Floor Statements

Mr. President, the Senate Rules Committee held another important hearing today to review yet another example of how the Senate rules are abused. I want to thank Chairman Schumer again for holding these hearings--they have been

invaluable in exploring ways to make the Senate work better for our country.

Over the past few months during this series of hearings, we have discussed and debated example after example of how the filibuster in particular--and the Senate's incapacitating rules in general--too often stand in the way of achieving real progress for the American people.

Today's hearing topic--secret holds and the confirmation process--was just one more example of how manipulation of the rules continues to foster a level of gridlock and obstruction unlike any we have seen before.

Senators Wyden, Grassley, and McCaskill testified at the hearing about their efforts to end the practice of secret holds. I applaud their work and dedication to transparency in government. Their fight to end the practice of secret holds is a worthy one that I wholeheartedly support.

Earlier this year I was proud to sign on to Senator McCaskill's letter to the majority and minority leaders, in which we pledged to no longer place anonymous holds and asked for Senate leadership to end the practice altogether.

At today's hearing, Senator McCaskill said that she has gathered enough support to surpass the 67-vote threshold required to consider and amend the Senate rules. That is no small task, as everyone in the Senate would attest. She should be congratulated for her work, as should all of our colleagues--Democrat and Republican--who have signed on to this effort. This bipartisan effort is proof that we are capable of working together.

But the mere fact that we have to have this conversation, that Senator McCaskill had to work for months for 67 votes to change rules that the Constitution clearly authorizes us to do with a simple majority vote, illustrates that secret holds are just another symptom of a much larger problem.

That problem is the Senate rules themselves.

The current rules--specifically rules V and XXII--effectively deny a majority of the Senate the opportunity to ever change its rules. This is something the drafters of the Constitution never intended.

As I have explained numerous times in committee hearings and here on the floor, a simple majority of the Senate can adopt or amend its rules at the beginning of a new Congress because it is not bound by the rules of the previous Congress.

Many colleagues, as well as constitutional scholars, agree with me. As my esteemed colleague from Utah, Senator Hatch, stated in a National Review article in 2005:

The Senate has been called a `continuing body.' Yet

language reflecting this observation was included in Senate

rules only in 1959. The more important, and much older, sense

in which the Senate is a continuing body is its ongoing

constitutional authority to determine its rules. Rulings by

vice presidents of both parties, sitting as the President of

the Senate, confirm that each Senate may make that decision

for itself, either implicitly by acquiescence or explicitly

by amendment. Both conservative and liberal legal scholars,

including those who see no constitutional problems with the

current filibuster campaign, agree that a simple majority can

change Senate rules at the beginning of a new Congress.

It is through this path--by a majority vote at the beginning of the next Congress--that we can reform the abuse of holds, secret filibusters, and the broken confirmation process. We can end the need for multiple cloture votes on the same matter, and we can instead begin to focus on the important business at hand.

Now, critics will argue that the two-thirds vote requirement for cloture on a rules change is reasonable. They'll say that Senator McCaskill managed to gather 67 Senators, so it must be an achievable threshold.

As I said at today's hearing, I commend Senator McCaskill for her diligence in building support to end secret holds. But I think it is also important to understand that other crucial reform efforts have failed because, inexplicably, it takes the same number of Senators to amend our rules as it takes to amend the U.S. Constitution.

As Senators Wyden and Grassley said in their testimony today, their efforts to end secret holds goes back more than a decade. Indeed, the effect of holds, on both legislation and the confirmation of nominees, is hardly a new problem.

In January 1979, Senator Byrd--then majority leader--proposed changing the Senate rules to limit debate to 30 minutes on a motion to proceed. Doing so would have significantly weakened the power of holds--and thus curbed their abuse.

At the time, Leader Byrd took to the Senate Floor and said that unlimited debate on a motion to proceed, ``makes the majority leader and the majority party the subject of the control and the will of the minority. If I move to take up a matter, then one senator can hold up the Senate for as long as he can stand on his feet.'' Despite the moderate change that Senator Byrd proposed, it did not have the necessary 67 votes to overcome a filibuster.

Efforts to reform the motion to proceed have continued since.

In 1984, a bipartisan study group recommended placing a 2-hour limit on debate of a motion to proceed. That recommendation was ignored.

And in 1993, Congress convened the Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress to determine how it can be a better institution. Senator Pete Domenici, my immediate predecessor, was the co-vice chairman of the committee. At a hearing before the committee, he said, ``If we abolish [the debatable motion to proceed], we have gone a long way to diffusing the validity of holds, because a hold is predicated on the fact that you can't get [a bill] up without a filibuster.''

The final report of that joint committee stated: ``There was significant agreement that the motion to proceed to a bill should not be debatable, or that debate on the motion should be limited to 2 hours.'' Despite the recommendation, nothing came of it.

And here we are again today--31 years after Senator Byrd tried to institute a reform that members of both parties have agreed is necessary.

Talking about change, and reform, does not solve the problem. We can hold hearings, convene bipartisan committees, and study the problem to death. But until we agree that the Constitution provides the right for each Senate to adopt its rules of proceedings by a simple majority vote, there will be no real reform.

Recognizing our constitutional right to change Senate rules by a majority will not only allow reform, but it will help prevent abuse. Members are less likely to abuse a rule if they know that it can be changed by a majority in the next Congress. Conversely, if they think it takes 67 votes to change the rule, there is no disincentive against abuse.

I look forward to future hearings in the Rules Committee and exploring ways that we can bring needed reform to the Senate at the beginning of the 112th Congress.

I ask unanimous consent that an April 19 Roll Call article titled, ``In Senate, Motion to Proceed' Should be Non-Debatable'' and Senator Hatch's 2005 article from the National Review Online be printed in the Record.

I rise today to introduce the bipartisan Global Conservation Act of 2010 with my colleague and fellow advocate on international conservation issues, Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas.

As our world grows increasingly intertwined through commerce, communication, and culture, we must also work together to protect the earth's natural resources through conservation. This bill acknowledges the important role our natural resources play in global economics, global health, and global security, and takes steps to strengthen the United States' involvement and productivity in conservation on a global scale.

