Barbara Boxer

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, today I ask my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to Sheriff's Deputy Ricky Del Fiorentino, an exceptional law enforcement officer, a devoted and loyal friend, and most of all a dedicated family man, who was tragically killed in the line of duty on March 19, 2014. Ricky Del Fiorentino was born and raised in Napa, CA, where he excelled in both football and wrestling at Napa High School. His high school football coach called him the best lineman he had ever trained. Ricky also placed second in the heavyweight division of the State wrestling championship in 1982 and later earned a scholarship to wrestle at the University of Oklahoma. In 1998, he was inducted into the Napa High Athletic Hall of Fame. After graduating from the Napa Valley Police Academy, Ricky joined the Mendocino County Sheriff's Office. His distinguished 26-year law enforcement career in Mendocino County included 10 years with the Fort Bragg Police before he returned to the sheriff's department in 2000. Residents of the Mendocino coast remember Deputy Del Fiorentino as a calm, towering presence and a guardian of the community. At a candlelight vigil in his honor, many community members described him as gentle, helpful, trusting, loving, and caring, relating personal interactions that had stayed with them for years. Deputy Del Fiorentino was a respected and experienced leader, passionate about his work and never hesitant to help someone in need. In 1992, he dove into the Noyo River to rescue a young man who had jumped off the Noyo Bridge. In 1998, he again showed his courage by rescuing four people who had been swept into the water at Pudding Creek by a sneaker wave. These heroic acts were second nature to Deputy Del Fiorentino, who received many official commendations from the community he served. Deputy Del Fiorentino's friends say he had a ready smile, was quick to laugh, was an avid outdoorsman and a devoted husband, father, and brother. When he was not on duty he spent as much time as he could with his friends and family. Ricky Del Fiorentino devoted his life to his family, his community, and his country. His dedicated and courageous service will not be forgotten. On behalf of the people of California, whom he served so bravely, I extend my gratitude and deepest sympathies to his family, friends, and colleagues.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the 99th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide--a tragedy that has left a dark stain on the collective conscience of the world. Between 1915 and 1923, more than 1.5 million Armenians were marched to their deaths in the deserts of the Middle East, murdered in concentration camps, drowned at sea, and forced to endure unimaginable acts of brutality at the hands of the Ottoman Empire. The Armenian Genocide--along with the Holocaust is one of the most studied cases of genocide in history. Countless experts have documented the atrocities that occurred, compiling an overwhelming body of historical evidence on the Armenian Genocide. However, successive U.S. administrations have refused to call the deliberate massacre of the Armenians by its rightful name, continuing only to refer to it as an annihilation, massacre, or murder. It has been nearly a century since the Armenian Genocide began and each day that goes by without full acknowledgement by the United States prolongs the pain felt by the descendants of the victims, as well as the entire Armenian community. For years, I have been urging both Democratic and Republican administrations to finally acknowledge the Armenian Genocide for what it was--genocide. I do so again today. The United States has often led the international community in speaking out against violence and suffering wherever it occurs. But tragically, our Nation is on the wrong side of history when it comes to the Armenian Genocide. I hope that this year we right this terrible wrong once and for all. It is time for the United States to join the list of countries from Argentina to France as well as 43 U.S. States that have unequivocally affirmed the Armenian Genocide. Genocide is only possible when people avert their eyes. Any effort to deal with genocide--whether past, present or future--must begin with the truth. So this April 24, as we pause to remember the victims of the Armenian Genocide and to celebrate the many contributions Armenian Americans have made to our great nation, I hope that the United States will finally and firmly stand on the right side of history and call the tragedy of 1915-1923 by its rightful name.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague from Illinois for his leadership in making our people healthier than they otherwise would be. He talked about the battles we have had making sure that we crack down on the tobacco companies that told us for years smoking was safe--as a matter of fact, do it, it will relax you--and they denied the science. We lived through those years. Many years ago, I worked with then- Senator Lautenberg--and Senator Durbin led the charge in the House--to stop smoking on airplanes. I remember coming home from these long trips and literally reeking of cigarette smoke--I never smoked in my life, but just sitting around it in the airplanes. Now we are working together on NIH issues. We are very upset about some of the false claims that are being made about ecigarettes, and we want the truth out. So before he leaves the floor, I want to thank the Senator.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, Senator Mikulski and I were just whispering to each other about how far we have come since the day Anita Hill came to the Hill and we couldn't do much to help her, but we organized and recognized that women had to be here in numbers sufficient to make a difference and clearly, today, we are. My colleague Senator Mikulski is our dean of the women. All she is basically saying, with all of us as an echo chamber, is this: Women deserve a fair shot. It is long past time for us to stop shortchanging half of the country and their families. I want to show us a chart that looks at what happens to a woman in a year when she gives up $11,000 because she is not being paid, for the same job, the same amount a man is. What could that $11,000 do? She could buy a year of groceries, she could provide a year of rent, a year of daycare, she could buy a used car, and she could afford community college. That is 1 year. Look at what happens over the course of a lifetime when because a woman is not getting her fair share, the equal amount that she deserves, she is only getting 77 cents on the dollar. It is $443,000. What could she do with that? Pay off her entire mortgage, send three kids to the University of California--a great school, I might say--and buy 8,000 tanks of gas. What is the point of all of this? It is to show that the dollars women are not getting could be going into the community, could be making sure their families are taken care of, and would make all the difference in the world. Now, I was a little startled to see some of my Republican friends on the other side--Republican Members of the House-- say this is demeaning to women. That is what I got out of a news report--that women don't need this. Would they have said that about children? Did children need protection against child labor? The answer is yes. Did workers need protection from a 14-hour day when they were being exploited? Yes. Did we need to make sure people in hazardous workplaces, such as chemical companies, have appropriate protective gear? Yes. Did we need to make sure there are fire exits in a crowded factory, after we saw a horrific fire called the Triangle fire? Yes. Now we need to make sure that women get equal pay for equal work. This is just part of the continuum of bending that arc of history toward justice. That is what is happening here under the leadership of Senator Mikulski and all of us who stand on her shoulders. I have to say it is a great day. It is a great day to hear my colleagues come to the floor and speak as one. We are speaking not only for the women of America, who make up more than half, but for their families. That is the point. Two-thirds of women are either the sole head of household or they share in providing for the economic well-being of their families. This is a matter of justice. It is a matter of fairness. It is a matter of a fair shot. I am proud to stand with my colleagues. I hope and pray we will get the 60 votes necessary. There is a filibuster going on, as usual. We need a supermajority. But I would say to my colleagues on the other side that too many women have to be super women. So give them a supermajority. They are super women who are holding down not one job but two jobs. So please help us. Let's celebrate tomorrow with a great vote. I yield the floor.