discrimination head-on, and it should not be a partisan issue or only a women's issue. It is good for women, it is good for families, and it levels the playing field for businesses in America that are doing the right thing and paying their workers fairly.

The Paycheck Fairness Act is good for business too. It recognizes employers for excellence in their pay practices, and it strengthens Federal outreach and assistance to all businesses to help them improve equal pay practices. It is time to address this issue and finally close the wage gap for our working women and their families.

I was very proud to stand with Senator Mikulski and other Members of Congress and the President as he signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 to give women who are victims of pay discrimination the tools they need to seek justice. But our work is far from complete. We are still not yet at the point where our daughters can expect to earn the same amount over their lifetime as our sons. That has to change. Now we need to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act as quickly as possible to keep our Nation moving in the right direction.

Again, I thank Senator Barbara Mikulski for her tremendous leadership and steadfastness on this issue and her hard work to make this a reality for every working woman in this country.

I yield the floor.

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

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

Mr. President, we are coming to a very critical vote. Today we have the opportunity to address an issue that affects the bottom line of nearly every American family. The paychecks that American women take home at the end of each week or each month are as tied to our economic health as just about anything else. It is what helps sustain local businesses. It is what pays grocery bills at the end of the month. It makes mortgage payments. Ultimately, the pay women receive as we continue to make up a larger and larger part of our workforce is going to be critical to the growth of this Nation. Yet over the course of the past week, as we have debated this bill in the Senate and across the country, we have been met by either silence or resistance from those on the other side of the aisle. Time and again we have heard the same excuses on why we cannot join together to provide the guaranteed fairness women deserve.

First, we heard this was a ``manufactured issue.'' Mr. President, if you talk to American women all across our country, you will quickly learn what some of my colleagues have called ``manufactured'' is an all-too-real part of everyday American women's lives. Women will tell you that at a time when families across America are struggling to make ends meet, equal pay for equal work should not be a pipe dream; it should be law. They will tell you that nearly 50 years after the Equal Pay Act was signed, the pay gap between what men and women earn is just as real today as it was back then. They will tell you women still earn 77 cents for every dollar earned by men. They will tell you this gap undermines their retirement security because they receive reduced Social Security benefits. Then, most importantly, they will tell you women are not worth less than men.

The other argument we have heard is that this critical vote is in some way a distraction from the economic issues we face, as if somehow the pay of women--who compromise nearly half of all American workers-- is not at its very core an economic issue. Let me be very clear. When women are not paid what they deserve, middle-class families, communities, and our economic growth pay the price.

Let's consider that in my home State of Washington where women still earn 77 cents on the dollar--or a pay gap that averages over $11,000 in lost earnings every year--for the average family that is an extra 90 weeks of groceries, it is 7 months of mortgage payments or it is 179 tanks of gasoline--all at a time when women are participating in the workforce at higher rates than ever before.

Surely, my friends and colleagues on the other side of the aisle realize this is not the time to be denying American families this extra income they need to make ends meet. Surely, we should be guaranteeing American women and their families the fairness they deserve. This should not be a partisan issue. Throughout the history of the Senate, we have joined together to root out discriminatory practices and provide the protections American workers deserve. Today, as American families struggle, it is time to make sure unfair practices are not contributing to those struggles.

Today we have an opportunity to close loopholes in the system that allows for pay discrimination, to create strong incentives for employers to obey the laws that are in place, and to strengthen Federal outreach and enforcement efforts on behalf of women.

Today we all have an opportunity to say the status quo is not good enough. We have the opportunity to tell our daughters we are not going to let another generation face a pay gap because we are unwilling to stand and fight. We have the chance to improve our economy right now. So to those of my colleagues who claim to be so concerned about the economy and the struggles of the middle class, now is your chance to prove to your constituents you mean what you say. Now is the chance to provide nearly half of all Americans with the economic fairness they deserve. Now is the time to guarantee American women equal pay for equal work.

I yield the floor and yield back the remainder of our time.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 15 minutes in morning business and not to take time away from the debate on the bill.

Mr. President, I have had a conversation with them----

Mr. President, next week Americans are going to spend time honoring and commemorating the men and women who died fighting for our great country. Memorial Day is a day to reflect on and give thanks to the sacrifices made by those who made the ultimate sacrifice. It is also a day to look forward and to think about what we all can do to help our veterans who sacrificed so much and who deserve our support when they come home.

So I come to the floor today to discuss an issue that, quite frankly, defies common sense. The high rate of unemployment among recently separated veterans is an issue that continues to make the transition home for veterans harder than ever. Despite the fact that our veterans have the leadership ability and the discipline and technical skills to not only find work but to excel in the workforce of the 21st century, our veterans continue to struggle.

Despite the skill and talent and training of our veterans, statistics continue to paint a grim picture.

According to the Department of Labor, young veterans between the ages of 18 and 24 have an unemployment rate that is nearly 20 percent. One in five of our Nation's heroes can't find a job to support their family, doesn't have an income that provides stability, and doesn't have work that provides them with the self-esteem and pride that is so critical to their transition home.

We know this should not be the case. We shouldn't let the skills and training our Nation's veterans have attained go to waste. That is why all of us joined together to overwhelmingly pass my VOW to Hire Heroes Act here in the Senate late last year. Among many other things, that law would provide tax incentives to encourage businesses to hire veterans; it makes participation in the transition assistance program mandatory for most separating servicemembers, and expands the education and training we provide to transitioning servicemembers.

Thanks to that legislation, we have been able to take real concrete steps toward putting our veterans to work. The tax credit is working, and VA is set to begin accepting applications for a retraining program that will benefit unemployed veterans ages 35 to 60 and help them get back to work.