As described in the legislation being introduced today, competing needs around the world are taxing natural resources that are vital to human survival. For example, 500 million people in developing countries depend on fresh water from natural areas that are under threat of degradation, and two billion people depend on rapidly diminishing fish stocks for a significant source of their daily protein. In contrast, wild species provide more than $300 billion in protection and benefits to world agriculture, including natural pest control and the pollination of two thirds of the crop species that feed the world. Forests prevent catastrophic flooding and severe drought, and coral reefs and mangroves reduce the impact of large storms on coastal populations, saving $9 billion in damages each year and reducing outlays for disaster assistance.

As natural resources continue to be polluted and depleted throughout the world, economies are threatened and conflicts begin to emerge. The United States National Intelligence Council expects demographic trends and natural resource scarcities relating to water, food, arable land, and energy sources to lead to instabilities and conflict in the years ahead.

With such threats looming, it is with urgency that we introduce this legislation that recognizes the intrinsic link between communities, conflict, and natural resources, and which looks to a future of local involvement in the preservation of natural resources for the benefit of international communities. The bill establishes conservation as a fundamental element in economic development, conflict mitigation, and adaptation to climate change.

To meet the conservation challenges of the 21st century, the Global Conservation Act reduces the duplication of Federal programs by bringing all U.S. agencies involved in conservation together to establish a national strategy for global conservation. Several executive branch agencies are engaged in some aspect of international conservation, yet their efforts are not coordinated in a manner that maximizes the effectiveness of the overall international conservation efforts of the United States.

By establishing an interagency working group, a special coordinator, and a presidential advisory committee on global conservation, this bill sets up the infrastructure to coordinate the efforts of the various federal agencies under a national strategy for international conservation. The bill identifies measurable goals, benchmarks, and timeframes for long-term action in the area of global conservation.

As our nation continues to strengthen its participation in the global community through conflict mitigation, foreign aid, and economic interaction, it is essential that we promote strong international conservation initiatives focused on the involvement and support of local communities. Such initiatives will only strengthen global security, health, and economies. This bill establishes a clear and unified direction for our international conservation efforts, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to move it through the legislative process.

I rise today to introduce the bipartisan Global Conservation Act of 2010 with my colleague and fellow advocate on international conservation issues, Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas.

As our world grows increasingly intertwined through commerce, communication, and culture, we must also work together to protect the earth's natural resources through conservation. This bill acknowledges the important role our natural resources play in global economics, global health, and global security, and takes steps to strengthen the United States' involvement and productivity in conservation on a global scale.

As described in the legislation being introduced today, competing needs around the world are taxing natural resources that are vital to human survival. For example, 500 million people in developing countries depend on fresh water from natural areas that are under threat of degradation, and two billion people depend on rapidly diminishing fish stocks for a significant source of their daily protein. In contrast, wild species provide more than $300 billion in protection and benefits to world agriculture, including natural pest control and the pollination of two thirds of the crop species that feed the world. Forests prevent catastrophic flooding and severe drought, and coral reefs and mangroves reduce the impact of large storms on coastal populations, saving $9 billion in damages each year and reducing outlays for disaster assistance.

As natural resources continue to be polluted and depleted throughout the world, economies are threatened and conflicts begin to emerge. The United States National Intelligence Council expects demographic trends and natural resource scarcities relating to water, food, arable land, and energy sources to lead to instabilities and conflict in the years ahead.

With such threats looming, it is with urgency that we introduce this legislation that recognizes the intrinsic link between communities, conflict, and natural resources, and which looks to a future of local involvement in the preservation of natural resources for the benefit of international communities. The bill establishes conservation as a fundamental element in economic development, conflict mitigation, and adaptation to climate change.

To meet the conservation challenges of the 21st century, the Global Conservation Act reduces the duplication of Federal programs by bringing all U.S. agencies involved in conservation together to establish a national strategy for global conservation. Several executive branch agencies are engaged in some aspect of international conservation, yet their efforts are not coordinated in a manner that maximizes the effectiveness of the overall international conservation efforts of the United States.

By establishing an interagency working group, a special coordinator, and a presidential advisory committee on global conservation, this bill sets up the infrastructure to coordinate the efforts of the various federal agencies under a national strategy for international conservation. The bill identifies measurable goals, benchmarks, and timeframes for long-term action in the area of global conservation.

As our nation continues to strengthen its participation in the global community through conflict mitigation, foreign aid, and economic interaction, it is essential that we promote strong international conservation initiatives focused on the involvement and support of local communities. Such initiatives will only strengthen global security, health, and economies. This bill establishes a clear and unified direction for our international conservation efforts, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to move it through the legislative process.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that our 30-minute block, which is coming up now, be divided in the following manner: Senator Whitehouse for 10 minutes, Senator Webb for 5 minutes, Senator Murray for 5 minutes, Senator Leahy for 5 minutes, and I will close with 5 minutes. With that, I yield to my good friend from Rhode Island, Senator Whitehouse.

Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Virginia, Mr. Webb.

My understanding is all the time is allocated in this 30-minute block. Senators are lined up to speak, I say to Senator Webb.

I yield an additional minute.

I have yielded 1 minute from my time out of the 30-minute block. It is not additional time.

Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Vermont, Mr. Leahy.

Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Washington, Mrs. Murray.

Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Washington for her comments, and I yield myself any remaining time in our 30-minute block.

Today, America faces an energy crisis. The Senate owes the American people solutions. But this resolution is an attempt to bury our heads in the sand and ignore reality.

The oilspill in the Gulf of Mexico is only the most visible aspect of our energy crisis. The true consequences of our energy policy are spread even wider than the spill and the costs, even more deadly.

First, our dependence on imported oil is a threat to our national security. Imported oil fuels dictators and terrorists, and the CIA believes climate change will make the world more unstable. If we block the clean energy transition with this resolution, we will be forced to use an additional 450 million barrels of oil, most of which will be imported. Instead, the Senate should reject this resolution and recognize that the transition to a clean energy economy is a national security priority. Americans want our national security out of the quagmire of foreign oil dependency. This resolution puts us in deeper.

