Barbara Boxer

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, I thank the Republican leader. It just stuns me when the Republican leader comes to the floor and has his ``blame Obama'' moment every day that he can. I thought this one was over the top. It is as if President Obama came in and everything was great and suddenly things are not going well. Excuse me, I was here. I know. I remember when we had surpluses under Bill Clinton and the Democrats, and the Republicans turned it into deficits as far as the eye could see. I cannot forget that because I remember a time when there was discussion about whether we were even going to have U.S. Treasurys anymore because we were not going to have debt anymore when Bill Clinton was President, and the Democrats set us on that right course. We had a balance between investments in our people and fair taxes so that the top 1 percent paid a fair share, and everybody did well. Madam President, 23 million new jobs were created with Bill Clinton. Then George W. comes in. Two wars go on the credit card, tax breaks to the wealthiest few--the millionaires and billionaires--on the credit card, and suddenly we have a crisis: No regulation of these sophisticated securities. My friend in the chair, the Acting President pro tempore, knows well what happened: no oversight, derivatives, new kinds of securities, taking a beautiful home ownership ethic we had in this country and gambling on it. What happened? The worst crisis since the Great Depression. Who comes into office? President Obama takes the oath. The unbelievable crisis he inherited and the unbelievable debt he inherited and the unbelievable budget deficit he inherited was just unbelievable. An auto industry was going to be gone. My friend Senator McConnell has a right to his opinion, and I respect it so much except he avoids telling the facts about how we got where we are. The American people do not suffer from amnesia. They understand this. They saw this President, this young President come in, faced with jobs bleeding 800,000 a month. Yes, he turned it around. Yes, he did, in fact, promote a rescue of the auto industry. We would have been the only great economy that did not have one if it was not for his courage. Yes, a couple of courageous votes on the Republican side joining with Democrats--that was a good moment. Yes, as Mitt Romney said: Oh yeah, they could have gone busto, bankrupt. We did not feel that way here. The President did not feel that way. So all of this Obama bashing on the floor of the Senate is going to continue because Senator McConnell is a very straightforward person, and he said--and I quote not the exact words, the sentiment, close to the exact words: Defeating President Obama is the highest priority of the Republicans. We are seeing that play out on this floor. I pledged that I would come here when I could to straighten out the record. So let's be clear. This President took over in the worst of times since the Great Depression. There have been millions of jobs created-- not enough. I will say this: If this economy sputters, this economic recovery we are in sputters, and has a hard time because of the depth of the crisis originally--the fact that the housing crisis still continues, the fact that there are problems in the global marketplace in Europe, and all of these factors--I want to say this: I want the person in the Oval Office to be a person who understands what is happening, and that is President Obama, who relates to working people, who relates to the middle class, who is not building an elevator for his cars in San Diego. That is how I feel. Every time there is an attack on this President, I am going to come down here and tell the truth to the American people. I yield the floor.

Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, what is the speaker situation? Do I have some time now to respond to the Republican leader?

Mrs. BOXER. OK. I would ask if I could have 2 minutes just to respond to my friend.

Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, I ask that I be allowed to speak on the Democratic side's time for up to 5 minutes.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to 27 servicemembers from California or based in California who have died while serving our country in Operation Enduring Freedom since March 1, 2012. This brings to 351 the number of servicemembers either from California or based in California who have been killed while serving our country in Afghanistan. This represents 18 percent of all U.S. deaths in Afghanistan. Cpl Conner T. Lowry, 24, of Chicago, IL, died March 1 while conducting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Corporal Lowry was assigned to 2nd Battalion, 11th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA. SPC Edward J. Acosta, 21, of Hesperia, CA, died March 5 in La Jolla, CA, of injuries sustained December 3, 2011, when his vehicle was struck by an improvised explosive device in Wardak province, Afghanistan. Specialist Acosta was assigned to 2nd Battalion, 5th Infantry Regiment, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Armored Division, Fort Bliss, TX. CPT Francis D. Imlay, 31, of Vacaville, CA, died March 28 from injuries received in an accident involving an F 15 aircraft near a base in Southwest Asia. Captain Imlay was assigned to the 391st Fighter Squadron, Mountain Home Air Force Base, ID. Cpl Michael J. Palacio, 23, of Lake Elsinore, CA, died March 29 while conducting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Corporal Palacio was assigned to Headquarters Battalion, 3rd Marine Division, III Marine Expeditionary Force, Okinawa, Japan. Cpl Roberto Cazarez, 24, of Harbor City, CA, died March 30 while conducting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Corporal Cazarez was assigned to the 1st Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA. Cpl Alex Martinez, 21, of Elgin, IL, died April 5 while conducting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Corporal Martinez was assigned to the 1st Combat Engineer Battalion, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA. CN Trevor J. Stanley, 22, of Virginia Beach, VA, died April 7 while deployed to Camp Lemonnier, Djibouti. Constructionman Stanley, a Seabee, was assigned to Naval Mobile Construction Battalion 3, homeported in Port Hueneme, CA. LCpl Ramon T. Kaipat, 22, of Tacoma, WA, died April 11 while conducting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Lance Corporal Kaipat was