Floor Statements

Mr. President, today I honor the life of South Africa's Helen Suzman, a champion of equality and rights for the people of South Africa who suffered under apartheid. For generations to come, her story will be an inspiration to people around the world who have the courage to speak out against injustice.

Helen Suzman dedicated her life and 36 years in South Africa's Parliament to fighting institutionalized racism in South Africa. Often she stood alone in defiance of her own Government as it systematically obstructed the rights and freedoms of the majority of South Africans. Particularly during the 13

years when she was the only anti-apartheid member of South Africa's Parliament, Helen Suzman provided the voice of reason that reminded the world of the injustices that persisted in South Africa.

Helen Suzman's intelligence, courage, and perseverance helped to end apartheid in South Africa. Her contribution to ending that evil has become a symbol of hope for millions in South Africa and around the world. That is a powerful and inspiring legacy, and it is one I am pleased to recognize and celebrate today.

Mr. President, I am introducing the Crane Conservation Act of 2009. I am very pleased that Senator Crapo has once again agreed to lead on this legislation with me. I am always glad to work with my colleagues from across the aisle. We are pleased to be joined by Senators Boxer, Brownback, Cardin, Kerry, Kohl, Landrieu, and Martinez, who are cosponsors of this legislation.

The Crane Conservation Act will ensure we do our part to protect the existence of these birds, whose cultural significance and popular appeal can be seen worldwide. This legislation is particularly important to the people of Wisconsin, as our state provides habitat and refuge to several crane species. But this legislation, which authorizes the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to distribute funds and grants to crane conservation efforts both domestically and in developing countries, promises to have a larger environmental and cultural impact that will go far beyond the boundaries of my home State.

Congress' efforts to help protect and recover species throughout the world began in earnest in 1994 when Congress passed and the President signed the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act. The passage of this act provided support for multinational rhino and tiger conservation by authorizing the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to distribute up to $10 million in grants every year to support projects in developing countries. Since 1994, Congress has established the ``multinational species conservation fund'' to cover other

species, such as elephants and great apes.

Today, with the legislation I am introducing, I am asking Congress to add cranes to this list. Cranes are the most endangered family of birds in the world, with 11 of the world's 15 species at risk of extinction. Specifically, this legislation would authorize up to $5 million of funds per year for fiscal years 2008 through 2012 to be distributed as conservation project grants to protect cranes and their habitat in Asia, Africa, and North America. In keeping with my belief that we should balance the budget, this bill proposes that the $25 million in authorized spending over 5 years for the Crane Conservation Act should be offset through the Secretary of Interior's administrative budget. This bill is similar to legislation I have introduced since the 107th Congress and I was very pleased that last Congress the bill passed the House of Representatives and the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and was positioned to pass the Senate before stalling late in the last Congress.

I am offering this legislation due to the serious and significant decline that can be expected in crane populations worldwide without further conservation efforts. Those efforts have achieved some success in the case of the North American whooping crane, the rarest crane on earth. By 1890, the whooping crane disappeared from its main migratory route from Idaho through Wyoming and Colorado to New Mexico. In 1944, only 21 birds remained along the migratory route between Montana and Texas' Aransas National Wildlife Refuge, via the Dakotas, Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma. Unfortunately, the breeding grounds for this remaining flock were unknown, but since they were discovered in Canada in 1955, cooperative efforts between the United States and Canada have been under way to recover the species. Today, this flock remains the only wild flock of North American whooping cranes that breeds in northwest Canada, and spends its winters in coastal Texas.

In 1980, a new course was chartered for recovering the species, and captive breeding efforts began at Patuxent Wildlife Research Center in Maryland in hopes of rearing chicks for release in the wild--today, captive breeding centers are also located at New Orleans' Audubon Species Survival Center and Canada's Calgary Zoo.

These breeding efforts blossomed into efforts to reintroduce a migratory flock of whooping cranes into their historic range in the Eastern United States. In 2001 this became a reality when the first class of whooping cranes followed their ``mother'' (actually an ultra light aircraft) over 1,300 miles to their wintering grounds.

The movement of this flock of birds shows how any effort by Congress to regulate crane conservation needs to cross both national and international lines. As this flock of birds makes its journey from Wisconsin's Necedah National Wildlife Refuge to Florida's Chassahowitzka National Wildlife Refuge and back, the birds rely on the ecosystems of a multitude of states in this country. Along the journey which traverses through Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Georgia the birds face threats from pollution of traditional watering grounds, collision with utility lines, human disturbance, disease, predation, loss of genetic diversity within the population, and vulnerability to catastrophes, both natural and man-made.

However, the birds can also rely on private landowners, the vast majority of whom have enthusiastically welcomed the birds to their rest on their land. Through its extensive outreach and education program, the Whooping Crane Eastern Partnership has obtained the consistent support of farmers and other private landowners to make this important recovery program a success. On every front, this partnership is unique. This ongoing recovery effort would not be possible without the cooperative efforts of federal and state governments, landowners, volunteers, and non-governmental organizations. Seven years later, these partnerships support an ever-growing eastern crane population, now numbering over sixty.

While over the course of the last half-century, North American whooping cranes have begun to make a slow recovery, many species of crane in Africa and Asia have declined, including the sarus crane of Asia and the wattled crane of Africa.

The sarus crane stands four feet tall and can be found in the wetlands of northern India and south Asia. These birds require large, open, well watered plains or marshes to breed and survive. Due to agricultural expansion, industrial development, river basin development, pollution, warfare, and heavy use of pesticides prevalent in India and southeast Asia, the sarus crane population has been in decline. Furthermore, in many areas, a high human population concentration compounds these factors. On the Mekong River, which runs through Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, Thailand, and China, human population growth and planned development projects threaten the sarus crane. Reports from India, Cambodia, and Thailand have also cited incidences of the trading of adult birds and chicks, as well as hunting and egg stealing in the drop in population of the sarus crane.

Only three subspecies of the sarus crane exist today. One resides in northern India and Nepal, one resides in southeast Asia, and one resides in northern Australia. Their population is about 8,000 in the main Indian population, with recent numbers showing a rapid decline. In Southeast Asia, only 1,000 birds remain.

The situation of the sarus crane in Asia is mirrored by the situation of the wattled crane in Africa. In Africa, the wattled crane is found in the southern and eastern regions, with an isolated population in the mountains of Ethiopia. Current population estimates range between 6,000 to 8,000 and are declining rapidly, due to loss and degradation of wetland habitats, as well as intensified agriculture, dam construction, and industrialization. In other parts of the range, the creation of dams has changed the dynamics of the flood plains, thus further endangering these cranes and their habitats. Human disturbance at or near breeding sites also continues to be a major threat. Lack of oversight and education over the actions of people, industry, and agriculture is leading to reduced preservation for the lands on which cranes live, thereby threatening the ability of cranes to survive in these regions.

If we do not act now, not only will cranes face extinction, but the ecosystems that depend on their contributions will suffer. With the decline of the crane population, the wetlands and marshes they inhabit can potentially be thrown off balance. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting legislation that can provide funding to the local farming, education, and enforcement projects that can have the greatest positive effect on the preservation of both cranes and fragile habitats. This modest investment can secure the future of these exemplary birds and the beautiful areas in which they live. Therefore, I ask my colleagues to support the Crane Conservation Act of 2009.

This legislation is endorsed by African Wildlife Foundation, American Bird Conservancy, American Veterinary Medical Association, Association of Zoos and Aquariums, Audubon Nature Institute, Born Free USA, Conservation International, Defenders of Wildlife, Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International, Fauna & Flora International, Humane Society of the United States, Humane Society International, International Crane Foundation, International Fund for Animal Welfare, International Rhino Foundation, National Wildlife Federation, National Wildlife Refuge Association, The Nature Conservancy, Sierra Club, Wildlife Alliance, Wildlife Conservation Society, and the World Wildlife Fund.

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

Mr. President, I am introducing the Crane Conservation Act of 2009. I am very pleased that Senator Crapo has once again agreed to lead on this legislation with me. I am always glad to work with my colleagues from across the aisle. We are pleased to be joined by Senators Boxer, Brownback, Cardin, Kerry, Kohl, Landrieu, and Martinez, who are cosponsors of this legislation.

The Crane Conservation Act will ensure we do our part to protect the existence of these birds, whose cultural significance and popular appeal can be seen worldwide. This legislation is particularly important to the people of Wisconsin, as our state provides habitat and refuge to several crane species. But this legislation, which authorizes the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to distribute funds and grants to crane conservation efforts both domestically and in developing countries, promises to have a larger environmental and cultural impact that will go far beyond the boundaries of my home State.

Congress' efforts to help protect and recover species throughout the world began in earnest in 1994 when Congress passed and the President signed the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act. The passage of this act provided support for multinational rhino and tiger conservation by authorizing the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to distribute up to $10 million in grants every year to support projects in developing countries. Since 1994, Congress has established the ``multinational species conservation fund'' to cover other

species, such as elephants and great apes.

Today, with the legislation I am introducing, I am asking Congress to add cranes to this list. Cranes are the most endangered family of birds in the world, with 11 of the world's 15 species at risk of extinction. Specifically, this legislation would authorize up to $5 million of funds per year for fiscal years 2008 through 2012 to be distributed as conservation project grants to protect cranes and their habitat in Asia, Africa, and North America. In keeping with my belief that we should balance the budget, this bill proposes that the $25 million in authorized spending over 5 years for the Crane Conservation Act should be offset through the Secretary of Interior's administrative budget. This bill is similar to legislation I have introduced since the 107th Congress and I was very pleased that last Congress the bill passed the House of Representatives and the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and was positioned to pass the Senate before stalling late in the last Congress.