But that bill is only that, a first step. Today I am here to talk about the next step, and that step is to build partnerships with private businesses, large and small, all across our country, to hire our Nation's heroes. Recently I was up in New York where I participated in a lively roundtable discussion hosted by the Robin Hood Foundation. This discussion on veterans employment was moderated by Tom Brokaw on the USS Intrepid and brought together people of various backgrounds, including former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs ADM Mike Mullen, and Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan, to talk about this important issue.

What is very apparent is that there is momentum to build public- private partnerships. What is also apparent is there is a lot of room for improvement in this area.

I want to first make clear that a lot of companies across the country are far ahead of the curve. In fact, many private sector companies have already joined our efforts in addressing this critical issue. J.C. Penney, one of America's largest retailers, and Joseph Abboud, a men's clothing company, partnered with Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America to launch the Welcome Home Joe--Thanks A Million Program.

To prepare veterans for job interviews, this program has provided 5,000 veterans with certificates to purchase business attire. For the last decade, we have expected our brave men and women in uniform to prepare for the battlefield. In the process, they have become accustomed to wearing combat boots and battle dress uniforms. Now they are expected to wear a suit and tie for job interviews--something that sometimes seems pretty foreign to them. But thanks to this program, thousands of transitioning veterans can now hang up their battle dress uniforms and dress for their next challenge.

Other companies such as Schneider National, one of America's largest

trucking companies, are realizing the skills our veterans have gained over the last decade of work are directly applicable to their business. Schneider National recognizes that a veteran who has driven a 7-ton truck across Afghanistan's dangerous and rugged terrain is more than qualified to drive a freight truck across our Nation's roads. In addition to providing many veterans with new jobs, Schneider National also provides newly separated veterans with on-the-job training through their military apprenticeship program. As part of that program, veteran employees are eligible to earn a monthly educational benefit check from the VA in addition to a paycheck. Schneider National serves as a great example of how companies can hire veterans who have proven they can perform on the job but lack proper certifications for civilian employment.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce also should be commended for launching its Hiring Our Heroes initiative which has sponsored 150 hiring fairs in 48 of our States. At one of these recent hiring fairs, General Electric, the employer of 10,000 veterans, launched its veterans network transition assistance program. As part of that program, General Electric has vowed to hire 1,000 additional veterans every year for the next 5 years and provides job-seeking veterans with one-on-one mentoring sessions. Those sessions help transitioning veterans improve resume writing and interviewing techniques so they can capitalize on the skills they have developed during their military service.

That is just a fraction of the work being done by our Nation's employers. There are many success stories at big companies such as Home Depot and small companies such as General Plastics in my home State which has created a pipeline to hire veterans at its aerospace composite factory. All of these companies are not only examples of success stories but they have also created a roadmap about how best to find, hire, and train veterans. It is our job to make sure those lessons are being heard.

Today I am here on the floor to lay out a few things that all businesses, large and small, can do to bring our Nation's heroes into their companies. First, get the word out to companies to educate their human resources teams about the benefits of hiring veterans and how skills they learned in the military translate to the work a company does. I can't tell my colleagues how often I hear from veterans who tell me the terms they use in interviews and on resumes fail to get through to the interviewer.

Second, help our companies provide job training and resources for transitioning servicemembers. This is something I have seen done at large organizations such as Amazon and Microsoft, but also at smaller companies in conjunction with local colleges. In fact, the most successful of these programs capitalizes on skills developed during military service but also utilizes on-the-job training.

Third, let business leaders know how important it is to publicize job openings with our Veterans Service Organizations at local military bases so we can help connect veterans with jobs, and to work with local one-stop career centers.

Fourth, develop an internal veterans group within our companies to mentor recently discharged veterans.

Finally, if possible, please reach out to local community colleges and universities to help develop a pipeline of the many veterans who are using GI bill benefits to gain employment in a particular area.

If we can spread the message on just a few of these steps, I am confident we will be able to continue to build on the success we have had in hiring veterans.

There is one other even more important step we have to take to ensure that businesses are taking, and it has to do with the difficult issue that some potential employees face. I have heard repeatedly from veterans that they do not put their military service on their resume because they fear it stigmatizes them. They fear that those who have not served see them all as damaged or unstable. We have to understand what mental health challenges are and what they are not.

As we seek to employ more veterans, we need future bosses and coworkers to understand that issues such as posttraumatic stress or depression are natural responses to some of the most stressful events a person can experience. We need them to understand that these illnesses do not afflict every veteran and, most importantly, we need to understand that for those who are affected by these illnesses, they can get help, they can get better, and they can get back to their lives. We need to let businesses know if they have a veteran who is facing some challenges, we should do the right thing and encourage him or her to get help. They need to know it is OK to reach out. Help them take advantage of the excellent mental health care the VA is capable of providing. The veteran will be better and they will be an even stronger member of a company's team.

Those are some steps our employers can take, but we also need to make sure our veterans are taking steps to stand out as candidates. Unfortunately, too often our veterans don't see how the skills they learned in the military translate from the battlefield to the working world. One of the biggest reasons for that is often our veterans don't understand the vernacular of the working world.

A few weeks ago I was home in Washington State talking about this issue when I met a woman named Anne Spurte. Anne is a veteran. She helps other local veterans find work through an organization called The Unfinished Mission. Anne told me how often she has heard from veterans who told her they were not qualified for the jobs they had seen on line or in the paper. Repeatedly they told her they didn't see how their experiences mattered to employers in the area. So one day in front of a whole group of veterans, Anne pulled out this job advertisement from Boeing for a position as a fabrication specialist. Anne could once again sense that the veterans who sat there and read this ad thought they weren't qualified for this manufacturing job that is listed in Boeing's space exploration division. But then Anne concentrated all the attention of the veterans in the room on the competency and qualifications section that was listed on that job advertisement and she asked all of them: Did you spend time in the service working together to remove obstacles to help a team accomplish its goals? Did you work to fully involve others on the team in decisions and actions? Were you held responsible? Did you demonstrate your commitment to the team? Around the room, all of these veterans' heads were nodding as she read verbatim from the Boeing job announcement. Every veteran understood they had the core skills employers at Boeing were looking for, but they just didn't realize it.