assigned to 1st Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA. CW2 Nicholas S. Johnson, 27, of San Diego, CA, died April 19 in Helmand province, Afghanistan, when his Black Hawk (UH 60) crashed. Chief Warrant Officer Johnson was assigned to the 2nd Battalion, 25th Aviation Regiment, 25th Infantry Division, Wheeler Army Airfield, HI. SSgt Joseph H. Fankhauser, 30, of Mason, TX, died April 22 while conducting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Staff Sergeant Fankhauser was assigned to 7th Engineer Support Battalion, 1st Marine Logistics Group, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA. SPC Manuel J. Vasquez, 22, of West Sacramento, CA, died April 24 in Paktika province, Afghanistan. Specialist Vasquez was assigned to the 2nd Battalion, 28th Infantry Regiment, 172nd Infantry Brigade, Grafenwoehr, Germany. SGT Moises J. Gonzalez, 29, of Huntington Beach, CA, died April 25 in Balkh province, Afghanistan, of injuries sustained when his vehicle rolled over. Sergeant Gonzalez was assigned to the 509th Combat Service Support Company, 504th Battlefield Surveillance Brigade, Fort Hood, TX. SSG Andrew T. Britton-Mihalo, 25, of Simi Valley, CA, died April 25 in Kandahar province, Afghanistan, of injuries sustained from small arms fire. Staff Sergeant Britton-Mihalo was assigned to the 2nd Battalion, 7th Special Forces Group, Eglin Air Force Base, FL. LT Christopher E. Mosko, 28, of Pittsford, NY, died April 26 while conducting combat operations in Nawa district, Ghazni province, Afghanistan. Lieutenant Mosko was assigned as a Navy Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Platoon Commander to Combined Joint Special Operations Task Force, Afghanistan. He was stationed at EOD Mobile Unit 3, San Diego, CA. MSgt Scott E. Pruitt, 38, of Gautier, MS, died April 28 while conducting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Master Sergeant Pruitt was assigned to I Marine Expeditionary Force Headquarters Group, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA. PFC Christian R. SanNicolas, 20, of Anaheim, CA, died April 28 in Kandahar province, Afghanistan, of injuries sustained when his vehicle encountered an improvised explosive device. Private First Class SanNicolas was assigned to 1st Battalion, 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 82nd Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC. Sgt John P. Huling, 25, of West Chester, OH, died May 6 while conducting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Sergeant Huling was assigned to 7th Engineer Support Battalion, 1st Marine Logistics Group, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA. SSG Thomas K. Fogarty, 30, of Alameda, CA, died May 6 in Ahmad-Kheyl, Afghanistan, from injuries sustained when enemy forces attacked his unit with an improvised explosive device. Staff Sergeant Fogarty was assigned to the 3rd Battalion (Airborne), 509th Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team (Airborne), 25th Infantry Division, Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, AK. SPC Chase S. Marta, 24, of Chico, CA, died May 7 in Ghazni province, Afghanistan, of wounds suffered when enemy forces attacked his unit with an improvised explosive device. Specialist Marta was assigned to the 3rd Squadron, 73rd Cavalry Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 82nd Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC. Sgt Wade D. Wilson, 22, of Normangee, TX, died May 11 while conducting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Sergeant Wilson was assigned to 2nd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA. SGT Brian L. Walker, 25, of Lucerne Valley, CA, died May 13 in Bowri Tana, Afghanistan, when the enemy attacked his vehicle with an improvised explosive device. Sergeant Walker was assigned to the 425th Brigade Special Troops Battalion, 4th Brigade Combat Team (Airborne), 25th Infantry Division, Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, AK. PO1 Ryan J. Wilson, 26, of Shasta, CA, died of complications associated with a medical condition May 20 in Manama, Bahrain. Petty Officer First Class Wilson was assigned to U.S. Naval Forces Central Command headquarters in Bahrain. 2LT Travis A. Morgado, 25, of San Jose, CA, died May 23 in Zharay, Afghanistan, of injuries sustained when insurgents attacked his patrol with an improvised explosive device. Second Lieutenant Morgado was assigned to the 5th Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment, 3rd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA. Cpl Keaton G. Coffey, 22, of Boring, OR, died May 24 while conducting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Corporal Coffey was assigned to 1st Law Enforcement Battalion, 1st Marine Headquarters Group, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA. SPC Vilmar Galarza Hernandez, 21, of Salinas, CA, died May 26 in Zharay, Kandahar province, Afghanistan, when enemy forces attacked his unit with an improvised explosive device. Specialist Galarza Hernandez was assigned to the 4th Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment, 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA. SPC Tofiga J. Tautolo, 23, of Wilmington, CA, died May 27 in Bati Kot, Nangarhar province, Afghanistan, of wounds sustained when his vehicle was attacked with an enemy improvised explosive device. Specialist Tautolo was assigned to the 3rd Squadron, 61st Cavalry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, Fort Carson, CO. LCpl Joshua E. Witsman, 23, of Covington, IN, died May 30 while supporting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Lance Corporal Witsman was assigned to 2nd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. I thank the Senator.

Mrs. BOXER. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mrs. BOXER. I want to say that I agree with my friend's comments about Senator Stabenow and Senator Roberts. I consider both my friends. They are terrific legislators. The Paycheck Fairness Act I do want to go back to the vote that just occurred. I would note that we had present in the Chamber some of the House Members, women of the House. I think they are gone now. It was to underscore the importance of this vote and what it means. My question goes to this: Is my colleague aware that women in their lifetime are so shortchanged that the average woman, in the course of her career, by the end of her career has made $400,000 less than her male counterpart? Is my friend aware of that?