Here at home, this dependence is also a threat to the pocketbooks of American families and businesses.

In 2008, American families and businesses sent $475 billion overseas to pay for foreign oil. Last year, we sent over $300 billion overseas. By the end of this year, we will have sent over $1 trillion outside the U.S. for imported oil in the last 3 years.

That is a massive transfer of wealth from families in New Mexico and the other 49 States to the treasuries of foreign nations.

If this resolution succeeds, we will import millions more barrels of oil and send billions more of our hard-earned money overseas.

If the Senate fails to act, the administration must take up the slack. This resolution would paralyze the Federal Government.

The administration is already making progress with new vehicle fuel efficiency rules, which will save 450 million barrels of oil. This resolution would jeopardize that effort, taking us backwards.

Further administration efforts will improve efficiency at power plants and major factories and reduce pollution.

Small businesses, farmers, and ranchers need not worry. They will not be subject to any EPA regulations on greenhouse gases.

Our dependence on dirty fossil fuels is also a threat to the global climate system--the air we breathe and the water we drink--in New Mexico and around the world. This resolution specifically rejects the EPA's scientific finding, conducted by nonpartisan scientists, that greenhouse gas pollution is a threat to public health and to the environment. There are no climate scientists in the Senate. This body has no business injecting political bias into scientific deliberations. The resolution should be rejected for this reason alone.

It is revealing that this resolution is supported by dozens of special interests that have worked for years to discredit strong science. The vast majority of the evidence tells us that global warming is real. Strong scientific evidence shows that unless we transition to clean energy sources, our home States will pay a heavy price.

Many supporters of this resolution doubt climate science. In response, I point to the scientists of Los Alamos National Lab. The scientists and supercomputers there keep America's nuclear arsenal safe, secure, and reliable. They have no margin for error. Los Alamos also runs some of the most sophisticated global climate models used by scientists around the United States and the world. These models indicate a serious risk to our landscapes and water supplies. Many scientific studies in the field confirm those risks.

In New Mexico, scientific evidence indicates devastating forest fires, droughts, and invasive species will be worsened by global warming. According to the Nature Conservancy, over 95 percent of New Mexico has seen temperature increases due to global warming. Ninety- three percent of our watersheds have become dried, and snowpack has decreased over the last 30 years.

Making matters worse, this same reliance on fossil fuels pollutes our atmosphere with toxic compounds such as sulfur dioxide, soot, and mercury, alongside greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide.

Luckily, we have numerous cost-effective solutions at hand to address the energy and climate crisis. New Mexico and many other States across the Nation are rich in much cleaner domestic sources of energy, sources such as wind, solar, geothermal, and natural gas.

Last week, a uranium enrichment plant opened in New Mexico to provide emission-free fuel for American nuclear powerplants. Several years ago, wind energy was unusual, but now it is increasingly common, especially in the American West. Offshore wind has the potential to provide 30 percent of the east coast's power as well. The United States is now installing over a gigawatt of solar power each year. And there are another six gigawatts of concentrated solar power projects planned nationally, particularly in the Southwest. U.S. natural gas reserves have also increased by 35 percent in just 1 year. We now have a century's worth of supply. While natural gas is a fossil fuel, it is significantly cleaner than either coal or oil, and it is more abundant. The clean energy transition does not just mean renewable energy; it also means a renewed focus on natural gas and nuclear power.

Ironically, this resolution would also eliminate the incentive to invest in carbon capture technologies which are the future of coal.

Even worse, this resolution undercuts the push for energy efficiency. Without rules to reduce pollution, powerplants lack the right incentives to save energy. Both government and industry studies have found that the right efficiency investments could save energy and more than $1 trillion at the same time. Energy efficiency does not mean turning down the heater in the winter or the air-conditioner in the summer.

Mr. President, at its core, this resolution is about delay. The House is not going to take up this resolution. The sponsor of this resolution knows the President does not support this. There are not the votes. And really what is going on here is delay.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to express support for S. 3307, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, and to introduce two pieces of legislation that I hope will be included in the final reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Act that is passed by this body.

I commend Chairman Lincoln and Ranking Member Chambliss for their successful efforts to produce a bipartisan and fully paid for Child Nutrition Reauthorization bill--a bill that won unanimous support in the Agriculture Committee where it passed this past March.

The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 is critically important to the health, well-being, and even education of our nation's children. It seeks to confront the challenges of hunger and obesity that are increasingly pervasive in our youth. Specifically, the act reauthorizes our nation's major Federal child nutrition programs administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, USDA, including the National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, WIC, the Child and Adult Care Food Program and the Summer Food Service Program.

Totaling $4.5 billion in additional funding over the next 10 years, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act is the largest new investment in child nutrition programs since their inception--and it is completely paid for by off-sets in other USDA programs. This added funding will allow for an increase in reimbursement rates for school meals, which is an important provision since current reimbursement rates fall short of the funding schools need in order to provide nutritious meals with fresh fruits and vegetables to students. The bill also makes mandatory the funding authorized in the Child Nutrition Act to help schools establish school gardens and source local foods through ``farm to cafeteria'' efforts.

Beyond funding, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act makes enrollment into the free school meals program automatic for foster children and for students already enrolled in Medicaid. The bill further promotes the establishment of school wellness policies, and allows the USDA to set school nutrition standards for all foods, including those sold a la carte, in vending machines and during special events such as afterschool sports.

While this bill, combined with the President's request of $10 billion for child nutrition programs over the next 10 years, represents a huge step toward a healthier population of young people, I believe there is room for even more improvement. To this end, I am today introducing the Child Nutrition Enhancement Act, and the Ensuring All Students Year- Round, EASY, Access to Meals and Snacks Act. These two bills will help schools ramp up their nutrition and health programs, and ensure that kids have access to food, even on weekends and holidays when they cannot get meals at school. These bills also enjoy House support, with Representatives Polis and Larsen already having introduced companions in that chamber.