I am offering this legislation due to the serious and significant decline that can be expected in crane populations worldwide without further conservation efforts. Those efforts have achieved some success in the case of the North American whooping crane, the rarest crane on earth. By 1890, the whooping crane disappeared from its main migratory route from Idaho through Wyoming and Colorado to New Mexico. In 1944, only 21 birds remained along the migratory route between Montana and Texas' Aransas National Wildlife Refuge, via the Dakotas, Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma. Unfortunately, the breeding grounds for this remaining flock were unknown, but since they were discovered in Canada in 1955, cooperative efforts between the United States and Canada have been under way to recover the species. Today, this flock remains the only wild flock of North American whooping cranes that breeds in northwest Canada, and spends its winters in coastal Texas.

In 1980, a new course was chartered for recovering the species, and captive breeding efforts began at Patuxent Wildlife Research Center in Maryland in hopes of rearing chicks for release in the wild--today, captive breeding centers are also located at New Orleans' Audubon Species Survival Center and Canada's Calgary Zoo.

These breeding efforts blossomed into efforts to reintroduce a migratory flock of whooping cranes into their historic range in the Eastern United States. In 2001 this became a reality when the first class of whooping cranes followed their ``mother'' (actually an ultra light aircraft) over 1,300 miles to their wintering grounds.

The movement of this flock of birds shows how any effort by Congress to regulate crane conservation needs to cross both national and international lines. As this flock of birds makes its journey from Wisconsin's Necedah National Wildlife Refuge to Florida's Chassahowitzka National Wildlife Refuge and back, the birds rely on the ecosystems of a multitude of states in this country. Along the journey which traverses through Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Georgia the birds face threats from pollution of traditional watering grounds, collision with utility lines, human disturbance, disease, predation, loss of genetic diversity within the population, and vulnerability to catastrophes, both natural and man-made.

However, the birds can also rely on private landowners, the vast majority of whom have enthusiastically welcomed the birds to their rest on their land. Through its extensive outreach and education program, the Whooping Crane Eastern Partnership has obtained the consistent support of farmers and other private landowners to make this important recovery program a success. On every front, this partnership is unique. This ongoing recovery effort would not be possible without the cooperative efforts of federal and state governments, landowners, volunteers, and non-governmental organizations. Seven years later, these partnerships support an ever-growing eastern crane population, now numbering over sixty.

While over the course of the last half-century, North American whooping cranes have begun to make a slow recovery, many species of crane in Africa and Asia have declined, including the sarus crane of Asia and the wattled crane of Africa.

The sarus crane stands four feet tall and can be found in the wetlands of northern India and south Asia. These birds require large, open, well watered plains or marshes to breed and survive. Due to agricultural expansion, industrial development, river basin development, pollution, warfare, and heavy use of pesticides prevalent in India and southeast Asia, the sarus crane population has been in decline. Furthermore, in many areas, a high human population concentration compounds these factors. On the Mekong River, which runs through Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, Thailand, and China, human population growth and planned development projects threaten the sarus crane. Reports from India, Cambodia, and Thailand have also cited incidences of the trading of adult birds and chicks, as well as hunting and egg stealing in the drop in population of the sarus crane.

Only three subspecies of the sarus crane exist today. One resides in northern India and Nepal, one resides in southeast Asia, and one resides in northern Australia. Their population is about 8,000 in the main Indian population, with recent numbers showing a rapid decline. In Southeast Asia, only 1,000 birds remain.

The situation of the sarus crane in Asia is mirrored by the situation of the wattled crane in Africa. In Africa, the wattled crane is found in the southern and eastern regions, with an isolated population in the mountains of Ethiopia. Current population estimates range between 6,000 to 8,000 and are declining rapidly, due to loss and degradation of wetland habitats, as well as intensified agriculture, dam construction, and industrialization. In other parts of the range, the creation of dams has changed the dynamics of the flood plains, thus further endangering these cranes and their habitats. Human disturbance at or near breeding sites also continues to be a major threat. Lack of oversight and education over the actions of people, industry, and agriculture is leading to reduced preservation for the lands on which cranes live, thereby threatening the ability of cranes to survive in these regions.

If we do not act now, not only will cranes face extinction, but the ecosystems that depend on their contributions will suffer. With the decline of the crane population, the wetlands and marshes they inhabit can potentially be thrown off balance. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting legislation that can provide funding to the local farming, education, and enforcement projects that can have the greatest positive effect on the preservation of both cranes and fragile habitats. This modest investment can secure the future of these exemplary birds and the beautiful areas in which they live. Therefore, I ask my colleagues to support the Crane Conservation Act of 2009.

This legislation is endorsed by African Wildlife Foundation, American Bird Conservancy, American Veterinary Medical Association, Association of Zoos and Aquariums, Audubon Nature Institute, Born Free USA, Conservation International, Defenders of Wildlife, Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International, Fauna & Flora International, Humane Society of the United States, Humane Society International, International Crane Foundation, International Fund for Animal Welfare, International Rhino Foundation, National Wildlife Federation, National Wildlife Refuge Association, The Nature Conservancy, Sierra Club, Wildlife Alliance, Wildlife Conservation Society, and the World Wildlife Fund.

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

Mr. President, today I introduce a straight-forward bill that is a first step toward helping American workers and businesses. This bill is part of my E-4 Initiative, which focuses on issues affecting the economy, energy, education and employment. The Skills Standards Certification Evaluation Act will require the Secretaries of Labor, Education and Commerce to evaluate skills standards certification programs that have been developed with federal funding.

Skills Standards Certifications have emerged over the past two decades in response to job growth in high-technology and varied industries. The training or classes usually take weeks or months, rather than years. Often, they are developed in response to the needs of one industry or even one company, though the skills are often applicable more widely.

As the President-elect and Congress work to save and create jobs through additional funding for infrastructure, green jobs, and similar programs, among other things, it is even more critical that employers be able to find qualified workers for a variety of positions. Workers who can easily demonstrate their skills quickly and easily will be able to benefit from such investments early on.

Over the past two decades, the Federal Government has taken conflicting approaches to skills standards certifications. That is why, as part of the Skills Standards Certification Evaluation Act, I require a recommendation from the Secretaries of Labor and Commerce on how Congress ought to move forward with funding for these certification programs. Both the national, top-down, and a local, bottom-up approach have been tried, and a thorough evaluation will make clear how we can move forward to get the most out of the funding the Federal Government provides.

These certifications have a tremendous benefit for workers. First, because the training is often condensed into a few weeks with a flexible schedule, it allows people to complete certifications without leaving a current job and without the financial cost of attending a full-time program that lasts a year or more. In addition, these programs allow workers to clearly demonstrate a certain set of skills, and may open more doors for higher-paying employment. Because these programs can be completed without leaving work, they also allow workers to advance within a career or company to more skilled positions and better wages and benefits.

For employers, Skills Standards Certifications can simplify the search for employees. I have heard from numerous Wisconsin employers, especially small businesses with limited resources, that it is hard to find employees with the skills they need, or who will be dedicated and loyal. Skills Standards Certifications clearly show the qualification of an individual, of course, but also tell the employer that he or she is dedicated enough to invest in the course to earn the certificate. Very few people will spend the time and money to enroll in such a program if they don't intend to use the certificate.

Lastly, these programs can help state and local governments quantify their skilled workforce, which can be invaluable when marketing the area to businesses and investment.

This bill is a small first step in what I hope can be a continuing effort to help hard-working Americans obtain and use high-demand work skills.

Mr. President, today I reintroduce a piece of my E4 initiative, so named because it is a collection of proposals that address issues important to the economy, education, employment and energy. This piece of the E4 legislation focuses on the important supporting role that transportation can play in economic development by creating an environment where employers and those seeking employment or better employment are connected together. Having such a system to overcome transportation hurdles can benefit both employers and employees, as well as the local economy and is all the more important in these difficult economic times.

In more general terms, investing in our infrastructure like roads, bridges and transit systems can have direct job creation impacts. This is one reason I have fought hard with the rest of the delegation for a fair rate of return for Wisconsin from the highway bill. It is also why in a letter I sent to President-elect Obama and Senate leaders I included highway and transit projects as part of a variety of ready-to- go infrastructure projects that should be included in the forthcoming economic recovery program.

In addition to supporting transportation-related jobs, linking workers and businesses that need them can also be an important part of a more comprehensive job creation strategy. This can mean supporting a robust public transportation system or more specific programs designed to link low-income individuals with jobs. I have consistently done the former by supporting

public transportation during consideration of the highway bill and Amtrak reauthorizations. But my specific proposal today focuses on the latter and improving the Job Access and Reverse Commute, JARC, program that links low-income workers with employers.

I have heard good things about the JARC program and was glad that it was shifted away from earmarks and was made available as a combination formula and competitively awarded program in the last highway bill. The primary program goal is to locally assess the transportation needs of low-income workers and then plan and fund programs to help alleviate transportation-related barriers to employment or better employment. While initially this may have been viewed as a way to support reverse commute projects whereby transit routes were established to allow city center residents to access jobs in the suburbs, the program actually does much more than just this and provides reliable transportation to low-income urban, rural and suburban workers.

In Wisconsin, the Federal JARC program is jointly administered by the State departments of transportation and workforce development as the Wisconsin Employment Transportation Assistance Program, WETAP. According to the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, transportation barriers can include a lack of a dependable vehicle or bus service in the area, an absence of local jobs, or childcare transportation problems. The State agencies in Wisconsin have found several different types of projects to be effective depending on the local circumstances. These projects have included the traditional public transit projects such as extending bus lines or supporting van-pooling, along with other programs such as providing cars or car repairs to low-income individuals. Wisconsin has even found that assisting with indirect barriers such as transportation of children to and from childcare facilities is critical in allowing some individuals to improve their job prospects.

A recent University of Illinois Chicago, UIC, study found that the societal benefits from this program are $1.65 per dollar spent and estimates lifetime benefits to low income participants of $15 per dollar spent due to their ability to find and retain better paying jobs. While the goals of the Job Access and Reverse Commute program are important and the program has been found to be fairly effective, there are some details that have prevented the program from reaching its full potential. Working closely with transportation officials in Wisconsin and partially based on recommendations from the UIC study, I've come up with some specific ideas to improve the program.

