Floor Statements

Mr. President, I will vote today against cloture on amendment No. 436, dealing with subsidies for the ethanol industry, because its author used inappropriate procedural tactics to attach it to an unrelated bill devoted to economic development.

I support eliminating unnecessary tax subsidies to the ethanol industry, but today's vote is a political maneuver orchestrated by members of the minority party. I am pleased that the Senate will have an opportunity to vote on the merits of this issue, without extraneous debates over Senate procedure and process, in the coming days.

I will then support this measure to eliminate subsidies to the ethanol industry, which is necessary to save taxpayer dollars, reduce the deficit, and rein in our national debt.

Mr. President, I was unavoidably absent during today's vote to extend three expiring provisions of the PATRIOT ACT, due to my son's college graduation. I voted to extend these provisions earlier this year when this legislation was before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Had I been able to attend today's vote, I would have voted again with the majority to extend these provisions.

Additionally, I would have voted to table amendment No. 363, which would have prohibited the use of any PATRIOT Act authorities to investigate or procure records relating to firearms. I would also have voted to table

amendment No. 365, which would have sharply curtailed existing rules that help the Treasury track the financial activities of terrorists.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to extend my remarks to 15 minutes, if necessary.

Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, we all have a shared commitment to our Nation's veterans. That shared commitment is reflected in many of the programs that are supported by yourself and my other colleagues in this body every year. I deeply respect the knowledge and dedication that my fellow Senators have brought to this critical issue. Each of my colleagues, almost without exception, has supported measures that have helped our veterans over the years.

I rise to introduce my first piece of legislation, a bill to help our Nation's veterans.

Our Nation must keep faith with the men and women who have served and sacrificed for our freedom. Unfortunately, and unconscionably, America is still failing them and their families by tolerating unemployment, homelessness, and inadequate health care. We must renew our commitment to the more than 250,000 veterans in Connecticut and 22 million across the country to ensure that no veteran is left behind.

Our commitment to veterans must be unwavering. Despite our best intentions, we fail all too often to accord our veterans the support they have earned. Unfortunately, according to the Department of Veterans Affairs, more than 76,000 veterans are homeless on any given night and nearly twice that number will be homeless at some point during the year. The unemployment rate among veterans has doubled over the past 3 years. Twenty-seven percent of veterans in their early twenties are unemployed. That number is almost twice the unemployment rate of their peers who have not served in the military. The Bureau of Labor Statistics recently reported that unemployment for veterans who served their country after September 2001 to be 11.5 percent, again, a figure far higher than the national unemployment rate.

Twenty percent of Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans are estimated to suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. When veterans return home, they must wait at least half a year, on average, for a claims decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs before they can receive benefits. Those numbers are simply unacceptable. As I speak today, America's longest war continues, with less than 1 percent of the Nation in uniform. Never in the history of the country have so few fought for so long, at such great personal cost and sacrifice.

Under the leadership of Secretary Shinseki, the Department of Veterans Affairs has taken strong steps toward the goal of building a 21st century system that supports caregivers of seriously injured Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, improving services to women veterans, expanding the availability of health care, and preventing veteran homelessness.

Gaps in the system remain, and they are debilitating, destructive, and devastating for many veterans. We can do better and we must do more. The legislation I introduce today is entitled Honoring All Veterans Act of 2011. Its 16 comprehensive provisions are only the first phase of my efforts.

This legislative proposal is a comprehensive package but only an opening salvo in a sustained, unceasing campaign to ensure that no veteran is left behind. It is a downpayment on a larger debt. The goal is to give all veterans the homecoming and the services they need and deserve. Our military men and women have kept their promise to serve and sacrifice for this country, and we must now keep faith with them. Our commitment to veterans should reflect the depth of their sacrifice. This measure is entitled Honoring All Veterans Act because all veterans are brave service men and women, serving today in places we can barely pronounce the names of. They are deployed around the globe, and they deserve to be honored for defending our freedom and democracy. We must honor that service not only in words but in deed.

This legislation comes from veterans and their families--seeing and hearing their struggles and dreams, their achievements and defeats as I have worked for them during my 20 years as attorney general and 4-plus months as a Senator.

In the VFW and American Legion halls, in living rooms, in school auditoriums, and in countless gatherings across the State of Connecticut, I have been privileged to listen and learn from veterans and their families who have shared their personal stories and insights.

This legislation simply continues the work I have done as attorney general. I worked to make the Department of Defense release information on those who may have been improperly separated from military service, and urged the Department of Veterans Affairs to update its obsolete database systems that were preventing tens of thousands of disabled veterans from obtaining deserved tax benefits. In 2007, I worked with the Connecticut congressional delegation to make the Department of Defense provide accurate information about educational benefits to veterans. I have fought for them individually when they encountered bureaucratic resistance and red tape from an unresponsive system. I am proud of that work and proud, most important, of my partnership with veterans in Connecticut in proposing this legislation. My goal then, and it has been continuously, is to keep faith with our veterans, to honor our promises to them.

This Honoring All Veterans Act of 2011 will address four key areas: first, expanding job opportunities for veterans; second, assisting homeless veterans; third, improving veterans health care, with a special emphasis on mental health services; fourth, modernizing the Department of Veterans Affairs.

On expanding job opportunities to honor all veterans and give them the welcome home they deserve, we need to focus first on jobs. Like all Americans, veterans are striving to provide for their families and participate in the economic recovery to find jobs in our slowly recovering economy. Good jobs require education and training, as well

as independent living services for veterans. Our Nation has done much to address this issue, such as the expanded post-9/11 GI bill, but gaps in the system remain. They are all too glaring. My legislation will expand job opportunities in five significant ways.

First, the legislation raises the statutory cap for the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Independent Living Program to welcome hundreds of additional veterans. This vital program helps veterans with severe service-connected disabilities, enabling them to live independently. It helps veterans with those kinds of disabilities to participate in family and community life and increases their potential to return to work. There is a strong case for removing the cap on participation in the program. I would like to recognize the distinguished junior Senator from Hawaii for the work that he has done in this regard. I hope that my legislation will ensure the program can continue to assist veterans coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan, while Congress works to find funding to remove the cap completely.

