Floor Statements

Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it adjourn under the previous order.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, the middle class is the backbone of our Nation. Middle-class families sustain our neighborhoods and our economy and support our public services such as our schools and police and fire departments and libraries.

Over the last 2 weeks--last week and the week before--I traveled extensively across Ohio and met with Ohioans who define the character of the American middle class.

College students at the University of Toledo described their hopes and aspirations to become our next educators and entrepreneurs, community and business leaders, and civic activists.

Workers at the 60-year-old General Motors plant in Defiance, near the Indiana border, described how they are ready to build the next generation car engines and rebuild the middle-class communities in which they work and live.

In Cincinnati, workers at GE's historic Evendale plant--a Cincinnati suburb--represent the classic American success story: people working hard, getting ahead, getting paid an honest day's wage for an honest day's work.

I met with veterans. Chairman Akaka allowed me to set up, in Cambridge, OH--in eastern rural Appalachian Ohio--a Veterans' Committee hearing. I met with other veterans in the Chillicothe VA Center and the Cincinnati VA Center--two terrific VA facilities--to meet with and talk to and understand better the services for veterans who return from war and who represent those values of hard work and fair play.

Too many middle-class families in the Presiding Officer's State-- whether it is Joliet, IL--or Mansfield, OH, too many middle-class families are still fighting to have something to show for it. They are fighting for a secure job with decent wages, a home with an affordable mortgage, and the belief that their children will have a future full of opportunity and stay close by and raise their children so they can know their grandparents.

Tax day is today, April 15, and many middle-class Americans are just trying to get by while our economy begins to recover. That is why when President Obama and this Congress--the Senate and the House--enacted the American

Recovery and Reinvestment Act last year, we made sure that one-third of those several hundred billion dollars--one-third of those dollars went to tax relief for 95 percent of working families in America.

We hear my colleagues on the other side of the aisle talk about tax cuts as if they invented them, but we don't hear them tell the truth about tax cuts because their idea of tax cuts is overwhelming tax benefits to the wealthiest people in our society--not doing what President Obama and the House and Senate did last year and this year: providing those tax breaks and tax cuts and tax relief directly to the large middle-class and working class in this country. Middle-class taxpayers, as a result, can collect on more than a dozen Recovery Act tax benefits this season. While the Recovery Act is putting Americans back to work rebuilding America, it is also honoring the dignity of work through the Making Work Pay tax credit. On average, Ohioans received $496 through the Making Work Pay tax credit, $496 in people's pockets. Middle-class tax relief helps make college more affordable through the American Opportunity Credit, tax savings for up to $2,500 to pay college expenses. More homes can be energy efficient and less costly through energy efficiency and renewable energy incentives. Energy-efficient windows and doors and heating and cooling systems reduce utility bills, while increasing the value of the most important asset for many Americans--their home. The first-time home buyer tax credit has made the dream of home ownership a reality, helped create jobs, stabilized home prices, and rebuilt communities across the Nation.

These are tax breaks that have been enacted that Americans are already taking advantage of and, in many cases, celebrating on this day that people aren't particularly glad to see: April 15. It means this April 15 is a whole lot better for American taxpayers than 2 years ago, when April 15 was for people who didn't have the tax relief the Obama administration has brought them.

The Cash for Clunkers Program provided American consumers and Ohio consumers with vouchers to purchase new fuel-efficient vehicles. It was a resounding success. More Americans bought more American cars. That program stabilized the auto sector. It saved and created thousands of jobs across Ohio and the Nation. I saw these jobs being created in Defiance, OH, as I mentioned, where some 80 workers will be called back to help build the engine for the new Chevy Cruze made in Youngstown. I know those workers at GM in Parma, a Cleveland suburb, will be helping with some of the stamping and the fabrication of the Chevy Cruze, and I know that 1,100 workers are in the process of being put back to work, to work a third shift at the Lordstown GM plant to build the most energy-efficient car in the GM fleet.

Existing tax credits, such as the earned income tax credit which rewards work for people making $20,000 to $40,000 a year--this is not welfare; it rewards people who are working hard, playing by the rules, not making a lot of money--or the child tax credit, these existing tax credits were expanded to ensure more eligible Americans received the tax credits they earned. Nationwide, the average tax refund is up 10 percent--$266 for a record average. The average tax refund is $3,036 so far. Those numbers will slightly change as people file today, before midnight.