The Child Nutrition Enhancement Act would expand the Team Nutrition Networks program, a USDA program that provides grants to school districts to support State Wellness and Nutrition Networks in schools that conduct nutrition education and enhance school wellness. To allow this expansion, the bill includes mandatory funding at a level of 1 cent per reimbursable meal through National School Lunch Program, Child and Adult Care Food Program, and Summer Food Service Program, totaling approximately $70 million per year. Such funding would be used for State staff and programs, formula-based grants and USDA administration.

The Ensuring All Students Year-round Access to Meals and Snacks Act would allow local government agencies and private nonprofit organizations to feed children meals and snacks 365 days-a-year through the Summer Food Service Program, whether it be after school, on weekends and school holidays, or during the summer. School supplemental food providers find that children often go hungry on weekends and school holidays because their main source of nutrition is the free school lunch program. This bill would allow food service programs to fill in the gaps on holidays and weekends when kids are likely to miss meals, and ease the administrative burden of food service programs by allowing year round meals and snacks through the Summer Food Service Program, rather the current requirement to switch back and forth between the Summer Food Service Program and other child nutrition programs such as the Child and Adult Care Food Program.

With September 30th as the looming deadline for reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Act, I call on my colleagues and the leadership in the Senate to expedite the debate and passage of the Healthy, Hunger- Free Kids Act. I look forward to working with the Agriculture Committee and the Senate leadership to include the Child Nutrition Enhancement Act, and the EASY Access to Meals and Snacks Act in the final bill, and to complete the legislative process for this important reauthorization.

Mr. President, today I join Senator Bingaman in introducing a bill to designate the Valles Caldera National Preserve as a unit of the National Park System. Known as the Valle Grande, this icon of the Jemez Mountains is one of the largest volcanic calderas in the world. The vast grass-filled valleys, forested hillsides, and numerous volcanic peaks make the Valles Caldera a treasure to New Mexico, and a landscape of national significance millions of years in the making.

Volcanic activity began in the Jemez Mountains about 10 million years ago. This activity reached a climax about 1.5 million years ago with a series of explosive rhyolitic eruptions that dropped hundreds of meters of volcanic ash for miles surrounding the caldera, and gave the surrounding area its distinctive landscapes of pink and white tuff overlaying the black basalts of the Rio Grande Rift. In the millennia following the Caldera's explosive creation, natural processes of erosion and weathering carved vibrant canyons and left pinion topped mesa stretching like fingers away from the massive caldera. As the great valley was drained of magma, and later a caldera lake, it filled with the diversity of plants and wildlife that makes the area so valuable to biologists and ecologists today. With such resources and natural beauty, it is no wonder that for millennia people have also been an integral part Valle Grande.

For generations innumerable, the Valles Caldera has been a part of life for the Pueblo Tribes of northern New Mexico. Today, the caldera continues to have important cultural and religious significance, something that must and will be respected and protected as the preserve moves into the management of the National Park Service.

In recent centuries, the Valles Caldera has been often in private ownership beginning with Spanish settlers who introduced livestock to the grassy valleys that continue to fatten elk and cattle in the summer months. Recognizing the unique national significance of the caldera, the Federal Government finally purchased the area in 2000 through the Valles Caldera Preservation Act, which I was proud to help shepherd through Congress with Senator Bingaman and then-Senator Domenici. The subsequent creation of the Valles Caldera National Preserve included the creation of a board of directors and the Valles Caldera Trust to manage the area. The legislation also included mandates for stakeholder involvement and eventual financial self-sufficiency of the preserve.

As Senator Bingaman and I take steps today to begin a transition of the Valles Caldera into the National Park System, I want to applaud the decade of work that both the Board of Trustees and the Valles Caldera Trust have dedicated to the preserve. I especially want to highlight the contributions of individual employees who have been on the ground in the caldera, day after day, developing research programs that utilize the unmatched natural resources of the caldera, managing cattle grazing and expanding the livestock program to include cutting edge scientific research, and extending educational opportunities in the caldera to students from across state and the country.

With the heavy mandate of self-sufficiency looming and the annual struggle to get sufficient funding for the caldera, Senator Bingaman and I are proposing a new direction forward. As a new unit of the National Park Service, the National Preserve will have a sustainable future with greater access to the public.

Since 1939, the National Park Service has conducted numerous studies of the Valles Caldera. In each, the Park Service consistently deemed the area of significant national value because of its unique and unaltered geology, and its singular setting, which are conducive to public recreation, reflection, education, and research. With this legislation the Secretary of Interior is directed to continue the longstanding grazing, education, and hunting programs that so many New Mexicans value as a once-ina-lifetime opportunity. By utilizing the resources and skills within the National Park Service, I believe the Valles Caldera National Preserve will continue to prosper as a natural wonder full of significant geology, ecology, history, and culture.

The Valle Grande is truly that: a great valley that so very many New Mexicans value and feel connected to. The future of the preserve is of utmost importance to us in New Mexico, and also has significance nationally. I look forward to working with Senator Bingaman and all of the stakeholders who care about the future of this preserve to ensure that this legislation emerges from the legislative process with improvements that are supported by my colleagues in the Senate and-- most importantly--by the people of New Mexico.

Mr. President, I rise today to express support for S. 3307, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, and to introduce two pieces of legislation that I hope will be included in the final reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Act that is passed by this body.

I commend Chairman Lincoln and Ranking Member Chambliss for their successful efforts to produce a bipartisan and fully paid for Child Nutrition Reauthorization bill--a bill that won unanimous support in the Agriculture Committee where it passed this past March.

The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 is critically important to the health, well-being, and even education of our nation's children. It seeks to confront the challenges of hunger and obesity that are increasingly pervasive in our youth. Specifically, the act reauthorizes our nation's major Federal child nutrition programs administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, USDA, including the National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, WIC, the Child and Adult Care Food Program and the Summer Food Service Program.

Totaling $4.5 billion in additional funding over the next 10 years, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act is the largest new investment in child nutrition programs since their inception--and it is completely paid for by off-sets in other USDA programs. This added funding will allow for an increase in reimbursement rates for school meals, which is an important provision since current reimbursement rates fall short of the funding schools need in order to provide nutritious meals with fresh fruits and vegetables to students. The bill also makes mandatory the funding authorized in the Child Nutrition Act to help schools establish school gardens and source local foods through ``farm to cafeteria'' efforts.