Second, the legislation authorizes veterans to reuse the Department of Defense Transition Assistance Program, known as TAP, and meet with counselors at any military installation for up to 1 year after their separation. This program was developed to assist military personnel leaving the service with information about jobs, education, and career development. Veterans returning to Connecticut wishing to participate again in the Transition Assistance Program should have that opportunity to participate for a second time, maybe even a third time. Coming back from deployment, servicemembers are often focused on other important aspects of the transition process, rather than how to find a job. They may have never written a resume before or attended a job interview. Having started the job search they have specific areas where they realize they need help. I discussed this idea at a recent Senate Armed Services Committee hearing with the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Manpower and Reserve Affairs. He testified that the military is right now in the process of redesigning the TAP program. I am going to work toward having this provision included in the redesign of the TAP program so that TAP continues to be an opportunity once a servicemember returns home.

Third, the legislation authorizes a study of how best to ensure that civilian employers and educational institutions recognize veterans' military training. The military recruits the most talented men and women in America to serve, and then it invests heavily in their professional development. Yet when they trade their uniforms in for civilian clothes, employers and others such as professional accrediting organizations often refuse to recognize or understand how to make use of their military experience and the expertise they have gained.

The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America reported that 61 percent of employers do not believe they have ``a complete understanding of the qualifications ex-servicemembers offer,'' and recently separated servicemembers with college degrees earn on average almost $10,000 less per year than their nonveteran counterparts.

One way to close this gap is to have the Department of Defense review the list of military occupations specialties, such as the 22 MOS's in Army engineering or 16 MOS's in Army communications, and ensure that completing MOS qualifications will provide those servicemembers with credentials recognized by civilian employers.

The study authorized in this legislation will start that process. I am committed to working in the Senate to see this problem resolved.

Fourth, the legislation reauthorizes the Veterans Education Outreach Program to provide money for campus-based outreach services to veterans. This program was first established in 1972 to provide colleges with a significant number of veterans on campus with additional resources to make sure those students get the most out of their educational experience and use VA benefits available to assist them. I believe that the return of veterans from deployments during the Global War on Terror requires the same kind of on-campus support. While there are other programs helping veterans pay the cost of tuition and many colleges have great veterans services on-campus, the Veterans Education Outreach Program is the missing link to ensuring veterans are informed about their VA benefits and maximizing the opportunity to study and obtain employment.

Fifth, the legislation authorizes a comprehensive program at the Department of Labor to assist veterans with TBI or PTSD in the workplace. It provides technical assistance to employers of veterans living with those conditions and provides best practices relating to helping those employees develop successful strategies for on-the-job success. The legislation requires the Office of Disability Employment Policy to coordinate an inter-agency working group which will produce a federal homecoming plan for reintegration of these veterans. These tasks have been conducted to a limited degree by the Department of Labor through the America's Heroes at Work program and the Veterans Employment & Training Services and they are to be commended for their efforts to date. However, by defining these requirements in statute, it is my hope that these programs will expand to reach all veterans that need help.

This legislation also reaches veterans in a variety of other key areas. Recently, a female veteran visited my office. She and her two children were homeless and needed help. In their case, we could find temporary shelter. But on the issue of homelessness, many veterans do not know where to turn or are hesitant to do so. The current per diem given to homeless veterans does not address rising costs and regional variations in helping homeless veterans. Women are particularly underserved now, and my hope is that new housing projects take care of female veterans. For example, the Newington Mission Homeless Project in my state will help forgotten heroes find shelter. The Honoring All Veterans Act reforms the per diem program and helps military families avoid homelessness by permanently extending their foreclosure protection for servicemembers.

On improving veteran health care and mental health services, as I have traveled Connecticut meeting with veterans, I have seen firsthand how veterans with traumatic brain injury or post-traumatic stress disorder face unique challenges in accessing the Department of Veterans Affairs for benefits and medical assistance. Veterans deserve the best possible medical care, particularly when it comes to treating TBI or post-traumatic stress. These are the signature wounds of the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. More than a quarter of these injuries are undiagnosed, according to the military itself. Then too often, even if they are diagnosed, servicemembers are screened but do not receive a full course of treatment.

To address this issue, my legislation requires the Department of Defense to identify and then close the gap between screenings and treatment. Simply diagnosing a soldier or a marine with symptoms of PTSD or TBI does not heal them.

This legislation also addresses the problem of finding qualified psychiatrists, psychologists, and nursing professionals to work in VA medical hospitals and outpatient clinics by accessing graduates from the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences. This university trains outstanding medical professionals for military service. Under existing law the Secretary may exempt graduates from working in a military hospital after graduation, based upon forecast demand. The Honoring All Veterans Act allows those graduates identified by the Secretary as excess to military requirements to serve out their commitment in the VA medical systems, rather than releasing them to private hospitals. This provision is just one example of how the legislation is crafted to better utilize the existing resources of the DOD and VA medical systems.

Modernizing the Department of Veterans Affairs is the final section of this legislation. It addresses the DOD and VA transition process through improved monitoring and oversight. It increases pension benefits and gives veterans grounds for appeal at the Board of Veterans Appeals if the VA has misplaced or misfiled their documents.

I hear about this problem, as my colleagues do, again and again as I listen to veterans. Recently, a veteran visited

my office. He has been waiting on a hearing date with the Board of Veterans Appeals for over a year.

His story is typical.

This legislation provides much needed improvement to the Board of Veterans Appeals. I look forward to working with my colleagues to address other much needed improvements.

We can honor our veterans whose claims are stuck in the Board of Veterans Appeals by confirming judges to the court that reviews them. Three of those nine seats are now vacant, and each judge must preside over 600 cases per year, far more than any other Federal appellate court.

Finally, in closing, let me recognize the many veterans throughout the State of Connecticut who helped me craft this measure.

I thank CDR Richard DiFederico of the VFW and CDR Daniel Thurston of the American Legion for their very dedicated work, not only in assisting me but day in and day out on behalf of veterans.

I thank Bob Janicki, who has spent recent years after serving this country in the U.S. Marine Corps during the Vietnam era, for providing help to homeless veterans and veterans seeking jobs.

Paul ``Bud'' Bucha is a veteran and friend with the most distinguished service record possible in winning the Medal of Honor. His life after military service, giving back to other veterans and managing several successful companies, has been an example of how veterans continue to provide leadership with courage and vision.

MSG Frank Alvarado has made a number of very helpful suggestions, including, for example, reauthorizing the Veterans Education Outreach Program.

I would also like to acknowledge my deep respect to Dr. Linda Schwartz, who has been a tireless advocate for all veterans.

