Barbara Boxer

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. So this whole notion has worked very well. But in closing, because I do not want to interrupt the speech of my friend, because I think it is important, it seems to me suddenly there has been a huge injection of politics into a bill that should have had, as you point out, I say to my friend from Connecticut, bipartisan support. If, in fact, the Republicans came up with the idea to have a fee on these institutions, to protect the taxpayers so that we have no bailouts, and now, after meeting with the banks, it feels to me these big institutions have turned on their own idea. But they are using the language that is the opposite of what they now want to do. Because, as I understand it--tell me if I am right--if we keep the status quo and do nothing, which is again their idea right now, we are in trouble, because we saw what happens when these big institutions get in trouble. Main Street starts to hurt. Lending starts to freeze. We have seen millions of job losses due to that horrible time we went through. I want to commend my friend and urge him, if he has to come here every day--and I will be glad to come over here as well--to explain to the American people the truth. I am so tired of politics obscuring the truth. We need to put an end to it. We are not perfect. The other party is not perfect. No one is perfect. We do not have the ideas that are going to save and cure every problem. But we know one thing from this crisis. We had to turn to taxpayers. What a nightmare. Thank goodness, by the way, those funds are being repaid. We are still out some funds, but the vast majority of those funds are repaid. But we are not going to go through that again. I would never vote, and I say that right here, to bail out these big institutions that were gambling. They gambled on the future of America. I will not do it. Therefore, let's put something into place where they pay into a fund so if there is a problem in the future and they are going bust, we will wind them down and we will wind them out on their dollar. I hope you will keep saying that, because I do not mind getting in a debate with the other side. As a matter of fact, I think there are great differences between the two parties, which makes our country great because we all appeal to different people in the country. It is good for the stability of the Nation. But let's not come here with false debate. Let's not come here with made-up arguments, because that only hurts the debate. I wanted to praise my friend. I wanted to spend a couple of minutes thanking him for doing this.

Mrs. BOXER. Bingo.

Mrs. BOXER. You got it.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I am honored today to join with the people of San Bernardino as they celebrate their bicentennial--the 200th anniversary of the founding of this great city. From the day in 1810 when Franciscan missionary Father Dumetz named the area ``San Bernardino'' to the present, San Bernardino--nestled south of the San Bernardino Mountains and west of the lower desert--has been recognized for its scenic beauty and strategic location. San Bernardino's colorful history begins in the early years of the 19th century when Spanish missionaries were the first settlers to the region. Mission San Bernardino was established in 1810 and the missionaries, along with the American Indians native to the area, diverted water to the valley from Mill Creek for irrigation purposes. As a result, the area flourished. Gradually the mission period came to a close and soon came the rise of the Great Spanish Rancheros. The abandoned Mission San Bernardino did not stay vacant for long. San Bernardino Rancho was granted to the Lugo Brothers in 1842 and eventually became an important post on the trading route known as the Spanish Trail, where pioneer trailblazers such as Kit Carson and Jedediah Strong Smith often traveled. In 1848, California joined the United States. By this time, many rancheros had left the area. In 1851, the Lugo brothers eventually sold San Bernardino Rancho to a party of 500 Mormon settlers who built a stockade around the ranch and named it ``Fort San Bernardino''. The community thrived and was officially incorporated in 1854 as a city with a population of 1,200. At that time, San Bernardino was strictly a temperance town, with no drinking or gambling allowed. As the 19th century waned, the giant railway companies eventually found their way to San Bernardino, changing it from a sleepy town into an enterprising city. Santa Fe, Union Pacific, and Southern Pacific all made San Bernardino the hub of their southern California operations. When the Santa Fe Railway established a transcontinental link in 1886, the already prosperous valley exploded. Even more settlers flocked from the East, and the population doubled between 1900 and 1910. San Bernardino has had a great history with military involvement. The San Bernardino Engineer Depot, commonly called Camp Ono, was located along what is now the I-215 freeway was used by the U.S. Army as a vehicle and ammunition supply and storage depot, drycleaning facility, sewage spreading area, tent manufacturing and dyeing facility, locomotive maintenance facility, railcar and tank degreasing facility, motor vehicle pool, prisoner of war camp, bomb manufacturing, and water softening facility. The site was also a part of the Advance Communications Zone Depot in the southern California defense system. Camp Ono consisted of a total of 1,662.82 acres and was leased by the U.S. Army on 1 July 1940 and existed until December 1946. A prisoner of war camp occupied 300 acres of the site. Approximately 499 Italian prisoners of war were incarcerated, and they were used to maintain army vehicles, degrease tanks, and operated a tent repair and tent dyeing facility. Norton Air Force Base was also located east of downtown San Bernardino. This frontline military installation was home to a logistics depot and heavy-lift transport facility for a wide variety of military aircraft, equipment, and supplies as part of the Material/Air Force Logistics Command and then as part of the Military Airlift Command. The secondary mission of the base was as a headquarters for Aerospace Defense Command for southern California, the Air Force Audio- Visual Center and numerous Air Force Reserve units and the Office of the Inspector General. Norton was closed as a result of base realignment and closure, BRAC, action in 1994. The aviation facilities of the base were converted into San Bernardino International Airport and the remainder for other private development opportunities. Mattel Toys, Stater Bros Markets, Pep Boys, and Kohl's also are located within the industrial complex on the former base. McDonald's was founded by brothers Richard and Maurice McDonald in San Bernardino in 1940. Their introduction of the Speedee Service System in 1948 established the principles of the modern fast-food restaurant. San Bernardino is also the home of Al Houghton Stadium and the Western Regional Little League Inc. Each year San Bernardino hosts 11 Western States in the West and Northwest regional tournaments. The winner of each tournament goes on to the Little League World Series in Williamsport, PA. San Bernardino has a plethora of educational opportunities. California State University, San Bernardino, was founded in 1965 and graduated its first class in 1969. From a very small beginning, this university has flourished with new facilities and Division II sports programs. There are also many other schools of higher learning in the city, including San Bernardino Valley College, the Art Institute of California-Inland Empire, Argosy University-Inland Empire, Everett College, and the American Sports University. Today San Bernardino has emerged as a modern urban community with a bright future. The enduring spirit and vitality of yesterday's pioneers are still evident and reflected in the pride of community. The city of San Bernardino serves as the county seat and is the largest city in the county of San Bernardino, with a population more than 205,000. Please join me in honoring the city of San Bernardino as it celebrates its bicentennial.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I am pleased to pay tribute to Walter ``Wally'' Bishop, general manager of the Contra Costa Water District--CCWD--as he retires after 18 years of dedicated service. A native of Washington DC, Mr. Bishop started his career in 1973 as an engineer for the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission. Upon arriving in California, he went to work as an engineer for the Ventura Regional County Sanitation District in 1975 before moving to northern California, where he worked for the East Bay Municipal Utility District from 1983 to 1992. The CCWD serves over 550,000 people in Central and Eastern Contra Costa County and carries a large influence on the direction of California water policy, given its location on the Delta's edge. Starting as CCWD's general manager in 1992, Mr. Bishop continually advocated for a customer-first, entrepreneurial approach throughout the district. Under his leadership, CCWD's Los Vaqueros Reservoir Project was permitted, designed, and completed. It was the first major reservoir to be permitted and constructed in more than a decade. A well-known leader in both State and national water issues, Mr. Bishop has been recognized by numerous organizations for his commitment to water issues and policy. He was recently awarded the Edward J. Cleary Award from the American Academy of Environmental Engineers for his leadership in environmental engineering and management. He has also been a two-term member of the National Drinking Water Advisory Council, which advises the Environmental Protection Agency Administrator on everything that EPA does relating to drinking water. I commend Mr. Bishop for his 18 years of dedicated service to the CCWD. Along with his friends and colleagues throughout Contra Costa County and the San Francisco Bay Area, I thank him for his efforts and wish him the best as he embarks on the next phase of his life.