Beyond funding, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act makes enrollment into the free school meals program automatic for foster children and for students already enrolled in Medicaid. The bill further promotes the establishment of school wellness policies, and allows the USDA to set school nutrition standards for all foods, including those sold a la carte, in vending machines and during special events such as afterschool sports.

While this bill, combined with the President's request of $10 billion for child nutrition programs over the next 10 years, represents a huge step toward a healthier population of young people, I believe there is room for even more improvement. To this end, I am today introducing the Child Nutrition Enhancement Act, and the Ensuring All Students Year- Round, EASY, Access to Meals and Snacks Act. These two bills will help schools ramp up their nutrition and health programs, and ensure that kids have access to food, even on weekends and holidays when they cannot get meals at school. These bills also enjoy House support, with Representatives Polis and Larsen already having introduced companions in that chamber.

The Child Nutrition Enhancement Act would expand the Team Nutrition Networks program, a USDA program that provides grants to school districts to support State Wellness and Nutrition Networks in schools that conduct nutrition education and enhance school wellness. To allow this expansion, the bill includes mandatory funding at a level of 1 cent per reimbursable meal through National School Lunch Program, Child and Adult Care Food Program, and Summer Food Service Program, totaling approximately $70 million per year. Such funding would be used for State staff and programs, formula-based grants and USDA administration.

The Ensuring All Students Year-round Access to Meals and Snacks Act would allow local government agencies and private nonprofit organizations to feed children meals and snacks 365 days-a-year through the Summer Food Service Program, whether it be after school, on weekends and school holidays, or during the summer. School supplemental food providers find that children often go hungry on weekends and school holidays because their main source of nutrition is the free school lunch program. This bill would allow food service programs to fill in the gaps on holidays and weekends when kids are likely to miss meals, and ease the administrative burden of food service programs by allowing year round meals and snacks through the Summer Food Service Program, rather the current requirement to switch back and forth between the Summer Food Service Program and other child nutrition programs such as the Child and Adult Care Food Program.

With September 30th as the looming deadline for reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Act, I call on my colleagues and the leadership in the Senate to expedite the debate and passage of the Healthy, Hunger- Free Kids Act. I look forward to working with the Agriculture Committee and the Senate leadership to include the Child Nutrition Enhancement Act, and the EASY Access to Meals and Snacks Act in the final bill, and to complete the legislative process for this important reauthorization.

Mr. President, today I join Senator Bingaman in introducing a bill to designate the Valles Caldera National Preserve as a unit of the National Park System. Known as the Valle Grande, this icon of the Jemez Mountains is one of the largest volcanic calderas in the world. The vast grass-filled valleys, forested hillsides, and numerous volcanic peaks make the Valles Caldera a treasure to New Mexico, and a landscape of national significance millions of years in the making.

Volcanic activity began in the Jemez Mountains about 10 million years ago. This activity reached a climax about 1.5 million years ago with a series of explosive rhyolitic eruptions that dropped hundreds of meters of volcanic ash for miles surrounding the caldera, and gave the surrounding area its distinctive landscapes of pink and white tuff overlaying the black basalts of the Rio Grande Rift. In the millennia following the Caldera's explosive creation, natural processes of erosion and weathering carved vibrant canyons and left pinion topped mesa stretching like fingers away from the massive caldera. As the great valley was drained of magma, and later a caldera lake, it filled with the diversity of plants and wildlife that makes the area so valuable to biologists and ecologists today. With such resources and natural beauty, it is no wonder that for millennia people have also been an integral part Valle Grande.

For generations innumerable, the Valles Caldera has been a part of life for the Pueblo Tribes of northern New Mexico. Today, the caldera continues to have important cultural and religious significance, something that must and will be respected and protected as the preserve moves into the management of the National Park Service.

In recent centuries, the Valles Caldera has been often in private ownership beginning with Spanish settlers who introduced livestock to the grassy valleys that continue to fatten elk and cattle in the summer months. Recognizing the unique national significance of the caldera, the Federal Government finally purchased the area in 2000 through the Valles Caldera Preservation Act, which I was proud to help shepherd through Congress with Senator Bingaman and then-Senator Domenici. The subsequent creation of the Valles Caldera National Preserve included the creation of a board of directors and the Valles Caldera Trust to manage the area. The legislation also included mandates for stakeholder involvement and eventual financial self-sufficiency of the preserve.

As Senator Bingaman and I take steps today to begin a transition of the Valles Caldera into the National Park System, I want to applaud the decade of work that both the Board of Trustees and the Valles Caldera Trust have dedicated to the preserve. I especially want to highlight the contributions of individual employees who have been on the ground in the caldera, day after day, developing research programs that utilize the unmatched natural resources of the caldera, managing cattle grazing and expanding the livestock program to include cutting edge scientific research, and extending educational opportunities in the caldera to students from across state and the country.

With the heavy mandate of self-sufficiency looming and the annual struggle to get sufficient funding for the caldera, Senator Bingaman and I are proposing a new direction forward. As a new unit of the National Park Service, the National Preserve will have a sustainable future with greater access to the public.

Since 1939, the National Park Service has conducted numerous studies of the Valles Caldera. In each, the Park Service consistently deemed the area of significant national value because of its unique and unaltered geology, and its singular setting, which are conducive to public recreation, reflection, education, and research. With this legislation the Secretary of Interior is directed to continue the longstanding grazing, education, and hunting programs that so many New Mexicans value as a once-ina-lifetime opportunity. By utilizing the resources and skills within the National Park Service, I believe the Valles Caldera National Preserve will continue to prosper as a natural wonder full of significant geology, ecology, history, and culture.

The Valle Grande is truly that: a great valley that so very many New Mexicans value and feel connected to. The future of the preserve is of utmost importance to us in New Mexico, and also has significance nationally. I look forward to working with Senator Bingaman and all of the stakeholders who care about the future of this preserve to ensure that this legislation emerges from the legislative process with improvements that are supported by my colleagues in the Senate and-- most importantly--by the people of New Mexico.

