Sherrod Brown

Mr. BROWN

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BROWN

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to speak for 3 minutes notwithstanding the previous order.

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, at a quarter after, I am leading a group of seven or eight Senators to talk about the trade promotion authority and the transpacific partnership, but I would like to take this opportunity while the floor is empty--and I thank my Republican colleagues--to talk about Ohio civil rights pioneer Congressman Louis Stokes. I have known him for 35 years. We celebrated his 90th birthday on Monday, and I had the opportunity to speak to him. Lou Stokes is a proud son of Cleveland, the city in which I live. He was born in that city nine decades ago and grew up in one of the first Federal housing projects in the country. Lou rose to prominence as a lawyer and a legislator. His father worked in a laundromat and his mother cleaned houses. Lou himself shined shoes to earn extra money. He served in the Army during World War II and went to college at night on the GI bill. He is the American success story. Lou was stationed in the Deep South during segregation. He was appalled by the discrimination he witnessed, even for those wearing the uniform and serving our country. That experience compelled him to dedicate his life to fighting injustice. He handled matters big and small in his legal practice. He argued the landmark case of Terry v. Ohio before the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court's ruling in Terry addressed the police stop-and-frisk policy and defined what constitutes a reasonable search and seizure. As the first African American to represent Ohio in the U.S. Congress and the first African American to serve on the Committee on Appropriations, his mere presence was groundbreaking. But Lou never rested on his laurels. While serving as a Congressman for 15 terms, he was a fierce advocate for the city he loves and for civil rights. Lou didn't use his success to seek glory for himself; he used his powerful position to expand opportunities for men and women, for people of all colors, and young people and old people. After retiring from Congress, he didn't retire; he returned home to Cleveland and played a key role in Cleveland's civic life. His role at Squire Sanders was instrumental in the firm's growth. Working alongside his longtime friend and my friend John Lewis--the lawyer John Lewis in Cleveland, not Congressman John Lewis in Washington--he made a difference in so many ways. Lou served on the Ohio Task Force on Community-Police Relations. He is known always to fight for his neighborhood, the projects where he and his brother Carl, who was the first Black mayor of a major American city, grew up. Carl was elected as mayor right before Lou was elected to Congress. It has been their labor of love to work to improve schools and opportunities in Cleveland. The Cleveland VA center is named after Lou Stokes, as are buildings throughout the Nation. They illustrate his hard work and his dedication. It is fitting that as we celebrate his milestone birthday this week, the final week of Black History Month, we renew our commitment to the cause of Lou Stokes's 90 years. Lou means so much to me personally, he means so much to Cleveland, and he means so much to our country. I know the Presiding Officer, Senator Inhofe, got to serve with him in the House, as I did, and it was an honor to do that and a privilege to call Lou Stokes my friend. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I know there is a UC order for seven or eight Senators. Senators Casey, Merkley, Whitehouse, Markey, Warren, Baldwin, and Sanders we believe will be here for the next 45 minutes under an agreed-to order to talk about our concerns with trade promotion authority and the Trans-Pacific Partnership. I will lead off, then Senator Casey will speak, and then Senators Merkley and Whitehouse. We know a number of things. We know that American workers are the most competitive and productive in the world. We also know that far too many have been left behind because of wrongheaded trade deals. In the 20th century, we built the strongest economy in the history of the world by building the strongest middle class in the history of the world. We invested in the health and safety of our workforce, guaranteed workers the right to bargain for fairer pay and reasonable hours. It was a fight to do so and more remains to be done. We expanded opportunity for women and people of color, which society had never done, to realize their full potential in the labor force. Americans up and down the income spectrum reaped the awards. Workers got more productive, wages went up, profits were good, communities were strong. We led the world with a booming economy fueled by a skilled and powered workforce. The talent and tenacity of American workers has not changed, but our leaders'--including in this body--commitment to those workers, frankly, and, unfortunately, has. Nowhere has that abandonment been more clear than the free trade agreements we now approve with little oversight and minimal debate. These binding trade agreements affect all American workers. They cut into small business and industry, and they cut to the heart of the values we hold dear--or say we hold dear--as a sovereign democracy. Too often they are pushed through this body so quickly that the corporations pushing them hope we won't notice these agreements are loaded with corporate handouts that weaken our Nation's ability to chart its own course. The last thing we need is another NAFTA. We know what the North American Free Trade Agreement did to us 20 