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, it is clear to everyone watching the debate on the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act that amendments were offered for the sole purpose of derailing health care reform. Therefore I voted to table all amendments. Under normal circumstances, I would have supported some of the amendments offered by my colleagues. For example, last night, an amendment was offered to clarify that the health care reform bill would not adversely affect VA and military health care programs. I am a cosponsor of freestanding legislation that would make that very same clarification. However, last night, when Senator Webb asked unanimous consent for that legislation to be adopted separate from this bill, an objection was raised from my friends on the other side of the aisle. I am pleased that the bill passed because it will make life better for the people I represent.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, I rise today to pay tribute to 14 servicemembers from California or based in California who have died while serving our country in Operation Enduring Freedom since December 16, 2009. This brings to 147 the number of servicemembers either from California or based in California who have been killed while serving our country in Afghanistan. This represents 14 percent of all U.S. deaths in Afghanistan. PFC Serge Kropov, 21, of Hawley, PA, died December 20, 2009, as a result of a nonhostile incident in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Private First Class Kropov was assigned to Marine Aircraft Group 16, 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, CA. LCpl Omar G. Roebuck, 23, of Moreno Valley, CA, died December 22, 2009, as a result of a nonhostile incident in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Lance Corporal Roebuck was assigned to 2nd Combat Engineer Battalion, 2nd Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Lejeune, NC. SSG David H. Gutierrez, 35, of San Francisco, CA, died December 25, 2009, at Kandahar Air Field, Afghanistan, of wounds suffered when insurgents attacked his dismounted patrol with an improvised explosive device in Howz-e Madad. Staff Sergeant Gutierrez was assigned to the 2nd Battalion, 1st Infantry Regiment, 5th Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, Fort Lewis, WA. SSG Anton R. Phillips, 31, of Inglewood, CA, died December 31, 2009, at Forward Operating Base Methar Lam, Afghanistan. Staff Sergeant Phillips was assigned to G Forward Support Company, 77th Field Artillery Regiment, 2nd Battalion, Task Force Wildhorse, Forward Operating Base Methar Lam, Afghanistan. LCpl Jeremy M. Kane, 22, of Towson, MD, died January 23, 2010, while supporting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Lance Corporal Kane was assigned to 4th Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 4th Marine Division, Marine Forces Reserve, based out of Camp Pendleton, CA. SGT David J. Smith, 25, of Frederick, MD, died January 26, 2010, from wounds received January 23 while supporting combat operations in Helmand Province, Afghanistan. Sergeant Smith was assigned to 4th Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 4th Marine Division, Marine Forces Reserve, based out of Camp Pendleton, CA. SSG Mark A. Stets, 39, of El Cajon, CA, died February 3, 2010, in Timagara, Pakistan, from wounds suffered when insurgents attacked his unit with an improvised explosive device. Staff Sergeant Stets was assigned to the 8th Psychological Operations Battalion, Airborne, 4th Psychological Operations Group, Airborne, Fort Bragg, NC. LCpl Alejandro J. Yazzie, 23, of Rock Point, AZ, died February 16, 2010, while supporting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Lance Corporal Yazzie was assigned to 1st Combat Engineer Battalion, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Camp Pendleton, CA. PFC Charles A. Williams, 29, of Fair Oaks, CA, died February 7, 2010, at Camp Nathan Smith, Afghanistan, of injuries sustained while supporting combat operations. Private First Class Williams was assigned to the 97th Military Police Battalion, 18th Military Police Brigade, Fort Riley, KA. LCpl Joshua H. Birchfield, 24, of Westville, IN, died February 19, 2010, while supporting combat operations in Farah province, Afghanistan. Lance Corporal Birchfield was assigned to 3rd Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Twentynine Palms, CA. SSG Michael David P. Cardenaz, 29, of Corona, CA, died February 20, 2010, in Kunar, Afghanistan, when enemy forces attacked his unit with rocket-propelled grenades. Staff Sergeant Cardenaz was assigned to the 2nd Battalion, 12th Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, Fort Carson, CO. SPC Ian T.D. Gelig, 25, of Stevenson Ranch, CA, died March 1, 2010, in Kandahar, Afghanistan, of wounds suffered when enemy forces attacked his vehicle with an improvised explosive device. Specialist Gelig was assigned to the 782nd Brigade Support Battalion, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 82nd Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC. LCpl Carlos A. Aragon, 19, of Orem, UT, died March 1, 2010, while supporting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Lance Corporal Aragon was assigned to 4th Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 4th Marine Division, Marine Forces Reserve, based out of Camp Pendleton, CA. LCpl Nigel K. Olsen, 21, of Orem, UT, died March 4, 2010, while supporting combat operations in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Lance Corporal Olsen was assigned to the 4th Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 4th Marine Division, Marine Forces Reserve, based out of Camp Pendleton, CA. I would also like to pay tribute to a young American who was killed serving our country in Iraq during this same time period. This brings to 883 the number of servicemembers either from California or based in California who have been killed while serving our country in Iraq. This represents 20 percent of all U.S. deaths in Iraq. PFC Scott G. Barnett, 24, of Concord, CA, died January 28 in Tallil, Iraq, of injuries sustained while supporting combat operations. Private First Class Barnett was assigned to the 412th Aviation Support Battalion, 12th Combat Aviation Brigade, Katterbach, Germany.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, today I ask my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to Midge Costanza, a dear friend and great American who passed away this week. This woman of great passion, compassion, vitality, kindness, and commitment died after a long battle with cancer in San Diego, CA, where she had lived and worked for the past 20 years. I first heard of Midge in 1976, when President-elect Jimmy Carter made history by making her the first woman ever named Assistant to the President. As President Carter's public liaison, she reached out to Americans who had previously been denied access to the White House. By the time I first ran for Senate in 1992, Midge had moved to San Diego, where she worked tirelessly on behalf of my campaign. She ran our San Diego office, introduced me to local leaders, and often spoke on my behalf at rallies and other speaking engagements. She was a riveting speaker who inspired even the toughest crowd. The daughter of Sicilian immigrants, Midge was born in 1932 in LeRoy, NY, and grew up in Rochester. After high school, she went to work and became active in several community organizations. Soon she was volunteering for Democratic political campaigns, including Averell Harriman's successful campaign for governor of New York. In 1964, she served as the Monroe County director for Robert F. Kennedy's Senate campaign. Midge served a member of the Democratic National Committee from 1972 to 1977. In 1973, she ran for an at-large seat on the Rochester City Council and won in a landslide. In 1974, she lost a congressional race to a popular Republican incumbent. Two years later, she served as State cochair for Jimmy Carter's Presidential campaign. At the 1976 Democratic National Convention, she gave an inspiring speech seconding Carter's nomination. After leaving the White House, Midge served on the board of directors for several organizations, including the National Gay Rights Advocates and the AIDS research group Search Alliance. Following my 1992 campaign, Midge worked on the 1994 campaigns of gubernatorial candidate Kathleen Brown and Congresswoman Lynn Schenk. Over the years, she also coached many candidates in strategy and public speaking. In 2000, she was appointed Special Assistant to the Governor by California Governor Gray Davis and served as his liaison for women's groups and issues. Since 2003, Midge has been an adjunct professor at San Diego State University and established the Midge Costanza Institute for the Study of Politics and Public Policy at SDSU. For the past 5 years, Midge has served as public affairs officer for San Diego district attorney Bonnie Dumanis. Last year, when she and the district attorney visited my Washington office, we shared some laughs and stories about our early days together. Shortly before Midge died, she received a call from President Carter, who expressed his love for her and his gratitude for her outstanding service to the Nation. Today I want to echo those sentiments and bid a fond farewell to my dear friend Midge Costanza. Midge was a great role model for women in public service. Her insight and wit will be missed by all of us who knew her.