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I am pleased and honored to salute James B. Frankel, a respected lawyer, environmental activist, and a pillar of the San Francisco community who recently celebrated his 90th birthday. James Frankel was born on February 25, 1924, in Chicago to Louis and Thelma Frankel. After graduating from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1945, Jim went on to earn a law degree from Yale University, where he met his future wife Louise. Shortly thereafter the couple moved to San Francisco, where they raised their family. In San Francisco, Jim maintained an active law practice until his retirement in 2000. He also contributed to the training and education of future lawyers, serving as an adjunct professor of law at Yale, UC Berkeley, Stanford, and UC Hastings. Those of us who know Jim know that he is an inspiring and vibrant man who has always been generous with both his time and his energy on behalf of so many worthy causes. As an avid nature lover and outdoorsman passionate about backpacking, skiing, and the annual bicycle trips across Europe that he continued to take well into his eighties, Jim was an early supporter of the Natural Resources Defense Council, for which he served as a trustee for nearly 20 years. My family is lucky to have known Jim for many years, and I have always admired his boundless passion and tireless zest for living life to its fullest. As Jim celebrates his 90th birthday, I am honored to join Louise, their children and five grandchildren, and Jim's many friends and admirers in offering my very best wishes on this wonderful milestone and many more years of continued happiness.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I am so proud to join Senator Murray, who organized several of the women here, to speak out in favor of the minimum wage increase for the workers of America. My colleagues have said it well, but it bears repeating: No one in America--male or female--should have to live in poverty after putting in a full day's work. Yet that is the case today. We should give hard-working Americans a fair shot to get ahead so they can raise their families. Everyone deserves that fair shot, and that is why Democrats have a fair-shot agenda. Right now we don't seem to have many Republicans joining us in our desire to raise the minimum wage so that it gets people above the poverty line when they work full time. I would argue that anyone who votes against that level of pay--which is about $10.10 an hour to get a worker right above poverty--simply wants to keep people in poverty, and that is not the American way. Right now a mom who is working full time and makes minimum wage earns just $290 a week. That is just $15,000 a year, which is below the poverty rate for a single mom. No mom or dad should come home from a full day's work and have to worry about whether they can feed their children or whether they can afford a roof over the heads of their kids. I see Senator Warren is here, and she has brought such attention and focus to the unfairness in the number I am about to say. There are 400 families in America that control as much wealth as 150 million Americans. To hear people in this Chamber--who do just fine supporting their families--oppose the minimum wage is absolutely, in my view, a morally wrong position. They have their right to it, but I think it is morally wrong. The minimum wage is a two-thirds problem for women. Let's be clear. Almost two-thirds of workers earning minimum wage or less are women, two-thirds of tipped minimum wage workers are women, and in two-thirds of American families, women are the breadwinners or co-breadwinners. We have a two-thirds problem. Women are overrepresented in low-wage jobs, and that is why I am so proud that next week Senator Mikulski is going to lead us toward equal pay for equal work. It is a wonderful bill. I think it is called the Paycheck Fairness Act. When we lift the salaries of these workers, it helps entire families. Senator Harkin's bill, which we are all supporting, will benefit 14 million children. We have to do it for workers like Wendy Arellano, who works directing vehicles at an airport and has two other jobs, but she still doesn't make enough to support her two daughters. We should do it for women like Shareeka Elliot, who works all night as a janitor scrubbing the floors and cleaning the toilets but still doesn't make enough to get her kids above the poverty line. We should do it for women like Nyah Potts, who is working so hard to finish her college degree, but she is struggling to make enough to support herself and her son. I joined Nyah at a press conference last week. In closing, I want to talk for a minute about the tipped minimum wage. This is a disgrace because the tipped minimum wage at the Federal Government is $2.13 an hour. We all know--because it has been studied-- that there are waitresses and there are waiters, and most of the less- expensive restaurants hire women, and they don't get big tips. If there is a storm, and suppose nobody comes into the restaurant that day, they get paid $2.13 an hour. This bill does move us up to 70 percent of minimum wage for tipped workers. Personally, I think there ought to be no difference. In California, we pay our workers--all of them, tipped or not--the full minimum wage. And no one can tell me that California's restaurants are suffering. They are some of the most successful in the country and in the world. So let's be clear. History shows raising the minimum wage doesn't hurt the economy. Now we will hear our colleagues on the Republican side cite the CBO study that said we could lose hundreds of thousands of jobs. That study is an outlier. In 1956, the minimum wage was a buck. I hate to say it, but I remember those days. It was a dollar. And I remember, I worked my first job as a telephone operator for Hilton Hotels, and I earned the minimum wage. Actually, then, because I was a teenager, it was half the minimum wage, so I worked for 50 cents an hour. I was not very good at that job, but I tried hard. But let's say Congress had that attitude then: We are not going to raise the minimum wage because we will lose jobs. The minimum wage would still be a dollar an hour. How ludicrous. Since then--since 1956--we have raised the minimum wage 18 times. Guess what. Did we lose jobs? No. The economy grew by more than 80 million jobs. I know others are waiting to speak. I am so excited to finally get to vote on paycheck fairness and on minimum wage. All we Democrats are saying is, let's give Americans a fair shot. I yield the floor.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, what is the time situation?

