Daniel Akaka

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I am today introducing legislation to make various improvements to VA rural health care. I am pleased to be joined in this effort by Senators Max Baucus and Mark Begich. The legislation is designed to bring more doctors into small communities; promote the use of volunteer counselors to help with mental health issues; expand telemedicine services; and create incentives for VA's community partners to provide high quality services to veterans. As the drawdown of forces in Iraq begins, VA must be prepared to meet the health care needs of veterans upon their return. Many veterans live in small towns and communities. This includes a large number of Guard members and Reservists who have served in such an integral role in Iraq and Afghanistan. Members of the Guard and Reserve face challenges that are different than those faced by their active duty counterparts, who return to military bases with the support of their unit and programs geared toward re-acclimating them to life outside of the combat zone. When members of the Guard or Reserves return home, they often are isolated from their units, leaving them to reintegrate back into their communities without a strong VA or DoD presence or support system. When health care is needed, a rural community may not have providers who offer mental health services, such as group counseling, and may not be familiar with treating combat-related disorders. I believe strongly that there is an obligation to care for all veterans in need, regardless of where they live. We must ensure that adequate resources are available to serve those who live in rural communities, and that VA works closely with local health care providers to help meet the need for care. It is critical that VA reach out to veterans living in rural communities so that they receive the care they need. Every resource must be united in the effort to care for wounded warriors, whether in a community hospital or VA clinic. When there is no VA presence in a community, VA may need to pay community providers for the reasonable costs of care. Last month, the Committee on Veterans' Affairs held a hearing on health care for veterans in rural areas. We heard from the chief executive officer of a community hospital, from a former director of a rural health clinic, and from outreach organizations who work to bridge the gap between VA and community health care systems. These witnesses testified about how hard it is for veterans who live in rural areas to find health care in the communities where they live, and about how difficult it is for community hospitals and clinics to provide quality services with the limited resources available to them. Committee on Veterans' Affairs staff also conducted an oversight visit to Hawaii and saw firsthand the needs of veterans living in rural communities on the neighbor islands. Many of those veterans find it hard to access VA health care because of travel restrictions and a shortage of services in their communities. Committee staff found that technology was not being used to bridge this gap; indeed, the use of telemedicine is actually declining in Hawaii. The legislation we are introducing today would help address the needs of veterans living in rural communities in a number of ways. First, the bill would bring more doctors to targeted communities by repaying their student loans while they work for VA. Currently, VA's loan repayment program is capped at an amount that is less than \1/3\ the average cost of medical school. This bill would remove the cap, allowing VA to offer full loan repayment so as to provide a much more effective recruitment tool. In addition, this bill would encourage VA and HHS to use the National Health Service Corps Scholarship Program to recruit physicians for VA facilities located in underserved areas. The National Health Service Corps pays for medical school up front in exchange for a doctor's agreement to work in an underserved area after graduation. To address the shortage of mental health providers in many communities, this legislation would also allow VA to shorten the credentialing and privileging process for licensed volunteer counselors who could provide mental health services to our veterans. The legislation would also create a pilot program to place VA doctors in community hospitals so as to enable them to provide more continuous care for veterans. Under this pilot, VA doctors working in communities without a VA hospital would be able to follow their patients when admitted to the local hospital. Participating VA doctors would earn additional compensation for assuming these responsibilities, thereby creating financial incentives for doctors to stay within VA. Since many non-VA hospitals do not have mental health providers or other providers experienced in the treatment of conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder that disproportionately affect veterans, this would also bring needed expertise into other care communities. This bill would also allow VA to monitor the quality of care provided in non-VA facilities. Currently, there is no way for VA to do such quality assurance in a systematic way. This bill would encourage VA's community partners to participate in quality programs like peer review, or to seek accreditation by an outside organization. This bill also would bring new technologies to rural communities. By modifying VA's internal mechanism for distributing funds, the legislation would provide incentives for VA hospitals and clinics to use telehealth technologies. VA currently bases the distribution of funds to its facilities on workload and does not currently count all telehealth visits in a facility's workload. By requiring VA to give hospitals and clinics credit for telehealth visits, this bill will promote the natural expansion of these services to our veterans. Finally, for those veterans who must travel by air to obtain their health care--because of their health status, geography or other barriers--this bill would allow VA to pay beneficiary travel benefits for airfare to those veterans who cannot afford it. In recognition of the cost of airfare, a different income eligibility standard from that used for ground transportation would be used in connection with reimbursement of the costs of air travel. I urge our colleagues to work with me and the other members of the Veterans' Affairs Committee to improve access to health care for veterans who live in rural areas. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I introduce the Federal Hiring Process Improvement Act to help agencies fix the broken recruitment and hiring process in the Federal Government. I am pleased to be joined by my good friend Senator Voinovich in this effort. The Federal Government is the largest employer in the U.S., but every day talented people interested in Federal service walk away because the hiring process is longer and more complicated than that of other employers. Too many Federal agencies have built entry barriers for new workers, done too little to recruit the right candidates, and invented an evaluation process that discourages qualified candidates. In the private sector, many employers post job vacancies through a variety of online and other venues and require only a resume and cover letter to apply. Applying to the federal government should be similarly accessible and easy. However, agencies often require substantial essays and other documentation at the initial application stage. Agencies need to adapt, just as the private sector has, to take advantage of modern technology to boost recruitment efforts and streamline the hiring process to make it more user friendly. Inexpensive outlets such as social networking sites offer agencies an opportunity to expand their profile and post job opportunities without emptying their wallets. It is easier than it was in the past to submit and track application materials during the application process. Agencies should accept candidate-friendly applications such as resumes and cover letters for the initial application and ask for additional information only as needed. Likewise, technology makes it possible to provide automated information to candidates, so candidates should receive timely and informative feedback about the application process. Additionally, more employees with advanced and technical skills are needed in the modern federal workforce, so more pipelines into colleges and technical schools need to be developed to recruit candidates from diverse backgrounds. Last year, I chaired a hearing of the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia, where witnesses testified to the need for reforms in the hiring process. The Government Accountability Office testified to the broad failures of agencies to address such problems as passive recruitment strategies, unclear job vacancy announcements, and imprecise candidate assessment tools. Witnesses testified that young people are greatly interested in Federal Government service, but agencies need to meet them where they are. Developing broader recruitment strategies, using online resources and streamlining the hiring process are essential to attracting the next generation of Federal employees. In response to the hearing, the Office of Personnel Management, OPM, developed the End-to-End Hiring Roadmap initiative that provides agencies a streamlined 80-day model from the time a manager seeks to fill a position to the time an offer is made. This initiative addresses strategic workforce planning, targeted recruitment, clear job announcements, and hiring flexibilities. The initiative also advocates accepting resumes and cover letters over the lengthy and onerous knowledge, skills, and abilities essays, KSAs, required for many Federal jobs. This initiative includes many positive steps, but many agencies are not adopting them. OPM does not have the authority to require agencies to do so. Congress must step in. The Federal Hiring Process Improvement Act requires agencies to develop strategic workforce plans, including hiring projections and critical skills gaps analyses of the workforce; post brief, clear job announcements in plain writing; Allow submission of resumes and cover letters and no longer require KSAs; provide timely notification to applicants of the status of their application; take no more than 80 days from the time a manager decides to fill a vacancy to the time an offer is made; keep an inventory of all applicants who elect to be considered for other Federal vacancies; and measure the effectiveness of hiring efforts and reforms. Agencies must make reforming the recruitment and hiring process a top priority, and this bill furthers the discussion. The Federal Hiring Process Improvement Act will require agencies to abandon their stale recruitment and hiring processes and develop streamlined hiring practices that attract high-quality candidates. The future of the Federal workforce is depending on it. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Veterans' Insurance and Benefits Enhancement Act of 2009. This comprehensive legislation, much of which was considered and passed by the Senate in the last Congress, would improve benefits and services for veterans both young and old. This legislation would make several important improvements in insurance programs for disabled veterans. It would establish a new program of insurance for service-connected disabled veterans that would provide up to a maximum of $50,000 in level premium term life insurance coverage. This new program would be available to service-connected disabled veterans who are less than 65 years of age at the time of application. More importantly, unlike VA's Service-Disabled Veterans Insurance program, the premium rates for this program would be based on an updated mortality table, meaning that premiums under this program would be fairer to veterans. This legislation would also expand eligibility for retroactive benefits from traumatic injury protection coverage under the Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance program. This insurance program went into effect on December 1, 2005. All insured servicemembers under SGLI from that point forward are covered by traumatic injury protection regardless of where their injuries occur. However, individuals sustaining traumatic injuries between October 7, 2001, and November 30, 2005, that were not incurred as a direct result of Operations Enduring or Iraqi Freedom are not eligible for a retroactive payment under the traumatic injury protection program. This legislation would expand eligibility to these individuals. This bill would also increase the maximum amount of Veterans' Mortgage Life Insurance that a service-connected disabled veteran may purchase from the current maximum of $90,000 up to $200,000. In the event of the veteran's death, the veteran's family is protected because VA will pay the balance of the mortgage owed up to the maximum amount of insurance purchased. The need for this increase is obvious in today's housing market. In addition, this legislation would increase the amount of supplemental life insurance available to totally disabled veterans from $20,000 to $30,000. Many totally disabled veterans find it difficult to obtain commercial life insurance. This legislation would provide these veterans with a reasonable amount of life insurance coverage. This bill would also increase certain benefits for veterans and their survivors that have not been updated for many years. The minimum benefit rate for low-income parents of children who have died during