Mr. President, today I introduce the National DWI Victims Memorial Designation Act of 2010, which is cosponsored by my colleague Senator Jeff Bingaman. This legislation would designate the DWI Victims Memorial of Perpetual Tears in Moriarty, New Mexico, as the National DWI Victims Memorial.

Opened in 2008, the DWI Victims Memorial of Perpetual Tears is the Nation's first and only memorial of its kind. The Memorial Perpetual Tears helps raise awareness of the devastation caused by driving while impaired, DWI, crashes by recognizing their victims, educating the public, and encouraging preventive measures. The memorial aims to give comfort to the innocent victims of drunk driving and raise awareness of the devastating toll of DWI deaths on our nation's roadways. Located on a four-acre site next to Interstate 40, the Memorial of Perpetual Tears attracts passersby in addition to those who travel specifically to visit the memorial.

The National DWI Victims Memorial Designation Act of 2010 would require that any reference to this memorial in a law, map, regulation, document, record, or other official paper of the United States government refer to the site as the National DWI Victims Memorial. As a Senator from New Mexico, I am proud to seek such an official designation for the DWI Victims Memorial of Perpetual Tears. It is fitting that such a national memorial should be located in the State that once led the Nation in DWI fatalities and now leads the way in drunk driving prevention.

Compared to 20 years ago, our roads are much safer today. Yet even as the overall number of people killed on our roadways has declined, drunk driving still accounts for one third of all traffic fatalities nationwide. In 2008, drunk driving killed about 12,000 Americans, including 143 people in my home State of New Mexico. That is an average of 32 people killed every day by drunk driving. This unacceptable death toll is all the more shocking when you consider that each one of those deaths was preventable.

Although other communities have established remembrance gardens and monuments honoring drunk driving victims, the DWI Victims Memorial of Perpetual Tears is unique. The memorial resembles a veterans cemetery with markers representing the most recent 5-year period of deaths in New Mexico attributed to DWI. The memorial includes a site dedicated to victims of DWI nationwide. The Memorial of Perpetual Tears gives further recognition to innocent victims of DWI nationwide by displaying Victim Tribute books in the memorial visitor center. The Victim Tribute books include stories and pictures submitted by injured victims and family members of those killed in DWI crashes.

The Memorial of Perpetual Tears is a testament to the hard work and dedication of local volunteers who have made this memorial possible. Sonja Britton, the mother of a DWI victim, saw the need for a memorial to those killed by drunk driving on our Nation's roadways. For years, she rallied support and found many local residents and others nationwide who were willing to help. Mike, Mary, and Ralph Anaya and their family provided key support by donating prime real estate next to Interstate 40 to give the memorial a fitting location. Thanks to the efforts of so many, the Memorial of Perpetual Tears today provides a focal point where families can gather to mourn the loss of loved ones as well as join with others to promote DWI awareness and prevention.

Having a National DWI Victims Memorial gives us another resource in the fight to end drunk driving. I share Sonja's vision that one day we will have no more senseless deaths caused by DWI crashes. As she says most eloquently, ``My dream will be realized when this mission is achieved and when our loved ones will no longer be injured or killed by alcohol-related traffic crashes. We must stop this carnage.''

Working together, we can make Sonja's dream a reality.

I urge all my colleagues to support this legislation and to join Senator Bingaman and me in celebrating the work of the volunteers who have made the DWI Victims Memorial of Perpetual Tears possible.

Mr. President, today I introduce the National DWI Victims Memorial Designation Act of 2010, which is cosponsored by my colleague Senator Jeff Bingaman. This legislation would designate the DWI Victims Memorial of Perpetual Tears in Moriarty, New Mexico, as the National DWI Victims Memorial.

Opened in 2008, the DWI Victims Memorial of Perpetual Tears is the Nation's first and only memorial of its kind. The Memorial Perpetual Tears helps raise awareness of the devastation caused by driving while impaired, DWI, crashes by recognizing their victims, educating the public, and encouraging preventive measures. The memorial aims to give comfort to the innocent victims of drunk driving and raise awareness of the devastating toll of DWI deaths on our nation's roadways. Located on a four-acre site next to Interstate 40, the Memorial of Perpetual Tears attracts passersby in addition to those who travel specifically to visit the memorial.

The National DWI Victims Memorial Designation Act of 2010 would require that any reference to this memorial in a law, map, regulation, document, record, or other official paper of the United States government refer to the site as the National DWI Victims Memorial. As a Senator from New Mexico, I am proud to seek such an official designation for the DWI Victims Memorial of Perpetual Tears. It is fitting that such a national memorial should be located in the State that once led the Nation in DWI fatalities and now leads the way in drunk driving prevention.

Compared to 20 years ago, our roads are much safer today. Yet even as the overall number of people killed on our roadways has declined, drunk driving still accounts for one third of all traffic fatalities nationwide. In 2008, drunk driving killed about 12,000 Americans, including 143 people in my home State of New Mexico. That is an average of 32 people killed every day by drunk driving. This unacceptable death toll is all the more shocking when you consider that each one of those deaths was preventable.

Although other communities have established remembrance gardens and monuments honoring drunk driving victims, the DWI Victims Memorial of Perpetual Tears is unique. The memorial resembles a veterans cemetery with markers representing the most recent 5-year period of deaths in New Mexico attributed to DWI. The memorial includes a site dedicated to victims of DWI nationwide. The Memorial of Perpetual Tears gives further recognition to innocent victims of DWI nationwide by displaying Victim Tribute books in the memorial visitor center. The Victim Tribute books include stories and pictures submitted by injured victims and family members of those killed in DWI crashes.

The Memorial of Perpetual Tears is a testament to the hard work and dedication of local volunteers who have made this memorial possible. Sonja Britton, the mother of a DWI victim, saw the need for a memorial to those killed by drunk driving on our Nation's roadways. For years, she rallied support and found many local residents and others nationwide who were willing to help. Mike, Mary, and Ralph Anaya and their family provided key support by donating prime real estate next to Interstate 40 to give the memorial a fitting location. Thanks to the efforts of so many, the Memorial of Perpetual Tears today provides a focal point where families can gather to mourn the loss of loved ones as well as join with others to promote DWI awareness and prevention.