Connecticut is blessed to have the leadership of veterans who help each other, care for each other, look out for each other. I look forward to working with them in ensuring that this legislation is passed. I have no illusions that accomplishing passage of these kinds of measures will be easy, but I hope for support across the aisle. This kind of goal certainly ought to unite us, not divide us. We have so much more in common on this issue than in conflict. I am hoping we can work together to ensure that we keep faith with our veterans, that we honor their service, ensure that we welcome them home with the kind of services they need and deserve so that no veteran will be left behind.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a summary of this legislation.

Mr. President, we all have a shared commitment to our Nation's veterans. That shared commitment is reflected in many of the programs that are supported by yourself and my other colleagues in this body every year. I deeply respect the knowledge and dedication that my fellow Senators have brought to this critical issue. Each of my colleagues, almost without exception, has supported measures that have helped our veterans over the years.

I rise to introduce my first piece of legislation, a bill to help our Nation's veterans.

Our Nation must keep faith with the men and women who have served and sacrificed for our freedom. Unfortunately, and unconscionably, America is still failing them and their families by tolerating unemployment, homelessness, and inadequate health care. We must renew our commitment to the more than 250,000 veterans in Connecticut and 22 million across the country to ensure that no veteran is left behind.

Our commitment to veterans must be unwavering. Despite our best intentions, we fail all too often to accord our veterans the support they have earned. Unfortunately, according to the Department of Veterans Affairs, more than 76,000 veterans are homeless on any given night and nearly twice that number will be homeless at some point during the year. The unemployment rate among veterans has doubled over the past 3 years. Twenty-seven percent of veterans in their early twenties are unemployed. That number is almost twice the unemployment rate of their peers who have not served in the military. The Bureau of Labor Statistics recently reported that unemployment for veterans who served their country after September 2001 to be 11.5 percent, again, a figure far higher than the national unemployment rate.

Twenty percent of Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans are estimated to suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. When veterans return home, they must wait at least half a year, on average, for a claims decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs before they can receive benefits. Those numbers are simply unacceptable. As I speak today, America's longest war continues, with less than 1 percent of the Nation in uniform. Never in the history of the country have so few fought for so long, at such great personal cost and sacrifice.

Under the leadership of Secretary Shinseki, the Department of Veterans Affairs has taken strong steps toward the goal of building a 21st century system that supports caregivers of seriously injured Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, improving services to women veterans, expanding the availability of health care, and preventing veteran homelessness.

Gaps in the system remain, and they are debilitating, destructive, and devastating for many veterans. We can do better and we must do more. The legislation I introduce today is entitled Honoring All Veterans Act of 2011. Its 16 comprehensive provisions are only the first phase of my efforts.

This legislative proposal is a comprehensive package but only an opening salvo in a sustained, unceasing campaign to ensure that no veteran is left behind. It is a downpayment on a larger debt. The goal is to give all veterans the homecoming and the services they need and deserve. Our military men and women have kept their promise to serve and sacrifice for this country, and we must now keep faith with them. Our commitment to veterans should reflect the depth of their sacrifice. This measure is entitled Honoring All Veterans Act because all veterans are brave service men and women, serving today in places we can barely pronounce the names of. They are deployed around the globe, and they deserve to be honored for defending our freedom and democracy. We must honor that service not only in words but in deed.

This legislation comes from veterans and their families--seeing and hearing their struggles and dreams, their achievements and defeats as I have worked for them during my 20 years as attorney general and 4-plus months as a Senator.

In the VFW and American Legion halls, in living rooms, in school auditoriums, and in countless gatherings across the State of Connecticut, I have been privileged to listen and learn from veterans and their families who have shared their personal stories and insights.

This legislation simply continues the work I have done as attorney general. I worked to make the Department of Defense release information on those who may have been improperly separated from military service, and urged the Department of Veterans Affairs to update its obsolete database systems that were preventing tens of thousands of disabled veterans from obtaining deserved tax benefits. In 2007, I worked with the Connecticut congressional delegation to make the Department of Defense provide accurate information about educational benefits to veterans. I have fought for them individually when they encountered bureaucratic resistance and red tape from an unresponsive system. I am proud of that work and proud, most important, of my partnership with veterans in Connecticut in proposing this legislation. My goal then, and it has been continuously, is to keep faith with our veterans, to honor our promises to them.

This Honoring All Veterans Act of 2011 will address four key areas: first, expanding job opportunities for veterans; second, assisting homeless veterans; third, improving veterans health care, with a special emphasis on mental health services; fourth, modernizing the Department of Veterans Affairs.

On expanding job opportunities to honor all veterans and give them the welcome home they deserve, we need to focus first on jobs. Like all Americans, veterans are striving to provide for their families and participate in the economic recovery to find jobs in our slowly recovering economy. Good jobs require education and training, as well

as independent living services for veterans. Our Nation has done much to address this issue, such as the expanded post-9/11 GI bill, but gaps in the system remain. They are all too glaring. My legislation will expand job opportunities in five significant ways.

First, the legislation raises the statutory cap for the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Independent Living Program to welcome hundreds of additional veterans. This vital program helps veterans with severe service-connected disabilities, enabling them to live independently. It helps veterans with those kinds of disabilities to participate in family and community life and increases their potential to return to work. There is a strong case for removing the cap on participation in the program. I would like to recognize the distinguished junior Senator from Hawaii for the work that he has done in this regard. I hope that my legislation will ensure the program can continue to assist veterans coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan, while Congress works to find funding to remove the cap completely.

Second, the legislation authorizes veterans to reuse the Department of Defense Transition Assistance Program, known as TAP, and meet with counselors at any military installation for up to 1 year after their separation. This program was developed to assist military personnel leaving the service with information about jobs, education, and career development. Veterans returning to Connecticut wishing to participate again in the Transition Assistance Program should have that opportunity to participate for a second time, maybe even a third time. Coming back from deployment, servicemembers are often focused on other important aspects of the transition process, rather than how to find a job. They may have never written a resume before or attended a job interview. Having started the job search they have specific areas where they realize they need help. I discussed this idea at a recent Senate Armed Services Committee hearing with the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Manpower and Reserve Affairs. He testified that the military is right now in the process of redesigning the TAP program. I am going to work toward having this provision included in the redesign of the TAP program so that TAP continues to be an opportunity once a servicemember returns home.

Third, the legislation authorizes a study of how best to ensure that civilian employers and educational institutions recognize veterans' military training. The military recruits the most talented men and women in America to serve, and then it invests heavily in their professional development. Yet when they trade their uniforms in for civilian clothes, employers and others such as professional accrediting organizations often refuse to recognize or understand how to make use of their military experience and the expertise they have gained.