Mrs. BOXER. I think it is important for people to understand what just occurred. We had a straight party-line vote on an issue that impacts every single woman in this country. I think when people say there is a difference between the parties--I like working with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. I have good relationships with them. But for goodness' sake, how can you have a party that, to a person here, votes against equal pay for equal work? I will close with this question to my friend. It is my understanding that 90 percent of the people support the idea of equal pay for equal work. Is my leader aware of this, and when does he think he might bring this back before the body?

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I thank Senator Mikulski so much not only for yielding to me but for her extraordinary leadership in the Senate on so many issues of fairness and justice for women, for families, for children, and for our seniors. It is really a legendary record that she has amassed, and this is just one more example. I also thank President Obama for his leadership in calling attention to this important legislation, the Paycheck Fairness Act. If you were to stop someone on the street and in the simplest terms say: Do you think it is right to pay people differently for the same job? Do you think that is right--they have the same experience, the same education, the same qualifications--people would say: No, that is not right. Yet that is what has been happening to America's women, even though we have, since the 1960s, a very important law in place that is supposed to guarantee fair pay to everyone, including women. But women earn 77 cents for every $1 earned by a man. When you drill down to those numbers, you find out in a vast number of cases they are doing the same work as the man, making less. Of course, Lilly Ledbetter made a very important point about this and became quite famous with a Supreme Court case where she had been doing the same things as her male counterparts--working in a tire factory, being a manager, being skilled, being strong, and yet underpaid. When she discovered it, trying to seek justice, she was unable to do so. The Senate stepped to the plate, and with Democrats moving forward, we passed the Lilly Ledbetter law, which does take care of the statute of limitations. It allows you to take as long as you have to to get to court to make your case. For Lilly, it was too late, and she never was able to recover what she deserved. So now what Senator Mikulski has done with the Paycheck Fairness Act is to say we are going to go the next step. We are going to make sure that women have justice in the workplace, that women have rights. Why is this important to families--not just to women but to families? It is because over a lifetime of discrimination that so many women face, it is not like here where you are a Senator, you are a Senator, you are a Senator, woman or man, out there it is different. When you are discriminated against over a lifetime and are only getting 77 cents--and some, by the way, only make 56 cents or 62 cents on the dollar--the average wage loss over a working lifetime is over $400,000. If you take a look at what our families could do with $400,000--educate a child, make sure people get the best of medical care, make sure the family has enough so they can all take a break together and have a decent vacation or buy a better car--this is an issue that not only involves women but our families and our economy because, guess what, if that $400,000 during a lifetime was with the family rather than the corporate CEO, who is making millions, you would see the economy stimulated because middle-class families spend those dollars. They do not hoard those dollars. So I am going to close by giving a couple of real-life examples. Mr. President, how much time do I have remaining?

Mrs. BOXER. I am going to tell you some real stories. A woman from California had an identical advanced degree as her husband. They both landed exact jobs but in different parts of the company--different worksites. The husband was offered $5,000 more in starting salary. They were shocked. The same resume. The same qualifications. Then there was the health care worker in Long Island who discovered she had been earning $10 an hour less than her male colleagues. When she brought it up to her superiors, she was reprimanded for even asking about the rationale behind the wage gap. Senator Mikulski's bill says a person cannot be reprimanded or punished because they are trying to find out if they are being paid fairly. That is why we have to pass this law. Anyone voting against it is taking a stand against women, is taking a stand against fairness, is taking a stand against justice, is taking a stand against our families. Then there was a female employee for a major corporation in Florida who was told when she was hired that to disclose her salary to other workers was grounds for dismissal. Since then she realized her male counterparts made more than she did. But she did not have any written proof. Another, a female employee at that company was told because her husband picked her up from work in a nice car that she did not need to get a salary increase. One woman retired after 15 years as an award- winning CEO of a public agency. Her male replacement, who had little experience, was hired at a higher salary. After having a child, a California woman was fired from her job at a nonprofit. Her replacement, a man with less experience, was given 30 percent more in starting salary. We have example after example after example. How the Republican side of the aisle could filibuster this bill is beyond my imagination. I do not know what they are thinking. They will give an excuse. They will come up with some excuse. They will say: Oh, it will hurt jobs. It will hurt this and that. It is all made up. It is all made up. In this great Nation, when we move toward equality, we all prosper together. I urge an ``aye'' vote. I thank Senator Mikulski for this moment to be able to support this important bill. I yield the floor.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I wish to pay tribute to my friend Ernie Yates, the dynamic California labor leader who is retiring next month after 49 years as a member, business agent, and officer of Teamsters Local 665 in San Francisco. Ernie was born in San Francisco in 1946 and attended Mission High School. At age 17, he got a job at Allright Parking and joined Local 665. In 1977, Ernie was appointed as the business agent for Local 665 and his assignments included policing labor agreements and processing grievances in a variety of crafts, including the rent-a-car, parking garage, shuttle bus, and taxicab industries. Three years later, he was elevated to the executive board of Local 665 and became its president. Throughout the next decade, Ernie negotiated Teamster regional, master, and white paper contracts in all of the core automotive industries under the local's jurisdiction. In 1992, with the active support of hundreds of Local 665 members, Ernie was elected secretary-treasurer, the principal officer of the union, a position he has held until his announced retirement in 2012. During his 35 years as an officer and business agent of Local 665, Ernie honed his skills as an expert labor negotiator. In both good and bad economic times, Ernie has used these skills to bring fair and just contract settlements to thousands of workers at Teamster worksites throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. Ernie has been married to his beloved wife Janet for 47 years. Together they have two sons, Michael and Mark; a daughter, Kimberly; 12 grandchildren and 4 great-grandchildren. On June 12, 2012, Teamsters Local 665 will celebrate Ernie's decades of service to the union's membership and the working families of California. I am honored to join them in saluting a great Californian and a great American, Ernie Yates.