What Anne made those veterans come to understand was that their skills were being lost in translation, and what many of them needed to do was simply articulate their experiences in a way that employers could understand.

So today I want to reiterate to all of our veterans that no matter what branch you served in or when you served or how long you served, the skills you learned are valuable and it is up to you to make sure employers see that.

Our veterans don't ask for a lot. Oftentimes they come home and don't even acknowledge their own sacrifice. My own father never talked about his time fighting in World War II. In fact, I never saw his Purple Heart or knew that he had a wallet with shrapnel in it from when he was hit or a diary that detailed his time in combat, until after he died and my family gathered to start sorting through his belongings. But our veterans shouldn't have to ask. We should know to provide for them.

When my father's generation came home from the war, they came home to opportunity. My father came home to a community that supported him. He came home to college and a job--a job that gave him pride and helped him start a family and one that ultimately led to me starting my own.

That is the legacy of opportunity we have to live up to for today's veterans. Together, working with the private sector, we can ensure that the brave men and women who have worn our uniform have that real opportunity. We can make sure they get a fair shot from America's employers, that they are not measured by fear or stigma but by what they can do, what they have done, and what they will do.

I thank those companies that are leading the way as our veterans transition from military service to the civilian workforce. The Veterans Affairs' Committee, which I chair, has a Web site with a list of some of those companies that are contributing to this effort. I would encourage all of our colleagues to visit that Web site and suggest companies that can be added to our list. I look forward to working with all of them, and many more of our Nation's businesses, on this important next step in bringing our veterans home to opportunity.

As we celebrate our fallen heroes on Memorial Day next week, let's all keep thinking about how we can make sure our veterans are getting everything they need after they have given so much.

Before I yield the floor, I wish to take a moment to acknowledge a young Marine reservist, an Afghanistan combat veteran, who has been working part time on my Veterans' Affairs Committee staff for the last year. Carlos Fuentes is a hard-working, well-liked young man who graduated from American University earlier this month. He has helped our committee get a better understanding of what our veterans are facing when they are looking for work, and I want to thank him for his continued service to our Nation. I need my colleagues to know that Carlos is going to be getting married this weekend and I wish him and his bride many happy years to come.

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

Mr. President, I too wish to thank the Senator from Tennessee, as he referred to how we are working together on a bipartisan basis on the Better Pharmaceuticals and Devices for Children Act--a very critical piece of this legislation that I will talk about in just a few minutes as well. But I would like to thank him for working with us, and really I want to thank all of the Senators who worked very hard on this piece of legislation, working with stakeholders and advocates for over a year on the bill that will be on the floor later this afternoon. I commend Chairman Harkin as well as Ranking Member Enzi for working together in a bipartisan fashion to get this to the floor today.

I hope all of our colleagues really understand the critical importance of moving forward with this bill as efficiently as possible because, as many people know, if we do not make this legislation a priority, by the end of September over 2,000 employees at the Food and Drug Administration are going to be sent packing with pink slips. But what is just as important, if not more important, is that failure to pass this legislation will put drug and medical device approval at a standstill. That will not only halt innovation but it will put the lives of many Americans at risk while they wait for potentially lifesaving medicine.

No one knows the importance of that more than Seattle Genetics, a company in my home State of Washington. In August of last year, Seattle Genetics received FDA accelerated approval of a drug intended to treat Hodgkin's lymphoma, the first of its kind approved by the FDA in more than 30 years.

As a biotech company, Seattle Genetics' relationship with the FDA was really vital to the work they were doing to bring this drug to patients who were in need. Ultimately, Seattle Genetics received FDA approval 11 days earlier than expected, and that meant they were able to anticipate the timing of its approval, organize their sales teams, and ship the first business day following approval for a patient already waiting for that critical drug. That kind of collaboration would not have been possible had the FDA lacked the resources necessary to make it a reality.

I believe that Clay Siegall, who is the president and CEO of Seattle Genetics, was truly able to underscore the issue of what we are discussing here today. I want to tell you what he said.

It is only through working with an FDA--that has the

resources and dedication to achieve thorough and timely

reviews--that we are able to fulfill our promise to improve

the lives of people through innovation. Passage of this bill

helps to provide both the resources and incentives for FDA to

rapidly review and approve important therapeutic

breakthroughs for patients in need.

That highlights the importance of this legislation.

I also wish to highlight another part of this bill that I have been very focused on, as the Senator from Tennessee just talked about, and that is the need to make sure drugs and medical devices are specifically tested and labeled and proven to be safe and effective for our children. This is so important for families and doctors across America.

I really want to thank Chairman Harkin as well as Ranking Member Enzi for including my bill, the Better Pharmaceuticals and Devices for Children Act, in the broader legislation we are considering here today.

I was very proud to work with Senator Alexander, along with Senators Reed and Roberts, to put together this commonsense legislation. This bipartisan language will make sure our children are prioritized in the drug development process and that drug labels provide clear, detailed information about the proper use and dosage of medications for children. It will give parents and doctors more information, and it will make sure the key programs

we count on to protect our children do not expire. It will push to make sure children are never just an afterthought when it comes to the safety and effectiveness of our Nation's drugs and medical devices.

Mr. President, as you have heard today, this is a bill that has received bipartisan support. I commend all of the Senators who have worked on it in a bipartisan way. We don't get credit for that enough in this country. But this is certainly one where everybody came together and worked together in committee. This bill holds the livelihood of so many Americans in its balance.