The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America reported that 61 percent of employers do not believe they have ``a complete understanding of the qualifications ex-servicemembers offer,'' and recently separated servicemembers with college degrees earn on average almost $10,000 less per year than their nonveteran counterparts.

One way to close this gap is to have the Department of Defense review the list of military occupations specialties, such as the 22 MOS's in Army engineering or 16 MOS's in Army communications, and ensure that completing MOS qualifications will provide those servicemembers with credentials recognized by civilian employers.

The study authorized in this legislation will start that process. I am committed to working in the Senate to see this problem resolved.

Fourth, the legislation reauthorizes the Veterans Education Outreach Program to provide money for campus-based outreach services to veterans. This program was first established in 1972 to provide colleges with a significant number of veterans on campus with additional resources to make sure those students get the most out of their educational experience and use VA benefits available to assist them. I believe that the return of veterans from deployments during the Global War on Terror requires the same kind of on-campus support. While there are other programs helping veterans pay the cost of tuition and many colleges have great veterans services on-campus, the Veterans Education Outreach Program is the missing link to ensuring veterans are informed about their VA benefits and maximizing the opportunity to study and obtain employment.

Fifth, the legislation authorizes a comprehensive program at the Department of Labor to assist veterans with TBI or PTSD in the workplace. It provides technical assistance to employers of veterans living with those conditions and provides best practices relating to helping those employees develop successful strategies for on-the-job success. The legislation requires the Office of Disability Employment Policy to coordinate an inter-agency working group which will produce a federal homecoming plan for reintegration of these veterans. These tasks have been conducted to a limited degree by the Department of Labor through the America's Heroes at Work program and the Veterans Employment & Training Services and they are to be commended for their efforts to date. However, by defining these requirements in statute, it is my hope that these programs will expand to reach all veterans that need help.

This legislation also reaches veterans in a variety of other key areas. Recently, a female veteran visited my office. She and her two children were homeless and needed help. In their case, we could find temporary shelter. But on the issue of homelessness, many veterans do not know where to turn or are hesitant to do so. The current per diem given to homeless veterans does not address rising costs and regional variations in helping homeless veterans. Women are particularly underserved now, and my hope is that new housing projects take care of female veterans. For example, the Newington Mission Homeless Project in my state will help forgotten heroes find shelter. The Honoring All Veterans Act reforms the per diem program and helps military families avoid homelessness by permanently extending their foreclosure protection for servicemembers.

On improving veteran health care and mental health services, as I have traveled Connecticut meeting with veterans, I have seen firsthand how veterans with traumatic brain injury or post-traumatic stress disorder face unique challenges in accessing the Department of Veterans Affairs for benefits and medical assistance. Veterans deserve the best possible medical care, particularly when it comes to treating TBI or post-traumatic stress. These are the signature wounds of the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. More than a quarter of these injuries are undiagnosed, according to the military itself. Then too often, even if they are diagnosed, servicemembers are screened but do not receive a full course of treatment.

To address this issue, my legislation requires the Department of Defense to identify and then close the gap between screenings and treatment. Simply diagnosing a soldier or a marine with symptoms of PTSD or TBI does not heal them.

This legislation also addresses the problem of finding qualified psychiatrists, psychologists, and nursing professionals to work in VA medical hospitals and outpatient clinics by accessing graduates from the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences. This university trains outstanding medical professionals for military service. Under existing law the Secretary may exempt graduates from working in a military hospital after graduation, based upon forecast demand. The Honoring All Veterans Act allows those graduates identified by the Secretary as excess to military requirements to serve out their commitment in the VA medical systems, rather than releasing them to private hospitals. This provision is just one example of how the legislation is crafted to better utilize the existing resources of the DOD and VA medical systems.

Modernizing the Department of Veterans Affairs is the final section of this legislation. It addresses the DOD and VA transition process through improved monitoring and oversight. It increases pension benefits and gives veterans grounds for appeal at the Board of Veterans Appeals if the VA has misplaced or misfiled their documents.

I hear about this problem, as my colleagues do, again and again as I listen to veterans. Recently, a veteran visited

my office. He has been waiting on a hearing date with the Board of Veterans Appeals for over a year.

His story is typical.

This legislation provides much needed improvement to the Board of Veterans Appeals. I look forward to working with my colleagues to address other much needed improvements.

We can honor our veterans whose claims are stuck in the Board of Veterans Appeals by confirming judges to the court that reviews them. Three of those nine seats are now vacant, and each judge must preside over 600 cases per year, far more than any other Federal appellate court.

Finally, in closing, let me recognize the many veterans throughout the State of Connecticut who helped me craft this measure.

I thank CDR Richard DiFederico of the VFW and CDR Daniel Thurston of the American Legion for their very dedicated work, not only in assisting me but day in and day out on behalf of veterans.

I thank Bob Janicki, who has spent recent years after serving this country in the U.S. Marine Corps during the Vietnam era, for providing help to homeless veterans and veterans seeking jobs.

Paul ``Bud'' Bucha is a veteran and friend with the most distinguished service record possible in winning the Medal of Honor. His life after military service, giving back to other veterans and managing several successful companies, has been an example of how veterans continue to provide leadership with courage and vision.

MSG Frank Alvarado has made a number of very helpful suggestions, including, for example, reauthorizing the Veterans Education Outreach Program.

I would also like to acknowledge my deep respect to Dr. Linda Schwartz, who has been a tireless advocate for all veterans.

Connecticut is blessed to have the leadership of veterans who help each other, care for each other, look out for each other. I look forward to working with them in ensuring that this legislation is passed. I have no illusions that accomplishing passage of these kinds of measures will be easy, but I hope for support across the aisle. This kind of goal certainly ought to unite us, not divide us. We have so much more in common on this issue than in conflict. I am hoping we can work together to ensure that we keep faith with our veterans, that we honor their service, ensure that we welcome them home with the kind of services they need and deserve so that no veteran will be left behind.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a summary of this legislation.

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

Madam President, I am very pleased and honored to join my distinguished colleagues--most recently the occupant of the chair--as we pledge to continue to fight to stand for women's health care and to fight the devastating cuts that are incorporated in the House Republican budget.

This fight against these cuts is essential not only for the health of millions of women across the United States but also for our health care system and even for the effort to cut the debt and deficit, which has to be one of our most important goals.