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I am proud to join my colleague Senator Snowe in once am introducing legislation to improve aviation safety. The Safe Skies Act we are introducing today will close a loophole in the Department of Transportation's recent rule on pilot fatigue, and ensure that pilots of cargo planes are just as well rested and prepared for their important work as the pilots of passenger planes who they share airports and airways with. Following the tragic crash of Flight 3407 in 2009, Senator Snowe and I introduced legislation to address several important aviation safety issues, including the need to update pilot fatigue regulations to reflect new, scientific research. Under the new rule issued by the Department of Transportation, pilots of passenger planes will be limited to flying eight or nine hours, depending on the start time. Minimum rest periods will be 10 hours, with the opportunity for eight hours of uninterrupted sleep. Unfortunately, cargo pilots were left out of the rule--which undermines the one level of safety we are trying to achieve in our airline industry. Current rules regarding cargo flight operations permit cargo pilots to be on duty as many as 16 hours during a 24-hour period, regardless of when they begin their shift. Compared to passenger pilots, cargo pilots are permitted to fly 60 percent more hours--as much as 48 hours in a 6-day period. Keeping cargo pilots out of the improved flight and duty time regulations does not make sense; they too need rest in order to safely perform their jobs. And the safety of our skies depends on all pilots performing well. This legislation directs the Secretary of Transportation to apply the same flight and duty time regulations for pilots of passenger planes to cargo pilots as well. This bill is supported by the Airline Pilots Association, the Independent Pilots Association and the Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations, and has been championed in the House by Representatives Chip Cravaack and Timothy H. Bishop. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this legislation as part of our ongoing efforts to improve the safety of our Nation's aviation system.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I am proud to join my colleague Senator Snowe in once am introducing legislation to improve aviation safety. The Safe Skies Act we are introducing today will close a loophole in the Department of Transportation's recent rule on pilot fatigue, and ensure that pilots of cargo planes are just as well rested and prepared for their important work as the pilots of passenger planes who they share airports and airways with. Following the tragic crash of Flight 3407 in 2009, Senator Snowe and I introduced legislation to address several important aviation safety issues, including the need to update pilot fatigue regulations to reflect new, scientific research. Under the new rule issued by the Department of Transportation, pilots of passenger planes will be limited to flying eight or nine hours, depending on the start time. Minimum rest periods will be 10 hours, with the opportunity for eight hours of uninterrupted sleep. Unfortunately, cargo pilots were left out of the rule--which undermines the one level of safety we are trying to achieve in our airline industry. Current rules regarding cargo flight operations permit cargo pilots to be on duty as many as 16 hours during a 24-hour period, regardless of when they begin their shift. Compared to passenger pilots, cargo pilots are permitted to fly 60 percent more hours--as much as 48 hours in a 6-day period. Keeping cargo pilots out of the improved flight and duty time regulations does not make sense; they too need rest in order to safely perform their jobs. And the safety of our skies depends on all pilots performing well. This legislation directs the Secretary of Transportation to apply the same flight and duty time regulations for pilots of passenger planes to cargo pilots as well. This bill is supported by the Airline Pilots Association, the Independent Pilots Association and the Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations, and has been championed in the House by Representatives Chip Cravaack and Timothy H. Bishop. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this legislation as part of our ongoing efforts to improve the safety of our Nation's aviation system.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, today I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the memory of Dr. Frederick Margolin, my former neighbor in Greenbrae, CA. After a 3-year battle with ALS, Fred passed away peacefully on May 10, 2012, surrounded by his beloved family. Fred Margolin was born in New York in 1936 and raised in Florida. After graduating from the University of Miami Medical School in 1960, he interned at Los Angeles County Hospital and served for 2 years as an Air Force medical officer in Germany, before returning to California, where he lived for the rest of his life. Following his residency at the University of California, San Francisco, Dr. Margolin practiced radiology at California Pacific Medical Center from 1968 to 2007 and served as chairman of the Department of Radiology from 1978 to 1992. He was the founder of the Breast Health Center and served as its medical director from 1984 to 2007. Widely recognized as a national leader in radiology and breast cancer screening, he was honored as a fellow of the American College of Radiology and the Society of Breast Imagining. In 2001, he was selected as one of America's Best Doctors for Breast Care. Throughout his distinguished career, Dr. Margolin worked not only to provide the best possible care to his patients but to extend access to care to poor women and underserved populations. Fred was a devoted family man who adored Myrna, his wife of 54 years. Together they traveled the world, often on cruises with close friends, and each year they took their children and grandchildren to Mexico for a family vacation. Dr. Fred Margolin will be deeply missed by his patients, colleagues, family, and friends. On behalf of the people of California and the patients and communities he served so well, I send my gratitude and condolences to Fred's wife Myrna; their children, Jody Margolin Hahn, Elizabeth Brett Garon, and Lawrence Harry Margolin; and their seven grandsons.