With a proven effective program and continuing unmet needs by employers and low-income individuals seeking employment, JARC could use a boost in funding. So that is why my proposal ramps up funding by $100 million over 5 years from the current funding of $165 million to $265 million in fiscal year 2014.

My proposal would also allow the Federal share of projects to increase to 80 percent from the current 50 percent level for operating expenses. The 50 percent local and State match wasn't feasible for far too many local governments in Wisconsin and as a result Wisconsin has not been able to spend all its Federal funds. The higher Federal cost share will better balance the need to leverage Federal funds, while ensuring that these critical funds are fully utilized--millions of dollars in an account does nothing to link people to jobs.

Besides the challenge in coming up with a 50 percent local cost share, the other main issue that has kept JARC from being as effective as it could be is the paperwork and reporting burden required by the program, especially for the small nonprofit groups that often have never dealt with Federal grant requirements before. My proposal directs the Federal Transit Agency, FTA, to examine the current reporting requirements to see if there are ways to streamline the amount of paperwork required while still ensuring that the program goals are met.

My bill also includes a pilot program funded at $10 million a year for 5 years in order to test a few areas that seem very promising, but should be evaluated more fully before broader implementation. The first portion of the pilot program builds off the regulatory streamlining evaluation and allows the FTA to test streamlined reporting requirements to help get the balance between oversight and administrative burden right.

The second part of the pilot program focuses on improving education- and employment-related transportation for teens and young adults. Enabling students and young people to reliably get between their high schools or neighborhoods and technical colleges, job training centers or apprenticeships can have a lifelong positive impact.

The third section of the pilot program would allow experimentation with combining different transit programs and integrating JARC projects across local political boundaries to provide a more comprehensive local transportation system. Instead of having one transit program to assist the disabled, one targeted toward the elderly and another focused on jobs, this pilot program would encourage funding combined applications to meet these needs together with one comprehensive project. There is even the potential for the Department of Transportation to further coordinate with other departments such as Health and Human Services for healthcare-related transportation. Similarly, the needs of employers for employees do not recognize local political boundaries, so encouraging greater collaboration between local entities to make a more robust interconnected system should ultimately provide more efficient and effective service.

While the FTA already provides some technical assistance for the JARC program, my proposal provides a small boost in funding and some additional areas of emphasis. For example, after hearing about the struggles that some small nonprofits have with the reporting requirements, in addition to looking for ways to streamline the requirements, my proposal would direct the FTA to also provide some technical assistance especially targeted to this need.

The final element of my proposal is the offset. The new spending authorized in the proposal is fully offset by rescinding highway and bridge earmarks that have not had funds spent from them despite being authorized over a decade ago as part of the TEA-21 highway bill. Helping connect workers and employers is a much better use of these funds than letting them sit unused in some obscure DOT account.

Providing reliable transportation to low-income individuals only goes so far--it is the companies and innovators creating the jobs and the individuals seeking to better their lot through education or more challenging employment, that are doing the heavy lifting. That being said, transportation can clearly be a challenge for companies and workers and in the case of the JARC program can play an important supporting role.

Mr. President, we are all aware of the serious challenges our economy faces in the short term and the urgency of our need to promote job creation and economic development. I am committed to engaging in this broad effort with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. But it is essential that our efforts not just be short term fixes--they must not only aim to create jobs and investment opportunities in the short term, they must be part of strategic efforts to strengthen our Nation's innovation capabilities and sustain long term economic development in a changing and competitive global environment. There is no better way to do this than by stimulating and supporting small business innovation, especially in areas of national priority. As part of this effort, today I am introducing the Strengthening Our Economy Through Small Business Innovation Act of 2009.

Job growth, innovation and economic development are driven by our small

businesses. Small businesses also tend to be based in our cities and communities and so they are major contributors to our local economies. Half of our county's payroll jobs and most of our new job opportunities are provided by small businesses. Small businesses are proven innovators and drive commercialization of cutting edge technologies. Not only are small businesses our major source of employment, they employ about one third of our country's scientists and engineers and generate more patents on a per capita basis than large businesses and universities. They also are effective partners with universities to enhance product creation, develop university income and attract university graduates and faculty through increased innovative job opportunities.

Over the last 25 years, through the Small Business Innovation and Research program, SBIR, and, more recently, the Small Business Technology Transfer program, STTR, up to 2.5 percent and 0.3 percent, respectively, of Federal R&D funds from 11 Federal agencies have been specifically allocated to our Nation's small businesses to fund innovation. These small business allocations are not sufficient. We must diversify and strengthen innovation capabilities and our economic base, and to accomplish this we must extend and increase R&D allocations to our Nation's innovative small businesses.

My bill does 3 things. First, it extends the SBIR and STTR programs for a further 14 years so that small businesses, as well as universities and non-profit research organizations that collaborate with small businesses, can continue to leverage Federal research and development funding.

Second, it significantly increases the allocation of funds and the awards from large Federal research and development budgets to small businesses through the SBIR and STTR programs. It would increase the SBIR allocation from its current 2.5 percent to 10 percent and the STTR allocation from 0.3 percent to 1.0 percent over a 3-year period. It would increase SBIR phase I awards from $100,000 to $300,000 and phase II awards from $750,000 to $2.2 million. Third, it identifies specific funding priorities for energy innovation; safe and secure water; domestic security; and transportation.

The SBIR program is tested, successful and worthy of extension. In its comprehensive study of the SBIR program, the National Research Council found that the program ``is sound in concept and effective in practice''; was ``stimulating technological innovation''; ``linking universities to the public and private markets''; ``increasing private sector commercialization of innovations'' at an ``impressive'' rate; and ``providing widely distributed support for innovation activity.'' The study concluded that:

[T]he program is proving effective in meeting Congressional

objectives. It is increasing innovation, encouraging

participation by small companies in R&D, providing support

for small firms owned by minorities and women, and resolving

research questions for mission agencies in a cost effective

manner. Should the Congress wish to provide additional funds

for the program in support of these objectives, those funds

could be employed effectively by the nation's SBIR.

The NRC's study also found that universities and other non-profit research institutions would benefit significantly from the increase in both the SBIR and the STTR programs. In particular, the STTR allocation increase will directly benefit universities and efforts to bring university-based research into the commercial marketplace, as a partnership with a non-profit research institution, such as a university, is a requirement of all STTR award recipients. Many of the small businesses that receive SBIR funding are rooted in the university infrastructure so investigators and graduates from universities will have opportunities to be part of commercial developments. More than two-thirds of SBIR companies report that at least one founder was previously an academic. About one-third of SBIR company founders were most recently employed as academics before founding the company. Over a third of SBIR projects cite direct university involvement with 27 percent of projects having university faculty as contractors on the project, 17 percent using universities themselves as subcontractors, and 15 percent employing graduate students.

In its report accompanying reauthorization legislation, the Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee recently concluded that:

increases in the SBIR allocation will invest money in

research, contracting, internships, and other collaborative

activities done with universities, with the contracting and

patenting activities with SBIR companies being a sizable

source of revenue for universities as well. The university-

industry partnerships that SBIR creates are crucial in that

they provide an applied research and commercialization focus

that otherwise likely would not be present in university

research. More specifically, the partnerships are important

in exposing faculty and the next generation of scientists and

engineers to commercial research and development. SBIR

businesses provide graduate and undergraduate students with

hands-on experience and job opportunities that universities

would be unable to provide alone.

Our country not only faces immediate economic and employment challenges, it faces major challenges in transportation, energy, domestic security and water quality and safety. Targeted research and development will be critical. Congress, with non-partisan expert guidance, has a role to play in guiding our national research and development priorities and, in this case, stimulating small business innovation and job creation in specific areas of critical national need. The National Academies of Science and other independent government research organizations provide us with carefully researched and considered recommendations on how we can address these priorities, so my bill draws on their recommendations to develop innovative energy technologies; enhance water quality and security; strengthen domestic security; and address transportation priorities. This is not only a good investment in short term job creation; it is an imperative investment in our Nation's long term innovation prospects and economic development.

The costs of my bill would be fully offset by cancellation of the airborne laser program. CBO estimates that cancelling that program will produce savings of over $2.6 billion.

Mr. President, as the 111th Congress begins, I am reintroducing a number of different bills designed to fuel job creation and spur economic development. My initiative, dubbed E4 because of its focus on economy, employment, education, and energy, seeks to respond to economic and job development needs both in my State of Wisconsin and around the country. These challenging economic times call for a comprehensive set of solutions including providing new job training opportunities for workers, fostering innovation among small businesses, protecting the existing family-supporting jobs in our nation, and boosting educational opportunities for young Americans. Today I am introducing the Connecting Education and Emerging Professions Act of 2009, which provides competitive grants to States and local school districts to promote better collaboration between high schools and local businesses and workforce development groups. This E4 education initiative is designed to help prepare America's students for future success in the workforce and post-secondary education as well as enhance America's competitiveness in the global economy as we prepare to enter the second decade of the twenty-first century.

Helping to ensure that all American students have access to a high- quality education is critical to boosting America's competitiveness and helping to ensure that our country is better equipped to respond to the economic challenges currently before us. Investment in our young people now will pay off in the future when these individuals are better prepared to compete for the highly skilled jobs of tomorrow. If the United States is to remain competitive on an international stage and continue to lead the world in innovation and development, we need to make certain that our young people are well prepared to meet current and future economic challenges.

Improving educational opportunities in the United States is going to require

a comprehensive set of policy strategies and I look forward to working with my colleagues in Congress this year as we get to work on a variety of education issues including expanding access to education from pre-K through college. We also face the monumental task of reauthorizing and reforming the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, ESEA, better known as No Child Left Behind, NCLB. As we consider the ESEA reauthorization, we should make substantial changes to the testing mandates that were imposed through NCLB and provide support to states that develop smarter accountability systems with enhanced assessments that measure higher-order thinking skills among students. We also need to look at ways to strengthen and reform our Nation's public secondary schools as part of the ESEA reauthorization. The legislation I am introducing today is designed to help support innovative changes that are taking place in some of our Nation's high schools and help even more States and local communities make improvements to their local high schools.