Mrs. BOXER. Do I need to ask permission to speak on health care?

Mrs. BOXER. I would so ask.

Mrs. BOXER. Thank you so much, Mr. President. I want to say a big thank you to Senator Murphy because he has been a great leader on this issue. He and I are coming from States where people are signing up and signing up and surpassing the goals. The stories are incredibly heartwarming and wonderful and are being told on the radio and being told on TV. The truth is coming out about the Affordable Care Act. All of the scares aside, we see now it is working. Why is it working? Because there was a very simple premise when we passed this bill 4 years ago; and that was, people deserve a fair shot at affordable health care. That is all it was. They deserve a fair shot at getting affordable health care. They deserve affordable health care. They deserve to be free from discrimination by the insurance companies. So I am so pleased Senator Murphy has taken it upon himself to organize a few of us so we do not allow misinformation and lies to be spread about the Affordable Care Act. What I loved about President Obama's speech yesterday at the Rose Garden was that he is so open about it. He said: Yes, we had a flawed rollout. We lost time. That was bad. And, yes, no bill is perfect. I think it was our colleague Angus King who said it the best. He said: The most perfect document in the world is the Constitution, and it has been amended 27 times. So is any bill perfect? Is any document perfect? Of course not. But I am here to say, given the facts--not the made-up stuff--given the facts, I am so proud I was able to vote for the Affordable Care Act. I am so proud of that. And I am sad that not one Republican joined us in that vote--not one of them, not one of them. When you go back to 4 years ago, we saw that millions of our citizens were uninsured because they could not afford insurance; or they were uninsured because their insurance company walked out on them when they were sick; or there were annual limits on their plans, and they simply went over that annual limit and they went broke and they could not afford insurance. Some had lifetime caps. And it sounded like a lot: Oh, you have a cap of a quarter of a million dollars. But then when you get cancer, that cap is reached a heck of a lot faster than you thought. So we had kids kicked off their parents' health insurance at 18, 19 years old. We had people with asthma, diabetes, cancer who could not get insurance until the Affordable Care Act passed. Being a woman was considered a preexisting condition. If you were a victim of domestic violence, forget it. The insurance company wanted no part of your risk. So Democrats took action--took action. All the Republicans can do is come down here and say: Oh, here is one constituent's story. For every one constituent's story that they tell, No. 1, doublecheck the facts because sometimes we look at the facts and they are not exactly what they say. But I can give 100 stories to their 1 of people finally getting health care. By the way, we can fix this law any day of the week with the help of the Republicans if they have an issue they think needs to be addressed. But their answer is: repeal, repeal, repeal. Why would they want to repeal a law that is helping, I will tell you, over 100 million Americans, not 7 million--7 million who are on the exchange--but I will show you more than 100 million of our people are getting preventive care, free cancer screenings, immunizations, contraception. It has made a big difference in their lives. It is making a big difference that kids can stay on their parents' policies. Why do they want to repeal a law that does that, that gives us a patients' bill of rights, so insurance companies cannot look at you when you are sick, in your darkest moment and say: Senator or friend or Mr. Jones or Mrs. Smith, I am so sorry to tell you that you are not getting any more coverage because we just learned you had diabetes. You did not tell us. You did not mention it. You are out. I do not know why Republicans want to take that away from people, but then again history is repeating itself. I tell my friends--I have so many friends on the other side of the aisle. We just see the world differently. When we go back to Medicare, you should see what the Republicans said in this Senate about Medicare: Socialism, let it wither on the vine. Bob Dole was here. He was so proud he voted against it. He led the charge. ``It is terrible.'' Now you have tea party members come with signs to rallies that say, ``Don't touch my Medicare.'' They love their Medicare. They do not understand it is a government program, Medicare. The government is the insurer. Of course, Paul Ryan wants to end it in his budget. So I guess nothing changes; it all stays the same. They hated Medicare. They still hate it. They wanted it to wither on the vine. They totally destroy it in Ryan's budget. Social Security. You should see what they said about Social Security. It was an abomination. That is what they said. So nothing changes. We have different people in different clothes. I look a little different than the Democrats in the old days. There were no women here for starters. My colleague is very handsome. He had some predecessors that looked good, but they all say the same thing: Government should not be involved in any of this. It will all be great. You know what. I wish they were right. I wish they were right. My husband developed a small business. He managed to pay health care for his people. He was proud to do it. But you know not every business is fair and just and right. So, yes, once in a while we have to say let's all work together to make sure people are covered. When I was a little kid, my mother used to tell me all the time: Without your health care, you have nothing. If you are sick, you got nothing. I used to say: Oh, God, I am so tired of hearing that. I remember she used to say: You see that beautiful actress over there? She has everything, but she got sick so she has nothing. Your health is everything, she told me. You have to protect your health. She was right. How do you protect your health and the health of your family? By getting preventive care so you can catch something early. If you do not have insurance, you do not get that preventive care. You are in trouble. If something happens and you are in an automobile accident and you thought you were an invincible young person and nothing would happen to you and suddenly you find yourself with broken bones and everything else, including a broken heart, and you have no health insurance, you can go bankrupt. People did, because it was so hard to get affordable insurance before the Affordable Care Act. So what you are hearing and will continue to hear are scare tactics, stories. I am here to tell you--and I want to say it very clearly-- about the millions and millions of Americans who understand that the Affordable Care Act is working for them. Yesterday was a historic day. They said: Never would you get 7 million people to