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, it is with a heavy heart that I ask my colleagues to join me today in honoring the memory of an extraordinary environmental pioneer and wilderness champion, Dr. Edgar Wayburn. Ed was a soft spoken yet remarkably successful conservationist whose legacy is enjoyed by millions. Ed passed away on March 5, 2010, at his home in San Francisco at the age of 103. Born in Macon, GA, in 1906, Ed made his first trip to California in 1927, at the age of 21. He was immediately struck by the awe-inspiring vistas of Yosemite National Park and the Sierra Nevada. He was captivated by the majestic beauty of California and knew he would one day return. After graduating from Harvard Medical School, Ed served in the U.S. Air Force during World War II. In 1939, Ed joined the fledgling Sierra Club, an organization he would later serve as the president of five times. By 1947, Ed was living in the San Francisco Bay area and had grown active in efforts to protect the beautiful landscapes of coastal California. Ed's career in conservation spanned 60 years, during which he was never compensated financially for his efforts. Ed maintained his private medical practice while dedicating evenings, weekends, and vacation time to his relentless pursuit of protecting lands for public enjoyment. In California, Ed was instrumental in the creation of Redwood National Park, the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, and Point Reyes National Seashore. Working tirelessly alongside the late Congressman Phil Burton, Ed won support for protecting these parks, which today are some of my great state's most revered natural treasures. Ed's environmental legacy stretches far beyond California. He and his beloved wife Peggy, who passed away in 2002, worked tirelessly to protect the Alaskan wilderness. After Ed and Peggy's first life- changing visit to Alaska, they inspired a national campaign that ultimately culminated in the passage of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, signed into law by President Carter in 1980. As a result, the National Park system nearly doubled in size, adding 10 new national parks with the stroke of the President's pen. To this day, the Alaska Lands Act is the largest public lands legislation in the history of the United States. Ed Wayburn possessed a deep understanding of the value of our public lands and precious wild places. In Ed's 2004 publication ``Your Land and Mine,'' he states that ``in destroying wilderness, we deny ourselves the full extent of what it means to be alive. In preserving wilderness, we not only recognize our place in the chain of life, but we also invite ourselves to reach, to explore, to wonder, and to make a difference.'' Ed held an unshakable belief in the natural world's ability to provide humanity with critical opportunities for introspection and inspiration. As a doctor, Ed understood the connection between an individual's well-being and the health of the environment. As a leader, he understood the importance of providing the public with wild places to foster that connection. In August of 1999, President Clinton presented Ed with the Presidential Medal of Freedom. President Clinton said of Ed, ``He has saved more of our wilderness than any person alive.'' The Presidential Medal of Freedom is the highest civilian honor an American can receive, and signifies the magnitude of the legacy left to us by this great and humble man. Ed has left an indelible mark on the landscape of America. He was a compassionate physician, an inspiring conservationist, and a wonderful family man who served his country both in and out of uniform. Though he will be deeply missed, Ed has left us with so many priceless gifts. The parks he helped to build, and the lands he helped to protect, will be enjoyed by Americans and visitors to our great nation for many generations to come. And as our world continues to change, and wild places grow increasingly rare, the gifts that Ed bestowed upon us will become evermore valuable. Ed is survived by his daughters Laurie, Cynthia, and Diana; his son William; and his three grandchildren. My thoughts and prayers are with Ed's family during this difficult time.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today, I am proud to join Senator Brownback in introducing bipartisan automotive right to repair legislation. Our bill, the Motor Vehicle Owners Right to Repair Act, allows consumers the freedom to choose which repair shops they use for auto repairs and routine vehicle maintenance. Consumers today have many choices when it comes to the vehicle they drive, but not necessarily when it comes to the maintenance or repair options for those vehicles. Most cars today rely on computers to perform many of the automobile's vital functions including brakes, airbags, ignition and other operating systems. If an electronic component of a car fails or needs tuning, an access code is often needed in order to repair or replace the necessary part. These codes are currently provided on a voluntary basis to repair shops by car manufacturers. Unfortunately, many local independent repair shops are provided only limited or incomplete information by manufacturers to access and repair most elements of those vehicles. This lack of information puts consumers at a disadvantage, forcing many to pay premium prices to repair simple parts at dealerships or travel long distances to reach repair shops that take valuable time away from families and work. There are over 219,000 employees working in over 26,000 independent repair shops in California, providing those workers with good paying jobs. In this economy, we can't afford to disadvantage small businesses working hard to support their families. The Boxer-Brownback bill will require car manufacturers to provide all information and tools necessary to diagnose, service, maintain and repair a motor vehicle, including all safety alerts, access codes and recalls. This information must be provided to all repair shops, not just dealers or manufacturers' designated shops. Our bill also protects the integrity of manufacturers' concepts and systems by not requiring manufacturers to make public any information that is entitled to protection as a trade secret. As cars become more complex and expensive to repair, consumers deserve to have choices when it comes to repairing their auto vehicles. This bill provides consumers that choice, while ensuring small businesses have the information they need in these difficult economic times.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today, I am proud to join Senator Brownback in introducing bipartisan automotive right to repair legislation. Our bill, the Motor Vehicle Owners Right to Repair Act, allows consumers the freedom to choose which repair shops they use for auto repairs and routine vehicle maintenance. Consumers today have many choices when it comes to the vehicle they drive, but not necessarily when it comes to the maintenance or repair options for those vehicles. Most cars today rely on computers to perform many of the automobile's vital functions including brakes, airbags, ignition and other operating systems. If an electronic component of a car fails or needs tuning, an access code is often needed in order to repair or replace the necessary part. These codes are currently provided on a voluntary basis to repair shops by car manufacturers. Unfortunately, many local independent repair shops are provided only limited or incomplete information by manufacturers to access and repair most elements of those vehicles. This lack of information puts consumers at a disadvantage, forcing many to pay premium prices to repair simple parts at dealerships or travel long distances to reach repair shops that take valuable time away from families and work. There are over 219,000 employees working in over 26,000 independent repair shops in California, providing those workers with good paying jobs. In this economy, we can't afford to disadvantage small businesses working hard to support their families. The Boxer-Brownback bill will require car manufacturers to provide all information and tools necessary to diagnose, service, maintain and repair a motor vehicle, including all safety alerts, access codes and recalls. This information must be provided to all repair shops, not just dealers or manufacturers' designated shops. Our bill also protects the integrity of manufacturers' concepts and systems by not requiring manufacturers to make public any information that is entitled to protection as a trade secret. As cars become more complex and expensive to repair, consumers deserve to have choices when it comes to repairing their auto vehicles. This bill provides consumers that choice, while ensuring small businesses have the information they need in these difficult economic times.