My CEEP bill seeks to address a couple of interrelated issues related to secondary education. The first issue is the alarmingly high dropout rate in our nation's high schools. While numbers vary slightly, a growing body of research indicates that the United States has a graduation rate of approximately 70 percent and that about one-third of our country's high school students will not graduate on time. Graduation rates for minority and low-income students are even lower, in many cases, alarmingly lower. In addition, many of our nation's urban school districts report very high dropout rates, including the Milwaukee Public School District. According to the Cities in Crisis report released in 2008 by the Editorial Projects in Education Research Center, the Milwaukee Public Schools has a graduation rate of 46.1 percent. Unfortunately, there are at least a dozen large urban districts that have even lower graduation rates than Milwaukee.

One of our top education priorities as a Nation must be to address the low graduation rates nationwide in urban, suburban, and rural school districts. We must also work to close the huge opportunity gap that is created by the large disparity in graduation rates between our minority and non-minority students as well as between low-income and more affluent students. Solving this problem will require a broad, comprehensive solution involving the federal, state and local governments. It is my hope that when Congress finally reauthorizes the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, we pay particular attention to the needs of our nation's high schools and our students.

While many factors contribute to high dropout rates, disengagement from classroom instruction can contribute to a student's decision to drop out. Some students feel that high school is not relevant to their lives and do not see how completing high school will translate into future career and academic success. In this increasingly competitive twenty-first century where postsecondary education is now required for many entry-level jobs, it is up to us to show our nation's students why it is so important that they graduate from high school.

Another issue that this bill seeks to address is the growing sense among employers and postsecondary institutions that our nation's high school students who do graduate are unprepared for success either in the workforce or in college. Employers in various economic sectors, including technology, manufacturing, health care, construction, and others, report difficulty in identifying qualified candidates for skilled positions. Recent surveys also indicate that many employers are dissatisfied with the overall preparation of secondary school graduates. In order for companies in the United States to be competitive in a global economy, we must have a highly skilled workforce. Adequate preparation at the high school level can help prepare students for entry into our rapidly changing global economy where new emerging industries are cropping up in Wisconsin and around the country.

To address these two interrelated issues, my bill would provide 5- year competitive education grants to states and school districts to foster collaboration and discussions between schools, businesses, and others about the emerging industry workforce needs and how to prepare our high school students to meet those needs, both academically and practically. States and local school districts must use this money to form partnerships with local or regional businesses, postsecondary institutions, workforce development boards, labor organizations, nonprofit organizations and others.

These partnerships will have the responsibility of surveying local, regional, and statewide emerging industries and deciding what are the academic and work-based skills that our high school students need in order to be successful in these emerging industries. The partnerships will then work together to develop new and engaging curriculums and programs designed to teach the academic and work-based skills that are necessary to succeed in these new emerging industries. Once the partnership has designed a curriculum or program and received approval from the Federal Department of Education, the partnership will work to implement the program in qualifying schools.

During the implementation phase, the partnership will come together to implement hands-on learning and work opportunities for students including internships, apprenticeships, job shadowing, and other career and technical education programs. These hands-on learning and work opportunities will be based on the emerging industry pathways curriculum or program that the eligible partnership has designed and will offer students practical academic experiences and skill-building lessons that they can use in the workplace or in postsecondary education.

This legislation seeks to help schools, businesses, colleges, and the students who would be served by this legislation talk with each other to build new programs that would help boost student engagement in learning and student attendance and graduation rates while also preparing students for success in the workforce or in college after they graduate. There are a number of successful local and state programs around Wisconsin that this legislation would help support and that served as valuable examples as I developed this legislation.

Wisconsin's Department of Public Instruction, Department of Workforce Development, and various local school districts have all been working to boost Wisconsin's career and technical education offerings and gear these offerings towards emerging industries. My bill seeks to help Wisconsin and other states build on these efforts and engage in additional conversations with interested stakeholders to design new curriculums and programs to prepare students for emerging industries.

I look forward to moving this legislation forward this year as the new Congress begins to debate how best to boost educational opportunities for all of our Nation's children. We have a significant achievement gap and graduation gap in urban, rural, and suburban schools throughout the country and it is imperative that we work together to promote innovative ideas that will close these gaps. Some of our Nation's schools are experiencing high dropout rates in part because students aren't connecting with what they are being taught. At the same time, we're seeing an emergence of new industries, like those aiming to capitalize on alternative energies and energy efficiency, that need employers with skills and training in their field. If we help schools connect their students with businesses, workforce development boards, and colleges that offer career and academic opportunities in these new and exciting fields, we can help to lower the alarming dropout rates while helping these emerging industries thrive.

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

Mr. President, today I introduce a straight-forward bill that is a first step toward helping American workers and businesses. This bill is part of my E-4 Initiative, which focuses on issues affecting the economy, energy, education and employment. The Skills Standards Certification Evaluation Act will require the Secretaries of Labor, Education and Commerce to evaluate skills standards certification programs that have been developed with federal funding.

Skills Standards Certifications have emerged over the past two decades in response to job growth in high-technology and varied industries. The training or classes usually take weeks or months, rather than years. Often, they are developed in response to the needs of one industry or even one company, though the skills are often applicable more widely.

As the President-elect and Congress work to save and create jobs through additional funding for infrastructure, green jobs, and similar programs, among other things, it is even more critical that employers be able to find qualified workers for a variety of positions. Workers who can easily demonstrate their skills quickly and easily will be able to benefit from such investments early on.

Over the past two decades, the Federal Government has taken conflicting approaches to skills standards certifications. That is why, as part of the Skills Standards Certification Evaluation Act, I require a recommendation from the Secretaries of Labor and Commerce on how Congress ought to move forward with funding for these certification programs. Both the national, top-down, and a local, bottom-up approach have been tried, and a thorough evaluation will make clear how we can move forward to get the most out of the funding the Federal Government provides.

These certifications have a tremendous benefit for workers. First, because the training is often condensed into a few weeks with a flexible schedule, it allows people to complete certifications without leaving a current job and without the financial cost of attending a full-time program that lasts a year or more. In addition, these programs allow workers to clearly demonstrate a certain set of skills, and may open more doors for higher-paying employment. Because these programs can be completed without leaving work, they also allow workers to advance within a career or company to more skilled positions and better wages and benefits.

For employers, Skills Standards Certifications can simplify the search for employees. I have heard from numerous Wisconsin employers, especially small businesses with limited resources, that it is hard to find employees with the skills they need, or who will be dedicated and loyal. Skills Standards Certifications clearly show the qualification of an individual, of course, but also tell the employer that he or she is dedicated enough to invest in the course to earn the certificate. Very few people will spend the time and money to enroll in such a program if they don't intend to use the certificate.

Lastly, these programs can help state and local governments quantify their skilled workforce, which can be invaluable when marketing the area to businesses and investment.

This bill is a small first step in what I hope can be a continuing effort to help hard-working Americans obtain and use high-demand work skills.

Mr. President, today I reintroduce a piece of my E4 initiative, so named because it is a collection of proposals that address issues important to the economy, education, employment and energy. This piece of the E4 legislation focuses on the important supporting role that transportation can play in economic development by creating an environment where employers and those seeking employment or better employment are connected together. Having such a system to overcome transportation hurdles can benefit both employers and employees, as well as the local economy and is all the more important in these difficult economic times.

In more general terms, investing in our infrastructure like roads, bridges and transit systems can have direct job creation impacts. This is one reason I have fought hard with the rest of the delegation for a fair rate of return for Wisconsin from the highway bill. It is also why in a letter I sent to President-elect Obama and Senate leaders I included highway and transit projects as part of a variety of ready-to- go infrastructure projects that should be included in the forthcoming economic recovery program.

In addition to supporting transportation-related jobs, linking workers and businesses that need them can also be an important part of a more comprehensive job creation strategy. This can mean supporting a robust public transportation system or more specific programs designed to link low-income individuals with jobs. I have consistently done the former by supporting

public transportation during consideration of the highway bill and Amtrak reauthorizations. But my specific proposal today focuses on the latter and improving the Job Access and Reverse Commute, JARC, program that links low-income workers with employers.

I have heard good things about the JARC program and was glad that it was shifted away from earmarks and was made available as a combination formula and competitively awarded program in the last highway bill. The primary program goal is to locally assess the transportation needs of low-income workers and then plan and fund programs to help alleviate transportation-related barriers to employment or better employment. While initially this may have been viewed as a way to support reverse commute projects whereby transit routes were established to allow city center residents to access jobs in the suburbs, the program actually does much more than just this and provides reliable transportation to low-income urban, rural and suburban workers.

In Wisconsin, the Federal JARC program is jointly administered by the State departments of transportation and workforce development as the Wisconsin Employment Transportation Assistance Program, WETAP. According to the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, transportation barriers can include a lack of a dependable vehicle or bus service in the area, an absence of local jobs, or childcare transportation problems. The State agencies in Wisconsin have found several different types of projects to be effective depending on the local circumstances. These projects have included the traditional public transit projects such as extending bus lines or supporting van-pooling, along with other programs such as providing cars or car repairs to low-income individuals. Wisconsin has even found that assisting with indirect barriers such as transportation of children to and from childcare facilities is critical in allowing some individuals to improve their job prospects.

A recent University of Illinois Chicago, UIC, study found that the societal benefits from this program are $1.65 per dollar spent and estimates lifetime benefits to low income participants of $15 per dollar spent due to their ability to find and retain better paying jobs. While the goals of the Job Access and Reverse Commute program are important and the program has been found to be fairly effective, there are some details that have prevented the program from reaching its full potential. Working closely with transportation officials in Wisconsin and partially based on recommendations from the UIC study, I've come up with some specific ideas to improve the program.