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Later this month, California residents and visitors from around the world will gather to celebrate the 75th anniversary of a beloved California landmark: the Golden Gate Bridge. The Golden Gate Bridge is without doubt one of the greatest structures of the 20th century. This seamless stretch of cables and steel beams was the vision of renowned bridge architect and engineer Joseph Strauss, whose prior experience prepared him to design the longest suspension bridge of its day, which many said could never be built. But built it was, even in the middle of the Great Depression. After more than 4 years of construction, the Bridge opened on May 27, 1937. Hailed as an architectural masterpiece for its complex construction and structural elegance, it soon became a cornerstone of ground transportation in the Bay Area, carrying passengers and commerce between San Francisco and its neighbors to the north. The Golden Gate Bridge is much more than a transportation corridor or engineering marvel. With its breathtaking setting and dazzling golden- orange color, the Bridge is the iconic symbol of the San Francisco Bay Area, holding a unique place in the hearts and minds of residents and visitors alike. It is the gateway not just to the Bay Area but to the western United States. During World War II, the Bridge gained fame as the last site our troops saw as they shipped off to fight in the Pacific and the first structure they saw when they arrived back home. In dozens of movies shot in San Francisco, the Bridge appears in the opening scenes to let you know immediately where you are: in one of the most beautiful places on earth. This year the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District and the Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy--in cooperation with the National Park Service, the Presidio Trust, and the City and County of San Francisco--have launched a 75th anniversary program, with 75 tributes to celebrate the countless ways in which the Bridge connects people and places. On May 27th, the anniversary season will culminate in a Golden Gate Festival, with events along the San Francisco waterfront from Fort Point to Pier 39. With the theme of ``Bridging Us All,'' this community celebration will honor a beloved landmark that represents and reflects the ingenuity, inclusiveness, and creativity of the San Francisco Bay Area.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. I will wait.

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I rise to say that it is stunning to see the Republican Party running away from a bill they supported and a deal they cut. The deficit reduction deal was led by Senator Conrad. The Budget Control Act is the law of the land. Instead they are offering up a series of budgets that I believe will destroy this country. Why do I say that? Because they destroy the middle class and they give to the millionaires and the billionaires. That is a recipe for a third world nation, the haves and the have-nots. I hope the American people wake up and pay attention because a budget is a statement of who we are as a people. I was proud to serve on the Budget Committee. I wish I was still on there, but I had other options for my State. I decided to leave the Budget Committee and go on the Commerce Committee. That is one tough committee, and we are going to miss Senator Conrad. His leadership is exemplary, and he has explained why the replacement budgets the Republicans have offered are unworkable. Some of them don't even make any sense. This is serious business because one of them did pass the House. Not only did it pass the House, but then they passed another law, and we call it reconciliation, which is dangerous in what they did. They stood with all of their heart, with all of their soul, with all of their power and their fervor to fight for the 1 percent. They are fighting for the millionaires, the multimillionaires, the billionaires, and the trillionaires; that is who they are fighting for. They are giving them back an average of $150,000 a year. Over the 10-year period that average millionaire can write a big kiss to the Republicans if this ever becomes law because they would get back $1.5 million over the 10- year period. How do they pay for this largess? How do they pay for this warm, fuzzy hug to the people who have everything? They cut the heart out of the middle class. I will give some examples. They would allow student loan rates to double so students would have to pay not a 3-percentage point interest rate on their student loans but over 6 percent. They will cut the heart and soul out of America's infrastructure. Did you ever look at the construction industry lately? Well, there are 1.4 million unemployed construction workers. We need to make sure they are building the roads, highways, and the 70,000 bridges that are deficient. Half of our roads don't meet the standards. We need to rebuild America, as the President said--not Afghanistan, not Pakistan. Thank you very much. Iraq? The blood of our people is on the ground over there. It is time to spend that money here as our President has said. They continue all that war spending, they add to that war spending, and they expect everybody else to stand back and quietly accept a doubling of their student loan rate and a cut in the transportation program. They end Medicare, period. They are going to turn it into a voucher system, and our elderly are going to have to negotiate to try and find a way to pay for health insurance, and it will cost them thousands of dollars more. One of these budgets actually cuts Social Security by 39 percent. Imagine a Social Security recipient living on $18,000 getting a cut of almost 40 percent. So this is what they are doing, I say to my colleagues. They eliminate the Department of Education. They eliminate the ability for many people to pay for their energy assistance in the winters. They walk away from alternative energy, which is going to free us from foreign oil and make us safer. That is what they do, and they do it all in the name of tax breaks for the people in America who--I am very proud of them. They made it. In my State, a lot of those folks who have made it have written to me and said: Senator, we want everybody to have the chance we had. The only passion of Republicans is for those who have. They practice Robin Hood in reverse. In one of the budgets, they even--I think it is the Ryan budget--tax the poorest people. They tax the poorest people. They raise taxes on the poorest people, and they cut taxes on the richest people. Robin Hood in reverse. Isn't that sweet? Isn't that kind? Not. So they bring America to its knees. They walk away from the Budget Control Act. Do we know why they don't like it? Because it forces spending cuts across the board. I don't like that, but we are serious about deficit reduction. In my closing remarks I will say this: In the last 40 years, one party balanced the budget. In the last 40 years, one party created a surplus. That happens to be the Democratic Party and a Democratic President named Bill Clinton. How did we do it? We met each other halfway. We said that when we are faced with a crisis, we have to put everything on the table and everybody makes a little bit of a sacrifice. It is no big deal. We ask the people who have the most to do a little more, and we find ways to cut spending. That is what we did in the Clinton years. Do we know what happened? We created I think 23 million new jobs. We created 23 million new jobs. We balanced the budget, we created a surplus, and now we have to listen to the demagogues over there lecture us about how to balance the budget. Wrong. We know how to do it. They don't know how to do it. All they know how to do is stand up and attack our President when our President inherited this terrible deficit from George W. Bush, who took a surplus--Bush did--and turned it into deficits as far as the eye can see. And we were losing--I ask unanimous consent for 30 additional seconds.