sign up for private insurance on the exchanges-- never. It happened. Why? Because this is a product people need, health insurance that is affordable. But that number is the tip of the iceberg. I will prove it. Medicaid; that is, insurance for the poorest working people. We expanded it. We let more people qualify: 4.5 million Americans previously uninsured now have coverage through Medicaid. So let's do the math. There are 7 million on the exchanges--7.1; 4.5 million on Medicaid who did not have it before; 3 million young adults are able to stay on their parents' plan who were not able to do that before. How about this? Eight million senior citizens who have saved billions of dollars because of the fix in the Affordable Care Act that says they get more help paying for their prescriptions. That adds up to, drum roll, 22.6 million Americans with those very important benefits, but then here is the other thing. One hundred million Americans are now getting help with preventive services that they used to have to pay for: immunizations, mammograms, vaccines, annual exams, and other lifesaving preventive care. We are talking about millions and millions. Even with private health care now, you can have no annual limit, no lifetime limit. They cannot be turned away for preexisting conditions. Your insurance company cannot break out on them just when they are needing them. So that is almost everyone in the country who is benefiting from the law. Let me tell you about California. We are the biggest State in the Union, 38 million strong. Covered California is the way we set up our exchange. It is coveredCA.com. Peter Lee is the head of that. I wish to thank Peter Lee today--he does not know I am doing this--for his extraordinary leadership. Here is what happened. We exceeded our State's goal for enrollment through Covered California by not 100,000 people, not 200,000 people, not 300,000 or 400,000, but by 500,000 people we exceeded our goal. That is bigger than some States. Can you believe it? Half a million people, more than we expected. I am sure Senator Thune is shocked by this. This is a fact. We expected to have 700,000 sign up. Instead we had 1.2 million. That does not even include all of those who signed up on Monday or who were still in the process of completing enrollment. We are going to hear a lot of stories about families who are paying what they think is too much--and I want to work with everybody to make this law better, believe me--but listen to a couple of my constituents. Julie Mims from Sacramento said: We no longer have to worry about being ruined physically and financially by a serious health issue. . . . We enrolled in a Bronze 60 plan that will cost us $2 a month. This is a working woman who is getting the help she needs to have a decent--decent--health care policy. Then there is Rebecca Tasker. She runs a small construction business in San Diego with her husband. They are saving $1,000 a month. They are saving $12,000 a year that they can spend on their family. They can spend that in their community boosting this economy. She said, ``These savings will help our company grow and might allow us to be able to hire our first employee this year.'' So here is a small businesswoman who had to spend so much on health care, and now because of the Affordable Care Act she is able to save $1,000 a month and possibly hire her first employee. Have you heard of something called job lock? Before the Affordable Care Act, people said: I do not want to leave my job because I have health care. I am scared to go out on my own. I would not be able to get it. I would not be able to afford it. That is why we set up the exchanges. It is freeing people to move out of a job that maybe they think is a dead-end and start their own business. Here is a woman who is going to be able to hire her first employee with the money she is saving. There are hundreds more stories. I will be coming to talk about those in the coming days and weeks. Stunningly, House Republicans keep bragging about their never-ending efforts to take health care away from millions of Americans. Do you know the House has voted not once, not twice but more than 50 times to repeal the Affordable Care Act. They are doing it again. If they had spent as much energy working with us to make the law better, which the President said he is open to, we are open to, just like we worked with them on Medicare Part D when they carried that. We worked with them to make it better. Can you imagine, we would be standing here talking about even more millions of people. I have to say and this--I know it might be viewed as controversial, but because this law helps women so much with mammography, with vaccines, with birth control, with the end of discrimination based on gender, with an end of discrimination if you have been the victim of violence, with the end of discrimination because you could carry a child and have a pregnancy and want coverage, this Affordable Care Act helps women. So I am going to say this: When you vote 50 times to repeal a law that benefits women, you are voting against women. So you can say all you want to become--and I know Speaker Boehner said: I want to become more sensitive to women. I have an idea: Stop trying to take away health care from women and their families and then you will see women feel much better about you. Women are smart. They know who is on their side. They know who wants to give them a fair shot. But it is not people who want to take away their health care. That is what you say day in and day out. Remember, under the Affordable Care Act, many women were denied health insurance because of preexisting illnesses such as breast cancer, depression or, again, even being a victim of domestic violence. They were charged more than men. Let us be clear. Now we are guaranteed access to free preventive care and maternity care. Women are now paying zero dollars for a checkup--zero. This is it. Zero dollars to get a test to check for cervical cancer, zero dollars for a mammogram, zero dollars for FDA-approved contraception. Why do the Republicans want to repeal this law and take away mammograms, take away tests for cervical cancer, and take away checkups and FDA-approved contraception? Why? At the same time, they say they do not understand why women do not gravitate to their party. I have to say, we should be celebrating this law--yes, fixing it where it needs to be fixed. But I think if Republicans would join with us and say let's work together to make this a better plan--if you have someone who cannot find their doctor in their plan, let's try to work together to fix it. If you have someone who you think deserves a subsidy, let's work together and try to fix it. But let's remember, folks, I just pointed out the millions of people who are benefiting. House Speaker Boehner called the Affordable Care Act a ``rolling calamity.'' House Majority Whip McCarthy said the enrollment numbers would be ``staggeringly low.'' Several GOP Members tweeted excitedly about how enrollments in