I urge the Senate to move forward quickly and support the legislation and get it passed.

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

Mr. President, today I wish to recognize Charlie Earl for his exemplary record of public service to the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges and the people of Washington State.

Charlie Earl will retire on July 31, 2012, after more than 40 years of public service in the State's higher education system and a variety of government positions. He most recently served for 6 years as the executive director of the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges and 7 years as president of Everett Community College. As the executive director, Charlie worked to increase public access to higher education while enhancing the quality of Washington State's career and technical education system. All the while, the past several years have seen the most difficult economic environment in Washington State's recent history. As our State budget tightened, spending on our community colleges decreased by 22 percent, but this did not stop Charlie from developing a vision for the State and leading toward it with energy, passion, and commitment.

While Charlie served as executive director, he propelled Washington's community and technical colleges to be among the most innovative in the country. Charlie's leadership supported the development and expansion of the Washington State student achievement performance award, opportunity grants, 4-year applied baccalaureate degrees, an open course library, and the Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training, I-BEST, Program. These changes allowed for many students to return to school to earn their diploma or certificate or learn new skills required of the 21st century workforce. The I-BEST Program challenges the traditional notion that students must complete all basic education before they can begin postsecondary education or training. This model allowed students to move through school, earn degrees, and join the skilled workforce faster and with less cost to the student, State, and Federal Government. I am not alone in seeing this as a revolutionary model in adult education. In 2011, the I-BEST Program was named a ``Bright Idea'' by Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government and is being replicated in 20 other States. All of this would not have been possible if not for Charlie's leadership, advocacy, and stewardship of the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Education and its staff.

During Charlie's tenure, enrollment increased at Washington's 34 colleges by 80,000 students. This was clearly no small feat. Washington State has also seen the largest increase in certificates and degrees since the community and technical college system began tracking this statistic. This was achieved not simply because more students are enrolling in career and technical education but because more students are reaching important academic goals and building momentum to finish their academic program. As you can clearly see, Charlie worked tirelessly to promote student access, and ensure all students are making timely progress towards their education and career goals. The achievements of the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges during Charlie's tenure as executive director have been remarkable.

Charlie graduated from the University of Washington with a bachelor's degree in finance and from Washington State University with a master of arts degree in political science. He serves as chair of the National Council of State Directors of Community Colleges, is a past president of the Washington Association of Community and Technical Colleges, and has been a board member of the Washington Council on Aerospace, Workforce Training and Education Coordinating Board, Early Learning Advisory Council, Governor's Job Creation Subcabinet, and National Governors' Association Compete to Complete Advisory Group. Charlie's entrepreneurial spirit and unwavering commitment to student success will be sorely missed. I join with many in Washington State in congratulating Charlie on his achievements, and I look forward to seeing all that he will accomplish in his retirement.

Mr. President, today, as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I am proud to introduce the Dignified Burial of Veterans Act of 2012 with Senator Burr, Ranking Member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, and my Senate colleagues from the state of Florida, Senators Nelson and Rubio.

When America's heroes make a commitment to serve their country, we make a promise to care for them. One of the many ways in which we care for our veterans is by helping to provide them with a burial that honors their service.

That is why I was concerned when I learned that a veteran at a VA National Cemetery had an inappropriate burial. This veteran, with no known next-of-kin, was buried in a cardboard container that later disintegrated to the point where the veteran's remains were exposed and found during a raise and realign project at the cemetery. The veteran's remains were later placed in a bag and reburied with what was left of the cardboard box. This defies logic.

There is no reason why the remains of a veteran should ever be treated with this lack of dignity.

Yet, under current law, VA is not authorized to purchase a casket or urn for veterans who do not have a next-of-kin to provide one, or the resources to be buried in an appropriate manner.

We must take steps to prevent this from occurring again. That is why this bill would authorize VA to furnish a casket or urn to a deceased veteran when VA is unable to identify the veteran's next-of-kin and determines that sufficient resources are not otherwise available to furnish a casket or urn for burial in a national cemetery. This bill would further require that VA report back to Congress on the industry standard for urns and caskets and whether burials at VA's national cemeteries are meeting that standard.

I think we can all agree that every veteran deserves a dignified burial. Today, I am pleased to stand with my bipartisan colleagues to introduce a bill that would ensure that they receive one.

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

Mr. President, today, as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I am proud to introduce the Dignified Burial of Veterans Act of 2012 with Senator Burr, Ranking Member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, and my Senate colleagues from the state of Florida, Senators Nelson and Rubio.

When America's heroes make a commitment to serve their country, we make a promise to care for them. One of the many ways in which we care for our veterans is by helping to provide them with a burial that honors their service.

That is why I was concerned when I learned that a veteran at a VA National Cemetery had an inappropriate burial. This veteran, with no known next-of-kin, was buried in a cardboard container that later disintegrated to the point where the veteran's remains were exposed and found during a raise and realign project at the cemetery. The veteran's remains were later placed in a bag and reburied with what was left of the cardboard box. This defies logic.

There is no reason why the remains of a veteran should ever be treated with this lack of dignity.

Yet, under current law, VA is not authorized to purchase a casket or urn for veterans who do not have a next-of-kin to provide one, or the resources to be buried in an appropriate manner.

We must take steps to prevent this from occurring again. That is why this bill would authorize VA to furnish a casket or urn to a deceased veteran when VA is unable to identify the veteran's next-of-kin and determines that sufficient resources are not otherwise available to furnish a casket or urn for burial in a national cemetery. This bill would further require that VA report back to Congress on the industry standard for urns and caskets and whether burials at VA's national cemeteries are meeting that standard.

I think we can all agree that every veteran deserves a dignified burial. Today, I am pleased to stand with my bipartisan colleagues to introduce a bill that would ensure that they receive one.