Mrs. BOXER. We were losing how many jobs a month? We were losing 800,000 jobs a month when our President took over. The country was falling apart. He saved the auto industry--it is back on top--when others said: Let them go bankrupt. He started the job creation. It is not good enough, but I will tell my colleagues one thing: If we are going to make it better, we better start working together. Let's live by the Budget Control Act that is the law of the land, and let's use that time to find a long-term solution, as we did in the Clinton years. Thank you very much. I yield the floor.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the memory of Judge Robert E. Coyle, a talented jurist, a respected member of the community, and a kind and gentle man. Judge Coyle passed away on May 7 in Fresno at age 82. A Fresno native, Robert Coyle received his B.A. from Fresno State College in 1953 and his J.D. from the University of California, Hastings College of the Law in 1956. After law school, he began his legal career as a deputy district attorney in Fresno County before working as an associate at Hansen, McCormick, Barstow and Sheppard from 1958 to 1961 and as partner at McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Coyle and Wayte from 1961 to 1982. Judge Coyle was nominated to the Eastern District bench by President Reagan, confirmed by the Senate on March 31, 1982, and served as chief judge of the district from 1990 to 1996, when he took senior status and continued to take cases until 2006. Judge Coyle played an instrumental role in the construction of new Federal courthouses in Sacramento and Fresno. For 13 years, he led the effort to build the Fresno courthouse, often seen shuttling from his chambers to the construction site with his hard hat in hand. His passion for this project once prompted him to ride in a suspended platform to some 300 feet above the ground to get a glimpse of the view that is now enjoyed by the building's occupants and visitors. After taking in the views of his beloved hometown and the breathtaking Sierra and beautiful Coastal Range, Judge Coyle compared his experience to ``riding on a cloud.'' I am proud to have introduced legislation that led to the naming of the Federal courthouse in downtown Fresno as the Robert E. Coyle United States Courthouse. The nine-story building stands as a reminder to the community and people of California of the dedicated work of Judge Robert E. Coyle. Judge Coyle was always admired for his sharp intellect, collegiality, and gentlemanly ways. A giving person, he lent his time and talents to a number of community causes, including service on the board of trustees of the United Way Advocate. In his leisure time, he enjoyed spending time at the family cabin above Bass Lake. I extend my deepest sympathies to his wife of 59 years, Faye; his son and daughter-in-law, Robert and Kim; and his daughter and son-in-law, Barbara and Michael Vellone; and his grandchildren, Hunter, Sydney, Morgan, and Matthew. Judge Coyle will be greatly missed.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the hard work and remarkable accomplishments of Granada Hills Charter High School's Academic Decathlon team for winning the 2012 Academic Decathlon--its second consecutive national championship. I want to congratulate all the members of the team: Christian Koguchi, Stella Lee, Priscilla Liu, Kimberly Ly, Hamidah Mahmud, Lev Tauz, Julia Wall, Sean Wejebe, and Jimmy Wu, as well as its coaches Matthew Arnold, Nick Weber, and Spencer Wolf. Each year, hundreds of high schools throughout our Nation compete for the honor of becoming Academic Decathlon National Champions. This year, Granada Hills Charter High School not only became one of three schools to ever win consecutive national championships, but also set the highest score ever achieved at the Academic Decathlon National Championships. Competing in an Academic Decathlon is a daunting task. The Academic Decathlon's intense 2-day national final competitions include multiple- choice testing in seven different events, speeches, essay writing, and interviewing exercises. Students spend many hours studying, practicing, and competing, often away from their family and friends. I invite all of my colleagues to join me and the State of California in congratulating California's Granada Hills Charter High School Academic Decathlon team on becoming 2012 National Academic Decathlon Champions.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I salute the life and accomplishments of Burt Bacharach, who received The Library of Congress Gershwin Prize for Popular Song on Tuesday night. This award is given to musicians whose lifetime contributions to the field of popular song demonstrate the standard of excellence associated with George and Ira Gershwin. Mr. Bacharach received this award jointly with cowriter Hal David, which is the first time in the history of this award that it has gone to a songwriting team. This prestigious honor not only celebrates their work, but it places them among the ranks of Paul Simon, Paul McCartney, and Stevie Wonder, all previous recipients. Born in Missouri and raised in New York, Burt built a name for himself over his six-decade career as one of the country's most respected and honored songwriters. His partnership with Hal David created such beloved songs as ``Raindrops Keep Fallin' on My Head,'' ``What the World Needs Now is Love,'' ``Walk on By,'' and ``Alfie.'' The duo first began collaborating in the 1950s at the Famous Paramount Music Company, and among their first big hits were ``The Story of My Life,'' made famous by Marty Robbins, and ``Magic Moments,'' performed by Perry Como. Following on their first successes, between 1962 and 1972 their songs were almost continuously on Billboard Magazine's singles chart. During this time they worked with an array of singers, including Dionne Warwick, B.J. Thomas, Dusty Springfield, The Carpenters, Tom Jones, Jackie DeShannon, Gene Pitney, and Herb Alpert. Together, Burt and Hal have written numerous hits that have helped launch the careers of some of America's most celebrated musicians. Mr. Bacharach, one of the most honored and successful composers of our time, has earned three Academy Awards and eight Grammy Awards. These include the 1997 Grammy Trustees Award, which he shares with David, and the 2008 Lifetime Achievement Award. Even after being inducted into the Songwriters Hall of Fame, he is still touring and performing all over the world. I ask my Senate colleagues join me in honoring and congratulating Mr. Burt Bacharach on this well-deserved honor.