The IRS says this increase is largely due to the Recovery Act. Ninety-nine percent of working families and individuals in Ohio benefited from at least one of the tax cuts signed into law by President Obama. Working Ohioans received $1,046 on average as a result of these critical middle-class tax relief programs. That means because of what this Congress did, the Senate and the House, what President Obama did, middle-class Ohio families save over $1,000. That is $1,000 in their pockets that wouldn't have been there 2 years ago, before President Obama took office, would not have been available under the Bush tax policies because those tax policies benefited the richest people but didn't benefit the middle class.

So under the Bush tax policies, wealthier people were particularly happy, but the middle class was left out. Under Obama tax policies, wealthier people might not be quite so happy, but the broad middle class will have more than $1,000 extra in their pockets as a result of this middle-class tax relief. It is a critical part of the economic recovery.

That is why the President and the Congress passed just last month the largest health-related, middle-class tax cut in the last two decades when it passed the historic health care reform, insurance reform legislation. We know there is much work ahead. I would add the first thing that came out of that legislation on health care was already in place and is now already in place; that is, significant tax incentives for small businesses, for employers to provide health insurance for their employees. When they couldn't afford it in the past, with these tax incentives, many employers will be able to afford providing health insurance for their employees.

We know there is much work ahead to ensure the interests of the middle class are protected in our Tax Code over the corporate special interests. I know many Republicans, including those running for office in my State--for Governor and Senate and attorney general--many Republicans want to repeal the health care bill. But understand when they repeal the health care bill, they are doing what they have done in the past. They are taking from the middle class and giving to the wealthy. That is the class warfare I have heard on this floor for the last 3 years. It is the class warfare I heard in the House of Representatives when Republicans continued to do more and more for the richest people in this country and less and less for the middle class and less and less for low-income people. That is the kind of class warfare they have waged for years. I hope they aren't successful in doing that on the health care bill. I don't think they will be, but it is important to guard against that.

Senate Democrats are not just looking back with what we were able to do, we are looking forward to what we are going to do to make taxes work better for America. Senate Democrats are working on further tax relief to help middle-class families whose daycare costs for a young child or an elderly parent undercut their pay and their savings. We will continue to fight for middle-class tax relief that will rebuild our economy in Dayton and Springfield and Zanesville and Mansfield and Ravenna and Girard and Lima and restore prosperity for all Ohioans. We will continue to fight for college students in Toledo, the GM workers in Defiance, the GM workers in Evendale, and veterans and all middle- class families across the Ohio and the country. America's middle class, as a result, will pay less and save more because this President and this Congress are actually doing something about it.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following Senate resolutions: S. Res. 484, S. Res. 485, S. Res. 486, and S. Res. 487.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table en bloc.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 2 p.m. Monday, April 19; that following the prayer and the pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed to have expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate proceed to a period of morning business until 3 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each; that following morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session to debate the nomination of Lael Brainard to be an Under Secretary of the Treasury.

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

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the majority leader be authorized to sign any duly enrolled bills or joint resolutions today, April 15, or tomorrow, April 16, 2010.

Mr. President, today, Senator Reid filed cloture on several executive nominations. At 5:30 Monday, the Senate will proceed to a cloture vote on the Brainard nomination.

Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it adjourn under the previous order, following the remarks of the junior Senator from Alabama, Senator Sessions.

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

I appreciate the work Senator Warner is doing, along with Senator Hagan and Senator Udall. I came to the Senate 3\1/2\ years ago. I am personally not a lawyer, and I have, obviously, never sat as a judge, but I understand the custom here is that, typically, if there is a Senator from a State with the same party affiliation as the President, that Senator makes a recommendation to the President for a Federal judgeship or a district Federal judgeship, and normally the President will accept that. My senior Senator, my colleague from Ohio, is a Republican. So rather than block him out of the appointment process, the confirmation process, I asked him to join with me and we put together a committee for the northern district in Ohio for a judge vacancy. Actually, there were two, one in the northern district and we did one in the southern district. We had a panel of, I believe 17 people. The northern district panel was actually majority Republican. I am a Democrat; the President is obviously a Democrat. The southern district was a majority Democrat, barely. The panel did lengthy interviews of about 20 potential judges each--Federal judges--for the one vacancy in the northern district and the one in the southern district. In these interviews were people who were active in their communities, who donated their time and spent 2 or 3 full days.