their States wouldn't even fill a football stadium to capacity, and former Gov. Mike Huckabee said: ``You've got more people wanting to go moose hunting in New Hampshire than want Obamacare.'' Wrong. Really wrong--really, really wrong. It is time for Republicans to look at the facts. It is time for the GOP to accept the reality that this law is helping millions of people: seniors, women, men, students, children--all Americans. It is time to recognize that one of the biggest problems facing our country before the Affordable Care Act was a lack of affordable insurance and millions of people are gaining the benefits. So we are not going to go back to the days when our people were denied health care, where an insurance company would walk out on you, where you brought in a child with asthma when they were wheezing and the insurance company said: Get out. We can't insure that child. I have seen the tears before the ACA when people were forced into bankruptcy because they had no insurance, and I have seen the tears of joy since the ACA. So we will listen to our colleagues tell their tale of horrors, and that is fine. They have every right. I respect them. But remember, as we hear these stories, go back and make sure that is exactly what you thought you heard and then ask them what is their plan. How do they want to help women and their families and their children? So far, we haven't heard much. All we have heard about is repeal, repeal, repeal. That is not a policy. Repealing the Affordable Care Act will hurt Americans and not just a few but many millions. I yield the floor.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the life of Stanley Grinstein, a successful businessman, a patron of the arts, a philanthropist, and a social activist. He was also a great friend of mine, and I will miss him dearly. Born in Seattle in 1927, Stanley moved to Los Angeles with his family and graduated from the University of Southern California. He and his father started what would become a thriving forklift business that Stanley ran until he sold the company in 2000. In 1952, Stanley married Elyse, the love of his life. The couple began collecting art and soon became well-known patrons of modern artists. In January 1966, Stanley joined fellow art patrons Sidney Felsen and Ken Tyler to establish Gemini G.E.L., an artists' workshop and art print publisher. The first facility of its kind on the West Coast, Gemini quickly became a magnet not only for emerging Los Angeles artists but also for leading New York artists. Among the many artists who worked and published at Gemini were Robert Rauschenberg, Jasper Johns, Roy Lichtenstein, David Hockney, and Frank Stella. In 1981, Gemini donated its archives--containing works by these and other modern masters--to the National Gallery of Art. By this time, Stanley had begun his 26-year tenure as a trustee of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, LACMA. Over the years, he and Elyse made many major gifts to LACMA, including a seminal work by Marcel Duchamp and all 124 of Robert Rauschenberg's posters. Beyond the art world, Stanley was a deeply committed social activist who generously gave his time and resources in support of human rights, free speech, justice, and equality. Stanley was also a longtime benefactor of the Cedars Sinai Medical Center, where he served on the Board of Directors, Executive Committee, and Advisory Council for the Arts. A passionate believer in the role that art can play in the healing process, Stanley helped fill Cedars Sinai with art and brought joy to countless patients. Stanley Grinstein believed in living every moment to the fullest and inspiring others to enjoy what he called ``the party of life.'' I send my deepest condolences to Stanley's beloved wife Elyse; their daughters Ayn Grinstein, Ellen Grinstein Perliter, and Nancy Grinstein; sons-in-law Chuck Perliter and Neal Rabin; and six grandchildren Amanda, Joe, Alex, Willie, Tess, and Dia. I know they will truly miss this marvelous man, as will I.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I am pleased to pay tribute to my good friend Gloria Molina, who is serving her 24th and final year on the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. Gloria is a trailblazer who has inspired countless young women to pursue public service, and she is retiring from office at the end of this year after more than three decades of extraordinary service on behalf of the people of California. Gloria Molina was raised in Pico Rivera, the eldest of ten children born to a Mexican mother and Mexican-American father. A graduate of El Rancho High School, she worked full time as a legal secretary while attending college and becoming certified as an adult education instructor, teaching clerical skills to adults at the East Los Angeles Skills Center. Gloria entered government service as a staff member, first for Assemblymember Art Torres and later for Assembly Speaker Willie Brown. In 1982, after serving in the Carter White House and with the San Francisco Department of Health and Human Services, she made history as the first Latina ever elected to the California State Assembly. Gloria was elected to the Los Angeles City Council in 1987 and the County Board of Supervisors in 1991, making headlines each time for becoming the first Latina to serve in those positions. Since 1991, Supervisor Molina has represented nearly 2 million residents in the First District of our Nation's largest county, where she has focused on making services more effective and on completing major capital projects that improve the quality of life for residents of her district and the entire county. Among the initiatives she championed are the Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension, a six-mile light rail line connecting East L.A. to downtown and the rest of the county's mass transit network; the state-of-the-art LAC-USC Medical Center in Boyle Heights; the Plaza de Cultura y Artes at El Pueblo Historic Monument, a museum dedicated to showcasing and preserving the history of Mexicans and Mexican-Americans in Los Angeles; the Los Angeles River and San Gabriel River Master Plans, both of which serve as blueprints for ``greening'' local rivers and their tributaries; and the construction of more than 1,100 new affordable housing units in the First District. I have known Gloria for many years, and I am honored to salute her as she prepares to retire from elective office. I am pleased to join Gloria's many friends, family members, associates, admirers, and grateful constituents in wishing her health, happiness, and all the best as she embarks on the next phase of her life.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, the Senate is not in order. No one can hear.