Mrs. BOXER

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

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, yesterday I spoke on the floor about the Democratic bill to reduce interest rates on student loans, and I was lamenting the fact that our Republican colleagues would not even permit us to turn to the bill. They were filibustering a motion to proceed to the bill which meant we could no longer work on it. That is why this floor today is so empty. We should have been here working on a student loan bill which is so critical to so many college students and their families across the country. The interest rates on these student loans, which are the Stafford loans, the Federal subsidized loans, is going to go from 3 percent to 6 percent. We want to get it back down. This is important to 7.5 million students and their families. When I concluded my remarks, Senator Brown from Massachusetts took to the floor. He expressed shock that I was concerned about Republican filibusters and started to talk about how cooperative the Republicans have been, pointing to a few issues where we have worked together. Look, I am here to say that working together in a bipartisan manner on a few issues is fine, but we need to work together in a bipartisan manner on almost all the issues we work on because the American people are counting on us. Because there are a handful of issues on which the Republicans cooperated, let's not come down to the floor and say everything is perfect and Republicans are not blocking us, when, in fact, they are blocking us. The Democrats essentially retook the Senate in 2007. Since then, these Republican filibusters have been off the charts. Don't take my word for it, listen to congressional scholars Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein. They recently wrote an opinion piece in the Washington Post. It was based on a study. I ask unanimous consent to have that printed in the Record.

Mrs. BOXER. Here is the title of their piece, ``Let's Just Say It, The Republicans Are The Problem.'' They explain that in the past they looked at Congress and thought both parties were to blame. But on reflection, as they studied the facts--not the rhetoric but the facts--it was Republicans who are causing all the problems. Here is what they write: The filibuster, once relegated to a handful of major national issues in a given Congress, became a routine weapon of obstruction applied even to widely supported bills or Presidential nominations. All we have to do is watch the Senate or certainly when one is in the Senate we realize these scholars, Mann and Ornstein, are absolutely right. In this Congress, the 112th Congress, we have already seen 48 Republican filibusters; 48 times the Republicans stopped us from doing our work. But don't get the impression this was new behavior because it did not just start in the 112th Congress, it started way before. In the 111th Congress, which covered 2009 and 2010, Republicans conducted 91 filibusters. In the 110th Congress, 2007 and 2008, they conducted 112 filibusters. So far this year we have had 48 Republican filibusters. In the Congress before that we had 91, and the one before that we had 112. What does this mean? It means that in all those times we were unable to do the work of the American people because one party stopped it. There have been more filibusters by the Republicans in the 6 years since Democrats took over the Senate than there were in the prior 10 years. I want to remember one of those times because I was sitting down there in the manager's chair, coming out of my committee, Environment and Public Works, with a near unanimous vote on a little program called the Economic Development Administration. This EDA has been in place for--I want to say 50 years. It has been in place for 50 years--5 0; not 15--50 years through Presidents Republican and Democratic. It is a beautiful program because what it does is it takes some modest Federal funds and leverages States' money, local money and private money and it comes into areas that are having difficulty with job creation and invests that money there. As a magnet it creates all of these contributions, and we have seen hundreds of thousands of jobs created as a result. So I come to the floor to get this little bill reauthorized. After coming out of my committee with a strong bipartisan vote, it is filibustered. I stood down there for 5 days, and I could not believe it. They are filibustering a bill that would create and save hundreds of thousands of jobs. We also saw these Republican filibusters when we tried to say millionaires should pay their fair share, which would have reduced the deficit by billions. Oh, no, they could not stand to have us debate that so they filibustered. They filibustered a bill to eliminate tax subsidies to big oil and gas companies that are making record profits and getting subsidies that they have gotten for 30 to 40 years. No, we were not allowed to go to that. And then, of course, the most recent filibuster by Senate Republicans is on this critically important legislation to cut interest rates on student loans. They are going to double on July 1. Oh, no. They wouldn't even let us go to the bill. I say that despite the protestations of Senator Brown of Massachusetts, this has got to stop. He cited three or four times that we worked together. I say good for that; I am happy for that. That does not in any way change the fact that we face filibuster after filibuster, 48 times in this Congress so far now. I hope every college student in this country who has an opportunity is watching this Chamber. This Chamber should have been bustling today with people talking and working together, offering amendments