The panel then submitted to me the top three candidates in both the northern and southern districts, and I interviewed each of the three and chose who I thought would be the best Federal district judges. I then spoke with Senator Voinovich and he signed off on them. Both of these candidates were then submitted to the President, who in turn submitted them to the Senate and the Judiciary Committee. The Judiciary Committee voted overwhelmingly for each of them. Yet they still haven't come to a vote on the Senate floor.

I couldn't have done this in a more bipartisan and fair way to make it happen, and I know Senator Voinovich wishes to move on these judges. He signed off on them, and on the day we announced them we put out a joint statement where we said these were important judgeships and that we had selected the right people.

As Senator Cardin said, this is wrong. There are backlogs in these courts and, as Senator Hagan of North Carolina said, we need to fill these positions. As has been said, justice delayed is justice denied. There are backlogs both in the northern and southern district and we have these two ready to be voted on. We could do it today. It could be done by unanimous consent request, as Senator Udall of Colorado suggested. We could do that.

There are now two new vacancies in Ohio, and so we will start that process. But it doesn't make sense that President Obama's district court nominees have waited twice as long after being favorably reported by the Judiciary Committee to be voted upon. So in addition to the other judges who have been vetted by a whole process--from the State senator to the FBI, to the President, to the Senate Judiciary Committee--it is time now for a vote. And most of these will be unanimous or close to it.

I think there will be overwhelming support for Judge Pearson in the northern district and Judge Black in the southern district. They have proven they are ready to go and they would be good judges. Both are U.S. magistrates now, so they have gone through other vetting processes for those jobs. I hope my colleagues will decide to accept these and move on, because we have so many other things to do. This delay and obstructionism on judges is wrong and we need to move on.

Madam President, I thank Senator Warner for his leadership on this issue.

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

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

morning business for no more than 5 minutes.

Mr. President, I rise as a result of the resolution offered earlier today commemorating the tragic deaths of so many Polish leaders, especially the death of Tomasz Merta, who is the Minister of Culture in Poland.

I worked with Tomasz Merta a couple times over the last 25 years. In the early 1990s, he was a very young man, was still in his twenties, and he worked with Ohio State's Mershon Center, where I worked, helping his country's government transition from communism to democracy. We worked on everything from curricula writing to training teachers.

I worked with him again when I was a Member of Congress. This time I went to Ukraine, and he helped us train Ukrainian teachers, helped write curriculum, and help those Ukrainian teachers teach government courses on civic education in Kiev.

So Tomasz Merta, born in 1965, graduate of Warsaw University, got a Ph.D. His whole career was all about love of country, all about democracy, all about doing the right thing. He, in the nineties and since, was a prolific writer. He wrote articles about democracy, articles about teaching democracy, articles about building democracy. He was so important to this country. He was one of the youngest leaders who was killed on this terrible, tragic flight.

He had a terrific future. He was the Secretary of State and the Minister of Culture and National Heritage. We will all miss him. Tomasz, as his nickname was--Tomek is his real name. Tomasz is like Thomas and Tommy. Tomasz was a devoted husband, the father of three daughters.

I last saw him several years ago in Kiev. I so appreciate what he did. As I will say now in Polish: I offer my deep condolences to the people of Poland for this tragic loss.

Tomasz and some of his friends taught me some Polish. I must admit I read it, but the pronunciation he helped me with--he and Alicija and others in Poland. I am so sad about his loss. I am so sad for his country. I am so sad for his wife and his three beautiful daughters. I know that country will mourn his loss as it mourns the loss of so many other Polish patriots.