military service, or as the result of a service-connected disability, has remained at only $5.00 per month since 1975. This is unacceptable. Therefore, this bill would increase the minimum Parent's DIC benefit to $100 per month, and also increase the basic benefit for a parent with no income to the same level as that provided to low-income spouses of wartime veterans. In addition, this bill would increase the amount of pension paid to VA pensioners who receive Medicaid benefits from $90.00 per month, which was set in 1989, to $100 per month. In addition, all of these benefits and benefits for surviving spouses with children would be adjusted by cost-of-living allowances so that these VA benefits would never again become so outdated. Another provision included in this bill would reaffirm Congress's intent with regard to who should be eligible for a special monthly pension. Low income, nondisabled wartime veterans 65 and older qualify for a VA service pension benefit. Those who are totally and permanently disabled are eligible to receive a disability pension with additional monies if they are housebound, blind, or need help in everyday living activities. In a 2006 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims ruled that an older veteran no longer had to have a disability rated permanent and total in order to receive housebound benefits. The legislative history is clear that Congress intended that only those veterans with a permanent and total disability would qualify for housebound benefits. This provision would require VA to provide this benefit as Congress originally intended. This is not a comprehensive recitation of all the provisions within this important veterans' legislation. However, I hope that I have provided an appropriate overview of the benefits this legislation would provide for America's veterans and servicemembers. I urge our colleagues to support the legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I congratulate the six-member team from Iolani School for winning the national title in the U.S. Department of Energy's 2009 Real World Design Challenge, RWDC. The challenge is an annual competition that provides high school students with the opportunity to apply the lessons of the classroom to important energy and environment problems currently encountered in the engineering field. Iolani School's team placed first of 10 teams gathered from across the Nation in the competition finals held on March 21, 2009 at the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum. The theme for the 2009 challenge was ``Aviation and Fuel Consumption.'' I wish to acknowledge the students' diligence, team work, and ingenuity in crafting their winning solution to this year's daunting challenge. Teams were provided detailed specifications and flight capabilities of an actual twin-engine jet aircraft. Teams were then asked to improve the aircraft's fuel efficiency without drastically reducing its load capacity. I wish to acknowledge all team members on their success: Amy Ko, Adeline Li, Anya Liao, Celia Ou, Jessica Lynn Saylors, Julia Zhang. Their parents and families are recognized as well for their commitment, sacrifice, and support that helped to encourage and instill the important values that led to their success. However, these young women could not have achieved what they have done without the additional support and knowledge of the fundamentals of science given to them by their coach, Dr. Carey Inouye. I commend Dr. Inouye and all of their teachers at Iolani School on their dedication to instructing, nourishing, and inspiring the next generation of scientists and engineers. I would also like to echo the comments made by U.S. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, who said that this ``competition shows that U.S. students, when challenged to excel, are able to perform at the highest levels in science, math and engineering.'' I encourage these students to continue to study and follow their passions for science and engineering. I wish nothing but the best for the students, their families, and coach and wish them and the program continued success in future endeavors.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Veterans' Insurance and Benefits Enhancement Act of 2009. This comprehensive legislation, much of which was considered and passed by the Senate in the last Congress, would improve benefits and services for veterans both young and old. This legislation would make several important improvements in insurance programs for disabled veterans. It would establish a new program of insurance for service-connected disabled veterans that would provide up to a maximum of $50,000 in level premium term life insurance coverage. This new program would be available to service-connected disabled veterans who are less than 65 years of age at the time of application. More importantly, unlike VA's Service-Disabled Veterans Insurance program, the premium rates for this program would be based on an updated mortality table, meaning that premiums under this program would be fairer to veterans. This legislation would also expand eligibility for retroactive benefits from traumatic injury protection coverage under the Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance program. This insurance program went into effect on December 1, 2005. All insured servicemembers under SGLI from that point forward are covered by traumatic injury protection regardless of where their injuries occur. However, individuals sustaining traumatic injuries between October 7, 2001, and November 30, 2005, that were not incurred as a direct result of Operations Enduring or Iraqi Freedom are not eligible for a retroactive payment under the traumatic injury protection program. This legislation would expand eligibility to these individuals. This bill would also increase the maximum amount of Veterans' Mortgage Life Insurance that a service-connected disabled veteran may purchase from the current maximum of $90,000 up to $200,000. In the event of the veteran's death, the veteran's family is protected because VA will pay the balance of the mortgage owed up to the maximum amount of insurance purchased. The need for this increase is obvious in today's housing market. In addition, this legislation would increase the amount of supplemental life insurance available to totally disabled veterans from $20,000 to $30,000. Many totally disabled veterans find it difficult to obtain commercial life insurance. This legislation would provide these veterans with a reasonable amount of life insurance coverage. This bill would also increase certain benefits for veterans and their survivors that have not been updated for many years. The minimum benefit rate for low-income parents of children who have died during military service, or as the result of a service-connected disability, has remained at only $5.00 per month since 1975. This is unacceptable. Therefore, this bill would increase the minimum Parent's DIC benefit to $100 per month, and also increase the basic benefit for a parent with no income to the same level as that provided to low-income spouses of wartime veterans. In addition, this bill would increase the amount of pension paid to VA pensioners who receive Medicaid benefits from $90.00 per month, which was set in 1989, to $100 per month. In addition, all of these benefits and benefits for surviving spouses with children would be adjusted by cost-of-living allowances so that these VA benefits would never again become so outdated. Another provision included in this bill would reaffirm Congress's intent with regard to who should be eligible for a special monthly pension. Low income, nondisabled wartime veterans 65 and older qualify for a VA service pension benefit. Those who are totally and permanently disabled are eligible to receive a disability pension with additional monies if they are housebound, blind, or need help in everyday living activities. In a 2006 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims ruled that an older veteran no longer had to have a disability rated permanent and total in order to receive housebound benefits. The legislative history is clear that Congress intended that only those veterans with a permanent and total disability would qualify for housebound benefits. This provision would require VA to provide this benefit as Congress originally intended. This is not a comprehensive recitation of all the provisions within this important veterans' legislation. However, I hope that I have provided an appropriate overview of the benefits this legislation would provide for America's veterans and servicemembers. I urge our colleagues to support the legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I rise to recognize America's public servants, who provide the essential services upon which this nation relies. As the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia, I am honored to introduce a resolution paying tribute to these employees in celebration of Public Service Recognition Week. This is the 25th anniversary of Public Service Recognition Week, which always takes place the first full week of May. It is a time set aside each year to honor the men and women who serve America as Federal, State, and local government employees, and commend their dedication to serving others. The contributions of hardworking, talented government employees maintain our quality of life. They protect our borders from drug and weapon trafficking; conduct research to prevent future epidemics; and bring hope to those who live in poverty. Public servants teach our children; protect our homes and communities; secure our public water systems and critical infrastructure; preserve our natural resources; and defend the principles of liberty and freedom that we hold dear. The men and women who serve in the armed forces, and the civilian employees who support their missions, are prime examples of public service. They embody the spirit of service, characterized by a willingness to defend this nation. Despite the many hardships of serving through long conflicts, these men and women serve with bravery and unwavering devotion. They have sacrificed their lives so that we might continue to be free. President Obama has called for action to ``encourage a renewed spirit of national service for this and future generations.'' While Public Service Recognition Week provides the opportunity to honor and celebrate the works of federal employees, it also serves as an opportunity for all Americans to explore the various careers in public service. Through job fairs, agency sponsored events, and special exhibits, Public Service Recognition Week allows the American public to gain a deeper appreciation of the challenging and rewarding work available in the government. It is my hope that through these sponsored events, many young professionals will decide to embrace a career as a public servant. I encourage my colleagues to recognize the hard work and the services provided by government employees in their states and join in this annual celebration.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I introduce the Telework Enhancement Act of 2009 to allow greater workplace flexibility for Federal workers and agencies. I am pleased to be joined in this effort by my good friend, Senator George Voinovich. Flexible work arrangements referred to generally as ``telework'' have emerged as an important part of Federal agencies' management tools and continuity of operations plans during emergencies, allowing employees to work from home or a remote location. As the Internet and technologies have advanced and become integrated into the modern work environment, opportunities for employees to securely and efficiently perform their official duties from a remote location also have expanded. Last Congress, as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia, I joined Ranking Member Voinovich in holding a hearing to assess telework policies and initiatives within the Federal Government. Witnesses testified to the benefits of increased telework opportunities within the Federal workforce, including lower vehicle emissions associated with commuting, better work-life balance, reduced overhead costs for agencies, and increased trust and communication between employees and their managers. Expanding telework options helps the Federal Government attract and retain talented employees. With a large portion of the Federal workforce eligible for retirement in the coming years, it is essential for agencies to develop management tools to enhance recruitment and retention. This bill would provide Federal agencies with an important tool to remain competitive in the modern workplace and would offer a flexible option for human capital management. Despite these benefits, witnesses also testified that many agencies hesitate to implement broad telework programs. The witnesses cite agency leadership and management resistance as the greatest barriers to the development of robust telework policies. Even the head of the Patent and Trademark Office acknowledged that without his persistent leadership and commitment to telework, the PTO would not have the beneficial program that it does today. In the past, Congress has approved provisions in appropriations bills to enhance telework opportunities within the Federal Government and encouraged agencies to implement comprehensive telework programs. However, Congress has not approved an authorization bill to make all Federal employees presumptively eligible to telework unless an employing agency expressly determined otherwise. Last Congress I offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute to S. 1000, a telework bill introduced by Senators Stevens and Landrieu. My amendment was adopted by the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and the amended bill was reported on the floor of the Senate. The Telework Enhancement Act of 2009 builds on those efforts by laying the groundwork for robust telework policies in each executive agency. The Office of Personnel Management, OPM, would work with agencies to provide guidance and consultation on telework policies and goals. A Telework Managing Officer, TMO, would also be created within each agency. The TMO's primary responsibilities would be to monitor and develop agency telework policies, and act as a resource for employees and managers on telework issues. This bill does more than provide guidelines for the development of robust telework policies; it prohibits discrimination against employees who chose to telework, guaranteeing those employees will not be disadvantaged in performance evaluations, pay, or benefits. This bill also holds agencies accountable by requiring the submission of telework data to OPM. OPM is then responsible for submitting an annual report to Congress, which summarizes the telework data and reports on the progress of each agency in achieving its telework goals. I am proud to join Senator Voinovich in introducing the Telework Enhancement Act of 2009. We must make sure agencies have the tools necessary to make the Federal Government an employer of choice in the twenty-first century; enhancing telework options will further that goal. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I, along with members of the Hawaii Congressional Delegation, introduce a modified version of the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2009. In order to address concerns that have been raised, a new section prohibiting gaming has been included. With the exception of this one section, the resulting Senate bill and House bill preserve the language of S. 381 and H.R. 862, respectively; that were previously introduced on February 4, 2009. The legislation we introduce today is the legislation we will seek to move forward with toward enactment. I am not a proponent of gaming. Our legislation would not legalize gaming by Native Hawaiians or the Native Hawaiian government in the State of Hawaii, any other state, or the territories. I reiterate to my colleagues, as well as the people of this Nation that all forms of gambling are illegal in Hawaii and the Native Hawaiian government will be subject to all State and Federal laws. The legislation we introduce today with this added gaming prohibition provision simply clarifies our intent. Let me be clear for the record and for my colleagues that this bill is not about gaming. Rather it is about providing Federal recognition to Native Hawaiians so they may have the opportunity to enjoy the same government-to-government relationship with the U.S. provided to Alaska Natives and American Indians. The indigenous people of Hawaii, Native Hawaiians, have not been extended the Federal policy of self-governance and self-determination. The legislation provides parity and authorizes a process to federally recognize Native Hawaiians. The legislation is consistent with Federal law and maintains efforts by the U.S. Government and State of Hawaii to address the unique needs of Native Hawaiians and empower them to perpetuate their culture, language, and traditions. The United States has committed itself to a process of reconciliation with the indigenous people of Hawaii. Recognizing and upholding this U.S. responsibility for Native Hawaiians, the legislation allows us to take the next necessary step in the reconciliation process. The legislation does three things. First, it authorizes an Office within the Department of Interior to serve as a liaison between Native Hawaiians and the U.S. Second, it forms an Interagency Task Force cochaired by the Departments of Interior and Justice and comprised of officials from Federal agencies administering programs and services impacting Native Hawaiians. Third, it authorizes the process for the reorganization of a Native Hawaiian government for the purposes of a federally recognized government-to-government relationship. Once the Native Hawaiian government is recognized, the bill establishes an inclusive democratic negotiations process representing both Native Hawaiians and non-Native Hawaiians. There are many checks and balances in this process and any agreements reached during the negotiations process will require implementing legislation at the State and Federal levels. This legislation will go a long way to address issues present in my home State. It is clear there are longstanding and unresolved issues resulting from the 1893 U.S. overthrow of the kingdom of Hawaii. Progress to address these issues have been limited as there has been no government-to-government relationship to facilitate discussions or implement agreements. However, with the structured process in the bill the people of Hawaii will be empowered to come together, resolve these issues, and move proudly forward together as a State. The bill remains the product of the dedicated and mindful work of the five working groups that drafted the original bill that passed the U.S. House of Representatives in 2000. Individuals from the Native Hawaiian community, elected officials from the State of Hawaii, representatives from Federal agencies, Members of Congress, as well as leaders from Indian country and experts in constitutional law contributed to this bill. These working groups ensured that all parties that had expertise and would work to implement the bill had an opportunity to participate in the drafting process. Over the last 9 years there has been significant public input and congressional oversight. This bill benefits from the input received during the nine congressional hearings, including six joint House Natural Resources Committee and Senate Indian Affairs Committee hearings, five of which were held in Hawaii. The bill introduced today provides a constitutionally sound foundation for us to build upon. I encourage my colleagues to join Senator Inouye and me in enacting this legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I introduce the Telework Enhancement Act of 2009 to allow greater workplace flexibility for Federal workers and agencies. I am pleased to be joined in this effort by my good friend, Senator George Voinovich. Flexible work arrangements referred to generally as ``telework'' have emerged as an important part of Federal agencies' management tools and continuity of operations plans during emergencies, allowing employees to work from home or a remote location. As the Internet and technologies have advanced and become integrated into the modern work environment, opportunities for employees to securely and efficiently perform their official duties from a remote location also have expanded. Last Congress, as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia, I joined Ranking Member Voinovich in holding a hearing to assess telework policies and initiatives within the Federal Government. Witnesses testified to the benefits of increased telework opportunities within the Federal workforce, including lower vehicle emissions associated with commuting, better work-life balance, reduced overhead costs for agencies, and increased trust and communication between employees and their managers. Expanding telework options helps the Federal Government attract and retain talented employees. With a large portion of the Federal workforce eligible for retirement in the coming years, it is essential for agencies to develop management tools to enhance recruitment and retention. This bill would provide Federal agencies with an important tool to remain competitive in the modern workplace and would offer a flexible option for human capital management. Despite these benefits, witnesses also testified that many agencies hesitate to implement broad telework programs. The witnesses cite agency leadership and management resistance as the greatest barriers to the development of robust telework policies. Even the head of the Patent and Trademark Office acknowledged that without his persistent leadership and commitment to telework, the PTO would not have the beneficial program that it does today. In the past, Congress has approved provisions in appropriations bills to enhance telework opportunities within the Federal Government and encouraged agencies to implement comprehensive telework programs. However, Congress has not approved an authorization bill to make all Federal employees presumptively eligible to telework unless an employing agency expressly determined otherwise. Last Congress I offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute to S. 1000, a telework bill introduced by Senators Stevens and Landrieu. My amendment was adopted by the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and the amended bill was reported on the floor of the Senate. The Telework Enhancement Act of 2009 builds on those efforts by laying the groundwork for robust telework policies in each executive agency. The Office of Personnel Management, OPM, would work with agencies to provide guidance and consultation on telework policies and goals. A Telework Managing Officer, TMO, would also be created within each agency. The TMO's primary responsibilities would be to monitor and develop agency telework policies, and act as a resource for employees and managers on telework issues. This bill does more than provide guidelines for the development of robust telework policies; it prohibits discrimination against employees who chose to telework, guaranteeing those employees will not be disadvantaged in performance evaluations, pay, or benefits. This bill also holds agencies accountable by requiring the submission of telework data to OPM. OPM is then responsible for submitting an annual report to Congress, which summarizes the telework data and reports on the progress of each agency in achieving its telework goals. I am proud to join Senator Voinovich in introducing the Telework Enhancement Act of 2009. We must make sure agencies have the tools necessary to make the Federal Government an employer of choice in the twenty-first century; enhancing telework options will further that goal. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce the Federal Supervisor Training Act to enhance Federal employee and manager performance. Performance is essential to the success of our Federal Government. However, we cannot expect employees and managers to perform well if we do not invest in them through training and professional development. In particular, Federal employees deserve the support and guidance of well- trained managers who empower them to perform effectively, and managers deserve tools to successfully motivate and supervise employees. For managers and supervisors in the Federal Government, few things are more important than training. Supervisor trading programs improve communication, promote stronger manager-employee relationships, reduce conflict, and cultivate efficiency in the federal workforce. While the federal government encourages management and supervisory training, the development and implementation of training programs is left to the discretion of individual agencies. This leads to inconsistent guidance on training and sometimes inadequate training due to an agency's other priorities and limited resources. According to the 2002 report Making Public Service Work: Recommendations for Change, the Merit Systems Protection Board reported that poor supervisors or managers are the most common reason employees leave a position. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management 2008 Federal Human Capital Survey also shows the need for improvement: only 40 percent of Federal employees believed that their organization's leaders generate high levels of motivation and commitment to the workforce; only 42 percent said they are satisfied with their leaders' policies and practices; and only 48 percent of Federal employees said they were satisfied with the information they get from management. Given the growing number of Federal managers who are eligible to retire, it is increasingly important to train new supervisors to manage effectively. Good leadership begins with strong management training. It is time to ensure that Federal managers receive appropriate training to supervise Federal employees. The Federal Supervisor Training Act has three major training components. First, the bill will require that new supervisors receive training in the initial 12 months on the job, with mandatory retraining every three years on how to work with employees to develop performance expectations and evaluate employees. Current managers will have three years to obtain their initial training. Second, the bill requires mentoring for new supervisors and training on how to mentor employees. Third, the measure requires training on the laws governing and the procedures for enforcing whistleblower and anti-discrimination rights. In addition, my bill will: set standards that supervisors should meet in order to manage employees effectively; assess a manager's ability to meet these standards; and provide training to improve areas identified in personnel assessments. I am delighted that my bill has received support from the Government Managers Coalition, which represents members of the Senior Executives Association, the Federal Managers Association, the Professional Managers Association, the Federal Aviation Administration Managers Association, and the National Council of Social Security Management Associations; the American Federation of Government Employees; the National Treasury Employees Union; the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers; the AFL-CIO, Metal Trades Department; as well as the Partnership for Public Service. I believe this broad support, from employee unions to management associations to outside good government groups, demonstrates the need for this bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce the Federal Supervisor Training Act to enhance Federal employee and manager performance. Performance is essential to the success of our Federal Government. However, we cannot expect employees and managers to perform well if we do not invest in them through training and professional development. In particular, Federal employees deserve the support and guidance of well- trained managers who empower them to perform effectively, and managers deserve tools to successfully motivate and supervise employees. For managers and supervisors in the Federal Government, few things are more important than training. Supervisor trading programs improve communication, promote stronger manager-employee relationships, reduce conflict, and cultivate efficiency in the federal workforce. While the federal government encourages management and supervisory training, the development and implementation of training programs is left to the discretion of individual agencies. This leads to inconsistent guidance on training and sometimes inadequate training due to an agency's other priorities and limited resources. According to the 2002 report Making Public Service Work: Recommendations for Change, the Merit Systems Protection Board reported that poor supervisors or managers are the most common reason employees leave a position. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management 2008 Federal Human Capital Survey also shows the need for improvement: only 40 percent of Federal employees believed that their organization's leaders generate high levels of motivation and commitment to the workforce; only 42 percent said they are satisfied with their leaders' policies and practices; and only 48 percent of Federal employees said they were satisfied with the information they get from management. Given the growing number of Federal managers who are eligible to retire, it is increasingly important to train new supervisors to manage effectively. Good leadership begins with strong management training. It is time to ensure that Federal managers receive appropriate training to supervise Federal employees. The Federal Supervisor Training Act has three major training components. First, the bill will require that new supervisors receive training in the initial 12 months on the job, with mandatory retraining every three years on how to work with employees to develop performance expectations and evaluate employees. Current managers will have three years to obtain their initial training. Second, the bill requires mentoring for new supervisors and training on how to mentor employees. Third, the measure requires training on the laws governing and the procedures for enforcing whistleblower and anti-discrimination rights. In addition, my bill will: set standards that supervisors should meet in order to manage employees effectively; assess a manager's ability to meet these standards; and provide training to improve areas identified in personnel assessments. I am delighted that my bill has received support from the Government Managers Coalition, which represents members of the Senior Executives Association, the Federal Managers Association, the Professional Managers Association, the Federal Aviation Administration Managers Association, and the National Council of Social Security Management Associations; the American Federation of Government Employees; the National Treasury Employees Union; the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers; the AFL-CIO, Metal Trades Department; as well as the Partnership for Public Service. I believe this broad support, from employee unions to management associations to outside good government groups, demonstrates the need for this bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, it is my great honor and privilege to speak in support of the Serve America Act. I want to thank my dear friend and colleague Senator Kennedy, as well as Senators Hatch, Mikulski, and Enzi, for their commitment and dedication to this legislation, which celebrates our national legacy of service and volunteerism--a legacy which has made this country great. In my home State of Hawaii, children are taught from an early age the importance of nurturing and strengthening bonds between people. Each member of an `Ohana--or extended family--is expected to make a contribution--no matter how great or small--and to use their unique talents to benefit the community. Through this legislation we can increase this same sense of community responsibility throughout the Nation. In my role as chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on the Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia, I have advocated for programs and policies that encourage talented young people to join the Federal workforce. As we work to increase opportunities for national and community service, it is worth emphasizing that Federal Government service is a valuable way to contribute. I am pleased that this bill includes language that encourages post- secondary students to pursue careers in public service through the Campuses of Service program. By supporting efforts to develop and implement models of service-learning, the Campuses of Service programs will help us build a new generation of public servants in the Federal workforce. This will help us prevent a future leadership gap as more of our Nation's long-serving, dedicated Federal employees become retirement eligible. As chairman of the Veterans Affairs Committee, I am supportive of the provision in this Serve America Act that creates a Veterans Corps. This program will help our nation's veterans--members of our Armed Services--and their families through the creation of community-based programs designed to address their unique needs. This is a great way to give back to the community: to assist the men and women who have bravely risked their lives in defense of our Nation, by providing comfort to their families while their loved ones are deployed, or by helping disabled veterans back home. I am also pleased that the Veterans Corps will encourage our veterans to become volunteers themselves. As former members of our military, these dedicated men and women have gained experience and skills that can be used to benefit our Nation through community service. In Hawaii, we have a saying, 'a'ohe hana nui ke alu 'ia, which means that no task is too big when done together by all. This bill helps create opportunities for all of us to work together now and to teach the value of collaboration to younger generations. Please join me in voting in favor of passage of the Serve America Act. mahalo--Thank you. I yield the floor.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Taxpayer Abuse Prevention Act. Refund anticipation loans, RALs, are short term loans facilitated by tax preparers and secured by a taxpayer's expected tax refund which typically carry a three or four digit interest rate. These predatory RALs prey on low-income taxpayers, diminishing their earned tax credits. Earned Income Tax Credit, EITC, benefits are intended to help working families meet their food, clothing, housing, transportation, and education needs. According to the Internal Revenue Service, IRS, in 2007 EITC filers made up 63 percent of all RAL consumers despite being only 17 percent of the taxpayer population. The National Consumer Law Center estimates $567 million was drained out of the EITC program in 2007 by RAL loan and add-on fees. Working families cannot afford to lose a significant portion of their EITC funds by expensive, short-term RALs. The high interest rates and fees charged on RALs are not justified because these loans are outstanding for only a short length of time and present minimal risk to lenders because of the Debt Indicator, DI, program. The DI program is a service provided by the IRS that informs the lender whether or not an applicant owes Federal or State taxes, child support, student loans, or other government obligations, which assists tax preparers in ascertaining the ability of applicants to obtain their full refund so that the RAL can be repaid. It is troubling that the Department of the Treasury facilitates the use of RALs. In 1995, use of the DI program was suspended because of massive fraud in e-filed returns with RALs. The use of the DI program was reinstated in 1999. The effect of the DI program on total RAL volume is clear: the number of RALs fell dramatically following the suspension of the program in 1995 and rose again to pre-suspension levels immediately following its reinstatement in 1999. Use of the DI program should once again be stopped because it is helping tax preparers make excessive profits from low- and moderate-income taxpayers who utilize RALs. The Department of the Treasury should not be facilitating the use of RALs that allow tax preparers to reap outrageous profits by exploiting working families. The Taxpayer Abuse Prevention Act will protect consumers against predatory loans, reduce the involvement of the Department of the Treasury in facilitating the exploitation of taxpayers by terminating the DI program, and expand access to opportunities for saving and lending at mainstream financial services. My bill prohibits refund anticipation loans that utilize EITC benefits. Other federal benefits, such as Social Security, have similar restrictions to ensure that the beneficiaries receive the intended benefit. My bill also limits several of the objectionable practices of RAL providers. It will prohibit lenders from using tax refunds to collect outstanding obligations for previous RALs. In addition, mandatory arbitration clauses for RALs that utilize federal tax refunds would be prohibited to ensure that consumers have the ability to take future legal action if necessary. Too many working families are susceptible to predatory lending because they are left out of the financial mainstream. Between 25 and 56 million adults are unbanked, or not using mainstream, insured financial institutions. The unbanked rely on alternative financial service providers to obtain cash from checks, pay bills, send remittances, utilize payday loans, and obtain credit. Many of the unbanked are low- and moderate-income families that can ill afford to have their earnings unnecessarily diminished by reliance on high-cost and often predatory financial services. In addition, the unbanked are unable to save in preparation for the loss of a job, a family illness, a down payment on a first home, or education expenses. To address this problem, my bill also expands access to mainstream financial services. Electronic Transfer Accounts, ETAs, are low-cost accounts at banks and credit unions intended for recipients of certain Federal benefit payments, such as Social Security payments. My bill expands the eligibility for ETAs to include EITC benefits. These accounts will allow taxpayers to receive direct deposit refunds into an account without the need for a RAL. Furthermore, my bill would mandate that low- and moderate-income taxpayers be provided opportunities to open low-cost accounts at federally insured banks or credit unions via appropriate tax forms. Providing taxpayers with the option of opening a bank or credit union account through the use of tax forms provides an alternative to RALs and immediate access to financial opportunities found at banks and credit unions. The timeliness of this legislation has never been greater. I urge all of my colleagues to support this important bill that offers consumer protection from predatory RALs and expand access to mainstream financial services. I want to thank my colleagues, Senator Bingaman and Senator Durbin, for cosponsoring this legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Taxpayer Abuse Prevention Act. Refund anticipation loans, RALs, are short term loans facilitated by tax preparers and secured by a taxpayer's expected tax refund which typically carry a three or four digit interest rate. These predatory RALs prey on low-income taxpayers, diminishing their earned tax credits. Earned Income Tax Credit, EITC, benefits are intended to help working families meet their food, clothing, housing, transportation, and education needs. According to the Internal Revenue Service, IRS, in 2007 EITC filers made up 63 percent of all RAL consumers despite being only 17 percent of the taxpayer population. The National Consumer Law Center estimates $567 million was drained out of the EITC program in 2007 by RAL loan and add-on fees. Working families cannot afford to lose a significant portion of their EITC funds by expensive, short-term RALs. The high interest rates and fees charged on RALs are not justified because these loans are outstanding for only a short length of time and present minimal risk to lenders because of the Debt Indicator, DI, program. The DI program is a service provided by the IRS that informs the lender whether or not an applicant owes Federal or State taxes, child support, student loans, or other government obligations, which assists tax preparers in ascertaining the ability of applicants to obtain their full refund so that the RAL can be