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, I am honored today to recognize the League of Women Voters for their 90 years of voter education and activism, and specifically want to congratulate the League of Women Voters of Northwest Riverside. County. In 1920, when passage of the 19th amendment appeared to be imminent, members of the National American Woman Suffrage Association met to form the League of Women Voters. Carrie Chapman Catt first proposed the creation of a League to ``finish the fight'' and work to end all discrimination against women. While initially concerned with the status and rights of women, the League of Women Voters gradually expanded its interests to include issues affecting the whole community. I am sure suffragettes would be pleased that every issue became a women's issue. Today, the League works at all levels of government to address a wide variety of concerns including health care, education, climate change, land use, ethics and election and campaign finance reform. Whether through voter guides or public forums, the League gives voters the information they need to play a critical role in our community and country. For nearly 57 years, the League of Women Voters of Northwest Riverside County has made a difference--championing countless public policy challenges, hosting candidate forums and public information meetings, and distributing thousands of voter information guides. The suffragettes who started the movement to give women the right to vote did not know if they would succeed. But, they persevered. Today, with over 850 local Leagues, 50 State Leagues and the National League, the League of Women Voters remains just as committed to improving our democracy and the quality of life for all our citizens. Please join me in honoring the League of Women Voters for its dedication to the ideals of our great Nation.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, as we prepare to reauthorize the Child Nutrition Act, it is critical that we address the need to invest in commonsense ways to improve the health and well being of our nation's most precious resource--our children. Childhood obesity threatens the healthy future of one-third of American children. Every year we spend $150 billion to treat obesity- related conditions, and that cost is growing. Obesity rates tripled in the past 30 years, a trend that means, for the first time in our history, American children may face a shorter expected lifespan than their parents. Right now, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, USDA, spends more than $10 billion a year on school meal programs, but only a small fraction of that funding goes to fruits and vegetables. A recent report by the Institute of Medicine entitled School Meals: Building Blocks for Healthy Children, found that increasing the amount and variety of vegetables and fruits in schools is one of the best ways to make school meals healthier, and recommends that schools increase their offering of fruits and vegetables to help keep kids healthy. That is why I am introducing the Healthy Food in Schools Act, which would improve school nutrition by providing more fresh fruits and vegetables in school breakfasts and lunches starting in elementary school, when children are developing healthy eating habits. A recent study was conducted by Dr. Wendy Slusser, director of UCLA's Fit for Health Program, and Harvinder Sareen, Director of Clinical Programs at WellPoint, a health benefits company that found children's consumption of fruit and vegetables increases dramatically when produce is made available in school meals. The data also shows that increasing availability of fruits and vegetables exposes children to new foods, which can affect their eating habits for a lifetime. The Healthy Food in Schools Act instructs USDA to put in place a plan to promote the use of salad bars in schools and provide $10 million for fiscal years 2011 and 2012 to help schools purchase salad bars and fruit and vegetable bars for their cafeterias. The Healthy Food in Schools Act also includes $100 million for overall cafeteria infrastructure improvements. Many cafeterias around the country are looking to move away from processed food and toward kitchens that can cook healthier meals from scratch, but they lack the funds to implement such a plan. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act passed last year included $100 million in grants for cafeteria equipment, but the Department of Education received more than $650 million in requests for infrastructure improvements. This bill will help meet the needs of the many school districts that want to improve the meals they serve their students. This bill also provides competitive matching grants and technical assistance for schools to improve access to local foods. The bill directs $10 million a year for 5 years toward these farm-to-school programs. Farm-to-school programs are a proven, commonsense way to help improve the health of children while supporting local farmers and bolstering local economies. While many schools would like to incorporate fresh local food into their meals, schools often lack the startup funding and technical expertise to overcome barriers to making this change. These limited federal grants will give school districts and small- and medium-sized farms the help they need to develop new farm-to-school programs. With more than 31 million children participating in the National School Lunch Program and more than 11 million participating in the National School Breakfast Program, good nutrition at school is more important than ever. That is why I urge my colleagues to join me in support of including this commonsense bill in the upcoming reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Act. The Healthy Food in Schools Act will help ensure that our nation's children are not just eating, but also learning to eat healthy. The rise in the rates of children who are overweight or obese are a result of poor diets, a lack of physical activity, and insufficient nutrition education. A healthy school environment can help correct these problems and put our Nation's youth and our Nation on the path to a healthier and more sustainable future.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, as we prepare to reauthorize the Child Nutrition Act, it is critical that we address the need to invest in commonsense ways to improve the health and well being of our nation's most precious resource--our children. Childhood obesity threatens the healthy future of one-third of American children. Every year we spend $150 billion to treat obesity- related conditions, and that cost is growing. Obesity rates tripled in the past 30 years, a trend that means, for the first time in our history, American children may face a shorter expected lifespan than their parents. Right now, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, USDA, spends more than $10 billion a year on school meal programs, but only a small fraction of that funding goes to fruits and vegetables. A recent report by the Institute of Medicine entitled School Meals: Building Blocks for Healthy Children, found that increasing the amount and variety of vegetables and fruits in schools is one of the best ways to make school meals healthier, and recommends that schools increase their offering of fruits and vegetables to help keep kids healthy. That is why I am introducing the Healthy Food in Schools Act, which would improve school nutrition by providing more fresh fruits and vegetables in school breakfasts and lunches starting in elementary school, when children are developing healthy eating habits. A recent study was conducted by Dr. Wendy Slusser, director of UCLA's Fit for Health Program, and Harvinder Sareen, Director of Clinical Programs at WellPoint, a health benefits company that found children's consumption of fruit and vegetables increases dramatically when produce is made available in school meals. The data also shows that increasing availability of fruits and vegetables exposes children to new foods, which can affect their eating habits for a lifetime. The Healthy Food in Schools Act instructs USDA to put in place a plan to promote the use of salad bars in schools and provide $10 million for fiscal years 2011 and 2012 to help schools purchase salad bars and fruit and vegetable bars for their cafeterias. The Healthy Food in Schools Act also includes $100 million for overall cafeteria infrastructure improvements. Many cafeterias around the country are looking to move away from processed food and toward kitchens that can cook healthier meals from scratch, but they lack the funds to implement such a plan. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act passed last year included $100 million in grants for cafeteria equipment, but the Department of Education received more than $650 million in requests for infrastructure improvements. This bill will help meet the needs of the many school districts that want to improve the meals they serve their students. This bill also provides competitive matching grants and technical assistance for schools to improve access to local foods. The bill directs $10 million a year for 5 years toward these farm-to-school programs. Farm-to-school programs are a proven, commonsense way to help improve the health of children while supporting local farmers and bolstering local economies. While many schools would like to incorporate fresh local food into their meals, schools often lack the startup funding and technical expertise to overcome barriers to making this change. These limited federal grants will give school districts and small- and medium-sized farms the help they need to develop new farm-to-school programs. With more than 31 million children participating in the National School Lunch Program and more than 11 million participating in the National School Breakfast Program, good nutrition at school is more important than ever. That is why I urge my colleagues to join me in support of including this commonsense bill in the upcoming reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Act. The Healthy Food in Schools Act will help ensure that our nation's children are not just eating, but also learning to eat healthy. The rise in the rates of children who are overweight or obese are a result of poor diets, a lack of physical activity, and insufficient nutrition education. A healthy school environment can help correct these problems and put our Nation's youth and our Nation on the path to a healthier and more sustainable future.