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

I will attempt to do my best.

Mr. President, I wish to thank Senator Conrad for his leadership on this issue. At the end of last week, the Republicans in the House of Representatives passed legislation that continues their mad dash away from the bipartisan Budget Control Act and reflects the upside-down priorities that are guiding their party and stands absolutely no chance of passage in the Senate.

I think it would be very helpful at this point to remind my colleagues of the recent history that has brought us to this point.

In August of last year Democrats and Republicans came together, and we agreed to the Budget Control Act to cut spending and put in place a process for additional deficit reduction. The purpose of that bipartisan agreement was to move toward serious deficit reduction and to give some consistency to the Federal budget so the American people would not be threatened with a government shutdown every few months. That bipartisan deal sets the levels for next year's discretionary spending, which allows Congress to do its jobs and work to allocate Federal resources toward investments in jobs, infrastructure, innovation, maintaining our commitment to our servicemembers and their families, and protecting and supporting the middle-class families and so much more.

That was the agreement we came to. Speaker Boehner shook on it, Minority Leader McConnell shook on it, Majority Leader Reid signed it, joined many of my colleagues in voting for it, and then President Obama signed it into law. It became the law of the land. I would add it is binding and replaces and carries more weight than a budget resolution. It makes the budget resolutions we are debating today nothing more than political theater.

Senate Democrats fully intend to honor our word and stick to the bipartisan budget levels for next year, and Senate Republicans in our Appropriations Committee, including the minority leader, recently voted to stick to those levels as well. I was disappointed that less than 9 months after we shook hands on that deal House Republicans turned right around and broke it. They put appeasing their extreme base ahead of the word they gave to us and the American people. They demonstrated clearly that a deal with them isn't worth the paper it is printed on.

Despite House Republicans reneging on the deal, the Budget Control Act is the law. It is signed, and we have so many challenges ahead of us as a nation we cannot afford to relitigate bipartisan deals every time members of the extreme end of the Republican Party make some noise in a meeting. House Republicans are not only trying to relitigate that Budget Control Act, they want to pretend it never happened.

As part of that deal, in addition to the $1 trillion in discretionary spending cuts, a joint select committee on deficit reduction was formed to reduce the deficit by at least an additional $1.2 trillion. In fact, if they couldn't come to an agreement, the bipartisan Budget Control Act put in place automatic spending cuts, or sequestration, which spread evenly across defense and nondefense spending.

We all knew at the time the sequestration was not the ideal way to reduce spending, but we wanted to have that in place so that painful cuts were prominent and would help both sides to come to a bipartisan compromise.

I was called on by the majority leader to cochair that committee with Republican Representative Jeb Hensarling, and I am proud of that committee's hard work. I was extremely disappointed in the end that committee was not able to come up with a bipartisan deal.

I want to be clear--because this is very relevant today--we weren't able to get a deal because Republicans refused to even consider tax increases on the wealthiest Americans. The talks fell apart around that issue and that issue alone.

I came to the table with many of my colleagues with proposals for serious compromises on spending and a willingness to move forward with smart changes to strengthen entitlements. We knew many of these compromises would be painful, but we were willing to put them forward to get to a bipartisan deal and a balanced deal. But as much as we offered, we couldn't get our Republican colleagues to give an inch when it came to taxes on the wealthiest Americans and the biggest corporations even though the rich are paying the lowest tax rates today in generations. They were fundamentally opposed to any plan that would call on the wealthy to pay a penny more in taxes.

In poll after poll Americans overwhelmingly say they want to see a balanced approach to tackling the deficit and debt that puts everything on the table, including revenue. Every single bipartisan group that has come together to tackle this--from Simpson-Bowles, Domenici-Rivlin, Gang of 6--has included a balanced approach that reduces spending and raises revenues. That is the only real and fair way to tackle this challenge, and it simply doesn't make any sense to solve this problem with cuts alone.

So as we watch House Republicans rolling back the automatic cut they don't like and acting as though the bipartisan Budget Control Act never happened, I say to them today what I said to the Republicans in the joint select committee: We will not allow the debt and deficit to be reduced on the backs of our middle-class and most vulnerable Americans without calling on the wealthiest to contribute as well. It is not fair, it is not what the American people want, and it is not going to happen. We are facing these automatic cuts because Republicans continue to protect the rich above all else. Unless that changes before the end of the year, our country is going to have to face the consequences of intransigence.

Republicans in the House of Representatives are not only acting as though the BCA never happened, they are highlighting the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of a party that allows itself only to think in terms of cutting, shrinking, eliminating, and never in terms of investing and growing and fairness. The legislation they passed would roll back sequestration for next year by simply taking funding from programs middle-class families and the most vulnerable Americans count on and shifting it to defense. They want all of the deficit reduction from the Budget Control Act without any bipartisan compromise or shared sacrifice.

Since they refuse to consider raising taxes on the wealthy, the only way they can increase spending on defense is by absolutely devastating critical government investments in our families and in our future.

According to a report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the House legislation would not only roll back sequestration on the defense side, it would increase overall defense spending by over $8 billion.

And while they may say they are rolling back the automatic cuts on non-defense spending too, this report shows House Republicans are slashing these programs almost three-quarters of the way to what would be cut under sequestration.

Since they need to find a way to pay to undo the automatic cuts they don't like, their bill cuts even deeper into programs millions of families across America count on.

According to that same CBPP report, the Republican legislation would cut food assistance to the most vulnerable families, Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program, and block grants for States to run programs to help families and workers get back on their feet.

So House Republicans are actually increasing defense spending, protecting the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations, and throwing the entire burden on the backs of middle class families and the most vulnerable Americans.

That's not just bad policy, it is simply wrong.