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. I thank Senator Stabenow not only for her statement, but she has talked a lot about people she meets in her State and they say to her: Senator, all we want is a fair shot. Before Senator Stabenow leaves the floor I wanted to say I hear the same thing at home as well. When it comes to insurance all people want is a fair shot at affordable insurance. That is why we are here today. We are here to celebrate the fourth anniversary of the Affordable Care Act. I say for the record, we have millions of reasons in California to say thank you for the Affordable Care Act, and I will go through some of the numbers. We have exceeded our goals. We have now signed up 1 million, and that is 300,000 over our goal. We now know President Obama has extended the signup period for those who are signing up on the national exchange. We are not sure yet whether California is going to extend its time. Anyone within the sound of my voice--those in California--need to know that we have not yet extended the time, so join the millions of Californians who have signed up through the exchanges. Let's be clear: This is a real partisan battle. The House Republicans have been bragging about the 54 times they voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act, but I have to tell them before they vote again to tear this law down and vilify this law for the 55th time: Pay attention to the people in my State and all over the country. I will go through the math of what is happening here. In addition to the 1 million people in California who have signed up on the exchange, we have 400,000 young adults who are staying on their parents' insurance policies and 1.8 million people on Medicaid. When I say we have more than a million reasons to say thank you for this law, we really do. I have some other numbers to add to this. Eight million Californians now have access to free preventive care, including mammograms, birth control, and immunizations; 16 million Californians with preexisting conditions, such as asthma, cancer, and diabetes are guaranteed coverage--including 2.2 million children. California seniors and people with disabilities are saving money on prescription drugs--350,000, thanks to the work we did to close that doughnut hole, and 12 million Californians have new insurance protections and no longer have to worry about hitting annual limits on their health care. I say to the Republicans: Wake up and see what is happening in your communities. Don't take my word for it. Listen to some of my Californians: Just got my Obamacare Covered CA insurance plan. I'm ecstatic. Saving $400 a month. Another Californian said: ``Loving my new health coverage, way to go California.'' Another person wrote: Just paid my first premium for Covered CA healthcare. A 42% reduction for a nearly identical plan. Bobby Dutta from Sacramento writes: I was being crushed by the heavy burden of health insurance premium costs. I had a PPO plan with Anthem Blue Cross and was paying $1,324 per month for a family of two. Now, for a comparable plan through ACA, my premiums are $61 per month. Earth to Republicans: People are saving so much money because of the Affordable Care Act. They are getting peace of mind. Why would Republicans want to repeal a law that is helping so many people in California and across the country? I have never seen a law so vilified. Today I went back to the Congressional Record--and I want to share this with Senator Murphy, who has organized this today. I thought this was the only law Republicans vilified, but I went back to take a look at when Social Security was debated and passed. In 1935, on the floor of the House during the debate on Social Security, a Republican Congressman from Ohio said: This is compulsion of the rankest kind. That was how he talked about Social Security. He called it rank. Do not be misled by the title. The title says ``Old Age Benefits.'' Shame on you for putting such a misleading and unfair title on such a nefarious bill. Old-age benefits? Think of it! What a travesty! . . . Another Republican Congressman from Pennsylvania said: . . . security for the individual, whether worker or aged, will be a mockery and a sham if . . . [we] allot to our people the role of puppets of a socialistic state . . . Doesn't this sound familiar? If you do anything for people, Republicans will call you a socialist. They call Social Security socialist. He says: We cannot provide a sense of security by programs for the destruction of wealth . . . That is how he described Social Security. Listen, people pay into Social Security. It is an insurance plan. People pay premiums for their health care. I have to say it: The Republicans are vilifying the Affordable Care Act just as they vilified Social Security and they vilified Medicare. Let's look at what Republicans said about Medicare. In 1965 a Representative from Missouri said: . . . we cannot stand idly by now, as the Nation is urged to embark on an ill-conceived adventure in government medicine, the end of which no one can see, and from which the patient is certain to be the ultimate sufferer. I say to my colleagues: This is unbelievable. In 1965, the Republicans said that government medicine, which they called Medicare, even though you have a private doctor, would lead to patients suffering. If you ask patients who have Medicare now if they like it, they love it. Even the rightwing tea partiers who came to Washington had signs that said: ``Hands off my Medicare.'' The Republicans vilified Medicare. How about another one? A Republican from Wyoming had this to say about Medicare: I am disturbed about the effect this legislation would have upon our economy and upon our private insurance system . . . In 1995, Dick Armey, the Republican House majority leader, said that Medicare is ``a program I would have no part of in a free world.'' I want people to understand that when the Republicans vilify the Affordable Care Act, they are doing exactly what they did on Social Security and Medicare. They were on the wrong side of history then and they are on the wrong side of history now. And, of course, Newt Gingrich said Medicare was ``going to wither on the vine.'' Well, it would, if Republicans controlled this place. Senate Majority Leader Dole said in 1996, ``I was there, fighting the fight, voting against Medicare . . . because we knew it wouldn't work in 1965.'' Folks, there is a big difference between the parties. When you see the Republicans start to vote again to repeal the Affordable Care Act, that is what they wanted to do to Social Security and that is what they wanted to do to Medicare. We stopped them then, and we will stop them now. All they want to do is repeal all of these great benefits that are helping millions of people, and I say to them: Enough already. Enough. Work with us. Let's make sure everyone in America has that sense of security that they can handle whatever health impacts hit their families. I thank my colleague from Connecticut.