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I take this opportunity to recognize the 95th anniversary of the American Medical Women's Association, AMWA. AMWA is the Nation's oldest and largest multispecialty organization for women in medicine. The American Medical Women's Association was founded in 1915 in Chicago by Dr. Bertha Van Hoosen. At the time, women physicians were a minority, representing only 5 to 6 percent of all physicians in the United States. With the creation of AMWA, Dr. Van Hoosen intended ``to bring Medical Women into communication with each other for their mutual advantage, and to encourage social and harmonious relations within and without the profession.'' Since its inception 95 years ago, AMWA's membership has grown significantly. With more than 13,000 members today, AMWA has become a strong and trusted voice for women's health and the advancement of women in medicine at the local, national, and international level. For nearly a century, AMWA has empowered its members to be leaders in improving health for all, within a model that reflects the unique perspective of women. AMWA's members include physicians, residents, medical students, and health care professionals, all of whom are engaged in making a difference in the communities they serve. AMWA's charitable program, the American Women's Hospital Service, has provided international relief for more than 90 years, supporting clinics all over the world. The Journal of Women's Health, AMWA's medical journal, is a trusted resource for research and information on a wide range of women's health issues, and has been cited by the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, US News and World Report, and MSNBC.com. Through its many educational programs, support and mentorship of young women physicians, health care advocacy, and the promotion of excellence in medicine and scientific research, AMWA's members are truly champions for women's health. Since 1915, the American Medical Women's Association has served as the vision and voice of women in medicine. On its 95th anniversary, I commend the American Medical Women's Association for its tireless efforts to advance women in medicine, and look forward to its many future successes.

Mrs. BOXER

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

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I know you and I and others in this Chamber are focused like a laser beam on getting this economy turned around. Although we see some promising signs--for example, in my State of California it turns out that last month 32,000 new jobs were created--we still are not moving quickly enough on the jobs front. That is why I am particularly pleased that Leader Reid is focused on jobs, jobs, jobs, and we are going to finish, hopefully, the bill that is before us which is very critical to jobs. Then we are going to move on to the FAA reauthorization--the Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization--which is going to create 160,000 new jobs as we modernize our Nation's airports. After that, we are going to stop for a brief moment and take up the HIRE Act that we passed over here, and it has been passed in the House with a couple of pay-go changes. That will extend the highway trust fund until the end of this year and will save 1 million jobs. Mr. President, we can't play politics with the highway trust fund. The Nation needs us to build our highways, our bridges, and our roads. So we are doing the right thing. There is one piece of unfinished business that is directly related to our economy. There is no question that health care is directly related to our economy, and we need to fix a health care system that is broken. Now, I have listened to my Republican friends on this for a very long time, and they have a message for the American people. I would like to distill that message. That message is, when it comes to health care reform, when it comes to fixing the health care system, be afraid. Be very afraid. Mr. President, that is not the American way. When there is a challenge in front of us, we act. We don't cower in the corner in fear. I think it is important to note that if one were to be afraid, it should not be of fixing the system--which, in our mind, means if you like your health insurance, you can keep it, and we are going to make sure that it is affordable and that more people can obtain it. If there is one thing to be fearful of, it is doing nothing. It is the status quo. Let me explain why. Every day in America 14,000 people lose their health insurance. That could be any one of us, for any of a number of reasons. We might lose our job, or our spouse might lose their job, and that means we can't have health insurance anymore. An insurance company can rescind your policy. They can walk away and say: Oh, by the way, 10 years ago when you signed up, you didn't mention that you had one blood test that was a little awry and, therefore, we are walking away from you. You may have a cap on your policy and reach that cap, because you didn't read the fine print and so you are out; it is over. Any one of us could be one of the 14,000 people who loses their health insurance. Now, that would not happen in the Senate. Oh no. Every one of my colleagues is protected because we have a system that, yes, is a public option, where the rules are made by the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program and people can't mistreat us. But for some reason, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle don't seem to believe it is fair to give that kind of protection to ordinary families, so they are scaring people to death. So let me say again: If there is anything to be afraid of, it is doing nothing because you could be one of the 14,000 people--in my State about 1,400--who every day lose their insurance. Or, Mr. President, you could be one of the people who goes bankrupt because of a health care crisis. Sixty-two percent of bankruptcies in America today are directly linked to a health care crisis and most of those people have insurance. I repeat: Most of those people have insurance. I read a little story--I don't know if it is true--that Sarah Palin, the former Republican Vice Presidential nominee, said when she was young her family went to Canada to get their health care. I don't know if it is true, but I find it interesting if it is true. But here is the point: Doing nothing is not an option. Let me tell you what is happening. In California, a company--Anthem Insurance--has increased rates in the individual market by--hold on to your hat--29 percent. Imagine, 29 percent in one clip. This leads me to a study that was done by a nonpartisan group. That study showed what happens if we do nothing--which is, in fact, my Republican friends' idea because they say start over. Well, we started this under Teddy Roosevelt. It is time we acted. But this nonpartisan group said if we do nothing, the average cost of insurance would be 45 percent of a family's income by 2016. Imagine that. Yet my colleagues on the other side say: Well, if you go with the President's bill and the Democrats' bill, insurance rates will go up. The fact is, rates would not go up as much if you have the same policy. If you have a better policy, they may go up a little over time, but they are never going to be--never, never, never--45 percent of your income. There are two reasons for that: No. 1, we are going to watch insurance companies like a hawk, and that is the right thing to do. They are not selling us something that is a luxury. They are selling us a product that is a matter of life or death, and we ought to look over their shoulder a little more to make sure they are fair. So that is one reason. The other reason is, we are going to help people--the middle class-- families making up to $88,000 a year. We are going to make sure you get tax credits to help you pay for your premiums. That is a big deal. That is a good thing. So, remember, when the Republicans say: Be very afraid, don't be very afraid of reform, be very afraid of doing nothing. That is a reason to be very afraid. Then my Republican friends will say: They didn't take any of our ideas. Well, it turns out when the bill was being written in the Senate, well over 100 amendments--I think it was 160 amendments--of the Republicans were incorporated into the work of the HELP Committee. Oh, that is not good enough for them. We took 160 of their ideas, why can't they take an equal amount of our ideas? Why can't we work together, come to the table across party lines? It doesn't work that way. Then the President had them up for, I thought, a very instructive meeting, and the President took three or four more very big ideas of the Republicans--dealing with HSAs, dealing with medical malpractice, dealing with selling insurance across State lines, and a couple of other things. Yet they still say: It is not enough. Then they say: Be very afraid, people. Be very afraid because the Senate might do this with a majority vote. Well, I would suggest that all of us are here because we won a majority vote. I don't hear any of my colleagues suggesting we need 60 percent of the vote to win. We are here. I support minority rights very strongly, but there is a point where something turns and it becomes obstruction. I can't look into the faces of any of my constituents who are having all of these problems and tell them: I am sorry, I couldn't do anything even though we had a majority in the Senate. So they are scaring people about using a procedure they have used over the years. Out of 22 times, they have used the reconciliation procedure requiring a majority vote 16 times. I need to say that again. My Republican friends, who abhor the use of a majority rule, used it 16 times out of the 22 times it was used, and mostly it was used for health care. Then they say: Oh, no; when we used it, it was for much smaller things. Well, no, I checked it out. The whole