years ago when it passed. We know the damage it did to workers in Philadelphia. We know the damage it did to small companies in Oregon. We know what it did to communities in Rhode Island. And I know up close what it has done to far too many communities--from Troy to Piqua to Toledo to Dayton--in my State. We always talk about American exceptionalism. We give lip service to American exceptionalism. Our Nation is exceptional. We see these same people who always talk about American exceptionalism--and criticize anyone who doesn't talk about it--pushing trade agreements that undermine American laws and bypass our legal system. For what end? To benefit big companies that can't get what they want through our democratic system. I urge my colleagues and anyone else to read the article today written by Senator Warren of Massachusetts about something called ``investor-state dispute settlement.'' This is what I want to talk about for a moment. Take the issue of tobacco. Tobacco use is the world's leading cause of preventable death. Tobacco companies have been one of the most successful group of companies of any in American history. More trade deals give Big Tobacco a new tool to peddle its poison. How does that work? Big Tobacco turns to trade deals as the most fertile avenue for defeating international public health efforts. Big Tobacco knows it can't win in this body, even with a conservative majority that too often does the bidding of Wall Street and large companies. Senator Merkley and Senator Blumenthal have helped to lead this charge to make our tobacco law strong. So what do tobacco companies do if they can't win in a democratic body here? They use a trade provision called investor-state dispute settlement. In the case of Big Tobacco, it uses ISDS to challenge public health measures around the globe. Let me give an example. Big Tobacco and its supporters are suing Australia for its Tobacco Plain Packaging Act 2011. They are challenging under Australian-Hong Kong bilateral investment. They have good lawyers. They know how to do darned near anything to use these laws--that they helped write under trade policy--to benefit them and sell more cigarettes and poison our young people in far too many cases. The Tobacco Plain Packaging Act in Australia--passed by a democratically elected legislative body, signed onto by the executive branch in Australia--simply says that tobacco companies can't use their market-tested logos; they have to use plain black-and-white packaging. Also on the tobacco packet they put pictures of diseased lungs or pictures of people who have been sick from tobacco, so when people pick that packet up, they get the message. Big Tobacco sued Australia under the World Trade Organization despite the fact that the Australian courts had already ruled in favor of the country of the public health law. Tobacco companies have launched similar cases against Uruguay over its proposed graphic warnings on cigarette packages. Think about this: A big tobacco company is threatening to sue a small, relatively poor country such as Uruguay, saying: If you pass a public health law, we are going to sue you in court--not in one of your courts, but in some international court made up of mostly trade lawyers. So what does a country the size of Uruguay often do? They give up. They say: We can't afford to defend ourselves in an expensive court proceeding. Fortunately for Uruguay, Michael Bloomberg--one of the richest men in the world--stepped in and helped them fight back. Togo--one of the ten poorest countries in the world, West Africa-- simply gave up when Philip Morris sued them. The people of Togo wanted a law to protect their children from the big marketing of tobacco companies. Philip Morris came in, threatened to sue them, and the Government of Togo backed off. What is good about that? It is appalling. It is antidemocratic. It has been left to a comedy show to expose the practice of Big Tobacco. Watch John Oliver talk about this on HBO. Trade policy should ensure a level playing field for all companies competing in a global economy, not serve as a tool for the richest corporation to overturn laws enacted by sovereign governments-- particularly not when, in this country, we are facing stagnating wages, increased middle-class anxiety and insecurity, and rising inequality at home. So we are going to pass a trade agreement as CEOs' pay reaches record highs, as average wages stagnate, as profits go up, as unionization goes down, as wages fall as a share of GDP. Think about this. Productivity has increased in our country 85 percent in the past 30 years. It used to be, as productivity went like that, wages went like that. But now, productivity goes up 85 percent, wages went up 6 percent. The minimum wage in the United States today has 30-percent less buying power than it had 35 years ago. That is why this trade agreement is a bad idea. We know what has happened to manufacturing. We lost 5 million manufacturing jobs between 2000 and 2010. Just look at the impact of trade on U.S. manufacturing for more than 16 million jobs. It dropped here. We had the auto rescue here, which meant a little bit of an increase, but it increases only back to 12 million manufacturing jobs. We know bad trade agreements, bad policies on globalization, bad policies on taxes, mean lost jobs--lost manufacturing jobs. That is the ticket to the middle class. Ever since NAFTA in 1993, taking effect in 1994, we have seen the acceleration of that decline in manufacturing jobs. It is bad for our communities, it is bad for our families, it is bad for our workers, it is bad for the States of Pennsylvania and Oregon and Ohio and Rhode Island, and it is bad for our country.