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the memory of two dedicated public servants, California Highway Patrol officers Juan Gonzalez and Brian Law. Officer Gonzalez and Officer Law were tragically killed in the line of duty while responding to an automobile accident in Kingsburg, CA. A graduate of Tulare Union High School and California State University, Fresno, Juan Gonzalez joined the California Highway Patrol in 2008, the culmination of years of hard work and the realization of a goal that he had held since he was 5 years old. He worked for 2 years in San Jose before transferring to the Fresno area in 2010. A Marine and Air Force reservist, Brian Law also graduated from the California Highway Patrol Academy in 2008 and worked in Alameda County for the CHP for 5 years before transferring to Fresno last year. Officer Gonzalez and Officer Law first met as cadets at the California Highway Patrol Academy, where they became good friends. In 2013, they teamed up as partners in the CHP's Fresno office. Those who knew Officer Gonzalez fondly remember him as a trusted colleague and friend who was committed to his career and family. His determined spirit, unique laugh, and camaraderie will be missed. Officer Law was an avid sports fan with an engaging personality whose willingness to help others and passion for law enforcement helped him to become a respected member of the California Highway Patrol. Above all else, Brian is remembered as a devoted family man. Officers Gonzalez and Law dutifully served the people of California with honor and valor. Their service and dedication epitomize the best ideals of law enforcement, and I send my heartfelt sympathies to their families, friends and colleagues--especially Maria, Officer Gonzalez's mother, and his sister Sandra; and Rebecca, Officer Law's wife; his stepdaughter Lauren; son Brandon; daughter Samantha; father Denis Law; mother Judy Doty; and sister Carol Law-Stetson. They will be sorely missed.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to Sergeant Tom Smith, a 23-year veteran of the Bay Area Rapid Transit, BART, Police Department, who was an exceptional law enforcement officer, a devoted and loyal friend, and most of all a dedicated family man. Sergeant Smith was tragically struck down on January 21, 2014, becoming the first police officer in BART's 42-year history to be killed in the line of duty. Tom Smith was born and raised in the San Francisco Bay Area, the youngest of three brothers who all became police officers and the first to pursue a career in law enforcement. Joining the BART police at age 19 as a cadet, he rose through the ranks, serving as a field training officer and a K-9 handler before becoming a detective and eventually reaching the rank of Sergeant, where he led BART's detective unit. Colleagues remember Sergeant Smith as an experienced and respected leader who was passionate about his work. It was through his job that he met the love of his life, Kellie, a BART police officer with the K-9 unit. Married in 2001, Sergeant Smith and his wife have a beautiful 6- year-old daughter, Summer. His friends remember him as a devoted husband, father, and brother. When he was not on duty he spent as much time as he could with Kellie and Summer, his brothers Patrick, a Newark police officer, and Edward, an Alameda County sheriff's deputy, and his brother-in-law Todd, a Hayward police officer. Tom Smith dedicated his life to his family, his community, and his country. His dedicated and courageous service will not be forgotten. On behalf of the people of California, whom he served so bravely, I extend my gratitude and deepest sympathies to his family, friends, and colleagues.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, I was unable to attend the roll call vote on passage of H.R. 3370, the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act of 2014. Had I been present for this vote, I would have voted yea.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, would the Senator yield 2 minutes? I thank the Senator from Iowa for his generosity spirit, and I rise in strong support of the bill. Since 1990 this important block grant has helped States provide vouchers to our low-income families to help them afford quality childcare programs. We all know how important that is. With over 70 percent of moms in today's workforce, it certainly is a critical issue for our children and their families and for our economy. I have been involved in this issue both when I was a young mom and now as an older grandmother. Childcare can be very expensive. The average low-income family spends over 32 percent of their income on childcare every month and about the same for their rent. They don't have much left over. It is very difficult. In California we have almost 6 million children whose parents are working, and in our State we were able to help over 100,000 children through this very important program. I commend the sponsors of this bill, the HELP Committee, for the great work they have done. I have a couple of amendments, and I will finish in just a moment. Senator Burr and I have proposed amendment No. 2809, which simply ensures that all childcare programs on Federal facilities, such as military bases, conduct the same comprehensive background checks the bill already requires of childcare providers on State land. So it is like a little bit of an oversight that was left out. So we make sure if there is a childcare center on Federal lands--and, by the way, there are many--it is taken care of. Unfortunately, we have had experiences of all kinds of assaults on Federal lands, and I don't need to go into that. Amendment No. 2810 would help more parents afford quality childcare by increasing the child and dependent care tax credit from $3,000 to $6,000 per child, and making it refundable. I do hope we all support the underlying bill, and I thank the Senator from Iowa for his generosity.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, we know all Senators care deeply about their constituents and their families. If any one of us saw danger looming, we would do everything in our power to save them. Yet in the face of irrefutable scientific agreement, the Senate does nothing to make sure polluters pay for the carbon they emit, which would move us toward a clean energy economy and away from catastrophic climate change. Yes, there is money, big money, behind the polluters. Yes, those polluters are raging against us with layers of lies. Yet and still the environment which used to be a bipartisan issue has turned truly bitterly partisan, but we cannot and we must not and we will not give in because it is our job. We must preserve our environment for our people, which is pretty basic. The deniers have given in to the power of wishful thinking, just as those defending cigarette addiction did. To those who would say let China lead, I say this is shameful. In China 1.2 million people died in 2010 from air pollution. That is a fact, not a fantasy. America doesn't sit around and wait for someone else to protect the health and safety and the quality of life of our people. It is wrong. So I am so proud tonight to stand with my resolute colleagues as we fight back against those polluters who would put their self-interests ahead of the salmon we have sworn to protect. Thank you.