If Democrats were willing to accept a wildly imbalanced deficit reduction plan to avoid the automatic cuts, we would have done that in the Joint Select Committee. But we didn't then, and we won't now.

Any bipartisan deficit reduction plan, whether the goal is to reduce the deficit in a better way than the sequesters or to put our country on sound fiscal footing over the long term, has to be balanced. It has to be fair. And it has to work for middle class families across America. That means responsibly cutting spending. It means making sure entitlement programs that seniors and the most vulnerable families depend on are strengthened and secured for the next generation. It means examining where we can save money on the defense side. And it means raising revenue from the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations who are paying close to the lowest levels in generations.

Because budgets aren't just numbers on a page. They aren't just about charts and formulas and trajectories. Those are important but budgets are also about real people, with real lives. They are about investments in our families, our communities, and our economy. They are about the kind of country we want to be now and in the our future. And above all, budgets are about the choices and priorities of a nation.

Democrats are willing to make compromises. We are willing to have those tough conversations and come to the difficult agreements we know are necessary. We are willing to put everything on the table.

And I truly hope Republicans decide they are ready to do the same and end their commitment to protecting the rich from paying a penny more in taxes. Because while so many families continue to struggle, I think it's more than fair to ask the richest Americans to pay their fair share.

While we scour programs that so many middle class families rely on for

fat to trim, I think it makes sense to scour the tax code in just the same way and eliminate the egregious loopholes that the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations take advantage of.

And while oil and gas companies are making record profits, I think it just makes sense to end the handouts they get every year from U.S. taxpayers.

So Democrats stand ready to work with Republicans on this. But what House Republicans did last week has moved us in the wrong direction, and makes it even harder to get to the bipartisan deficit reduction deal they say they want.

So I urge them to end this partisanship.

Stop allowing a small and extreme minority of members to dictate policy for an entire chamber of Congress. Stop protecting the wealthiest Americans from sharing in the sacrifices so many Americans are making every day, and to truly work with us to get this done for the American people.

As soon as that happens, Democrats stand ready to get to a balanced and bipartisan deal.

The choices we make as a body in the coming months will affect every single American. As we have said from the start, we will put everything on the table, but that word is ``everything.'' We cannot come to a solution in America unless everybody contributes and there is shared sacrifice. That is the principle we have been fighting for, it is the one we will continue to fight for, and that is what the American people want. I am proud to stand with my party to continue to fight for that.

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 to speak as in morning business.

Mr. President, it is very hard to believe that today marks exactly 2 months since I first came to the floor to advocate passage of the Senate's version of the Violence Against Women Act. I was very encouraged to see our body finally come together and eventually support this important legislation. The Violence Against Women Act has helped provide lifesaving assistance to hundreds of thousands of women and their families, and it certainly was a no- brainer to make sure all women had access to that assistance.

However, I was very disappointed to learn that, a day after we passed it, House Republicans pulled an immediate U-turn and introduced their version of the bill that would undo the commonsense progress we made. The House Republican version of VAWA is a giant step backward for victims of domestic violence. It is dangerous and irresponsible and leaves women across the country more vulnerable to domestic abuse. Not only do they remove important protections that would be created by the Senate version of the bill, they actually strip existing protections already provided by this important law. In fact, it removes critical protections for LGBT victims, does little to address the epidemic of domestic and sexual violence in tribal communities, removes critical protections already in place for students on college campuses, and it rolls back protections for immigrant victims.

We have made a lot of progress since VAWA was first passed back in 1994. I hope no one will insist on putting partisan politics ahead of protecting victims of domestic violence. Where a person lives, whom they love or what their citizenship status may be should not determine whether their perpetrators are brought to justice.

The Senate bill that we passed last month builds on what works in the current law, it improves what doesn't, and it continues on the path of reducing violence toward women. It certainly should not be controversial.

Mr. President, it is time for the House Republicans to come to their senses and support our bipartisan bill so that women and families in this country can get the resources and support they need.

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

Mr. President, I would like to take a moment today to recognize National Secretary-Treasurer of the American Federation of Government Employees AFGE, J. David Cox, the recipient of the 2012 Yitzhak Rabin Public Service Award.

This award is given out by the American Friends of the Yitzhak Rabin Center each year to individuals who reflect Prime Minister Rabin's legacy of peace, leadership, and public service. Having come to know and appreciate J. David's accomplishments, I feel that he is more than a fitting recipient of this honor.

Over the course of his decades-long involvement with AFGE and AFL CIO, J. David has worked tirelessly to ensure that Federal employees here in Washington, D.C. and across the nation enjoy the dignity, fair pay, and safe working environment that they deserve. Based upon the number of leadership positions he has been elected to by his fellow Federal workers, it is clear that they approve of his efforts. In the past, he has served as Executive Vice-President of the AFGE National Veterans Affairs Council, President of AFGE Local 1738 in North Carolina, and Co-Chair of the Department of Veterans' Affairs National Partnership Council. In addition to his role as National Secretary- Treasurer, he currently is vice co-chair of the AFL CIO's Union Veterans Council, vice-president of North Carolina State AFL CIO, and was appointed by President Obama to serve on the Federal Salary Council and the Federal Prevailing wage council.

J. David got his start in the Federal workforce in 1983 as a registered nurse within the Department of Veterans Affairs. He served our nation's veterans for 23 years before moving on to AFGE in 2006. As Chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I have come to value J. David as an important advocate for veterans as well as VA's Federal workforce. J. David has testified before us several times over recent years and has established himself as a key asset to the Committee. Throughout his testimony, J. David has always sought to make sure that the doctors, nurses, and other health professionals at VA have the resources they need to provide the best possible care to our veterans. In particular, his vocal support for assured funding and VA budget reform help to lead to the current 2-year appropriations process that VA uses today.