In the end, these cuts are as far from cost-effective as any could possibly be. In the end, they will actually raise the cost of health care in this country because they will deny millions of women and girls preventive health care, which saves money in the long run. Preventive health care enables everyone to avoid the most costly consequences-- costly in terms of the pain and suffering and worry and concern that comes from failure to diagnose and treat problems earlier rather than later.

Indisputably, preventive and coordinated health care saves money. This Republican budget will cost more money. It also will have an impact on States, unquestionably. In Connecticut, 114,000 people will lose Medicaid if this program is changed into a block grant program, and Connecticut will lose $16.1 billion in health care benefits if our government in the State of Connecticut will have to shoulder this greater financial burden. The same will be true of other States across the country that will have to bear more of the costs. Taxpayers at the State level will pay those costs.

Again, that is as far from cost-effective as any program could be. The real consequences--the most dramatic and most immediate effect of this very misguided and cruel House Republican budget will be on women and children predominantly because Medicaid and Medicare serve them more than any other part of our population. Medicaid provides, in Connecticut, for example, 77 percent of the public funding for family planning. Medicaid pays for 35 percent of all the births in the State of Connecticut. The burden will fall on them disproportionately, and it will have real human consequences for women and children.

In a very pernicious way, it will also enable and encourage States to wage, at their level, the kind of ideological war on women's health we have seen, unfortunately and unconscionably, at the Federal level. We can already see the beginnings of it. In the State of Indiana, for example, they enacted legislation to prohibit Planned Parenthood from receiving Medicaid funds to be used for women's health care.

Think of it--Medicaid money cut completely for family planning, for cancer screening, for all kinds of preventive services that constitute the bulk of what Planned Parenthood does in Indiana and across the country under a law that is not only bad public policy but also illegal.

I thank the administration for recognizing the illegality of this law. It has done so in a statement recently issued by the Department of Health and Human Services. It has said unequivocally that this Indiana law that prohibits Planned Parenthood health centers from receiving Federal funds for family planning services under Medicaid and title X contravenes Federal law. Now we will ask--and I am circulating a letter to my colleagues to this effect--the Federal Government to take action that will provide real teeth for this statement and show that similar laws now pending in other legislatures, such as Kansas, Oklahoma, and elsewhere, will also bring compliance action from the Federal Government.

The fact of the matter is family planning services provided by Medicaid are a mandatory benefit under Federal law. Congress created this legal program for beneficiaries in 1972, and it was so concerned about the availability of family planning services that the Federal Government and this Congress required that they cover 90 percent of all of the cost of services in this area--an unprecedented incentive and a clear signal as to the importance of these services.

The Indiana law threatens access to vital preventive health care for millions of women in that State. Its precedent threatens the same kind of family planning and preventive care for millions more women across the country. And this body has, in effect, rejected that kind of restriction by a vote of 58 to 42 when we had to consider the continuing resolution just weeks ago.

Finally, this ideological war in Indiana is misguided, it is costly in dollars and in lives, and it should not be tolerated. Certainly it should not be permitted by the kind of approach that is embodied in the House Republican budget. I believe the Members of this body will take a stand against it and fight the kind of war on women's health care the House Republican budget so dramatically reflects.

Thank you, Mr. President.

I rise today to voice my concerns about a great deal of controversy surrounding a complaint issued under the National Labor Relations Act against the Boeing Company. Boeing recently decided to open a new plant in South Carolina. The National Labor Relations Board's acting general counsel issued a complaint because of evidence that this decision was made in retaliation for recent strikes at the Boeing plant in the Puget Sound area.

I hope there is no dispute about a couple of points. First, Boeing is a highly reputable company that produces great products valued around the world, and great jobs. Not just jobs but good jobs. There should be no doubt also about the importance of public debate, robust criticism of government agencies, including the National Labor Relations Board, when it makes decisions that spark disagreement. I have the greatest of respect for my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who may have been critical of NLRB decisions in the past and of this action in the present. There should be no doubt also about the importance of the integrity of the NLRB process which begins with a complaint, which is all we have here against Boeing, and then has a procedure for consideration by an administrative law judge of the facts and the law, then to the full board of the NLRB, and a right of appeal to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit.

Here, in this instance, there has been a series of attacks on the complaint and the acting general counsel that involve apparent efforts to impede or derail that process and to prejudge and even preempt that process. The effect is to politicize and potentially stop what should be a legal proceeding handled under the appropriate rules and laws and statutes by an independent government agency. This issue is about the integrity of the process.

At this point there is only a complaint against Boeing. This complaint was issued on the basis of statements and documents and actions by the company itself. There is certainly evidence, including at least one Boeing executive's statements, that the company may have retaliated against workers. The NLRB and Lafe Solomon, the acting general counsel, have not only the right but the responsibility to investigate and act where the facts and the law establish a right and obligation to do so. So no one should be trying to prejudge this case before it goes before the administrative judge, and no one should be seeking a pass from the appropriate process, and no one should be seeking to intimidate or to interfere with this lawful proceeding. I come to the floor today because of the prospect of exactly that danger occurring.

On May 12, Chairman Darrell Issa, representing the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, sent a letter to the acting general counsel of the NLRB requesting that it produce virtually all internal documents relating to this case. Indeed, the letter has a number of specific paragraphs that are sweeping in their scope, requesting, for example--demanding--that all documents and communications referring or relating to the Office of General Counsel's investigation of Boeing, including but not limited to all communications between the Office of General Counsel and the National Labor Relations Board. The House committee, with all due respect, is not a court. It is not the administrative judge. It is not a proper party to be demanding these documents in the course of a lawful judicial proceeding. The chairman's attempt to insert the committee into this case by conducting its own round of discovery at this point would interfere with the NLRB's ability to prepare and present its case before a real judicial officer.

These actions and some others are an attack on the integrity of the NLRB, an attack on its ability to make decisions and enforce the law as the Congress has instructed it and required it to do based on decisions involving the facts and the law alone. The NLRB is part of our justice system, and it should be given the opportunity to do justice in this instance. It should be given the opportunity to protect fairness and peace at the workplace, which is ultimately its mandate and its very solemn responsibility, and its tradition. Its mandate from the Congress is to protect jobs and foster economic growth by maintaining peace and fairness at the workplace. These priorities should be shared by all of the country. I certainly believe and hope that the people of Connecticut want fairness and peace in the workplace, as we do in our workplaces.