With a proven effective program and continuing unmet needs by employers and low-income individuals seeking employment, JARC could use a boost in funding. So that is why my proposal ramps up funding by $100 million over 5 years from the current funding of $165 million to $265 million in fiscal year 2014.

My proposal would also allow the Federal share of projects to increase to 80 percent from the current 50 percent level for operating expenses. The 50 percent local and State match wasn't feasible for far too many local governments in Wisconsin and as a result Wisconsin has not been able to spend all its Federal funds. The higher Federal cost share will better balance the need to leverage Federal funds, while ensuring that these critical funds are fully utilized--millions of dollars in an account does nothing to link people to jobs.

Besides the challenge in coming up with a 50 percent local cost share, the other main issue that has kept JARC from being as effective as it could be is the paperwork and reporting burden required by the program, especially for the small nonprofit groups that often have never dealt with Federal grant requirements before. My proposal directs the Federal Transit Agency, FTA, to examine the current reporting requirements to see if there are ways to streamline the amount of paperwork required while still ensuring that the program goals are met.

My bill also includes a pilot program funded at $10 million a year for 5 years in order to test a few areas that seem very promising, but should be evaluated more fully before broader implementation. The first portion of the pilot program builds off the regulatory streamlining evaluation and allows the FTA to test streamlined reporting requirements to help get the balance between oversight and administrative burden right.

The second part of the pilot program focuses on improving education- and employment-related transportation for teens and young adults. Enabling students and young people to reliably get between their high schools or neighborhoods and technical colleges, job training centers or apprenticeships can have a lifelong positive impact.

The third section of the pilot program would allow experimentation with combining different transit programs and integrating JARC projects across local political boundaries to provide a more comprehensive local transportation system. Instead of having one transit program to assist the disabled, one targeted toward the elderly and another focused on jobs, this pilot program would encourage funding combined applications to meet these needs together with one comprehensive project. There is even the potential for the Department of Transportation to further coordinate with other departments such as Health and Human Services for healthcare-related transportation. Similarly, the needs of employers for employees do not recognize local political boundaries, so encouraging greater collaboration between local entities to make a more robust interconnected system should ultimately provide more efficient and effective service.

While the FTA already provides some technical assistance for the JARC program, my proposal provides a small boost in funding and some additional areas of emphasis. For example, after hearing about the struggles that some small nonprofits have with the reporting requirements, in addition to looking for ways to streamline the requirements, my proposal would direct the FTA to also provide some technical assistance especially targeted to this need.

The final element of my proposal is the offset. The new spending authorized in the proposal is fully offset by rescinding highway and bridge earmarks that have not had funds spent from them despite being authorized over a decade ago as part of the TEA-21 highway bill. Helping connect workers and employers is a much better use of these funds than letting them sit unused in some obscure DOT account.

Providing reliable transportation to low-income individuals only goes so far--it is the companies and innovators creating the jobs and the individuals seeking to better their lot through education or more challenging employment, that are doing the heavy lifting. That being said, transportation can clearly be a challenge for companies and workers and in the case of the JARC program can play an important supporting role.

Mr. President, we are all aware of the serious challenges our economy faces in the short term and the urgency of our need to promote job creation and economic development. I am committed to engaging in this broad effort with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. But it is essential that our efforts not just be short term fixes--they must not only aim to create jobs and investment opportunities in the short term, they must be part of strategic efforts to strengthen our Nation's innovation capabilities and sustain long term economic development in a changing and competitive global environment. There is no better way to do this than by stimulating and supporting small business innovation, especially in areas of national priority. As part of this effort, today I am introducing the Strengthening Our Economy Through Small Business Innovation Act of 2009.

Job growth, innovation and economic development are driven by our small

businesses. Small businesses also tend to be based in our cities and communities and so they are major contributors to our local economies. Half of our county's payroll jobs and most of our new job opportunities are provided by small businesses. Small businesses are proven innovators and drive commercialization of cutting edge technologies. Not only are small businesses our major source of employment, they employ about one third of our country's scientists and engineers and generate more patents on a per capita basis than large businesses and universities. They also are effective partners with universities to enhance product creation, develop university income and attract university graduates and faculty through increased innovative job opportunities.

Over the last 25 years, through the Small Business Innovation and Research program, SBIR, and, more recently, the Small Business Technology Transfer program, STTR, up to 2.5 percent and 0.3 percent, respectively, of Federal R&D funds from 11 Federal agencies have been specifically allocated to our Nation's small businesses to fund innovation. These small business allocations are not sufficient. We must diversify and strengthen innovation capabilities and our economic base, and to accomplish this we must extend and increase R&D allocations to our Nation's innovative small businesses.

My bill does 3 things. First, it extends the SBIR and STTR programs for a further 14 years so that small businesses, as well as universities and non-profit research organizations that collaborate with small businesses, can continue to leverage Federal research and development funding.

Second, it significantly increases the allocation of funds and the awards from large Federal research and development budgets to small businesses through the SBIR and STTR programs. It would increase the SBIR allocation from its current 2.5 percent to 10 percent and the STTR allocation from 0.3 percent to 1.0 percent over a 3-year period. It would increase SBIR phase I awards from $100,000 to $300,000 and phase II awards from $750,000 to $2.2 million. Third, it identifies specific funding priorities for energy innovation; safe and secure water; domestic security; and transportation.

The SBIR program is tested, successful and worthy of extension. In its comprehensive study of the SBIR program, the National Research Council found that the program ``is sound in concept and effective in practice''; was ``stimulating technological innovation''; ``linking universities to the public and private markets''; ``increasing private sector commercialization of innovations'' at an ``impressive'' rate; and ``providing widely distributed support for innovation activity.'' The study concluded that:

[T]he program is proving effective in meeting Congressional

objectives. It is increasing innovation, encouraging

participation by small companies in R&D, providing support

for small firms owned by minorities and women, and resolving

research questions for mission agencies in a cost effective

manner. Should the Congress wish to provide additional funds

for the program in support of these objectives, those funds

could be employed effectively by the nation's SBIR.

The NRC's study also found that universities and other non-profit research institutions would benefit significantly from the increase in both the SBIR and the STTR programs. In particular, the STTR allocation increase will directly benefit universities and efforts to bring university-based research into the commercial marketplace, as a partnership with a non-profit research institution, such as a university, is a requirement of all STTR award recipients. Many of the small businesses that receive SBIR funding are rooted in the university infrastructure so investigators and graduates from universities will have opportunities to be part of commercial developments. More than two-thirds of SBIR companies report that at least one founder was previously an academic. About one-third of SBIR company founders were most recently employed as academics before founding the company. Over a third of SBIR projects cite direct university involvement with 27 percent of projects having university faculty as contractors on the project, 17 percent using universities themselves as subcontractors, and 15 percent employing graduate students.

In its report accompanying reauthorization legislation, the Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee recently concluded that:

increases in the SBIR allocation will invest money in

research, contracting, internships, and other collaborative

activities done with universities, with the contracting and

patenting activities with SBIR companies being a sizable

source of revenue for universities as well. The university-

industry partnerships that SBIR creates are crucial in that

they provide an applied research and commercialization focus

that otherwise likely would not be present in university

research. More specifically, the partnerships are important

in exposing faculty and the next generation of scientists and

engineers to commercial research and development. SBIR

businesses provide graduate and undergraduate students with

hands-on experience and job opportunities that universities

would be unable to provide alone.

Our country not only faces immediate economic and employment challenges, it faces major challenges in transportation, energy, domestic security and water quality and safety. Targeted research and development will be critical. Congress, with non-partisan expert guidance, has a role to play in guiding our national research and development priorities and, in this case, stimulating small business innovation and job creation in specific areas of critical national need. The National Academies of Science and other independent government research organizations provide us with carefully researched and considered recommendations on how we can address these priorities, so my bill draws on their recommendations to develop innovative energy technologies; enhance water quality and security; strengthen domestic security; and address transportation priorities. This is not only a good investment in short term job creation; it is an imperative investment in our Nation's long term innovation prospects and economic development.

The costs of my bill would be fully offset by cancellation of the airborne laser program. CBO estimates that cancelling that program will produce savings of over $2.6 billion.

Mr. President, as the 111th Congress begins, I am reintroducing a number of different bills designed to fuel job creation and spur economic development. My initiative, dubbed E4 because of its focus on economy, employment, education, and energy, seeks to respond to economic and job development needs both in my State of Wisconsin and around the country. These challenging economic times call for a comprehensive set of solutions including providing new job training opportunities for workers, fostering innovation among small businesses, protecting the existing family-supporting jobs in our nation, and boosting educational opportunities for young Americans. Today I am introducing the Connecting Education and Emerging Professions Act of 2009, which provides competitive grants to States and local school districts to promote better collaboration between high schools and local businesses and workforce development groups. This E4 education initiative is designed to help prepare America's students for future success in the workforce and post-secondary education as well as enhance America's competitiveness in the global economy as we prepare to enter the second decade of the twenty-first century.

Helping to ensure that all American students have access to a high- quality education is critical to boosting America's competitiveness and helping to ensure that our country is better equipped to respond to the economic challenges currently before us. Investment in our young people now will pay off in the future when these individuals are better prepared to compete for the highly skilled jobs of tomorrow. If the United States is to remain competitive on an international stage and continue to lead the world in innovation and development, we need to make certain that our young people are well prepared to meet current and future economic challenges.

Improving educational opportunities in the United States is going to require

a comprehensive set of policy strategies and I look forward to working with my colleagues in Congress this year as we get to work on a variety of education issues including expanding access to education from pre-K through college. We also face the monumental task of reauthorizing and reforming the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, ESEA, better known as No Child Left Behind, NCLB. As we consider the ESEA reauthorization, we should make substantial changes to the testing mandates that were imposed through NCLB and provide support to states that develop smarter accountability systems with enhanced assessments that measure higher-order thinking skills among students. We also need to look at ways to strengthen and reform our Nation's public secondary schools as part of the ESEA reauthorization. The legislation I am introducing today is designed to help support innovative changes that are taking place in some of our Nation's high schools and help even more States and local communities make improvements to their local high schools.