Reagan revolution was done by reconciliation--all the Bush tax cuts, health care and all. So the very slippery slope of their argument, whatever the argument of the day is, at the end of the day it is about scaring people. It is all about scaring people. So I am going to close with this. I am going to talk about the 8 or 10 things that happened within 6 months to a year that this bill was signed into law--real things. For all new policies, you can keep your child on your policy until he or she is 27 years of age--27 years of age. I know a lot of people whose kids have been thrown off their policy. They may have had asthma, for example, and the insurance company says they have a preexisting condition and so they can get no insurance. We fix that in this bill. If you have a preexisting condition and you are an adult, and you can't get insurance, you can join a high-risk pool and get insurance very soon--within 90 days. If you run a small business that is struggling to find affordable health insurance, or you are self- employed--and I have spoken to so many people in that situation in California--there will be many billions of dollars for small business and self-employed people in tax credits to help them get insurance. The President has also proposed increasing funding for community health centers by $11 billion so they can provide affordable, high- quality care to even more families in need. There will be no preexisting conditions for children. If you have a child who has a preexisting condition, they still can get insured. I think about the story Harry Reid told about the couple who had full insurance, and the woman gave birth to a baby and the baby had a cleft palate. The couple was distraught, but the doctor said: Don't worry. We can fix that baby right up and no one is going to know there was a problem. So they wrote to their insurance company. You know what their insurance company said, even though they gave full coverage to that pregnant woman. They said: Your baby has a preexisting condition. You are out of luck. Mr. President, that is morally reprehensible. So if you want to be scared about something--and I don't believe in being scared about anything--be scared about the status quo. Be scared about what your insurers could do to you in today's world. What else will happen with this bill? Well, prevention is pretty much free. As soon as this bill is signed into law, you get to go to your doctor and get preventive treatment pretty much for free. If you are a senior and you are on a prescription drug plan, we are going to close that gap--that payment gap where you get to a certain level and then your insurance company stops paying until you reach yet another level. This creates the situation where at the time you need your medicine the most, it is not there for you. We are going to close that doughnut hole. By the way, that impacts 794,000 Californians. The President wants to give about $250 to help our seniors who fall into that doughnut hole right away. Also, there will be insurance reform. The minute this bill is signed into law, an insurance company must use 80 percent of their income on you--on the people who have insurance--not on them, not putting it in their pockets, not on these outrageous bonuses and paying their people millions of dollars. So 80 to 85 percent will have to go into the business of helping their people by expanding coverage or lowering premiums. There are a couple more things that will kick in--no more caps on new plans. I remember my husband and I once had a plan that had a cap. We didn't even know it, but somebody warned us and we realized it was a bad plan and there was a cap. I forget the amount, but it wasn't that high. Also, you will be protected from your insurance company walking away from you. No more rescissions in all new plans. There are other benefits to retirees. In 2014, we will have these exchanges, and you will be able to shop for the best insurance in an exchange online. It will be very clear. So we are moving in the right direction, Mr. President. At the end of the day, by the way, this bill saves money. Not only is it deficit neutral, it helps the deficit. Why? Because we take the fraud, waste, and abuse out of the system. My message to the people of this great country is, don't listen to the fear mongering. Learn the facts. Understand how life will be better if we move forward with this reform--but not in 3 years, right away. I think if we do that, and we realize we are going to do it in a way that actually reduces the deficit, there should be strong support for this bill. I hope we will be able to get to that day as we focus on getting this country on track: jobs, jobs, jobs. We also fix this problem of unaffordable health care, tenuous health care. It has to become something we can count on. I yield the floor and suggest absence of a quorum.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the memory of two respected and dedicated public servants, Fresno County Sheriff's Deputy Joel Wahlenmaier and Reedley Police Officer Javier Bejar. Deputy Wahlenmaier and Officer Bejar were tragically killed in the line of duty while helping officers with the California Fire Marshal's office serve a warrant on a suspected arsonist in Minkler, CA. Deputy Wahlenmaier was born in Bakersfield, CA, and raised in Fresno. After spending his early career in construction, Deputy Wahlenmaier joined the Fresno County Sheriff's Department in 1998. During his tenure with the department, he worked as a detective in the homicide and property crime bureaus and he was a longtime member of the department's search and rescue team. Deputy Wahlenmaier is survived by his wife Beverly and children Amy and Austin. He had a profound love of the outdoors. He was a skilled fisherman and hunter who enjoyed skiing and water sports. Those who knew Deputy Wahlenmaier will always remember him as a trusted, caring, and kind colleague and friend, and above all else, a devoted family man. Officer Bejar was born in Mexico and moved to the United States with his family at the age of 3. He grew up in Orange Cove in Fresno County. While a student at Reedley High School, he became an Explorer Scout in the Reedley Police Department Police Explorer Program, which teaches young people interested in pursuing a law enforcement career the fundamentals of police service. After graduating from high school, he joined the U.S. Marine Corps, during which time he served a 14-month tour in Iraq and Kuwait and earned the rank of sergeant before he was honorably discharged. Officer Bejar joined the Reedley Police Department in 2005. He was named the Reedley Police Department Officer of the Year in 2007 and he received a life-saving medal in 2009. Office Bejar is survived by his wife Miriam, his parents, and seven siblings. He will always be remembered as a gentleman with an engaging personality who was committed to his job and family. Deputy Wahlenmaier and Officer Bejar dutifully served the residents of Fresno County with great selflessness, integrity, and valor. Their devotion to help others and passion to make a positive impact on the community epitomize the best ideals of law enforcement. Their lasting contributions to public safety and law enforcement are greatly appreciated. They will be sorely missed. We shall always be grateful for Deputy Wahlenmaier and Office Bejar's heroic service and the sacrifices that they made while serving the community and the people they loved.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, first, I wish to thank Senator Thune. He gave me permission to speak before him. I will be brief in my strong support for the Murray amendment to provide $1.5 billion for youth jobs programs through the Workforce Investment Act for summer and year-round employment. This amendment will help create up to 500,000 temporary jobs for young people. We know the youth jobs program works. Funds included in the Recovery Act for youth jobs provided over 300,000 young adults with employment opportunities last summer, stimulating local economies all across the country. Young adults who work not only help supplement family incomes, they also spend the money they earn in their communities. According to the Northeastern University Center for Labor Market Studies, every dollar earned by a young adult returns $3 to the local economy. Youth jobs programs also help disadvantaged young adults become active members of their communities. The many local workforce investment groups in my State of California not only provide disadvantaged young adults with short-term employment, they also offer job training and mentoring programs, help them advance their careers with educational opportunities, and teach critical life skills. We also know right now there are not enough work opportunities for teens and young adults. The unemployment rate for 16- to 19-year-olds is above 25 percent. For 16 to 19-year-old African Americans, the unemployment rate is nearly 50 percent. Youth jobs programs help keep our kids off the streets, which is important to all our communities. I wish to highlight one of the many Recovery Act youth jobs success stories in California. The Placer Herald reported that last summer the Golden Sierra Investment Board worked with 23 disadvantaged teens in Rocklin, CA, to construct a permanent storage facility at a local high school. The participants helped design the facility using computer design technologies. They built the mainframe, painted and dry-walled and installed solar lighting. Without Recovery Act youth job funds, this program wouldn't have been possible. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the article from the Rocklin, CA, Placer Herald. It is a wonderful story about the high school students taking on this building project.