The NLRB, very simply, should be given that opportunity to do justice without improper or inappropriate interference by Members of the Congress or anyone else. My hope is that it will be vindicated and the attacks will cease, and that it will be given the opportunity to go forward lawfully and appropriately and properly.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mr. President, I rise today to support the nomination of Professor Goodwin Liu's nomination to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Very simply, America deserves and needs the best of our legal profession on the bench, the best Americans on the bench. Goodwin Liu is an extraordinary American and an exceptional lawyer, and he will serve with distinction on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals if he is confirmed by the Senate, as I urge he should be.

He is qualified by reason not only of his remarkable intellect but also his professional experience, his life experiences, which are important to anyone who serves on the Federal bench. As demonstrating his intellect, he graduated with honors from Stanford University in 1991. He was a Rhodes scholar, graduating with honors also from Oxford. He then went to the Yale Law School, where he was editor of the Yale Law Journal, and clerked for two distinguished Federal judges, including Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

He has been a professor and a dean at the University of California- Berkeley School of Law. He has worked in private practice, including serving as a special assistant to the Deputy Secretary of Education. But his life has been about public service. Indeed, he served for 2 years at the Corporation for National Service, helping to begin the AmeriCorps National Service Program.

He has dedicated immense amounts of time to representing and serving the disadvantaged, including minority and low-income children in public schools, and he has received numerous awards, not only for his academic performance but also for that public service.

He brings to the bench potentially also life experience and diversity as an Asian American. There is no Asian-American member at present on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. There should be and Professor Liu ought to be that judge.

He has been endorsed by jurists across the political spectrum. Ken Starr, the former Watergate prosecutor, said about him that he has ``obvious intellect and legal talent.''

Ken Starr also highlighted Professor Liu's ``independence and openness to diverse viewpoints, as well as his ability to follow the facts and the law to their logical conclusion, whatever its political balance may be.''

That is a quality that is priceless in a jurist. It is to be valued on the Federal bench, it is to be sought, and it is the reason he has been endorsed, as well, by Clint Bolick, Bob Barr, Tom Campbell, John Hu, Richard Painter--the list could go on. But that list is simply reflective of that quality of the open-mindedness and willingness to listen that the Federal bench, and any bench, needs today.

He is supported by business leaders and law enforcement officials, including a bipartisan group of 27 former judges and prosecutors and the California Correctional Peace Officers Association. Again, endorsements reflect quality.

I want to finish by talking about a couple of qualities that I think are particularly important. One of them is the willingness to admit error and recognize the need for acknowledging error,

as Professor Liu did in the hearing I attended. By the way, he has had numerous hearings--an extensive review by this body. In that hearing most recently, he acknowledged statements that perhaps should have been said differently, could have been said better. We all, from time to time, commit those kinds of errors, but rarely do people have the courage to acknowledge them. Professor Liu is the kind of human being who searches for the best in himself, as well as in others. He has a quality of integrity I think is perhaps most important in a Federal judge, or any jurist, and I hope across the political spectrum in this body there will be support for Professor Liu when his nomination comes to a vote within the next couple of days.

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

Madam President, I wish to thank the Senator from Washington State for her leadership on this issue and for her eloquent remarks just now, as well as other Senators who have championed this cause, as I have, over years when we have fought rising gasoline prices in the State of Connecticut relentlessly and tirelessly, and now I rise here in support of this legislation, the Close Big Oil Tax Loopholes Act, which would fundamentally restore fairness to our markets and tax system.

Over the last decades, the big five oil companies have taken home about $1 trillion in profits while enjoying tens of billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies, giveaways, sweetheart deals, and preferences which undermine the credibility of our tax system and our economy in the eyes of ordinary Americans. Ordinary Americans, in fact, are still struggling to make ends meet, to stay in their homes, to keep their families together, and to find jobs.

In Connecticut, the price of gasoline now has risen to more than $4.25 a gallon from about $3 just a year ago. There are a number of ways to combat the spiraling cost of gasoline, including going after some of the illegal manipulation and speculation that may be occurring. I have proposed some measures--for example, a Department of Justice investigation that for the first time would effectively and comprehensively pursue the traders and hedge funds that are at an alltime high in their energy positions.

But the ending of giveaways and subsidies is about the fairness of our economic system and our Tax Code. Our families and businesses in Connecticut are paying these higher costs for gasoline but at the same time are providing subsidies that are in no way needed for exploration or refining or any part of the business of these big five oil companies. They have made over $30 billion in profits in the first quarter of this year alone, representing a 50-percent increase in profit from last year. Big Oil doesn't need help from American taxpayers to make unprecedented profits. For better or worse, they know how to do it without corporate welfare, and we ought to end the corporate welfare that makes our job of cutting the deficit and reining in the debt and reducing the size of government all the more difficult.

This call ought to be an easy one. We have difficult choices ahead in cutting spending and perhaps increasing revenue, but this one should be easy for us. I hope it will attract bipartisan support because there is truly nothing partisan about this kind of corporate welfare.

Despite claims to the contrary, ending these subsidies will not increase prices at the pump. It will impose basic fairness because Americans will no longer pay out of pocket for these tax breaks and giveaways to some of the most profitable companies in the world. It will not add to prices at the pump.

In my home State of Connecticut and across the country, people are rightly concerned about reducing our debt and deficit, and we will make those difficult choices just as Americans are making difficult choices in tightening their belts and their budgets as they struggle to find jobs and make ends meet. But as resources remain scarce for some of our most vital programs, we can ill-afford this kind of corporate welfare.

I urge my colleagues to seize this moment, to cut these subsidies, and to protect the hard-earned dollars of American taxpayers. Taxpayers in Connecticut and throughout the country basically want fairness-- shared sacrifice, truly shared sacrifice--and I urge my colleagues to demonstrate to the American people that we are serious about tackling unfair giveaways and to take this step toward restoring fairness.

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

Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Delaware for those very important and insightful comments both on the Navy SEALS and on the small business legislation that is pending before this body.

Mr. President, as my colleague, the distinguished Senator from Delaware, has mentioned, over the last 36 or so hours, our Nation and its allies around the globe have rightly celebrated an extraordinary military triumph, a great victory in the war on terror, a turning point, perhaps, toward peace: Osama bin Laden, the heinous mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, who murdered thousands of Americans, has been finally brought to justice.

We are rightly celebrating the extraordinary service, bravery, and skill of the Navy SEALS who were the tip of the spear--an American military that has brought to justice one of the worst war criminals of our time.

We celebrate not only, of course, the Navy SEALS, but all of the men and women who have given their lives and their service over the past years, and their families. We celebrate also the intelligence community's support of this effort, which was so crucial.