I am grateful for J. David's work and applaud the American Friends of the Yitzhak Rabin Center for selecting him as one of this year's award recipients. I offer my sincerest congratulations to J. David and hope that he continues to fight for Federal employees and veterans into the future.

Mr. President, we are here today because unless Congress acts, the interest rate for many of our students--over 100,000 of them in my home State of Washington--is going to double in 55 days.

On July 1, the law we passed that held rates on federally subsidized Stafford loans to 3.4 percent will end, and rates are going to jump overnight to 6.8 percent. That is going to add $1,000 to the cost of loans for these young people, and it is going to be another huge strain for students and families who are already fighting to afford college and still struggling in this tough economy.

This isn't an abstract issue for me. For me it is very personal. Pell grants and student loans were what allowed my six brothers and sisters and me to go to college when my dad got sick and had to leave his job. They were what made college affordable for us, and they were what allowed each one of us to pursue careers and give back to our communities. Because our government was there for us, at a very tough time for us, those seven kids in my family grew up to be a firefighter, a lawyer, a computer programmer, a sports writer, a homemaker, a middle-school teacher, and a United States Senator--a pretty good investment by our country. And our family's story is not unique.

In fact, last week I went across my home State of Washington listening to student after student describe the real-life impacts this interest rate hike will have on their livelihood. The Columbian, a newspaper in Vancouver, Washington, wrote a story on the roundtable I held last week with local students. As the Columbian reported: the rate hike would impact students like Dora Hernandez, a first-generation college student at Washington State University in Vancouver. They reported that: Dora became a mother at the age of 18, 2 months after she graduated from high school. She worked two to three jobs at a time to support herself and her child. It was at one of those jobs working the concession stand on a college campus that inspired her to improve her own life by earning a postsecondary degree. She received some financial aid, but she will still have $29,000 in student loans to pay back when she graduates this month, she told me, proudly standing right in front of that concession stand she used to work at. She has no job lined up yet. She said:

I was flabbergasted to find out how much student loan debt

I've accrued. Honestly, I'm scared. I hope Congress finds a

way to keep interest rates on student loans down for students

like me.

The Columbian also reported the story of Diane Robinson, a 24-year- old single mom who told me she decided to enroll at Clark College after a divorce left her with absolutely nothing. She told me:

I would not be here without the loans. It would be

impossible.

Through her tears, Diane told me that she was raised to repay her debts and worries about her looming student loan payments every single day. She said:

If there is an increase on student loan interest rates, it

will compromise my quality of life. Repaying the debt I have

accrued will be essential for me to have a happy future.

For millions of Americans, affordable college has been the ticket to the middle class. And for millions of small business owners, finding local workers with the education skills they need has been what has allowed them to expand and grow in our communities. We cannot afford to let that slip away. We can't allow access to college to become unattainable for so many of our families. As we all know, college costs are rising too quickly right now anyway. In fact, since 1985, the cost of a college education has increased by 559 percent because States have had to cut back their support for higher education and operating costs have increased. Student loan debt has spiked, and for the first time in U.S. history, the national student debt burden has surpassed $1 trillion. That is more than the total amount of credit card debt.

So the last thing our students right now need--the very last thing-- is for interest rates on this critical loan program to double. We cannot afford to allow that to happen. At a time when mortgage rates are under 4 percent, we should be doing everything possible to keep rates low for students today. In fact, we should be investing in our future and trying to get more high school students to continue their education. We should not be doubling interest rates on a critical loan program that students count on. It does not make sense.

The Stop the Student Loan Interest Rate Hike Act that is before us is a commonsense measure that will prevent a rate hike on more than 7.4 million college students, and it pays for it by closing a tax loophole that allows certain wealthy professionals to dodge paying their fair share of taxes. So I hope we can move to this today.

I want to add, it is not just the students I talked about, Dora and Diane, who are speaking out against this rate hike. In fact, if our Republican colleagues do decide to block our ability to go to this bill today, I know that students all across our country are going to continue to make their voices heard about this--whether it is in person or in letters or on Twitter or on Facebook--and we will bring those stories right here to the Senate over and over until Republicans see that the students of America are not going to take no for an answer on this critical issue that will affect their lives far into the future.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, it is a shame it has taken so long to get to this point, but I am very glad to see we are close to having this body move forward on this legislation.

The Violence Against Women Act has helped provide lifesaving assistance to hundreds and thousands of women and families, and it was certainly a no-brainer to make sure that all women had access to that assistance. I was proud to have been here serving in the Senate in 1994 when we first passed VAWA. Along with its bipartisan support, it received praise from law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges, victims, service providers, faith leaders, health professionals, advocates, and survivors. It obtained that broad support because it has worked.

Since it became law 18 years ago, domestic violence has decreased by 53 percent. We have made a lot of progress since 1994, and I am glad we are continuing on that path today on behalf of all women. In fact, Deborah, is here with us today.

Deborah is the Vice Chairwoman of the Tulalip Tribe in my home State of Washington.

Yesterday she joined Senators Boxer, Klobuchar and me to tell her emotional story about the devastating effects violence can have on women--especially Native women.

Deborah was repeatedly abused, starting at a very young age, by a non-tribal man who lived on her reservation. Not until after the abuse stopped around the 4th grade did Deborah realize she wasn't the only child suffering at the hands of her assailant--at least a dozen other young girls had fallen victim to this man.

This is a man who was never arrested for these crimes; never brought to justice; and still walks free today. All because he committed these heinous acts on the reservation--and as someone who is not a member of a tribe, it is an unfortunate reality that he is unlikely to be held liable for his crimes.

The debate we had over the provisions in this legislation was a matter of fairness.

Deborah's experience--and the experience of the other victims of this man--does not represent an isolated incident.