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

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

Mr. President, I noticed the senior Senator from Ohio, my colleague, was in the Chamber, and I wanted to thank him publicly for his vote yesterday, joining with three other Republicans Senators--Senators Collins, Snowe, and Brown, the new Senator from Massachusetts--in their vote to extend unemployment benefits.

There is simply no reason this shouldn't be bipartisan--this extension of unemployment benefits. It is not solving all our Nation's problems, but it certainly stimulates the economy. It is the best use of public dollars to help the economy because when we extend unemployment benefits, we pay unemployment benefits to a family in Ashtabula or a family in Yellow Springs who ends up putting money into their community. They spend it at the local grocery store, the hardware store, or the department store. They are able to pay their property tax, which is money that goes to schools, and all of those things. So it clearly has a stimulative effect on the local economy.

Even more than that, it is what we owe to people who are working hard, playing by the rules, and who can't find a job. We don't call it unemployment welfare. We call it unemployment insurance. I think all of us on both sides of the aisle, even though 30 of my colleagues worked against passing this legislation to extend unemployment benefits to people who are now unemployed but who were employed, understand, though maybe we need to have a little more instruction around here, that when people are employed, they pay into the system as insurance. When they are unemployed, they get assistance from the government to keep bread on the table, to keep their families fed. It is a pretty simple concept, and it has worked well for us for decades.

I hear from my Republican colleagues who voted against the extension of unemployment benefits that the reason they did so is because it is not paid for and that it will blow a hole in the budget. I know the Presiding Officer, when he represented Boulder in his

congressional district in Colorado before he came to the Senate--he was down the hall from me, and he remembers, as I do the time when we opposed the war in Iraq, and the Republicans who supported it, all but, I believe, three in the House and one in the Senate didn't think then about paying for that war. They didn't think about what that meant in terms of cost to their children and grandchildren when they passed that.

We were both in the House, Senator Udall of Colorado and myself, and they didn't think about the cost when we passed the Medicare giveaway to the drug and insurance companies, which Senator Udall and I--then congressmen--opposed. They didn't say anything about paying for it in those days. They just added it to the credit card for our children and grandchildren.

When they gave tax cuts to the richest Americans--hundreds of billions of dollars over 10 years to the wealthiest Americans--that was just added to the credit card of the future.

It is only now they object to the cost, when it is unemployed workers--people whose lifestyle, people whose quality of life isn't close to the quality of life and the lifestyle and the standard of living that we enjoy, dressed like this, working in a place like this, this august body, with the privileges that surround us. It is only when we talk about people who have lost their jobs, who don't have privileges that we do now--and generally through no doing of their own, but simply because they lost their jobs because their company closed or they got laid off--that they object to the cost.

Most of these workers were efficient workers who did what their employer asked. Yet we are going to be so stingy as to deny them unemployment compensation.

It is not like they are sitting around with nothing to do and should be out working. I talked to dozens of people, as I am sure Senator Udall, the Presiding Officer, has, talked to dozens of people who tell me they send out 10 or 15, sometimes 25, sometimes 50 resumes every week or so to try to get a job. Usually these resumes go unanswered and possibly barely even looked at because these companies are not even hiring.

It is a question of fairness. It is a question of good economics. It is a question, in some sense, of the privilege we enjoy here that they are denying even a shred of that same advantage, by refusing to extend their unemployment benefits and refusing to extend the assistance they could get for health care with the so-called COBRA program which allows them to keep the health insurance they had. It is at high cost--but not so prohibitively high a cost since we have been helping with that since the stimulus package and legislation I had written before the stimulus bill that included it in it that gave assistance to people who lost their insurance when they signed up for COBRA to keep what they had.

I do not know what to think about their opposition. I hear them say it is about the budget deficit but I really wonder if it is because they didn't say it before when it was the tax cuts for the rich, the drug and insurance company giveaway, billions of taxpayer dollars, and the Iraq war. They never thought about paying for those things but they want to do it on the backs of unemployed workers. I do not get that.

Let me make it more personal. I have two letters today. I talked to a lady from Painesville, OH, east of Cleveland, in Lake County right along Lake Erie. She wrote and then I actually called her today and talked to her. Her name is Barbara. She said:

My son-in-law just got his last unemployment check. He has

2 kids, a $1,000 house payment, car insurance, gas is $3 a

gallon, food bills, school clothes, school supplies, car

maintenance.