Yet even as the celebration has been conducted, on one small beach in Connecticut this news was greeted with solace and somber remembrance. It is the beach at Sherwood Island, in Connecticut, which is home to the living memorial for the Connecticut victims of 9/11, a memorial to 152 victims of this tragedy, this murderous attack by the man who has now been brought to justice. It is a beautiful place--exquisitely and heartbreakingly beautiful. The skyline of New York is visible from this point, jutting out from Westport. The skyline of New York could be seen in flames on the day of 9/11. This place provided a staging area for many of the relief efforts that happened on that day and succeeding days. Now it is a place where the community of Westport, the State of Connecticut, and the world can remember that tragedy and the people who lost their lives. It is also the place where every year Connecticut gathers to honor their memories and their families.

Many come--as some did yesterday--with very mixed feelings. The recent news, while welcome indeed, brings forth anew the agony of their loss. I know there are mixed feelings because I talked, a short while ago, with Lee Hanson, who is the father of Peter Hanson. Peter, his wife Sue Kim and their daughter Christine Lee Hanson all lost their lives on that day. Christine was only two and a half years old. People came to that place yesterday and on many other days to pay their respects and reflect on the tragedy of 9/11. They have felt ambivalence, mixed feelings, and their grief is renewed. For them there is no celebration because the legacy of their loss remains.

At the memorial, on a granite marker in Westport, there reads the following:

The citizens of Connecticut dedicate this living memorial

to the thousands of innocent lives lost on September 11,

2001, and to the families that loved them.

Today, while there are many voices who celebrate this victory--and rightly so--there are voices that are harder to hear, perhaps unheard: the victims and their families whose memory I wish to honor today. I wanted to take a moment of our time to recognize those that cannot speak, but in whose memory justice was served.

I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the names of those 152 men and women from Connecticut who died on September 11, 2001, as they are recorded on the memorial that honors their legacy at Sherwood Island.

Mr. President, we should be ever mindful of the people whose lives have been changed forever. The families of the victims and survivors need our help. Their children may have grown. Some may have children of their own. Their lives have moved on. Some have come to peace. But their lives, like the lives of the emergency responders who ran into the buildings--the firefighters, the police-- have been changed forever. Whether by maintaining a memorial in your community, helping to meet the needs of their children, or just listening to their voices, it is an honor to help those who have already given so much.

Many questions will arise in the days ahead over what will be the course of action for our Nation, but today let us give pause and reflect on how America's military has kept focused on justice for the victims of terror for almost 10 years. We have lost many servicemen and women in the line of duty and many more have been injured in this war. The lives of our veterans who have fought and served and sacrificed in the war on terror have been changed forever. We owe it to them to never forget as we celebrate this victory. We owe it to our veterans who have served and sacrificed to honor that service, not just in rhetoric but in deed. Our veterans have fought for a Nation that keeps faith with them.

We must make sure to leave no veteran behind in education, jobs, and health care--to provide for them what we have obligated and promised to provide. While we hope for peace from this day forward, we must do everything we can to support the brave American men and women in uniform and those of our allies whose relentless service and sacrifice have helped us to win this victory. So too do we support the brave first responders who are always poised, always ready, to respond when their city, State or the Nation calls. They should know they each have the thanks of a grateful Nation.

My hope is that the memory of the victims of 9/11 will bring us together in a time of unity and purpose just as that heinous act did on that day almost 10 years ago. The brutal murderers of September 11, 2001, hit the World Trade Center and hit the Pentagon, but they missed America, as was remarked at the time. They missed what makes America great. They brought us together in a time that we can remember with pride because it was a time of resolve and unity.

I hope the memory of those victims--the 152 from Connecticut and thousands more from around the country--as well as their families can bring us together now in a renewed sense of unity and purpose to face the challenges that lie ahead.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 3, 2011, at 10 a.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 3, 2011, at 2:30 p.m. in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 3, 2011, at 10 a.m. in room 366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 3, 2011, at 10 a.m., in 215 Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``Is the Distribution of Tax Burdens and Tax Benefits Equitable?''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 3, 2011, at 10 a.m., to hold a hearing entitled, ``Afghanistan: What is an Acceptable End-State and How Do We Get There?''

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 3, 2011, at 2:30 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities of the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 3, 2011, at 2:30 p.m.

Madam President, I rise near the end of this very important and profoundly significant budget debate to make some points not only about the dollars and cents in our health care system, but also to speak about a growing and persistent threat--the threat of irresponsible cutbacks to vital health care services for our Nation's most vulnerable--in the name of an ideological war on women's health care.

Our Nation is in the midst of a fiscal crisis. We need to recognize that there is a very immediate and important imperative to cut the costs of health care in this country. The costs of health care are spiraling out of control at a rate five times the rate of inflation.

The President, commendably, is talking about the need for serious measures and sensible conversation about what can be done to control and reduce the costs of health care. Just this week, the administration initiated Partnership for Patients, which is another step in the President's continuing efforts, and I believe this body's continuing efforts, to prevent and reduce needless costs to our health care system. For example, reducing the incidence of re-admissions to hospitals and providing for better outpatient treatment after people are out of the hospital; reducing the incidence of hospital inquired infections; to reducing the incidence of overprescription--or misprescribed drugs--these kinds of costs are preventable. We have an obligation to reduce those costs in health care when they are preventable.

Higher quality at lower cost has to be our objective. And, lowering costs also means preventive care for women when they cannot afford it. That is what Planned Parenthood does. The threat of H. Con. Res. 36 is to that profoundly important goal--higher quality health care at lower cost--that we can achieve as a nation if we invest in preventive care.

The threat of H. Con. Res. 36 is, therefore, not only to the 1.4 million Medicaid patients across the country who would be deprived of that preventive care, and not only to the more than 60,000 women in Connecticut who are at risk, but to all of us, to our families, and to our fiscal health. We know Planned Parenthood saves $4 for every $1 invested. Smart investments that go to provide the Pap smears, breast exams, and other kinds of preventive health care that not only save our health care system money, but that are an absolutely critical part of high quality health care in the United States.

But this debate is about more than costs. It is about human beings. It is about those women who need that preventive care for their future and their family's futures and eventually for their children's futures. Every woman across our Nation, including 1.4 million Medicaid patients who consider Planned Parenthood their primary source for preventive health, deserves to visit a health care provider she trusts--a health care provider that many of us have in this body whether we are men or women.