My CEEP bill seeks to address a couple of interrelated issues related to secondary education. The first issue is the alarmingly high dropout rate in our nation's high schools. While numbers vary slightly, a growing body of research indicates that the United States has a graduation rate of approximately 70 percent and that about one-third of our country's high school students will not graduate on time. Graduation rates for minority and low-income students are even lower, in many cases, alarmingly lower. In addition, many of our nation's urban school districts report very high dropout rates, including the Milwaukee Public School District. According to the Cities in Crisis report released in 2008 by the Editorial Projects in Education Research Center, the Milwaukee Public Schools has a graduation rate of 46.1 percent. Unfortunately, there are at least a dozen large urban districts that have even lower graduation rates than Milwaukee.

One of our top education priorities as a Nation must be to address the low graduation rates nationwide in urban, suburban, and rural school districts. We must also work to close the huge opportunity gap that is created by the large disparity in graduation rates between our minority and non-minority students as well as between low-income and more affluent students. Solving this problem will require a broad, comprehensive solution involving the federal, state and local governments. It is my hope that when Congress finally reauthorizes the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, we pay particular attention to the needs of our nation's high schools and our students.

While many factors contribute to high dropout rates, disengagement from classroom instruction can contribute to a student's decision to drop out. Some students feel that high school is not relevant to their lives and do not see how completing high school will translate into future career and academic success. In this increasingly competitive twenty-first century where postsecondary education is now required for many entry-level jobs, it is up to us to show our nation's students why it is so important that they graduate from high school.

Another issue that this bill seeks to address is the growing sense among employers and postsecondary institutions that our nation's high school students who do graduate are unprepared for success either in the workforce or in college. Employers in various economic sectors, including technology, manufacturing, health care, construction, and others, report difficulty in identifying qualified candidates for skilled positions. Recent surveys also indicate that many employers are dissatisfied with the overall preparation of secondary school graduates. In order for companies in the United States to be competitive in a global economy, we must have a highly skilled workforce. Adequate preparation at the high school level can help prepare students for entry into our rapidly changing global economy where new emerging industries are cropping up in Wisconsin and around the country.

To address these two interrelated issues, my bill would provide 5- year competitive education grants to states and school districts to foster collaboration and discussions between schools, businesses, and others about the emerging industry workforce needs and how to prepare our high school students to meet those needs, both academically and practically. States and local school districts must use this money to form partnerships with local or regional businesses, postsecondary institutions, workforce development boards, labor organizations, nonprofit organizations and others.

These partnerships will have the responsibility of surveying local, regional, and statewide emerging industries and deciding what are the academic and work-based skills that our high school students need in order to be successful in these emerging industries. The partnerships will then work together to develop new and engaging curriculums and programs designed to teach the academic and work-based skills that are necessary to succeed in these new emerging industries. Once the partnership has designed a curriculum or program and received approval from the Federal Department of Education, the partnership will work to implement the program in qualifying schools.

During the implementation phase, the partnership will come together to implement hands-on learning and work opportunities for students including internships, apprenticeships, job shadowing, and other career and technical education programs. These hands-on learning and work opportunities will be based on the emerging industry pathways curriculum or program that the eligible partnership has designed and will offer students practical academic experiences and skill-building lessons that they can use in the workplace or in postsecondary education.

This legislation seeks to help schools, businesses, colleges, and the students who would be served by this legislation talk with each other to build new programs that would help boost student engagement in learning and student attendance and graduation rates while also preparing students for success in the workforce or in college after they graduate. There are a number of successful local and state programs around Wisconsin that this legislation would help support and that served as valuable examples as I developed this legislation.

Wisconsin's Department of Public Instruction, Department of Workforce Development, and various local school districts have all been working to boost Wisconsin's career and technical education offerings and gear these offerings towards emerging industries. My bill seeks to help Wisconsin and other states build on these efforts and engage in additional conversations with interested stakeholders to design new curriculums and programs to prepare students for emerging industries.

I look forward to moving this legislation forward this year as the new Congress begins to debate how best to boost educational opportunities for all of our Nation's children. We have a significant achievement gap and graduation gap in urban, rural, and suburban schools throughout the country and it is imperative that we work together to promote innovative ideas that will close these gaps. Some of our Nation's schools are experiencing high dropout rates in part because students aren't connecting with what they are being taught. At the same time, we're seeing an emergence of new industries, like those aiming to capitalize on alternative energies and energy efficiency, that need employers with skills and training in their field. If we help schools connect their students with businesses, workforce development boards, and colleges that offer career and academic opportunities in these new and exciting fields, we can help to lower the alarming dropout rates while helping these emerging industries thrive.

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

Mr. President, I would like to thank the senior Senator from Wisconsin for his hard work to address antitrust issues in the rail industry along with other industries as Chairman of the Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee. I have been pleased to support his efforts to bring antitrust scrutiny to the large freight railroads since he first introduced a version of this legislation in 2006. As Senator Kohl well knows, this is a vitally important issue for rail customers and ultimately consumers both in Wisconsin and across the country.

Over the past several years, I have heard more and more comments and concerns from freight rail customers at my town hall meetings in Wisconsin and my meetings in Washington. The concerns have come from constituents who rely on freight railroads to transport their goods or receive raw materials. The comments I have heard have been diverse by industry, ranging from forestry, energy, farming, and petrochemical companies to various manufacturers, and by size, from family owned enterprises to large corporations. The problems they have described do not seem to be isolated incidents, but instead suggest a systematic continuing problem.

There are several general concerns that seem to apply no matter which class of railroad is discussed. While outright refusals of transport may be rare, several of my constituents have found it difficult to get timely estimates of costs for carriage for their cargo. This seems to especially be a problem for short distances or small loads, or if the cargo is only on the originating railroads' tracks for a short distance. Many have said that they feel like second-class citizens, denied the better service and dedicated trains that the long-haul receive.

I have also heard about problems with changes to transportation schedules, and problems with rail car delivery and ancillary services such as scales. Many rail customers seem to feel that as railroads continued to merge over the past two decades, service, especially for small customers, has declined dramatically. Again, this seems to especially affect small railroad customers who are dependant on rail transport, but face difficulty in receiving cars to fill, moving filled cars in a timely manner or weighing their loads.

Of course cost is also an issue, but it is not just the cost of transportation. Some rail customers feel that the Surface Transportation Board, STB, complaint process is too costly, slow and tilted in favor of the railroads over the customers. They contend that these hurdles to exposing anticompetitive practices have the effect of perpetuating the unfair treatment and excessive rates they experience.

Senator Kohl's proposal would remove the current railroad antitrust exemptions so that railroads would be covered like other segments of industry. The Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission would then have the authority to review mergers and block anti- competitive mergers. The legislation would also expand the ability of State Attorneys General and private parties to halt anti-competitive behavior and seek up to treble damages for any such violations.

I believe this is a very reasonable and measured proposal as evidenced by the bill being passed out of the Judiciary Committee in the previous Congress by voice vote. I look forward to supporting Senator Kohl's efforts to move the legislation through committee again and push for its passage into law during the current Congress.

While I hope that providing the Department of Justice the authority to review possible antitrust violations as proposed in the current bill will improve the situation for many shippers, it may have to go hand- in-hand with reforms at the STB as were contemplated in the previous Congress by Senator Rockefeller's Railroad Competition and Service Improvements Act of 2007.

Mr. President, I join my colleagues, the people of Rhode Island, and people across the Nation in mourning the passing of Senator Claiborne Pell. It was my honor to serve with him here in the Senate. My first term in the Senate coincided with his last years of distinguished service in this body. In particular, I enjoyed the opportunity to serve on the Foreign Relations Committee during his time as chairman. He was known on the committee, and throughout the Senate on both sides of the aisle, for his unfailingly kind manner and his outstanding commitment to public service, and rightly so.

Senator Pell had many accomplishments during his life in public service, including his authorship of legislation that created the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for Humanities, but his work to create what came to be known as Pell grants was perhaps his greatest achievement. Pell grants have helped millions of Americans attend college who otherwise may not have been able to attend due to cost. Higher education is one of the most important investments our Federal Government can make, and Senator Pell, who was deeply concerned about the emergence of a widening educational gap between low-income and more affluent Americans, worked to try to ensure that individuals from low-income families are not denied postsecondary education because they cannot afford it. As this new Congress begins, it is my hope that we can carry forward Senator Pell's legacy and boost Federal need-based grant programs to help ensure the doors of higher education are open to all Americans regardless of their financial circumstances.

Senator Pell's success in creating these grants, and giving so many Americans access to higher education, and to a better life, is a remarkable legacy. I am proud that I had the chance to serve with Senator Pell, and I join Americans across the country in honoring his memory.

Mr. President, I would like to thank the senior Senator from Wisconsin for his hard work to address antitrust issues in the rail industry along with other industries as Chairman of the Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee. I have been pleased to support his efforts to bring antitrust scrutiny to the large freight railroads since he first introduced a version of this legislation in 2006. As Senator Kohl well knows, this is a vitally important issue for rail customers and ultimately consumers both in Wisconsin and across the country.

Over the past several years, I have heard more and more comments and concerns from freight rail customers at my town hall meetings in Wisconsin and my meetings in Washington. The concerns have come from constituents who rely on freight railroads to transport their goods or receive raw materials. The comments I have heard have been diverse by industry, ranging from forestry, energy, farming, and petrochemical companies to various manufacturers, and by size, from family owned enterprises to large corporations. The problems they have described do not seem to be isolated incidents, but instead suggest a systematic continuing problem.

There are several general concerns that seem to apply no matter which class of railroad is discussed. While outright refusals of transport may be rare, several of my constituents have found it difficult to get timely estimates of costs for carriage for their cargo. This seems to especially be a problem for short distances or small loads, or if the cargo is only on the originating railroads' tracks for a short distance. Many have said that they feel like second-class citizens, denied the better service and dedicated trains that the long-haul receive.