repaid. It is troubling that the Department of the Treasury facilitates the use of RALs. In 1995, use of the DI program was suspended because of massive fraud in e-filed returns with RALs. The use of the DI program was reinstated in 1999. The effect of the DI program on total RAL volume is clear: the number of RALs fell dramatically following the suspension of the program in 1995 and rose again to pre-suspension levels immediately following its reinstatement in 1999. Use of the DI program should once again be stopped because it is helping tax preparers make excessive profits from low- and moderate-income taxpayers who utilize RALs. The Department of the Treasury should not be facilitating the use of RALs that allow tax preparers to reap outrageous profits by exploiting working families. The Taxpayer Abuse Prevention Act will protect consumers against predatory loans, reduce the involvement of the Department of the Treasury in facilitating the exploitation of taxpayers by terminating the DI program, and expand access to opportunities for saving and lending at mainstream financial services. My bill prohibits refund anticipation loans that utilize EITC benefits. Other federal benefits, such as Social Security, have similar restrictions to ensure that the beneficiaries receive the intended benefit. My bill also limits several of the objectionable practices of RAL providers. It will prohibit lenders from using tax refunds to collect outstanding obligations for previous RALs. In addition, mandatory arbitration clauses for RALs that utilize federal tax refunds would be prohibited to ensure that consumers have the ability to take future legal action if necessary. Too many working families are susceptible to predatory lending because they are left out of the financial mainstream. Between 25 and 56 million adults are unbanked, or not using mainstream, insured financial institutions. The unbanked rely on alternative financial service providers to obtain cash from checks, pay bills, send remittances, utilize payday loans, and obtain credit. Many of the unbanked are low- and moderate-income families that can ill afford to have their earnings unnecessarily diminished by reliance on high-cost and often predatory financial services. In addition, the unbanked are unable to save in preparation for the loss of a job, a family illness, a down payment on a first home, or education expenses. To address this problem, my bill also expands access to mainstream financial services. Electronic Transfer Accounts, ETAs, are low-cost accounts at banks and credit unions intended for recipients of certain Federal benefit payments, such as Social Security payments. My bill expands the eligibility for ETAs to include EITC benefits. These accounts will allow taxpayers to receive direct deposit refunds into an account without the need for a RAL. Furthermore, my bill would mandate that low- and moderate-income taxpayers be provided opportunities to open low-cost accounts at federally insured banks or credit unions via appropriate tax forms. Providing taxpayers with the option of opening a bank or credit union account through the use of tax forms provides an alternative to RALs and immediate access to financial opportunities found at banks and credit unions. The timeliness of this legislation has never been greater. I urge all of my colleagues to support this important bill that offers consumer protection from predatory RALs and expand access to mainstream financial services. I want to thank my colleagues, Senator Bingaman and Senator Durbin, for cosponsoring this legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Plain Writing Act of 2009. I am pleased that Senators George Voinovich, Tom Carper Carl Levin, Claire McCaskill, and Jon Tester have joined as original co-sponsors of this legislation. Our bill is very similar to H.R. 946, introduced by Representative Bruce Braley last month. The Plain Writing Act has a simple purpose: it would require the Federal Government to write more clearly. Agencies would be required to write documents that are released to the public in a way that is clear, concise, well-organized, readily understandable. This bill would extend an initiative that President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore started a decade ago as part of the Reinventing Government initiative. In 1998, President Clinton directed agencies to write in plain language. Although many agencies have made progress in writing more clearly, the requirement never was fully implemented. In recent years, the focus on plain writing has dropped. This legislation will renew that focus. There are many benefits to plain writing. First, it promotes transparency and accountability. It is very difficult to hold the Federal Government accountable for its actions if only lawyers can understand Government writing. As we face an economic crisis and unprecedented budget deficits, the American people need clear explanations of Government actions. Plain writing also improves customer service. Individuals and businesses waste time and money, and make unnecessary errors, because Government instructions, forms, and other documents are too complicated. Anyone who has filled out their own tax forms, applications for Federal financial aid or veterans' benefits, Medicare forms, or any number of other overly complicated Federal forms understands the need for plain writing. Government officials, in turn, spend time and money answering questions and addressing complaints from people frustrated with Government documents they cannot understand. Correcting the errors people make because they do not understand Government documents demands Government officials' time as well. Because of this, plain writing makes Government more efficient and effective. Numerous organizations have called on Congress to require the Federal Government to write more clearly, including the AARP, Disabled American Veterans, National Small Business Association, Small Business Legislative Council, Women Impacting Public Policy, American Nurses Association, American Library Association, American Association of Law Libraries, and several associations dedicated to promoting better communication. These groups support plain writing because their members complain about their frustration with trying to understand Government documents--or hiring attorneys to decipher them--and the time and money they waste because the Government does not write plainly. As a former teacher and principal, I understand that even very smart people must be trained to write plainly, so this bill recognizes that Federal Employees will need plain writing training. Each agency will report their plans to train employees in plain writing. Writing in plain, clear, concise, and easily understandable language is a skill that Congress and Federal agencies must foster. As Thomas Jefferson once said, ``The most valuable of all talents is that of never using two words when one will do.'' Additionally, congressional oversight will ensure that agencies implement the plain language requirements. Agencies will be required to designate a senior official responsible for implementing plain language requirements and to report to Congress how it will ensure compliance with the plain language requirement and on its progress. To avoid imposing too great a burden on agencies, agencies will not be required to rewrite existing documents. Only new or substantially revised documents will be covered. Similarly, this bill does not cover regulations, so that agencies can focus first on improving their every day communications with the American people. We recognize that it will be more challenging to write plainly when crafting regulations, which often must be technical and complex. Requiring plain writing is an important step in improving the way the Federal Government communicates with the American people. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Plain Writing Act of 2009. I am pleased that Senators George Voinovich, Tom Carper Carl Levin, Claire McCaskill, and Jon Tester have joined as original co-sponsors of this legislation. Our bill is very similar to H.R. 946, introduced by Representative Bruce Braley last month. The Plain Writing Act has a simple purpose: it would require the Federal Government to write more clearly. Agencies would be required to write documents that are released to the public in a way that is clear, concise, well-organized, readily understandable. This bill would extend an initiative that President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore started a decade ago as part of the Reinventing Government initiative. In 1998, President Clinton directed agencies to write in plain language. Although many agencies have made progress in writing more clearly, the requirement never was fully implemented. In recent years, the focus on plain writing has dropped. This legislation will renew that focus. There are many benefits to plain writing. First, it promotes transparency and accountability. It is very difficult to hold the Federal Government accountable for its actions if only lawyers can understand Government writing. As we face an economic crisis and unprecedented budget deficits, the American people need clear explanations of Government actions. Plain writing also improves customer service. Individuals and businesses waste time and money, and make unnecessary errors, because Government instructions, forms, and other documents are too complicated. Anyone who has filled out their own tax forms, applications for Federal financial aid or veterans' benefits, Medicare forms, or any number of other overly complicated Federal forms understands the need for plain writing. Government officials, in turn, spend time and money answering questions and addressing complaints from people frustrated with Government documents they cannot understand. Correcting the errors people make because they do not understand Government documents demands Government officials' time as well. Because of this, plain writing makes Government more efficient and effective. Numerous organizations have called on Congress to require the Federal Government to write more clearly, including the AARP, Disabled American Veterans, National Small Business Association, Small Business Legislative Council, Women Impacting Public Policy, American Nurses Association, American Library Association, American Association of Law Libraries, and several associations dedicated to promoting better communication. These groups support plain writing because their members complain about their frustration with trying to understand Government documents--or hiring attorneys to decipher them--and the time and money they waste because the Government does not write plainly. As a former teacher and principal, I understand that even very smart people must be trained to write plainly, so this bill recognizes that Federal Employees will need plain writing training. Each agency will report their plans to train employees in plain writing. Writing in plain, clear, concise, and easily understandable language is a skill that Congress and Federal agencies must foster. As Thomas Jefferson once said, ``The most valuable of all talents is that of never using two words when one will do.'' Additionally, congressional oversight will ensure that agencies implement the plain language requirements. Agencies will be required to designate a senior official responsible for implementing plain language requirements and to report to Congress how it will ensure compliance with the plain language requirement and on its progress. To avoid imposing too great a burden on agencies, agencies will not be required to rewrite existing documents. Only new or substantially revised documents will be covered. Similarly, this bill does not cover regulations, so that agencies can focus first on improving their every day communications with the American people. We recognize that it will be more challenging to write plainly when crafting regulations, which often must be technical and complex. Requiring plain writing is an important step in improving the way the Federal Government communicates with the American people. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I support the Omnibus Appropriations Act. I appreciate all of the efforts made by my friend, the senior Senator from Hawaii, to develop and manage this tremendously important bill. I also value the effort of the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee as well as all of the work done by the subcommittee chairmen and ranking members to draft the omnibus. Continuing resolutions hinder the ability of agencies to meet the needs of our communities and address changing circumstances. We must enact this legislation in order to have a more effective and responsive Federal Government in dealing with many of the problems that our Nation is confronted with currently. This legislation improves access to health care, education, housing, and economic development opportunities. It also provides essential support for financial literacy programs, transportation infrastructure investments, sustainable energy development, natural resource preservation, and investor protection efforts. This bill will help further promote medical research. Investments in medical research have tremendous potential to improve the lives of so many people by developing better methods to prevent, detect, and treat different illnesses. I am also proud that the legislation increases the ability of our federally qualified community health centers to better meet the medical needs of our communities. The fiscal year 2009 omnibus bill will help ensure that our Nation's students are prepared for the challenges of the 21st century. This includes funding for programs to help disadvantaged students reach their potential as well as funding to help recruit and retain highly skilled and talented teachers. The fiscal year 2009 Omnibus also includes $1.2 million in funding for Impact Aid. Impact Aid assists school districts that have lost property tax revenue due to the presence of tax-exempt Federal property, including Indian lands and military bases. It is vital to a State like Hawaii where there is a significant military presence. This legislation also provides vital resources for housing. Ten million dollars is provided for the Native Hawaiian housing block grant, which is administered in the State of Hawaii by the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, DHHL. DHHL is the largest affordable housing developer in the State of Hawaii. Although these resources provide only about one-tenth of the DHHL's spending, it is extremely important to support additional home ownership opportunities for residents throughout Hawaii. I also appreciated the inclusion of funding for the Laiopua 2020 Community Center. Economic Development Initiative resources will facilitate the development of this comprehensive community center. The community center will improve the quality of life for residents in the growing Kona community by increasing access to social services, recreational facilities, and educational and economic opportunities. The omnibus provides a slight increase in resources for the Community Development Block Grant, CDBG, Program. CDBG provides essential Federal resources to help meet the specific needs of communities. In Hawaii, our counties utilize CDBG resources to help provide affordable housing, assist the homeless, expand day care facilities, provide meals to low- income families, strengthen our medical infrastructure by making physical improvements to our community health centers, and expand opportunities to help individuals with disabilities find employment. This bill provides essential resources intended to improve our Nation's financial literacy lending and improve individual understanding of economics and personal finance. This bill includes $1.447 million in funding to implement the Excellence in Economic Education Act, which promotes economic and financial literacy among students in kindergarten through high school. An additional $1.6 million is provided for the Department of the Treasury's Office of Financial Education to increase access to financial education and protect consumers against predatory lending. Also, I applaud the inclusion of a directive in the bill that requires the Internal Revenue Service, IRS, in consultation with the National Taxpayer Advocate, to educate consumers about the costs of refund anticipation loans and expand access to alternative methods of obtaining timely refunds. The act also will improve our roads, transit, and airports; strengthen Hawaii's transportation infrastructure; and increase the mobility of our residents. Provisions contained within the act enable the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to address our Nation's critical navigation, flood control, and environmental restoration needs. I was pleased that more than $1.6 million was provided for Hawaii projects. Recognizing that shoreline erosion threatens upland development and coastal habitats along much of Hawaii's shoreline, I worked to provide funding for a regional sediment management demonstration program to further understand the dynamics of complex coastal processes and promote the development of long-term strategies for sediment management. On the island of Molokai funding has been provided to complete a much needed water resource study in order to more effectively manage ground-water resources. Wise stewardship and management at a watershed level has a significant impact on the health and quality of numerous natural resources. Inclusion of funds to address stream management and restoration is critical for Hawaii. These resources will assist and protect communities in Hawaii from destruction caused by severe weather and flooding, as well as promote conservation and revival of our islands' ecosystems. The fiscal year 2009 omnibus includes provisions that will go a long way to improve advancements in science and technology, as well as enhance U.S. competitiveness. In Hawaii and the Pacific, we are uniquely confronted by climate fluctuations and its impact on the public, economic development, and health of our ecosystems and wildlife. I am proud to have supported the inclusion of $1.75 million for the International Pacific Research Center at the University of Hawaii to conduct systematic and reliable climatographic research of the Pacific region. Improving our understanding of climate variability empowers us to use data and models to mitigate adverse impacts. Hawaii is home to some of the world's most critically threatened and endangered species, including the endemic Hawaiian monk seal. For years I have been an advocate for the conservation and recovery of the critically endangered monk seal and other cetaceans in the Pacific. The National Marine Fisheries Service issued the first Hawaiian monk seal recovery plan in 1983 and a revised plan in 2007. The Hawaiian monk seals are vulnerable due to a variety of influences, including human disturbances of birth and nursery habitats, entanglement in marine debris, and commercial fisheries. In the last 50 years the Hawaiian monk seal population has fallen by 60 percent. To address this need, I worked to include $2.6 million in this act to address female and juvenile monk seal survival and enhancement, as well as efforts to minimize monk seal mortality. In addition, these funds will strengthen coordinated regional office efforts for field response teams and enhance implementation of the 2007 recovery plan. The preservation of our national parks, forests, and public lands has been a priority of utmost importance. Public lands are valued assets that must be properly managed for the benefit of all Americans and future generations. I am encouraged that the act supports the preservation of our natural landscapes, furthers conservation of wildlife, expands water resource assessment, and fosters wise management of our Nation's natural resources. Given the unique needs of Hawaii, I supported funding in the Fiscal Year 2009 omnibus to fortify the preservation of four endangered Hawaiian waterbirds located within the James Campbell National Wildlife Refuge, as well as combat the threat of invasive species on our natural and cultural heritage. Invasive species are the primary cause of decline in Hawaii's threatened and endangered species, and cause hundreds of millions of dollars in damage to Hawaii's agricultural industry, tourism, real estate, and water quality. Funding will continue the ongoing, collaborative, interagency, and community-based effort to address invasive species impacts. Such joint action, cooperative agreements, and collaboration will be needed to control invasive species that are crossing geographic and jurisdictional boundaries. I am pleased that the omnibus supports the development of sustainable and clean energy. We must continue to invest in development and implementation of energy from renewable, efficient sources as this Nation transitions away from foreign oil. Our energy security and independence depend on conducting advanced research and better utilizing energy from sources including the sun, wind, ocean. Included in the act is $3.1 million to support the ongoing Hawaii-New Mexico Sustainable Energy Security Partnership. In order to develop, demonstrate, and deploy technologies that enhance usage of renewable resources, the Partnership evaluates electric and transportation infrastructure, tests technologies, and provides sound science to inform debate and the implementation of public policy. Building upon its successful development of a comprehensive model of the transportation and electricity infrastructures on the Big Island and Maui, these funds will be used to support promising projects identified for implementation on those islands, as well as extend efforts to evaluate and address the energy infrastructure needs on Oahu and Kauai. I am encouraged by the inclusion of funding to improve Hawaii's infrastructure and nurture sustainable agriculture production. Our agricultural industry is a key component of our State's economy, and I have long supported the policies and programs cultivating opportunities for our farmers and rural communities. Further, funds supporting research, extension, and teaching efforts are necessary as we prepare a skilled and thriving workforce focused on developing sustainable solutions that improve the health of our environment, as well as the quality and efficiency in production. Another important provision I want to highlight is the critical support included for the Securities and Exchange Commission, SEC, to better protect investors. I will continue to work with the SEC to ensure it has the statutory authority and resources necessary to better protect and educate investors and promote market stability. In conclusion, I want to thank the senior Senator from Hawaii for all of his extraordinary efforts to develop and shepherd this comprehensive bill through the legislative process. The Nation and our home State of Hawaii will benefit tremendously from its passage.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I am introducing today the proposed Veterans Rehabilitation and Training Improvements Act of 2009. This measure would improve the program of rehabilitation and training for veterans who suffer from service-connected disabilities by offering an increase in the amount of subsistence allowances, reimbursing certain incidental costs, and repealing the limit on the number of individuals who may be enrolled in a program of Independent Living services. Under current law, veterans who are enrolled in a program of rehabilitation under Chapter 31 receive a monthly subsistence allowance. This, in addition to the payment of the costs of the program of rehabilitation, is intended to offer the veteran a means of paying for basic living expenses while pursuing their training or education. With the enactment of the new Post 9-11 GI Bill last year, P.L. 110- 323, which adopted a tuition-and-fees plus a living allowance approach to the payment of benefits under the educational assistance program, I am concerned that there may be an inequity between the vocational rehabilitation and education programs and that individuals who would truly benefit from enrollment in a program of rehabilitation and employment under Chapter 31 will be tempted to enroll in the Chapter 33 education program in order to take advantage of the higher living allowance. Those who would make such an election might forgo valuable counseling, employment and placement, and other assistance from which they might benefit. To address this concern, the measure I am introducing today would modify the Chapter 31 program by offering a subsistence allowance to enrollees equal to the national average for the Department of Defense's Basic Allowance for Housing, BAH, for members of the military at the E- 5 level, adjusted for marital status. This is similar, although not identical to, the approach of the new chapter 33 program which adopted a regionalized BAH approach based on the address of the institution. This is intended to help ensure that individuals who could best benefit from enrollment in the Chapter 31 program are not faced with a disincentive to do so. With regard to the second issue, VA is permitted to pay certain costs associated with enrollment of an individual in a program of rehabilitation--for example, fees, equipment, and supplies. However, there are other costs that an individual might incur that are not covered by VA and these costs could represent a substantial barrier to the successful completion of a program. An example could be that of a single young mother with young children who--in order to attend classes--needs child care. Another example might be a veteran who lost both legs in service and needs a new suit in order to make the most favorable impression at the interview with a prospective employer. The legislation I am introducing today would require VA to issue regulations providing for the reimbursement of incidental costs associated with obstacles that pose substantial barriers to successful completion of a program. I believe that this will substantially increase the ability of many individuals to finish their rehabilitation programs and be placed in rewarding jobs. I also believe we need to repeal the cap on the number of individuals who may be enrolled in a program of Independent Living services under the Chapter 31 program. Current law provides that individuals for whom a determination is made that a program of rehabilitation leading to employment is not reasonably feasible may be eligible for enrollment in a program of independent living services which is designed to help the individual achieve a maximum level of independence in daily life. However, the number of veterans who in any one year may enroll in these programs is capped at 2,600. Even though the VA has testified in the past that this enrollment cap does not present any problem for the effective conduct of the program, I remain concerned--despite the fact that last year Congress raised the cap from 2,500 to 2,600 in P.L. 110-389--that the effect of the cap is to put downward pressure on VA's enrollment of eligible veterans in this very important program. This is of particular concern when so many of today's returning servicemembers suffer from disabilities that may require extensive periods of rehabilitation and assistance in achieving independence in their daily lives that can result from such conditions as traumatic brain injury or PTSD. Disabled veterans are transitioning from military service into an economy that is changing, challenging, and contracting at historic rates. My bill will give these veterans more of the help they need by increasing program flexibility and boosting the living stipend for disabled veterans undergoing rehabilitation. While there will be costs associated with this legislation, the veterans who are served by the chapter 31 rehabilitation and employment program are the highest priority for our Nation--individuals who have incurred service-connected disabilities in service to the country. This truly is one of the costs of war that must be borne. I look forward to working with my colleagues in moving this legislation through the Congress. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I am introducing today the proposed Veterans Rehabilitation and Training Improvements Act of 2009. This measure would improve the program of rehabilitation and training for veterans who suffer from service-connected disabilities by offering an increase in the amount of subsistence allowances, reimbursing certain incidental costs, and repealing the limit on the number of individuals who may be enrolled in a program of Independent Living services. Under current law, veterans who are enrolled in a program of rehabilitation under Chapter 31 receive a monthly subsistence allowance. This, in addition to the payment of the costs of the program of rehabilitation, is intended to offer the veteran a means of paying for basic living expenses while pursuing their training or education. With the enactment of the new Post 9-11 GI Bill last year, P.L. 110- 323, which adopted a tuition-and-fees plus a living allowance approach to the payment of benefits under the educational assistance program, I am concerned that there may be an inequity between the vocational rehabilitation and education programs and that individuals who would truly benefit from enrollment in a program of rehabilitation and employment under Chapter 31 will be tempted to enroll in the Chapter 33 education program in order to take advantage of the higher living allowance. Those who would make such an election might forgo valuable counseling, employment and placement, and other assistance from which they might benefit. To address this concern, the measure I am introducing today would modify the Chapter 31 program by offering a subsistence allowance to enrollees equal to the national average for the Department of Defense's Basic Allowance for Housing, BAH, for members of the military at the E- 5 level, adjusted for marital status. This is similar, although not identical to, the approach of the new chapter 33 program which adopted a regionalized BAH approach based on the address of the institution. This is intended to help ensure that individuals who could best benefit from enrollment in the Chapter 31 program are not faced with a disincentive to do so. With regard to the second issue, VA is permitted to pay certain costs associated with enrollment of an individual in a program of rehabilitation--for example, fees, equipment, and supplies. However, there are other costs that an individual might incur that are not covered by VA and these costs could represent a substantial barrier to the successful completion of a program. An example could be that of a single young mother with young children who--in order to attend classes--needs child care. Another example might be a veteran who lost both legs in service and needs a new suit in order to make the most favorable impression at the interview with a prospective employer. The legislation I am introducing today would require VA to issue regulations providing for the reimbursement of incidental costs associated with obstacles that pose substantial barriers to successful completion of a program. I believe that this will substantially increase the ability of many individuals to finish their rehabilitation programs and be placed in rewarding jobs. I also believe we need to repeal the cap on the number of individuals who may be enrolled in a program of Independent Living services under the Chapter 31 program. Current law provides that individuals for whom a determination is made that a program of rehabilitation leading to employment is not reasonably feasible may be eligible for enrollment in a program of independent living services which is designed to help the individual achieve a maximum level of independence in daily life. However, the number of veterans who in any one year may enroll in these programs is capped at 2,600. Even though the VA has testified in the past that this enrollment cap does not present any problem for the effective conduct of the program, I remain concerned--despite the fact that last year Congress raised the cap from 2,500 to 2,600 in P.L. 110-389--that the effect of the cap is to put downward pressure on VA's enrollment of eligible veterans in this very important program. This is of particular concern when so many of today's returning servicemembers suffer from disabilities that may require extensive periods of rehabilitation and assistance in achieving independence in their daily lives that can result from such conditions as traumatic brain injury or PTSD. Disabled veterans are transitioning from military service into an economy that is changing, challenging, and contracting at historic rates. My bill will give these veterans more of the help they need by increasing program flexibility and boosting the living stipend for disabled veterans undergoing rehabilitation. While there will be costs associated with this legislation, the veterans who are served by the chapter 31 rehabilitation and employment program are the highest priority for our Nation--individuals who have incurred service-connected disabilities in service to the country. This truly is one of the costs of war that must be borne. I look forward to working with my colleagues in moving this legislation through the Congress. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I join with my good friend from Hawaii, Senator Daniel Inouye, and my friends from Alaska, Senators Lisa Murkowski and Mark Begich, to reintroduce legislation to ensure retirement equity for Federal workers in Hawaii, Alaska, and the U.S. Territories. For years, Federal employees in my home State of Hawaii and in other non-foreign areas have been disadvantaged when it comes to their retirement due to a lack of locality pay. Federal workers in those areas may receive a non-foreign cost of living allowance, COLA, based on the difference in the cost of living between those areas and the District of Columbia. However, this pay adjustment does not count toward their retirement. The inequity in retirement benefits for Federal workers in Hawaii, Alaska, and the U.S. Territories hinders efforts to recruit and retain Federal workers in these areas, and it has led to several lawsuits against the Federal government. Most recently, on January 30, 2008, Judge Phillip M. Pro in the U.S. District Court in Honolulu issued a decision on this in Matsuo v. the Office of Personnel Management. In his ruling, Judge Pro acknowledged the disparity saying that Congress discharged its legislative responsibilities imperfectly and recommended that Congress correct the incongruity made so evident by this case. Under the Federal Employee Pay Comparability Act, FEPCA, of 1990, Federal employees in Alaska, Hawaii, and the Territories were excluded from receiving locality pay, which is adjusted for local labor markets across the country to help close the gap between private sector and public sector wages. The first year FEPCA was implemented, in 1994, Federal employees in Alaska, Hawaii, and the Territories were denied a pay raise so that Federal employees in the 48 contiguous States could receive their first locality pay allowance. Every year since 1994, Federal employees outside of the continental United States have been denied approximately one percent of the average annual pay raise, which goes toward locality pay rates. As you can imagine, this issue has caused Federal employees in the non-foreign areas great concern for years, but there has never been enough support for any proposed solution. In the past two years, however, we have laid the groundwork for the solution represented by this bipartisan bill. The previous Administration submitted a legislative proposal to phase-out non-foreign COLA and phase-in locality pay. That proposal provided a good starting point, but did not address numerous important issues, including the impact such a change would have on postal employees, employees who receive special rates, members of the Senior Executive Service, and others who are in agency- specific personnel systems or those who do not receive locality pay, such as employees under the National Security Personnel System at the Department of Defense. My Federal Workforce Subcommittee, in collaboration with Senators Stevens, Inouye, and Murkowski, worked extensively with Federal employees in Hawaii, Alaska, and the Territories and with the Office of Personnel Management, OPM, and other Federal agencies to craft a comprehensive solution, which we introduced as the Non-Foreign Area Retirement Equity Assurance Act last year. We also have worked with OPM to help ensure that affected Federal employees understand the proposal. After we introduced the bill, my Subcommittee held a series of meetings in Hawaii with representatives from OPM, the Postal Service, and DoD to educate Federal employees on the impact of the legislation and listen to their concerns. I also chaired a field hearing in Honolulu, Hawaii, where the Administration presented its formal opinion on the legislation and Federal employee representatives from Hawaii, Alaska, Guam, and other Territories were invited to express their thoughts on the legislation. While there are still divergent views on this proposal, the vast majority of employees who I have heard from support it. As the bill moved through the Senate, I agreed to a few modifications of the bill to address particular concerns. The Senate passed the amended version by unanimous consent in October 2008. Unfortunately, the 110th Congress adjourned before the House could take action on the bill. Today, we are reintroducing a similar version of the Non-Foreign AREA Act that passed the Senate by unanimous consent only a few months ago in the hopes that we can move quickly to address this growing inequity. This bill is not a windfall or a pay raise for Federal employees. Since 1994, Federal employees in Alaska, Hawaii, and the Territories have been denied pay and retirement equity and this bill seeks to correct the long-time inequity, prevent further lawsuits, and protect employees take-home pay in the process. As we all know, the declining economy is making it hard on working men and women to pay their bills and stay afloat. While locality rates have increased in recent years, non-foreign COLA rates have been gradually declining. COLA rates are expected to drop again this year in Alaska, Hawaii, and the Territories. Unless Congress acts soon, Federal employees in these areas will see their pay further adversely affected. In the current economic climate, we must be careful to do no harm. I continue to encourage employees in Alaska, Hawaii, and in the Territories to write us with their questions and concerns on our legislation. My goal remains to ensure that Federal workers in the non- foreign areas are not disadvantaged when it comes to their pay and retirement. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I join with my good friend from Hawaii, Senator Daniel Inouye, and my friends from Alaska, Senators Lisa Murkowski and Mark Begich, to reintroduce legislation to ensure retirement equity for Federal workers in Hawaii, Alaska, and the U.S. Territories. For years, Federal employees in my home State of Hawaii and in other non-foreign areas have been disadvantaged when it comes to their retirement due to a lack of locality pay. Federal workers in those areas may receive a non-foreign cost of living allowance, COLA, based on the difference in the cost of living between those areas and the District of Columbia. However, this pay adjustment does not count toward their retirement. The inequity in retirement benefits for Federal workers in Hawaii, Alaska, and the U.S. Territories hinders efforts to recruit and retain Federal workers in these areas, and it has led to several lawsuits against the Federal government. Most recently, on January 30, 2008, Judge Phillip M. Pro in the U.S. District Court in Honolulu issued a decision on this in Matsuo v. the Office of Personnel Management. In his ruling, Judge Pro acknowledged the disparity saying that Congress discharged its legislative responsibilities imperfectly and recommended that Congress correct the incongruity made so evident by this case. Under the Federal Employee Pay Comparability Act, FEPCA, of 1990, Federal employees in Alaska, Hawaii, and the Territories were excluded from receiving locality pay, which is adjusted for local labor markets across the country to help close the gap between private sector and public sector wages. The first year FEPCA was implemented, in 1994, Federal employees in Alaska, Hawaii, and the Territories were denied a pay raise so that Federal employees in the 48 contiguous States could receive their first locality pay allowance. Every year since 1994, Federal employees outside of the continental United States have been denied approximately one percent of the average annual pay raise, which goes toward locality pay rates. As you can imagine, this issue has caused Federal employees in the non-foreign areas great concern for years, but there has never been enough support for any proposed solution. In the past two years, however, we have laid the groundwork for the solution represented by this bipartisan bill. The previous Administration submitted a legislative proposal to phase-out non-foreign COLA and phase-in locality pay. That proposal provided a good starting point, but did not address numerous important issues, including the impact such a change would have on postal employees, employees who receive special rates, members of the Senior Executive Service, and others who are in agency- specific personnel systems or those who do not receive locality pay, such as employees under the National Security Personnel System at the Department of Defense. My Federal Workforce Subcommittee, in collaboration with Senators Stevens, Inouye, and Murkowski, worked extensively with Federal employees in Hawaii, Alaska, and the Territories and with the Office of Personnel Management, OPM, and other Federal agencies to craft a comprehensive solution, which we introduced as the Non-Foreign Area Retirement Equity Assurance Act last year. We also have worked with OPM to help ensure that affected Federal employees understand the proposal. After we introduced the bill, my Subcommittee held a series of meetings in Hawaii with representatives from OPM, the Postal Service, and DoD to educate Federal employees on the impact of the legislation and listen to their concerns. I also chaired a field hearing in Honolulu, Hawaii, where the Administration presented its formal opinion on the legislation and Federal employee representatives from Hawaii, Alaska, Guam, and other Territories were invited to express their thoughts on the legislation. While there are still divergent views on this proposal, the vast majority of employees who I have heard from support it. As the bill moved through the Senate, I agreed to a few modifications of the bill to address particular concerns. The Senate passed the amended version by unanimous consent in October 2008. Unfortunately, the 110th Congress adjourned before the House could take action on the bill. Today, we are reintroducing a similar version of the Non-Foreign AREA Act that passed the Senate by unanimous consent only a few months ago in the hopes that we can move quickly to address this growing inequity. This bill is not a windfall or a pay raise for Federal employees. Since 1994, Federal employees in Alaska, Hawaii, and the Territories have been denied pay and retirement equity and this bill seeks to correct the long-time inequity, prevent further lawsuits, and protect employees take-home pay in the process. As we all know, the declining economy is making it hard on working men and women to pay their bills and stay afloat. While locality rates have increased in recent years, non-foreign COLA rates have been gradually declining. COLA rates are expected to drop again this year in Alaska, Hawaii, and the Territories. Unless Congress acts soon, Federal employees in these areas will see their pay further adversely affected. In the current economic climate, we must be careful to do no harm. I continue to encourage employees in Alaska, Hawaii, and in the Territories to write us with their questions and concerns on our legislation. My goal remains to ensure that Federal workers in the non- foreign areas are not disadvantaged when it comes to their pay and retirement. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. AKAKA

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

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, as chairman of the District of Columbia subcommittee, I rise today in support of S. 160, the District of Columbia Voting Rights Act of 2009. I vote to enfranchise thousands of District residents and to affirm my commitment to the fundamental right of all Americans to participate in our great democracy. Despite our Nation's founding principle of ``no taxation without representation,'' District of Columbia residents lack full representation in Congress. They have sent sons and daughters to war in defense of our country, and they have paid Federal taxes in support of our Government. Despite this, the distinguished Delegate from the District of Columbia lacks a vote on the floor of the House of Representatives. Fair voting representation is fundamental to our democracy. I understand the challenges facing the District's residents, and I sympathize with its trouble to attain voting representation in Congress. I also understand that this will be an ongoing discussion. I am sensitive to the concerns raised by my colleagues on the constitutionality of our actions. Legal scholars have testified before the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee that Congress does have the constitutional authority to extend a vote to a District Representative in the House. I believe this legislation is constitutional, but ultimately it is the role of the courts to decide. Our representative democracy is based on the principle that citizens of this country should have a say in the laws that govern this country. If citizens disagree with the laws, they have the power to vote for different representatives. By extending this core principle to the District of Columbia, I believe this bill would be a decisive step forward for the rights of DC residents. Amendment No. 575 Now I wish to address the pending Ensign amendment. Today, we are addressing voting rights. Now is not an appropriate time to cloud the debate with amendments on gun control. Last year, when this gun issue was brought up on the Senate floor before being considered by the committee, I joined 10 of my colleagues in a letter to the majority leader asking that the bill follow Senate procedures and be referred to committee before consideration on the floor. As the chairman of the subcommittee charged with the oversight of the District of Columbia, I am familiar with the debate on DC's gun policies. Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court in the Heller decision struck down the District of Columbia's gun ban. Since then, the DC City Council has taken necessary steps to comply with the Supreme Court's decision, including the passage of legislation to address issues raised by the ruling. I do not believe any congressional action is needed to help DC comply with the Heller decision, but, more importantly, this is not the appropriate time to consider and vote on this issue. I am not against gun ownership. I am for self-determination. I strongly encourage my colleagues to give the District of Columbia and its citizens the opportunity to vote on and establish their own rules regarding gun control. It would be ironic if we were to with one hand finally give the people of the District voting representation but on the other hand take away their right to self-determination by forcing them to adopt a gun control policy on which they were unable to vote. I, therefore, urge my colleagues to vote no on the Ensign amendment and all related amendments. I am proud to lend my support for the underlying bill. I urge my colleagues to vote in support of voting rights for the residents of the District of Columbia and to reject any amendment that would abridge those rights or is not germane to the issue at hand. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I wish to express my deepest condolences and warmest aloha to the family and friends of William H. ``Mo'' Marumoto, who passed away last November. Mr. Marumoto was an inspiration to all of those who came in contact with him. Those who knew him well knew of his selflessness and commitment to the public good. During World War II, Mr. Marumoto and his family spent 3 years in the Gila River internment camp in Arizona. This experience did little to deter Mr. Marumoto's pursuit of excellence and service to his country. He served as student body president of his high school, Santa Ana High School, and later graduated from Whittier College. His remarkable career spanned over five decades. He arrived in Washington, DC, in 1969 to serve as assistant to the secretary of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, responsible for recruiting senior executives for the Office of Education. A year later, Mr. Marumoto became the first Asian American to serve at the executive level in the White House as an aide to President Richard Nixon responsible for filling Cabinet and sub-Cabinet level positions. In 1973, he founded The Interface Group Ltd., a Washington, DC-based executive search firm which specialized in placing women and minorities in senior executive positions. He is fondly remembered for his efforts to ensure diversity within the most senior levels of government. He was a remarkable leader as president and CEO of the Asian Pacific American Institute for Congressional Studies and received numerous national professional awards for his work in higher education, fundraising, direct mail, events management, and publications. My thoughts and prayers go out to Mo's loved ones. He will be deeply missed and his generosity will forever be remembered. May he rest in peace.

Mr. AKAKA

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I support the conference report for H.R. 1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. This vital legislation will create jobs, ensure that States can continue to provide essential health and social services, improve education, and assist veterans. This legislation will create jobs by encouraging innovation for the development of clean energy and strengthening our Nation's infrastructure. Additionally, the legislation includes funding for the Economic Development Administration to create additional economic opportunities. Our States are confronted with declining revenue while citizens have increasing health care and social service needs. This bill will provide funding to States so that they can continue to provide health care coverage and essential social services that will help our constituents in this great time of need. States must be good stewards of these resources and utilize them for their intended purposes. This recovery bill will also provide relief to workers and families hardest hit by the economic recession. In order to ensure that we have a well-educated workforce both now and in the future, I am pleased to support the provisions included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act designed to increase and support educational opportunities for our country's children as well as provide much needed resources and infrastructure improvements for educators nationwide. The establishment of a State Fiscal Stabilization Fund will help schools suffering during this difficult economic time to retain teachers and continue programs vital to helping students achieve their academic potential. I also applaud the inclusion of $100 million for impact aid. Due to the significant military presence in Hawaii, these funds are vitally important to Hawaii's public schools. I have been working, along with other members of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, to advocate for the needs of veterans in the context of this recovery and reinvestment bill and am pleased that the conference report includes funding that will benefit VA and the veterans it serves. Although I wanted the final agreement to include more of the Senate's shovel-ready projects to improve health care and other services veterans receive from VA, I am grateful the conference report includes more than a billion dollars in immediate funding that will create jobs while improving services for veterans. The conference report also includes $50 million to make key improvements to Veterans Benefit Administration IT systems and $150 million to provide a temporary increase in claims processing staff. In addition, there is $50 million included in the conference report that is intended for VA's National Cemetery Administration. This funding will be used to provide much needed cemetery infrastructure support and repair and investment in VA's National Shrine Initiative. I believe the funding will help meet our obligation to provide final resting places for veterans and honor their service. As helpful as this infusion of funding will be, more resources are needed. I remind all of my colleagues that these funds only begin to address existing, unmet needs. When it is time to begin work on the new budget, we must provide a robust VA appropriation to meet the new fiscal year's costs. I am glad that the conference report retains a provision to make sure that certain veterans facing financial hardship in this time of uncertainty receive an economic recovery payment. I will continue to work with my colleagues to secure additional resources for VA. I commend my colleague, Senator Inouye, for his ongoing advocacy on behalf of the Filipino veterans of World War II. This conference report contains an authorization for a lump sum payment for funds that were appropriated last session for these veterans. I look forward to having the conference report signed into law quickly so that we can begin our economic recovery and assist our citizens in need.