Mrs. BOXER. So this amendment is very important. As our economy continues to recover, we all know jobs are lagging. We need to do all we can to try to replicate what happened in Rocklin, CA. When you give a young person opportunity, a job opportunity, I think it stays with them the rest of their life. I remember the jobs I held when I was a teenager. One gave me a sense of self that I could help the company I was working for. I did many different jobs as a youngster in the summer. I was very fortunate to have that experience that I brought to other jobs later in my career. So this amendment will create up to 500,000 summer jobs. It will strengthen local economies. I do thank Senator Murray and the other cosponsors in the Senate. In closing, I wish to acknowledge Congresswoman Barbara Lee and the Congressional Black Caucus, who are leading the fight in the House to support critical youth job programs for our disadvantaged young people. When I talked to Congresswoman Lee, she said: Barbara, can you do something in the Senate. I remembered Senator Murray had this bill, and I called Senator Murray. We have this amendment here. I think the fact that it has been offered early in this bill is good because this is something we can do for our young people. They want so much to get job experience. They are struggling so much in this recession. I wish to congratulate Senator Murray and the other cosponsors. I hope we have strong bipartisan support for this amendment. Again, I thank Senator Thune for allowing me to speak, and I yield the floor.

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I want to thank Senator Webb for offering this amendment, which is the same text as our bill that we introduced about a month ago. I think Senator Webb has made an excellent case for this very important amendment which will reduce the deficit. It is an amendment that I believe reflects fairness and justice and the American way. In 2008 and 2009, the financial sector, as well as the automobile industry, received generous and unprecedented aid from taxpayers. It was done in order to stave off another Great Depression. It was a tough vote to make, and we did it because we believed we were on the brink of another Great Depression and, frankly, a financial collapse. If we remember back to those days, credit was frozen, businesses couldn't borrow, and we were hearing predictions that this could be the end of capitalism. We heard that from Republicans and Democrats alike. So what we did has worked. We have avoided a Great Depression. The economy is growing, although we are very worried about the slow pace of job creation, which is why we are working so hard to continue to create new jobs. But if we take a look at the financial institutions which received this huge bailout, what we see is they showed a resounding economic recovery in 2009. Thanks to taxpayer assistance, many of these companies are posting record profits. So you have these companies posting record profits, that benefited when times were bad with taxpayer help, and now they are paying out multimillion dollar bonuses to their top executives. The United States pays its President--our highest paid Federal official--$400,000. These company leaders are earning millions of dollars, and then, on top of that, bonuses. So what Senator Webb and I are saying is this: If you have received a bonus of $400,000 or more from one of the top recipients of the taxpayer bailout, you should pay a special one-time fee--50 percent of that bonus, which is on top of your salary. Fifty percent of the bonus of $400,000 or more should go back to the taxpayers and reduce our deficit. It is hard for me to imagine how these financial companies, which were bailed out by taxpayers, could have such a deaf ear to the plight of America's workers and why they would embark upon these enormous bonuses, especially since they are not lending the monies that we think they ought to lend to businesses. They are actually cutting back on lending to qualified businesses--I think it is an 18-percent reduction in loans to businesses--yet they are paying out these enormous bonuses. So what Senator Webb and I are saying is we want a one-time, 50-percent fee paid on the bonus that exceeds $400,000. This fee would only affect those recipients at the largest and most major companies who received this bailout. I want to reiterate this. The fee is paid on the bonuses that exceed $400,000. We don't touch the bonuses $400,000 or less. We are making a point. And even though we have been fair, it will return to the Treasury about $10 billion, is our estimate, over time. It is only fair that these institutions, which were so greatly assisted in 2009, should help our Nation with our fiscal problems. We inherited those problems from this economic collapse. We know that when President Bush handed the keys over to President Obama there already was a huge deficit in place, but President Obama had to act. We had to pass an economic recovery act. We had to make sure credit was flowing. So it added still more to the debt, and it seems to me only fair that people who are at those institutions that were bailed out--which only exist because of the generosity of taxpayers, because we knew if they failed there would be big trouble--if their bonuses are over $400,000 they ought to pay this special one-time fee back to taxpayers. Reducing the deficit is important and fairness is important. I want to thank my colleague from Virginia for working with me on this legislation, and I urge the Senate, in a bipartisan way, to join us in supporting this commonsense measure. We hear a lot of talk around here about the deficit, the deficit, the deficit. That is a very important priority for us--to reduce this deficit. Here is a way to do it that is totally fair and just. People who work at the institutions that got the biggest bailouts from Uncle Sam to save them, and those people who are now getting these enormous bonuses, ought to make a contribution to deficit reduction. We need it, we think it is right, and we hope there will be a big bipartisan vote in favor of the Webb-Boxer amendment. I yield the floor. Amendment No. 3338

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, I came here in the hope that, as we begin work on this very important bill that is going to help reinvigorate our economy, we are making progress on getting Senator Bunning to step down from his objection to a short-term extension of the number of programs that are essential to the well-being of our Nation. Senator Bunning says he is objecting to an extension of unemployment benefits and health subsidies for the jobless and, by the way, highway and transit programs and other programs because he wants to offset that extension with cuts in funding from the Economic Recovery Act. I want to make the point that at a time when jobless rates are soaring, certain of these actions that we take are emergency actions. They are actions we take because the long-term unemployed are in big trouble. If we pay for this by slashing economic recovery funds that are already obligated or are about to go out, and they are about to start hiring people, then it seems to me we are taking one step forward and two steps back. I am willing to vote on this matter, and I hope Senator Bunning will lift his objection if we get to vote. It is not a problem. Let's vote on it. I have written to Senator Bunning on a couple of occasions on behalf of the 201,000 Californians who have already seen their unemployment insurance benefits expire if we don't renew this. This is a very dangerous precedent to set. I noted to him that not only is he hurting people who are doing everything in their power to get work, but he is also shutting down transportation projects in California and in 16 other States because he will not agree to reauthorize the highway trust fund for just 30 days. This is an impossible situation. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a list of the States already impacted by Senator Bunning's objection to a 30-day extension for the highway trust fund.

Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, in California, we are already seeing layoffs because the department of transportation had to lay off and furlough--they furloughed, temporarily I trust--2,000 Federal inspectors who are overseeing in 17 of our States a number of important projects; for example, in Alaska, the Tongass National Forest road cleanup. Another project in Arizona is the Coronado National Monument main park entrance. In Arkansas, there is a shutdown. In California, there is the Sequoia National Park main entrance, the Southfork Smith River, and Golden Gate National Recreation Area road construction. In DC, there is the 9th Street Bridge replacement. One Senator is stopping these important construction projects. They are crucial safety projects that have been stopped in their tracks because one Senator has decided that it is his way or the highway. We have to stop bringing this Senate to paralysis. We all have our opinions. I have mine and I know the Senator from Montana has his and the Senator from New York has his and the Senator from Michigan has hers; and we think we are right and we make our case. Once we have argued our cases, the will of the Senate has to go forward. Senator Bunning doesn't seem to think it is an emergency that the highway trust fund has run out of funds. He doesn't think it is an emergency that there are long-term jobless Americans. He doesn't agree. He doesn't agree that it is an emergency, I gather, that people cannot pay for their health care extension. By the way, he also stopped--this is very important, and I know the Senator from Montana knows this well--the 21 percent to our doctors who take Medicare. I met with my doctors from California today. They cannot believe this is happening. In Ventura County our doctors are saying that because of this 21-percent cut they are facing in their reimbursements, they are only going to see emergencies. They are not going to see someone who has a nonemergency. This is gamesmanship. I call on Senator Bunning to remove his objection to the extension of the highway trust fund and the transportation programs and the unemployment benefits and the cuts in Medicare reimbursement to our doctors. Each week that Senator Bunning maintains his hold, each week that he insists he will stop this, 6,000 California families will lose their unemployment benefits. Let's end this today. Each week that Senator Bunning maintains his hold, many California small businesses will not be able to get access to needed loans from the SBA and the flood insurance program was held up. Californians and Americans from every State will lose their health insurance coverage. I can only marvel at this turn of events--and not marvel in a good way. It takes obstruction to the next level. It is a bridge too far. I think there are Members on the Democratic side who are willing to stand on their feet for as long as it takes to try to get this done today. We hope Senator Bunning will back down. If he continues and keeps this up, if the highway program is shut down for just 1 month, tens of thousands of jobs are at stake. I want to say what those jobs would be. In Arizona, it would be 1,400 jobs; in California, it would be 6,000; in Florida, 3,000; in Illinois, 2,000; in Kentucky--the home State of Senator Bunning, who is stopping the highway trust fund from being funded--it would be 1,198 jobs, if he keeps this behavior up for 1 month. Senator Bunning says he has every right to do this. Sure he does. He is a Senator and he can do it. But it is wrong. If each of us decided to throw a fit every time we didn't like something around here, who gets hurt? Not Senator Bunning. He has a job and he has health care. He is not worried. He is not a physician who is getting held up either. He is fine and I am fine. It is the people of Kentucky, his State, and it is the people of California, my State, who get hurt. If this keeps up for 1 month, there will be 6,000 job losses in Texas and 1,300 in Wisconsin. If this keeps up and we do not get our work done and we do not reauthorize the highway trust fund, as we did in the HIRE Act, we will lose 1 million jobs in America. That gets to be inexplicable in terms of ``a world of hurt.'' I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a chart prepared by AASHTO listing the impact of reductions in funding in all 50 States.

Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, as I stand here today, it would be pretty easy to solve this problem. Senator Bunning needs to stand down. He just needs to stand down. He made his point. He argues that we should pay for emergency funding. I voted for pay-go, but we do have a clause that says if it is a real emergency, we do not have to pay for it. The reason that is important is if we do what Senator Bunning wants and we extend this jobless help and we extend the highway trust fund and, on the other hand, we cut the economic recovery moneys which are all obligated and on which work is about to start, we are not doing anything for the country. Let's do this right. Many of us who are standing here saw terrible deficit and debt problems during the Clinton years. You know what we did? We fixed it. We had room for emergencies. But we fixed it by going to pay-go. When there were emergencies, we stepped back. I think it is fair to note that Senator Bunning is very agitated about the fact that we would extend jobless benefits without cutting spending in job creation. Yet when it was time for him to vote for tax breaks for the wealthiest people who earn over $1 million, he could care less that it was put on Uncle Sam's credit card. When it was time to pay for the war in Iraq, oh, put it on the credit card of the country. But all of a sudden, it is help to our families who need it so desperately and we are going to have to cut other programs that are providing jobs. It does not make sense. It is not fair, and it is not consistent. I renew my request that I have made twice now to Senator Bunning. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record my letters to him.

Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, I wrote to him on February 26 ``On behalf of the 201,000 Californians who will see their unemployment insurance benefits expire'' and telling him that the benefits will expire on Sunday, which was 2 days ago; that unemployment insurance is a lifeline to the long-term unemployed whose families have been hit hard by this recession. I thanked him for his immediate attention, and I hope he did, in fact, read this letter. And I hope he read my letter of March 1. I wrote to him as chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee. I wanted to make sure he knew that he also objected to reauthorizing the highway trust fund expenditures, and that means the Department of Transportation is starting to lay off people. They laid off inspectors, furloughed them. They will go back to work when we fix this mess. But what a mess. Do you know what it is to shut down construction jobs midway? By the way, these are private sector employers, private sector workers who are doing this work. It is unacceptable. I told him, ``It is hurting people in your State, in my State and all across the country.'' These Federal inspectors will be removed from critical projects across the Nation. Work is shutting down. I attached the Department of Transportation's list of the affected projects. I said: We can't have an economic recovery if people can't make ends meet and if transportation projects grind to a halt. We all know the housing sector is so weak. That construction is not going well. We need to construct the infrastructure of this Nation. These are not make-work projects. These are projects fixing bridges and highways and making sure our roads are safe. I asked him to stop his gamesmanship and remove his objection to the extension of the transportation authorization and the unemployment benefits. As I said today, I add to that the extension of the funding for our physicians who are relying on us not to allow a 21-percent cut for Medicare to go into place. The fact that we do not have a lot of leadership down here says to me they are working on this now. It says to me they are reaching out to Senator Bunning and my Republican colleagues to see if they will stand down. I want to say I hope he does. These are real people. These are real people who are suffering. There is no need for them to suffer. We are not going to turn our backs on the long-term jobless. We are not going to turn our backs at all. This is just political maneuvering which is making life very difficult for people whose lives have been pretty much shattered if they are long term unemployed and looking for work and trying desperately to get it. Hopefully, Senator Bunning will back down, and my Republican friends will agree that we can move forward. If they want a vote on Senator Bunning's plan to cut economic recovery funds that have already been obligated to put people to work to pay for an emergency, I am willing to take that vote any day of the week. I hope to be back later and have some comments. I hope those comments are: Good, we got past this crisis. But at the moment, it is 4 o'clock in the afternoon, and we are not through it yet. I am hopeful that maybe later we will get through this and extend these vital programs to the people who need them. I am going to close. I thank the people who have worked so hard with me on getting this highway reauthorization done. It is Republicans and Democrats. It is the Chamber of Commerce. It is AASHTO. It is the general contractors. It is the construction unions. This is an amazing team of people. It is the AAA. It is the car riders associations. It is everyone--Republicans, Democrats, Independents. They want an end to these games. I hope today we will see the end. If we do not, then we are going to have a long, long night ahead of us to make the point that it is wrong for one Senator to stop our people, our American people from getting the help they deserve, from getting the jobs they deserve to have in the highway fund and the help they need while they are looking for work. I yield the floor.