I have also heard about problems with changes to transportation schedules, and problems with rail car delivery and ancillary services such as scales. Many rail customers seem to feel that as railroads continued to merge over the past two decades, service, especially for small customers, has declined dramatically. Again, this seems to especially affect small railroad customers who are dependant on rail transport, but face difficulty in receiving cars to fill, moving filled cars in a timely manner or weighing their loads.

Of course cost is also an issue, but it is not just the cost of transportation. Some rail customers feel that the Surface Transportation Board, STB, complaint process is too costly, slow and tilted in favor of the railroads over the customers. They contend that these hurdles to exposing anticompetitive practices have the effect of perpetuating the unfair treatment and excessive rates they experience.

Senator Kohl's proposal would remove the current railroad antitrust exemptions so that railroads would be covered like other segments of industry. The Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission would then have the authority to review mergers and block anti- competitive mergers. The legislation would also expand the ability of State Attorneys General and private parties to halt anti-competitive behavior and seek up to treble damages for any such violations.

I believe this is a very reasonable and measured proposal as evidenced by the bill being passed out of the Judiciary Committee in the previous Congress by voice vote. I look forward to supporting Senator Kohl's efforts to move the legislation through committee again and push for its passage into law during the current Congress.

While I hope that providing the Department of Justice the authority to review possible antitrust violations as proposed in the current bill will improve the situation for many shippers, it may have to go hand- in-hand with reforms at the STB as were contemplated in the previous Congress by Senator Rockefeller's Railroad Competition and Service Improvements Act of 2007.

Mr. President, I am pleased to join with the senior Senator from Arizona, Mr. McCain, the junior Senator from Missouri, Mrs. McCaskill, the junior Senator from Oklahoma, Mr. Coburn, and the senior Senator from South Carolina, Mr. Graham, in introducing the Fiscal Discipline, Earmark Reform, and Accountability Act of 2009. Senator McCain has been one of the preeminent champions

of earmark reform, and I have been pleased to work with him in fighting this abuse over the last two decades. Senators McCaskill and Coburn, though newer to the Senate, have been two of the most effective advocates of earmark reform since taking office. And Senator Graham has been a courageous champion of reform as well, and during consideration of the Lobbying and Ethics Reform measure in the 110th Congress was a critical vote in helping to strengthen the earmark provisions of that legislation.

That measure was the most significant earmark reform Congress has ever enacted, and it reflected a growing recognition by Members that the business-as-usual days of using earmarks to avoid the scrutiny of the authorizing process or of competitive grants are coming to an end. It is no accident that the presidential nominees of the two major parties were major players on that reform package.

Mr. President, it would be a mistake not to acknowledge just how far we have come. The Lobbying and Ethics Reform bill was an enormous step forward, and I commend our Majority Leader, Senator Reid, as well as our former colleague from Illinois, President-elect Obama, for their work in ensuring the passage of that landmark bill.

But it would also be a mistake not to admit that we still have a way to go. The Fiscal Discipline, Earmark Reform, and Accountability Act of 2009 will build on the significant achievement of the 110th Congress by moving from what has largely been a system designed to dissuade the use of earmarks through disclosure to one that actually makes it much more difficult to enact them.

The principal provision of this measure is the establishment of a point of order against unauthorized earmarks on appropriations bills. To overcome that point of order, supporters of the unauthorized earmark will need to obtain a super-majority of the Senate. As a further deterrent, the bill provides that any earmarked funding which is successfully stricken from the appropriations bill will be unavailable for other spending in that bill.

The measure also closes a loophole in last year's Lobbying and Ethics Reform bill by requiring all appropriations conference reports and all authorizing conference reports to be electronically searchable 48 hours before the Senate considers the conference report. And it requires all recipients of federal funds to disclose any money spent on registered lobbyists.

I am delighted that President-elect Obama has announced that the expected economic recovery package which may be proposed in the next few days should be kept free of earmarks. I couldn't agree more, and I expect to join with Senators McCain, McCaskill, Graham, and Coburn to see that the recovery package is free of unauthorized earmarks.

In the past, this urgently needed measure was just the kind of legislation that typically attracted unauthorized earmarks. We are much more likely to be successful in keeping that package and other appropriations bills free of earmarks if we are able to use the tools proposed in this legislation.

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

Mr. President, I will support this legislation to provide financing to the U.S. auto industry because without this assistance millions of American jobs, and a fundamental part of our manufacturing base, will be jeopardized. In these difficult economic times, with unemployment increasing, we cannot afford to see these jobs disappear.

I understand that many people are upset about this rescue package. I, for one, am not happy to be running up still more charges on the taxpayers' tab. And I appreciate the arguments that have been made that the automakers' troubles are of their own making. Certainly some of their troubles are indeed of their own making, but not all of them. Some of the problems facing domestic automakers are the direct result of policies enacted or ratified in Washington.

The collapse of the housing and credit markets clearly hit the credit-sensitive auto industry hard, and we know that those problems in particular were not of the auto industry's making. Far from it. They were the result of two decades of the reckless disassembly of a sound regulatory system, combined with some unscrupulous actions by many in the financial industry--a deadly combination that has now brought the entire economy to the brink of disaster including domestic auto producers.

And at the same time Washington was repealing strong financial regulations, bipartisan majorities in Congress, led by Democratic and Republican Presidents, were also advancing deeply flawed trade policies which have further disadvantaged the domestic auto industry. Currency manipulation by foreign competitors, too, has put our domestic firms, including the automakers, at an enormous competitive disadvantage. Combine that with the failure of our major trade agreements to establish reasonable standards for workers, public safety, and the environment, and the self-made problems

of domestic auto producers are greatly magnified.

I will not defend the mistakes made by auto executives, but a significant amount of blame lies with Federal policymakers who blindly embraced philosophies of deregulation and trade that undermined protections for working families, public safety, and the environment. In fact, some of the same people opposed to any temporary help for the automakers now were the ones who helped dig the hole in which that industry now finds itself.

More importantly, being angry at these companies' past mistakes is no reason to permit the auto companies to go under at this time. To allow these companies to go into bankruptcy could prove to be a tremendous shock to our already weak economy and could end up costing the U.S. taxpayers even more in pension guarantees, unemployment benefits, and other costs.

And we are not just talking about the jobs of the autoworkers at the U.S. auto plants, although those jobs are important. We are also talking about the millions of jobs in related industries including steelmakers, rubber companies, hundreds of other suppliers, parts manufacturers, car dealers, and other industries that would be negatively impacted if the U.S. auto companies went bankrupt.

Workers around Wisconsin are already struggling with the downturn in the auto industry and would be even harder hit if Congress fails to provide assistance to the auto industry. My hometown of Janesville, WI, is proud home to the oldest GM plant and for over 80 years, generations of Janesville men and women have built cars and trucks for GM. The Janesville GM assembly plant has been the core of the community and surrounding area for decades by providing its workers with family- supporting jobs and contributing to the lifeblood of the community. Earlier this year, GM announced that it would cease production at the Janesville plant by the end of the year. Despite this unwelcome news, the State of Wisconsin and the local community, including workers, business owners, union leadership, have all come together to propose a plan to encourage GM to retool the plant to build a future product line. I am so proud that stakeholders in Janesville and in Wisconsin have come together to try to keep these jobs in Wisconsin and I will continue to do all I can, along with others in the Wisconsin congressional delegation, to support their efforts to keep an auto presence in Janesville.

Janesville is not the only community in Wisconsin that is closely watching what we do in Congress this week. A Chrysler engine plant employs hundreds of people in Kenosha and various suppliers and related manufacturers do business in communities throughout southeastern and southwestern Wisconsin. I have also heard from auto dealers representing communities all across Wisconsin about the need to provide assistance to the U.S. auto industry to help ensure that their businesses continue to provide jobs in these troubling times. I understand Americans want businesses to be held accountable for bad decisions they have made in the past, and I do not think the Federal Government should get in the business of bailing out every industry in need of help. But in this case, failure to provide assistance to the auto industry could cause such a horrible shock to the American economy and communities all across our country that we must take action.

While I think the Federal Government needs to act, any rescue package should not be a blank check and this particular rescue package contains various provisions to help ensure that the auto companies are held accountable for the Federal financial assistance they receive. Unlike the Wall Street bailout that I voted against, this bill provides strict rules that the auto companies must follow in order for the companies to be eligible for Federal assistance. The companies must negotiate with their employees, shareholders, creditors, and other parties to develop restructuring plans to show how these companies are going to reform themselves for the future, including improving their capacity to build the fuel-efficient vehicles that Americans are demanding. These restructuring plans are due within the first few months of 2009 and if they are not approved by the Federal Government, the auto companies will not be able to receive additional Federal funding and will have to repay the Federal assistance they have already received.

I would have preferred this money to come from the $700 billion Wall Street bailout that Congress passed earlier this year. I am disappointed that the Bush administration refused to use its authority under the Troubled Assets Relief Program, TARP, to provide financial assistance to the auto companies. Congress's investigative arm, the Government Accountability Office, testified before the Senate Banking Committee last week that the Bush administration currently has the authority under TARP to provide this assistance. Secretary Paulson could have acted weeks ago to provide such assistance to the auto industry, yet he continues to refuse to take those steps, and allocate what amounts to a small percentage of the Wall Street bailout to help millions of working families in this country.

Because of the administration's refusal to use its existing authority to help the auto industry, Congress has been forced to act. Unfortunately, we have also been forced by the administration to take money from the Section 136 Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Program that was created last year to provide Federal funding to auto companies and manufacturers to help them as they develop more fuel- efficient vehicles and related technology. This bill is far from perfect and one of my biggest concerns is that Congress has been compelled to raid the pot of money designed to help auto companies and parts manufacturers build more fuel-efficient cars in the future. Diverting the Section 136 money is going to further set back the work that the auto industry is doing to make their products greener and more marketable.