I am talking about women such as Rebecca in Meriden, CT. Rebecca's parents' health coverage did not extend to her, and she made too much money to qualify for Connecticut's Husky Program--too much money meaning $10 an hour and working part time, a total of $10,000--too much money to qualify for Husky. She depended on Planned Parenthood for regular health screenings and contraceptive care. As she said in her own words:

Planned Parenthood was my saving grace for my reproductive

health.

Women such as Maya, a 23-year-old uninsured young woman, a waitress, part time, doing an unpaid internship for a nonprofit organization. She went to Planned Parenthood for her routine Pap smear, and the results showed abnormal cells that required a biopsy and an operation to have the precancerous cells removed. That procedure could have been lifesaving for Maya; as are all of the routine screenings that Planned Parenthood provides for countless women across the country and in Connecticut. All of these procedures take place day in and day out around Connecticut, for a price they can afford. These stories from Rebecca and Maya are heard around our Nation, at least 60,000 strong in Connecticut alone.

As Martin Masselli, Community Health Center advocate and the president of Community Health Care, Inc. in Middletown, recently said:

Defunding Planned Parenthood would be the moral equivalent

of turning off the electricity and a whole segment of health

care would go dark.

That is what H. Con. Res. 36 means in human terms. In dollars and cents: preventive health care, the kind of work done by St. Vincent's in Bridgeport and Hartford Hospital, and Yale-New Haven hosptial, and countless others around the State and in the country because our hospitals and health care providers are responding responsibly to the need for higher quality and lower costs. We must preserve the momentum to move forward and to make sure the promise, as well as the obligation, the opportunity as well as the mandate, is fulfilled.

I call for my Senate colleagues to stand together for women such as Rebecca and Maya and for clinics and hospitals and providers across the Nation who depend on Planned Parenthood and to reject this resolution, to reject the effort to turn back the clock and to settle this debate once and for all, to end the ideological war which has itself nothing to do with saving money; that in fact, will cost more than it saves. I call for us to turn our attention, as we should and we must, to people who want us to put America back to work to create jobs, to foster economic growth, to fulfill the mandate that was articulated and expressed so eloquently by the people of this country in this last election, which was not to wage war on women's health.

The message was to put Connecticut and put America back to work, create jobs and continue our fragile economic recovery.

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

Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Georgia for those very moving and powerful remarks. I differ with him only in recognizing that the saying about digging a hole is not only a southern saying, but I think by now it is a national saying, thanks to my southern colleagues and others.

Let me just say about this debate that it has been very eloquent on both sides, but there is an unreality to it. In the real world, Americans are struggling to find jobs or keep them, striving to stay in their homes, working hard to keep their families together. In the real world, economic growth has to be a priority.

We are on the verge of a failure of action that threatens the fragile economic recovery that right now is a priority for most Americans, and it is unnecessary. We are truly in danger of distracting ourselves from what should be the main task and the central reason we should be seeking a budget, which is to fund the Federal Government for the remainder of this year and ensure that we continue economic growth and provide more jobs for the American people.

There is agreement on the numbers, on the dollars, on the figures for spending the remainder of this year. My colleague from Georgia has just confirmed what others have said on this floor repeatedly, what the majority leader said this morning. There is agreement on the cuts and the savings. The distraction is on an ideological war on women's health. A small minority--a very small minority--is holding this budget and this Nation hostage in this ideological war on women's health. That is a disservice to the American people who want us to go back to basics: jobs and the economy, get a budget done, avoid a shutdown that threatens that fragile recovery.

Again and again on this floor, my colleagues have made the point that uncertainty and unpredictability are enemies to small businesses and large in this country and elsewhere in the globe that count on American leadership, count on our leadership in achieving a budget.

This war on women's health care cannot be allowed to succeed. I have spoken about it, along with other Senators who have spoken on this floor, most recently the Senator from New Hampshire, who has been a leader on this issue, along with the Senator from California, Barbara Boxer, Senator Gillibrand, Senator Franken, Senator Lautenberg, Senator Mikulski, and others who have spoken out in favor of title X and Planned Parenthood funding.

The unreality of this debate reflects a failure to appreciate what these dollars mean to the women who depend on these services. They are women who cannot afford the kinds of screenings for cancer and cholesterol and other problems that are so vital to preventing those problems that cost us all larger dollars if they go untreated. These services are vital to the testing for other kinds of problems that may be more expensive to treat if they are not dealt with and, of course, contraception that prevents exactly the kinds of problems or issues on which many in this body have focused. In Connecticut alone, we are talking about more than 60,000 patients served by Planned Parenthood, including 30,000 title X patients, 18 health centers that are imperiled by this rider or the conditions that would be attached, and almost 100,000 preventive screenings that are vitally important to low-income women and men who need access--the key is access--to contraceptive services and preventive screenings, vital health care.

There is a silver lining to this cloud. This moment is teaching us something. In reality, it is a teaching moment. I think it will alert a lot of Americans to the importance of preventive services--testing, screening. If it draws one more woman or man to seek these kinds of testing services, it will have accomplished something.

The debate over these social issues will not be resolved in this budget and should not be resolved in the remaining few hours we have left. There will be other occasions when we can debate and resolve these social issues, the ideological divides that have been with us for decades and will remain after this budget, hopefully, is resolved in the next few hours.

My hope is that there will be other teaching moments but, most importantly, not only about health care but about the way the democratic process works.

In the short months I have been privileged--and I deeply mean privileged--to be part of this body and sometimes to preside in the very chair where the Presiding Officer is now, I have often looked around this Chamber and have seen the students and others who come to visit us and thought of the millions of Americans who are watching us and who hope that we will recognize we have more in common than in conflict as Americans; recognize that a shutdown of this government cannot happen consistent with our duties to seek what we have in common over what we have in conflict; that it would be devastating not only to American leadership around the globe but to the military men and women who are depending on our judgment and leadership, to the veterans, to the folks out there searching for jobs, trying to stay in their homes, keep their families together; recognize that the reason they sent us here is to do what is right for this economy now and to reach agreement and to do the kinds of things Americans do in their homes over that kitchen table when they disagree. They come together. They see what they have in common. They do not walk out of the house. They do not shut off the lights. They stay together, and they do what they think will best serve the common interest, which for us is to recognize that we have an agreement on the budget numbers, that we cannot be distracted by the ideological war on women's health, and that we should stay true to our principles.

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 period for morning business for debate only be extended until 11:15 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each, with the majority leader to be recognized at 11:15 p.m.

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