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, it was with great interest that I listened to my friend. I suppose we are making progress. He used to call climate change a hoax, and he did not say that. So maybe he is moving in our direction. But I also want to point out, he says we are going to be talking to ourselves. I am happy to report that I just learned of two petitions, one that has 65,000 signatures calling on us to act and another that has 30,000 signatures calling on us to act, and the night is young. Now, my friend from Oklahoma----

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, if the time is taken off their time, I am happy to yield.

Mrs. BOXER. That is wonderful. I am so happy you did not use hoaxes, and maybe there is a way for us to come closer together on this issue. But let my say this: People are listening. People care. Because when 97 to 98 percent of the scientists say something is real, they do not have anything pressing them to say that other than the truth. They do not have any other agenda. They do not work for the oil companies. I will tell you, as chairman of the environment committee, every time the Republicans choose a so-called expert on climate, we have tracked them to special interest funding, those 3 percent. They know where their bread is buttered. I am sorry my friend left. I guess he could not stand to hear the truth. So I will put that truth into the Record. I do not know how my Republican colleagues can continue to deny that climate change is happening. One would think they could see it out their window, because as my colleague says: Oh, there was such cold weather. That has been predicted by the scientists, extreme weather. Here is the U.S. Global Change Research Program, their National Climate Assessment draft: Some extreme weather and climate events have increased in recent decades. We have seen heavy downpours, more severe droughts, and some extremes. At the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works climate change briefing, Dr. Marshall Shepherd, president of the American Meteorological Society, and a director of the Atmospheric Sciences Program at the University of Georgia, said: Climate change is increasing the probability of extreme events, and in some cases maybe strengthening their intensity or increasing their frequency. We are loading the dice towards more Sandy or blizzard-type storms. So when my friend says: The planet is not warming; it is cold, we all know it is not about the weather. It is about the climate. It is about the long term--and, yes, we are going to see these extreme weather conditions. I would say that when my friends call us alarmists, that is ridiculous. We are trying to do our job. We are not scientists. We are not doctors either, for the most part, but we want to make sure people have health care coverage. We are not scientists, but we want to protect our people from the ravages of climate. I would ask my colleague Senator Schatz would he like me to go another 5 minutes, 10 minutes or 2 minutes? It is up to him. I can withhold. I am going to be here for quite a few hours.

Mrs. BOXER. Absolutely. Will the Presiding Officer tell me when I have used 3 minutes and then I will yield the floor at that time.

Mrs. BOXER. We just heard 45 minutes from my friend Jim Inhofe, whom I have a very friendly relationship with but who I think is a dangerous denier, a dangerous denier in the face of 97 percent agreement among scientists. He talks about international groups. I wish to talk about the National Academy of Sciences. Here is what they said: ``Levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses in earth's atmosphere are exceeding levels recorded in the past millions of years.'' That is our own National Academy of Sciences. I guess if we went out and asked the public do they support the National Academy of Sciences, I think it would come in at 90 percent, and the other 10 percent would say, I will get back to you. Then we have more from the National Academy: Climate change is occurring. It is very likely caused primarily by the emission of greenhouse gasses from human activity. They go on: Human activities have increased greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, is emitted by human activities and it has risen almost 40 percent over the past 150 years. So when you hear my colleagues on the other side of the aisle stand and deny this, how about the U.S. National Climate Assessment? This is the United States of America, our experts: Global sea level has risen by about 8 inches since reliable recordkeeping began. It is projected to rise another 1 to 4 feet by 2100. That is dangerous. We have already seen it happening. I could go on, and I will come back, but I will conclude with this. I am, in my concluding remarks, going to tell you about every incredibly prestigious scientific group that has warned us about climate change: The joint world science academies' statement, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Chemical Society, the American Geophysical Union, the American Institute of Biological Scientists, the American Society of Plant Biologists, the Association of Ecosystem Research Centers, the Botanical Society of America, the Crop Science Society of America, the Natural Science Collections Alliance, the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, the Soil Science Society of America, the American Medical Association, the American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union----

Mrs. BOXER. I ask unanimous consent for 30 additional seconds.