Having a National DWI Victims Memorial gives us another resource in the fight to end drunk driving. I share Sonja's vision that one day we will have no more senseless deaths caused by DWI crashes. As she says most eloquently, ``My dream will be realized when this mission is achieved and when our loved ones will no longer be injured or killed by alcohol-related traffic crashes. We must stop this carnage.''

Working together, we can make Sonja's dream a reality.

I urge all my colleagues to support this legislation and to join Senator Bingaman and me in celebrating the work of the volunteers who have made the DWI Victims Memorial of Perpetual Tears possible.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the NIST GREEN JOBS Act, to provide NIST Grants for green jobs, improved energy efficiency, and small business growth.

It has never been easy to be an entrepreneur or small business owner, and this is especially true since the recession began 2 years ago. Many small firms in the manufacturing sector, in particular, have struggled during a time of tight credit markets and reduced consumer demand. In the last 2 years, the manufacturing sector lost over 2 million jobs.

Twenty years ago, when Americans worried about how our small companies would compete globally in the face of stiff competition from Asia, Congress established the Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership, MEP, Program to assist small manufacturers.

The MEP program has since helped thousands of small- and medium-sized manufacturers across the nation increase their profit-lines and streamline their business processes through lean manufacturing techniques. The National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST, is the Federal steward for the nationwide MEP network, which has MEP Centers in all 50 States.

The New Mexico Manufacturing Extension Partnership in Albuquerque was one of the first such centers, and it provides small- and medium-sized manufacturers with the tools they need to grow, improve productivity and expand capacity. Since its creation, the New Mexico MEP has helped create or maintain more than 2,600 jobs in the State and achieve $24 million in annual cost savings for partner companies.

Today, as the U.S. continues to emerge from the worst recession since the Great Depression, the resources and expertise MEP provides manufacturers are more valuable than ever. Our MEP Centers do great work--and I believe they can do even more as companies look for ways to take advantage of new opportunities in a clean energy economy that promotes energy efficiency and independence for our country.

Since manufacturing now plays an increasingly important role in the construction industry, there is an important opportunity for the MEP program to strengthen its support of small manufacturers while also promoting green jobs and energy independence.

Builders today already rely on manufactured components and sub- assemblies. Manufacturing will become even more important to construction as homes are increasingly ``assembled'' on site from components made in a factory. Now that lean, high-quality manufacturing is applicable to construction, it is not a stretch for MEP Centers to teach the same skills to the construction industry, where small firms are the norm.

Technologies exist today for green building construction and retrofitting that can reduce energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. Yet many small firms, especially in the construction sector, do not have the skills or expertise to take advantage of new technologies to improve the energy efficiency. Moreover, NIST researchers at the Buildings and Fire Research Lab already help develop standards and technologies to improve buildings. Buildings today consume 73 percent of electricity and 40 percent of overall energy.

These companies would benefit from the type of training and business analysis activities that MEP Centers already provide to manufacturers. The MEP system could thus be a powerful and transformational force to create green jobs, increase energy efficiency, and promote technological transfer in the construction industry.

That is why I ask for the support of my Senate colleagues for the NIST GREEN JOBS Act, to fund MEP Center pilot projects for green jobs related to energy efficiency. This proposal builds on provisions already authorized by America COMPETES legislation.

My bill simply broadens this existing competitive grant program for MEP pilot projects to include activities related to energy efficiency. It also allows MEP Centers to extend services to companies in the construction industry working in these areas. Awarded on a competitive basis, these pilot projects could last up to 3 years and would be located in each region of the country. The pilot projects would thus create models for new MEP activities and services that could be replicated at MEP Centers regionally or nationwide.

The NIST GREEN JOBS Act authorizes $7 million in annual funding for 3 years. This funding would allow at least one MEP Center in each region to conduct a pilot project. The MEP Centers would not need to provide local matching funds for these competitively awarded pilot projects.

I believe this modest proposal would be a positive step toward both helping create and retain jobs in the manufacturing sector and improving our Nation's energy independence.

I therefore urge the support of all my colleagues for this legislation.

Mr. President, I know our Presiding Officer today is also going to come forward, and we hope to see him down on the floor. I thank Senator McCaskill very much for her organizational efforts, hers and Senator Warner's, and for working on this issue. This is a very serious issue for the Senate in terms of how we move forward on the rules. I kind of liken it--and I have some history here, and I know everybody has their history when it comes to administrations.

We have this administration elected a little over a year and a half ago, trying to put their people in place. They are trying to put people in place to run, for example--I am going to be talking about the Tennessee Valley Authority and talking about the EEOC, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. They are trying to put their people in place to run these agencies and to get the government to work. Sometimes in the past--and my father passed recently, but he used to visit with me about the way they used to do it in the old days. In the old days you got to put your people into place within the first couple of weeks of an administration. I remember my father telling me he took over as Secretary of the Interior in January. Within 2 weeks, he had all of his Presidential appointees in place. He had his team in place. He could start carrying out the responsibilities that had been given him by the President. My understanding is for most of the Cabinet members in President Kennedy's Cabinet, the same thing was true. Within a couple of weeks you had your team in place and you could go out and try to do the things your President had campaigned on.

We are seeing a striking difference between those days back in the 1960s and what happens today. We are seeing incredible obstruction in terms of trying to move forward. It is done through this process, as Senator McCaskill has brought out, of secret holds.

Since the Obama administration--I saw a figure at the end of the first year--they only had 55 percent of their team in place; 55 percent of their team. What we are talking about is holding up the ability of the President to have his team in place and do his job. I think that is unacceptable. I think one of the areas that is the worst when it comes to this is the hold process, the secret holds.

What is a secret hold? Everybody asks about these secret holds. This means a Senator is able to put a hold on a nomination and not come out in public. We all know that the very best thing is to shine light on the process. I think one of our Supreme Court Justices said it the best: Sunshine is the best disinfectant. With the secret holds, there is no sunshine. As many of us have pointed out on the floor, we want to bring sunshine to this process.