She writes:

Oh yes, the kids like to eat. . . . They turn off the

utilities when you do not pay them. . . . [P]lease vote to

extend unemployment until jobs are available that pay more

than minimum wage.

She goes on to write:

[We] need good paying jobs or unemployment right now. [My]

daughter has bills she wants to pay.

She said:

[My] husband wants to work for money.

She said:

My kids don't want welfare.

Again, I think perhaps the Republicans who voted en masse--with the exception again of four courageous Republicans, including my seatmate, Senator Voinovich, the senior Senator from my State, including the two Maine Senators and the Massachusetts Senator--perhaps they do not understand the difference between welfare and unemployment insurance. I wish they would pay more attention so that they did. This is again unemployment insurance. These people are not taking welfare. These are people who earned it.

The second and last letter I will read--Janet from Toledo in northwest Ohio writes:

I have been working since I was 14. I am going on 65.

So Janet has worked 50 years or so.

I had to take early retirements and I am [at] risk of

losing my home. . . . Thank the Lord I kept my car, but I

can't afford much else like health insurance.

People like me are struggling. Giving unemployment . . . is

giving money to people who have already earned it and paid

into the system.

She is not asking for herself but she is asking for the many people she sees in Oregon, OH, and Wauseon and Bryan and Toledo and Sylvania and all over northwest Ohio, people who again, as most Americans, play by the rules, work hard and simply ask for a fair shake. They want this unemployment insurance available, payments available to them. It is not a lot of money. It is not anything most of us would want to live on, on any kind of decent standard of living. It is enough to get them to pay their bills through the week, through the month, so their house will not be foreclosed on, so they can feed their children or whatever the basic needs of life are that are so important to them.

I again thank the four Republicans who joined the Democrats in extending this legislation. I hope we can move forward this week, pass this legislation and get it to the President so we can get on with the job of figuring out how to put more people to work in this country.

I spoke today, I did a conference call with several Ohio highway contractors to talk about what this meant to them, what we can do to get money so they can build more highways and bridges and water and sewer systems so they can help companies that want to expand do what they need to do to modernize and expand their plants so they can begin hiring people. That is our mission, extend unemployment benefits and figure out, working with the private sector, how we help them create jobs and get this economy back on track.

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

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order with respect to H.R. 4851 and the Baucus amendment No. 3721 be modified to provide the vote on the motion to waive the Budget Act occur at 12:30 p.m., the additional time be divided as previously ordered, and the remaining provisions of the previous order still in effect.

I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to a period of morning business with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

I would like to associate myself with the remarks of Senator Kerry. We share an interest in providing appropriate accommodation for spiritual and religious care in a reformed health insurance market.

No American should be left worse off as a result of health reform. Some spiritual care--including that which is provided by Christian Science practitioners and Christian Science nurses--has been covered by certain health insurance policies for decades.

For example, four plans under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program cover religious nonmedical nursing care and/or Christian Science practitioner services. They are the Government Employees' Health Association, the Mail Handlers Benefit Plan, the Special Agents Mutual Benefit Association, and the Association Benefit Plan.

Religious nonmedical nursing services are also covered under the Medicare and Medicaid Programs--42 U.S.C. Sec. 1395x(ss) and Sec. 1395i-5. TRICARE covers care in Christian Science nursing facilities, private duty Christian Science nursing services, and Christian Science practitioner services (10 U.S.C. Sec. 1079(a)(4)). And under section 223 of the Internal Revenue Code, funds contained in a health savings account may be used to pay for spiritual care (26 U.S.C. Sec. 223(d)(2)(A)).

I have an interest in identifying a statutory way to affirm that health insurance companies may still cover this mode of care as part of their policies.

Chairman Harkin has shown great leadership throughout health reform.

I thank the Senator for his assistance and look forward to working with him and Senator Kerry to ensure that appropriate protections for spiritual care are provided as health reform is implemented.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 269, S. 1749.

I ask unanimous consent the committee-reported amendments be agreed to, that the Feinstein amendment which is at the desk be agreed to, the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements be printed in the Record.