so we could cut these interest rates on student loans. College students and high school students who want to go to college, and their parents, grandparents, aunts, and uncles ought to understand that this floor is not filled today passing this legislation because of a Republican filibuster. What we do here matters. We could save students thousands of dollars on the life of their loans. These are student loans for the middle class. More than 75 percent of the borrowers in the program come from families with incomes below $60,000 a year. This is not some fun and games, but my Republican friends and their presumptive Presidential nominee want to cut taxes for people who earn millions of dollars. They want to give back an average tax cut of $250,000 a year, and they don't have it in their hearts to lower student loans for families who earn less than $60,000 a year. They call for permanent tax cuts for the people who don't need them and again they block the way for us to help the middle-class students to get a break. Yes, I hope college students are paying close attention to this debate. I know some of them from the great State of California whom I represent are paying attention. I have heard from some of them, and I will have some of their comments for the Record. Delmita Turner of Rancho Cordova, CA writes: I am the single mother of three children ages 7, 14, and 20. My daughter Khendel is in college and we have had to get student loans to pay for her tuition. I am also in college and have student loans as well. An increase would put a tremendous strain on an already stretched budget. After our family suffered nearly every type of loss one could, including death, foreclosure, divorce, and unemployment all within a year, I decided to go back to school with the hopes of making life better for my family. I began working a year ago last December after being unemployed for 2 years. Now I ask: How American is that? We always strive to be better. Here is a woman who went through death, foreclosure, divorce, and unemployment within 1 year. She decided to make life better for her family. She began working a year ago last December after being unemployed for 2 years. She continues: ``So please consider how this will impact so many of us.'' I am asking my Republican friends--as we have another vote on this I think tomorrow morning--to think of Delmita Turner of California and what this means to her. Then there is Joseph Briones of San Fernando, CA. He writes: I am a senior in high school who will be attending college this fall. My dad is unemployed and a cancer survivor and my mom is working part-time. These conditions put a large stress on my myself as well as on my parents to attend my top choice of college, Westmount College. We did not receive financial aid from the state and we have an immense amount remaining to pay for my upcoming educational years. We are going to be taking out student loans to pay for college. Please do not allow the passage of the bill that will increase the interest on student loans. We rely on these loans and it is difficult to pay them back for some students as it is. Please do not make it a larger burden for students to go to college. So tomorrow when we take up this bill again, I hope my Republican friends will stand down and think of Joseph Briones of San Fernando, CA, who is making a very pointed plea that he relies on these loans, and it is going to be very difficult if the interest rates are doubled. Then there is Rachel Zavarella of San Jose, CA. She says: Increasing Stafford loan interest rates only kicks students and borrowers when we are down . . . Increasing student loan interest is another dirty trick to redistribute wealth to the top, and it's disgusting and unacceptable. I want you to vote for students and borrowers by voting yes on the bill. Mr. President, that is just three stories from my State. I know in your beautiful State of Oregon, which has so many wonderful universities, you could have dozens of stories like this. Clearly this is not a time to increase loan rates for students. This should not be a partisan matter. Why would every single Republican vote no? I guess it is their ideology. Tax breaks for the rich, rich, rich, rich, and nothing for the middle class. If anyone wants to know the difference between the two parties, this is the moment. It used to be a little harder to describe the differences between the parties. When I was young, both parties stood here and fought for the middle class, for students, for the environment, and for women. It isn't that way anymore. It just is not. If we say we are here for the next generation, which all of us say all the time one way or the other, then you don't allow student loan interest rates to double. You don't allow it. We know how to fix it. We found a very simple way to pay for this that makes sense. Closing a tax loophole doesn't hurt anybody. Look at yesterday's vote. It was not good; it was not pretty. I am glad Senator Harry Reid is going to give us another chance to change that, and I hope my Republican friends are now hearing from their constituents back home. I hope when they come here tomorrow they will cast a ``yes'' vote and let us proceed to this bill and let us do our work. Let us stand for the people who need us to stand for them, the middle class of this great country. We know why the country is great; it is because of the middle class. We need to make sure they have the opportunity to go to college and not have this burden on them that is so heavy it becomes too heavy for them to bear. Pretty soon they will stop going to college because they don't want to have that burden on their back. We have a chance to do the right thing. I hope we will. Let the record show these filibusters are outrageous and they are historic in nature. We have never had them before. We have never had such a lack of cooperation from Republicans before, and it has been a sad several years where we have seen filibuster after filibuster, even stopping us from going to a bill. Tomorrow maybe we can come together and get on this bill and do our work. I yield the floor, and I note the absence of a quorum.