I wish to congratulate Senator Coburn for being the only Senator to step forward in this week-long process of trying to bring people out into the public. I understand Senator McCaskill's reading of this statute and my reading of this statute is if you have not come forward at this point on this large number of nominees for which unanimous consent has been asked, and there has been an objection, you are in violation of the law. You are in violation of the law. Only Senator Coburn has stepped forward to say I am holding up--I believe he is holding up the Broadcasting Board of Governors. He is holding up six people on the Broadcasting Board of Governors.

Today I am going to try to move--and we are doing this, I say to Senator Coburn, in a bipartisan way. We are not picking just Democrats. We are talking about the EEOC and the Tennessee Valley Authority, and we are moving forward with both Democrats and Republicans. That is why I am doing an en bloc request at this point so we can get both Democrats and Republicans in place.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session for the purpose of consideration of Calendar Nos.-- and this is important, the EEOC--616, Jacqueline A. Berrien, to be a member of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; 617, Chai Rachel Feldblum; 619, Victoria Lipnic, to be a member of the EEOC for the remainder of the term expiring July 1, 2010; and 620, Victoria Lipnic to be a member of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; that the nominations be confirmed en bloc, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table en bloc, no further motions be in order, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and that any statements relating to the nominees be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, now we have seen demonstrated, I think dramatically, what the process is here. We tried to move on a bipartisan basis for the EEOC to put Democrats and Republicans in that important government agency, an agency that focuses on discrimination. If the people are not in place, it cannot move forward with that very important goal. Our friend on the other side of the aisle, Senator Coburn, has objected to putting Democrats and Republicans in that agency so it can move forward.

I am going to try to move forward, also in a bipartisan way, on the Tennessee Valley Authority. Many people may not know, but in the Tennessee Valley, the power is provided by an agency called the Tennessee Valley Authority. Everybody knows how important power is to the economy. When we look around the world, we see communities being stifled because they have blackouts and brownouts and they don't have the available power. The Tennessee Valley Authority has a number of members who need to be appointed to the board of directors. We are moving today--both Democrats and Republicans--to try to bring home the point that we need to get this board of governors in place.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session for the purpose of consideration of Calendar Nos. 740, Maryland A. Brown; 741, William B. Sansom; 742, Neil G. McBride; and 743, Barbara Short Haskew, all to be members of the board of directors of the Tennessee Valley Authority; that the nominations be confirmed en bloc, the motions

to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table en bloc; no further motions be in order, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and that any statements relating to the nominees be printed in the Record as if read.

Mr. President, moving forward with some individual nominees for President Obama to put in place people at the Department of Commerce, at the Health and Human Services Department, at the Treasury Department, at the State Department, and at the Energy Department--all very important government agencies. All President Obama wants is to have his team in place so they can start doing their work. But what we are seeing on the other side over and again is secret holds and delay.

It is important to remind everybody that at this particular point in time 107 nominees of the executive branch are being held up. At this point in time in the past for President Bush, only 8 nominees were being held. So 107 are being held for President Obama, and for President Bush, there were only 8. You can only think and draw the conclusion that this is about preventing the President from getting his team in place, which is obviously a very important function.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session for the purpose of consideration of Calendar No. 640, Eric Hirschhorn, to be Under Secretary of Commerce for the Export Administration; that the nomination be confirmed; that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; that no further motions be in order, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and that any statements relating to the nominee be printed in the Record, as if read.

Mr. President, now proceeding with an important nomination for Health and Human Services, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session for the purpose of consideration of Calendar No. 647, Jim Esquea, to be an Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services; that the nomination be confirmed; that the motions to reconsider be made and laid upon the table; that no further motions be in order; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and that any statements relating to the nominee be printed in the Record as if read.

Mr. President, I will proceed with another important position in the Department of the Treasury. We all know the Department of the Treasury supervises everything that is out there in terms of our economy--a very important position.

I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session for the purpose of consideration of Calendar No. 652, Michael Mundaca, to be an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury; that the nomination be confirmed; that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; that no further motions be in order; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and that any statements relating to the nominee be printed in the Record as if read.

Mr. President, here is another important nomination at the Department of State.

I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session for the purpose of consideration of Calendar No. 722, Judith Ann Stewart Stock, to be an Assistant Secretary of State; that the nomination be confirmed; that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; that no further motions be in order; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and that any statements relating to the nominee be printed in the Record as if read.

Mr. President, I say to Senator Coburn that we very much understand that he is doing this for others. We want them to step forward. We want to get rid of these secret holds, as the Senator from Oklahoma has stepped forward on the broadcasting board. He has said he is holding up six people to go on that board of governors. It is out there in public, and it is something that all of us can examine and the media can examine. We can figure out whether his objections are legitimate. But that is the process. That is what is going on--secretly delaying the administration from getting its team in place.

Let's admit what is going on here. The folks who are putting on these holds do not want to see the President have his team in place. If he doesn't have his team in place, I think the expectation is that they think he would not be able to do the job.

Once again, the President nominated somebody important to work with Secretary Chu at the Department of Energy.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session for the purpose of consideration of Calendar No. 726, Patricia A. Hoffman, to be an Assistant Secretary of Energy; that the nomination be confirmed; that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; that no further motions be in order; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and that any statements relating to the nominee be printed in the Record as if read.

Once again, they are being held up through secret holds, and Senator Coburn has said he is doing this on behalf of Members on his side--not allowing all of these people to get into the government and do the job. We are talking about important government agencies, such as the Department of Commerce, Health and Human Services, Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of State, Secretary of Energy--all objected to today.

Many of these nominations have been pending for a while. There are very few objections in committee. This is something that is being put forward for the purpose of delay.

I am going to yield to the Senator from Minnesota.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that I believe will help improve the safety of automobile drivers and passengers. The legislation, the Vehicle Safety Improvements Act, would, among other things, require all automobiles sold in the United States be equipped with an event data recorder, an

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that I believe will help improve the safety of automobile drivers and passengers. The legislation, the Vehicle Safety Improvements Act, would, among other things, require all automobiles sold in the United States be equipped with an event data recorder, an

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Kristina Swallow, a fellow in my office, be granted floor privileges for this day.