In fact 34 percent of Native Women will be raped; 39 percent of Native Women will be subjected to domestic violence; and 56 percent of Native Women will marry a non-Indian who most likely would not be held liable for any violent crimes committed if these protections hadn't been included in this legislation.

Where people live and who they marry should not determine whether or not perpetrators of domestic violence are brought to justice.

With this bill today, we are taking a major step to uphold our government's promise to protect its citizens.

This bill builds on what works in the current law, improves what doesn't, and it continues on the path of reducing violence toward women.

It certainly should not have been controversial.

It is time for us to come together and support this bill so women and families across America can get the resources and support they need.

I particularly want to thank the courageous work of this wonderful tribal woman to help explain to all of us why the bill we have put before the Senate is so critical today.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, it is with great privilege that I congratulate BG John R. McMahon, division commander of the Northwest Division of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, on his well-deserved retirement after a long and successful career serving our country. Brigadier General McMahon has been stationed with the Northwest Division since 2009, and my staff and I have had the pleasure of working extensively with him during that time.

An example of Brigadier General McMahon's leadership ability was his response to a storm that caused serious damage to the Howard Hanson Dam in King County. The storm raised the flood threat for hundreds of thousands of residents in the Green River Valley, which is home to one of the largest manufacturing and distribution bases on the west coast. Brigadier General McMahon and the Army Corps reacted quickly and decisively to respond and repair right abutment seepage issues and other potential failure modes, allowing the facility to return to normal operation in less than three years.

During his tenure, Brigadier General McMahon addressed the need to replace three lock gates on the Columbia-Snake River navigation system, and that was no small feat. He has also worked extensively to lay the groundwork with the Department of State in preparation for the upcoming renewal of the Columbia River Treaty. Brigadier General McMahon's hard work leaves a strong legacy upon which these important efforts may progress.

Additionally, as we all know, the Missouri River system witnessed some of the worst flooding in history in 2011. Under Brigadier General McMahon's leadership, the Army Corps responded quickly and efficiently to minimize the threats of rising floodwaters and to answer calls for help in repairing the extensive damage caused by these floods. For this, so many are grateful. His professionalism and expertise helped our Nation through this disaster and undoubtedly lessened the destruction and prevented loss of life.

On behalf of all who live in the Pacific Northwest, I thank Brigadier General McMahon for his dedication to the safety and well-being of the people of our region. His knowledge, experience, and tireless effort will be sorely missed. Mr. President, I congratulate General McMahon and wish him and his family the best of luck in their future endeavors.

Madam President, I come to the Senate floor this evening to express my strong opposition to the resolution of disapproval filed by Senate Republicans that seeks to overturn critical new NLRB rules that will protect workers across America. I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose it. Some of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle frequently complain about how we spend our time on the Senate floor. Today, I have to say I am disappointed that we are being forced to spend valuable time on this issue.

Middle-class families across America are continuing to struggle in this very tough economy, and it is hard to understand why Senate Republicans want to spend time attacking an agency's mission to protect workers and employers and is critical to protecting access to the middle class for workers and families.

Thankfully, as we all know, our economy seems to be stepping back from the precipice. But for so many workers today paychecks still have not caught up, benefits continue to slip away, hours are getting cut, and job security is eroding. That is why I was very glad that at the end of last year, the NLRB voted to adopt modest commonsense rules that would make it easier for workers to fight for fair treatment in the workplace and help bring NLRB into the 21st century.

These new rules aren't going to solve every problem, but they are a step in the right direction and will help workers and families across the country. The new NLRB rules will strengthen and streamline the voting process by reducing unnecessary litigation and intentional delays. It will streamline pre- and postelection procedures, and it will facilitate the use of electronic communications and document filing. Those are all commonsense steps that should not be controversial.

I am extremely disappointed that Senate Republicans want to now eliminate these rules and roll back the clock on worker protections. The resolution we are going to vote on would eliminate steps to standardize and add transparency to the employee election process. It would eliminate steps that reduce frivolous litigation and create a more cohesive and productive workplace for workers and businesses. It will fundamentally weaken NLRB processes and procedures that workers and businesses rely on when they are trying to settle disputes.

It is bad for business, bad for working families, and it should not pass. Workers across this country deserve a fair process in the workplace. The NLRB rule this resolution would eliminate removes some of the unfair and unnecessary roadblocks so many workers face every day. I have to say that while we are discussing this issue, I want to express my disappointment and anger at the recent report from the inspector general about improper and politicized activities by a current Republican member of the NLRB board, an individual who previously worked for another board member who is a former staffer for a Republican Member of the Senate. That report details multiple instances of ethics misconduct, including the sharing of confidential information with outside parties. I am hopeful that issue will be fully investigated. I am deeply worried about the actions some people will take to undermine an agency with a mission to protect the rights of workers and employers. And honestly, I find it to be a sad statement about the nature of our politics today, because the NLRB is doing a lot of good work for workers in America and it shouldn't be tarnished with this sort of ethics issue.

This agency has borne the brunt of political attacks over the last year from special interest groups and elected officials trying to score political points at the expense of workers and families. Many of these attacks have been inaccurate; many have been unfair. Some have used the case involving Boeing and workers in my home State

of Washington to weaken the agency, even while the NLRB work is what allowed the two sides to come together and find a solution to that challenge. So I think this is wrong and these attacks should end.

The NLRB election rules are modest, they are commonsense steps toward a fairer system for workers and businesses and will help us move toward a system that works for everyone, and they will help make sure our workers can simply exercise their rights to bargain for fair wages, for benefits and equitable treatment under the law. That is what our workers expect, it is what they deserve, and it is what the NLRB is working to deliver.

Once again, I urge our colleagues to vote against that resolution of disapproval. It is the wrong way to go for workers. It is the wrong way to go for businesses and for the middle class.

Madam President, I yield the floor.