Everyone, including the U.S. auto industry, has acknowledged that U.S. auto companies need to start building more fuel-efficient vehicles. Furthermore, all of the U.S. auto companies have applied for loans under Section 136 and access to the Section 136 retooling funding is critical to their future success. Yet today we are taking this retooling money to pay for the short-term survival of these companies. This was a false choice and if the administration had been more willing to work with us on this issue, we could have done both. Instead, by taking from the Section 136 program today we are engaging in extremely shortsighted policymaking. I will work with my colleagues to help ensure that funding for Section 136 is reinstated next year.

I regret that we find ourselves in this position today. I thank Senators Levin, Stabenow, and Dodd and their colleagues in the House of Representatives for putting together this legislation in very difficult circumstances. This bill is not perfect, but given the need for prompt action, I will support it and I urge my colleagues to do the same. We must act in order to help protect millions of American jobs from disappearing and to help prevent countless communities in Wisconsin and around the country from experiencing even more economic hardships in the short term. As the new Congress gets under way shortly, I look forward to helping develop longer-term policies to assist American industry as it responds to 21st century challenges so that it can continue to lead the world in innovation.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I wish to express my deep concern about the rapidly deteriorating situation in the eastern region of the Democratic Republic of Congo. Over recent weeks, eastern Congo has been making international headlines since new fighting broke out between the Congolese military and rebels loyal to General Laurent Nkunda. The rebels overran several government military bases and major towns as they surrounded the strategic city of Goma. Meanwhile, the Congolese military--a feckless force that often rapes and pillages the very people it is meant to protect--retreated, leaving UN peacekeepers to fend off the rebels' advance and attempt to protect civilians. Fortunately, the rebels stopped before marching on Goma, but the situation remains extremely volatile.

I traveled last year to the very region, North Kivu Province, where this violence is taking place and saw firsthand the grave suffering of people who have lived through a decade of conflict and humanitarian crisis. The numbers are staggering: an estimated 5.4 million deaths over the last decade and 1,500 people still dying each day. In addition, millions have been displaced from their homes, living in squalid camps where children are subject to forced recruitment and women suffer unspeakable levels of sexual violence.

In my travels to many parts of Africa over the years, the suffering of women and girls in eastern Congo particularly stands out. I met with women and girls who had been gang raped, often leaving them with irreparable physical and psychological damage. I met with women who had lost their husbands, their homes, and their livelihoods and yet against all odds they refused to give up--if only for the sake of their children. There may be no worse place to be female than eastern Congo. And yet it is the strength of these women that continues to give hope.

The renewed fighting in eastern Congo is worrisome not only because it will further exacerbate this humanitarian tragedy, but also because it risks engulfing the neighboring countries in a new regional war. Last month, the Congolese Government accused Rwanda of sending troops across the border in support of Nkunda's forces. The rebels in turn have recently alleged that Angolan and even Zimbabwean troops are supporting the Congolese military. Despite vows by these governments to avoid another regional conflict, tensions remain high. It is not hard to imagine a minor incident sparking a repeat of 1998 when at least six neighboring countries were drawn into Congo's war.

Such a scenario would destabilize the Great Lakes region of Africa. Over recent years, the United States and our international partners have made significant investments--both financial and diplomatic--to assist in consolidating peace and restoring the rule of law in this region. No one wants to see those investments lost and the progress made reversed, and we may not have to. If we take bold and strategic action now, we can prevent a new regional conflict and revive the peace process in eastern Congo.

I was pleased that our top diplomat for Africa, Jendayi Frazer, traveled to the region with high-level diplomats from the UK and France 2 weeks ago. In addition, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon convened an emergency summit of regional leaders in Nairobi. But this diplomatic engagement must remain consistent and get all key actors, including Rwanda, to commit to a clear roadmap for implementing the already signed peace agreements. To be successful, we must also establish monitoring and verification mechanisms to hold the parties accountable and challenge the continued culture of impunity.

At the same time, while achieving a political solution is vital to ending the crisis in eastern Congo, the international community should also take measures to help protect civilians and enforce a ceasefire in the short term. The UN Secretary General has called for an additional 3,000 troops and police specially trained and equipped for rapid response to reinforce the peacekeeping force in Congo, known by its French acronym MONUC. The United States and other Security Council members should act immediately to fulfill those requests. In addition, the Security Council should clarify MONUC's mandate to prioritize civilian protection and conflict prevention in the east and ensure it is implemented equally by all brigades. A renewed MONUC will not only save lives, but can also deter military involvement from neighboring countries.

Ultimately though, lasting peace in eastern Congo and the wider region will require measures to transform the underlying causes of conflict. The continued exploitation of Congo's rich mineral base, particularly cassiterite, coltan, and gold, makes war a profitable enterprise. The international community should work with governments in the region to bring greater transparency and regulation to the trade in these minerals. The next administration and Congress must look seriously at how the United States can contribute meaningfully to this process as it is a critical step toward the larger goal of reforming Congo's economic and political institutions.

Congo has vast potential and its stability can have a positive impact across Africa. We have made notable progress in that direction over recent years, but we are once again standing at a precipice. In the face of a potential regional war, we can no longer rely on piecemeal tactics and half-measures. It is time for a comprehensive and concerted international effort to ensure protection and basic rights for all Congo's people. It is for that reason that I am today introducing a resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire in eastern Congo and a comprehensive solution to this crisis. I am pleased to introduce this resolution with the distinguished senior Senator from Kansas, who has long been a champion on this issue, and I hope our colleagues will join us in this urgent plea for peace.

Mr. President, today I commend Senator Elizabeth Dole for her dedicated work on behalf of North Carolina in the Senate and her decades of service to our Nation. In the Senate she has worked hard to ensure our veterans and servicemembers receive the benefits they have more than earned. I was pleased to have her cosponsorship and support for my measure allowing servicemembers to terminate cell phone contracts free of penalties.

Senator Dole has also demonstrated a commitment to solving the most difficult crises in Africa, particularly in Zimbabwe and Darfur. We both joined with Senator Clinton and Senator Lugar on legislation to assist Zimbabweans in their efforts to promote democracy and human rights in their country. I also welcomed Senator Dole's support on a resolution condemning the recent flawed elections in Zimbabwe. Her voice in the Senate on these issues will be missed. I thank her for her service to the Senate and the people of North Carolina, and wish her all the best for the future.

Gordon Smith

Mr. President, today I want to thank Senator Gordon Smith for his service to the people of Oregon. During my time on the Senate Foreign Relations African Affairs Subcommittee I have watched Senator Smith fight ardently for the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief that has saved countless lives around the globe. His leadership on legislation to fight HIV/AIDS and other diseases has been vital to our efforts to bring help to many African nations.

I also applaud his work to pass the Employment Non Discrimination Act, which I was also pleased to cosponsor. His efforts to end employment discrimination based on sexual orientation represent an important step toward ensuring equal rights for all Americans.

Finally, I want to recognize Senator Smith's work on legislation to require health insurers to include mental health benefits in their health insurance coverage. This excellent example of bipartisan cooperation, the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act, was made possible in part by the commitment of Senator Smith to ensuring those suffering from mental illness have access to medical treatments that will improve their quality of life.

Once again, I thank Gordon Smith for his dedication to the people of Oregon and the country while in the Senate, and I wish him all the best in the future.

John Sununu

Mr. President, today I want to take a moment to recognize the service of Senator John Sununu during his time here in the Senate. It has been a pleasure to work with him on a wide range of issues, from protecting the rights of law-abiding Americans to strengthening our foreign policy toward Africa.

Senator Sununu has made many important contributions during his time in this body, but his work to protect the constitutional rights of innocent Americans is certainly among the most important. He recognizes that our government can wage an effective fight against terrorism that still respects our basic freedoms. Senator Sununu has been a crucial voice on civil liberties issues like reforming the PATRIOT Act and keeping tabs on government data mining efforts. I am proud that we worked together on a number of bills. Most recently, we introduced legislation addressing the serious misuse of the FBI's national security letter authorities to obtain information about innocent people without judicial review. We also successfully passed legislation last year requiring Federal agencies to inform Congress about the use and development of the kind of government data mining technologies that raise the most serious privacy and efficacy concerns. I will miss his voice on these issues here in the Senate.

Finally, I want to recognize Senator Sununu's work on the Senate Foreign

Relations Committee's Africa Subcommittee. I had the privilege of working side by side with him when he was ranking member of that subcommittee, and I saw firsthand his commitment to ending devastating conflicts in Africa. I deeply appreciate his commitment to his work on Africa, and to so many other issues during his service in the Senate. I wish him all the best in the future.

Pete Domenici

Mr. President, today I would like to commemorate the life of the great Wisconsin conservationist Martin Hanson. Wisconsin lost one of the best environmental stewards of the last century on October 22 when Martin passed away in beautiful northern Wisconsin. I join so many other Wisconsinites, and conservationists nationwide, in paying tribute to Martin Hanson's memory.

Martin Hanson dedicated his life to protecting the Wisconsin landscape he loved. His legacy will carry on for many years to come in the peaceful shorelines, deep forests, and shimmering lakes of our State. Thanks to Martin's tireless work, future generations of Wisconsinites will fall in love with the great outdoors just as he did.

The Apostle Islands, a great Wisconsin treasure along Lake Superior, have been kept nearly pristine because of his environmental advocacy. Like so many other Wisconsinites, I travel to the Apostle Islands as often as I can to enjoy the spectacular scenery. Wisconsin has Martin Hanson, as well as Gaylord Nelson, to thank for protecting this Wisconsin treasure. The work of these two giants of Wisconsin's conservation movement helped make possible my own efforts to preserve the Apostle Islands and designate almost 80 percent of them as federally protected wilderness.

Generations of Wisconsinites are indebted to Martin Hanson, who was a key architect of our State's tradition of environmental conservation. So today I honor his memory, celebrate his extraordinary life, and give thanks for his outstanding legacy.