Mr. BROWN. Think about what Senator Whitehouse just said. A U.S. company that made an additive to gasoline filed suit against a public health law that the Canadian legislative body passed because they believed in clean air, and under NAFTA that company in the United States sued the Canadians. The Canadian taxpayers had to pay the company and repeal their public health law. I thought this was a democracy. Think about that multiplied by how many times--about what Senator Warren talked about her in piece in the Washington Post today.

Mr. BROWN

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

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 10 minutes as in morning business.

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, this week marks the final week of Black History Month, an annual tradition that celebrates Black history and culture but also is a call to action to continue our Nation's march, as halting as it sometimes is, toward equality. This week we take an important step toward awarding a Congressional Gold Medal to the foot soldiers who participated in Bloody Sunday, Turnaround Tuesday, or the Selma to Montgomery Voting Rights March. Senator Scott and I and Senators Shelby and Sessions and the banking committee moved forward on that earlier today. I am proud to be one of the 65 cosponsors. I am also introducing a resolution this week instructing the Postal Service to issue a commemorative stamp honoring the 50th anniversary of the Selma marches. It is far past time for us to honor the brave men and women who risked life and limb to demand full participation in our democracy. We can do this on the Senate floor. We can do it by traveling to Selma. Next week Senator Scott and I will lead a delegation to Selma for the anniversary of the march. I understand my colleague from Ohio may be joining us. I took my daughters Emily and Elizabeth there a number of years ago. I look forward to the journey to Selma with my wife in a couple of weeks, marking the 50th anniversary. Fifty years ago, Dr. King led thousands in that 54-mile march--the second Selma bridge crossing, if you will. They arrived in Montgomery 4 days later to a crowd of 25,000 Black and White supporters. In his speech that day, Dr. King told a story of one of the marchers: Sister Pollard, a 70-year-old African-American women who lived in Montgomery during the bus boycott a little less than a decade earlier. She was asked if she wanted a ride during the march instead of walking. She said: ``No.'' The person said: ``Aren't you tired?'' She said: ``My feet are tired, but my soul is rested.'' Progress is never easy, and as we celebrate Black History Month, we are reminded of the long journey we have traveled and how far we still have to go. This month we celebrate the contributions African Americans have made to the fabric of our Nation. When Carter G. Woodson started what became Black History Month in 1926, my State of Ohio--the Presiding Officer's State--had already produced 19th-century poet Paul Laurence Dunbar; Columbus native Granville T. Woods had already invented the telegraph device that sent messages between moving trains and train stations; Mary Jane Patterson had already become the first Black woman to graduate from Oberlin College, in my part of Ohio; Garrett Morgan, a Clevelander, had already invented the traffic signal; Ohio State Representative John P. Green had introduced a bill to establish Labor Day in Ohio, which later became Labor Day, which we all celebrate; and COL Charles Young, who found freedom in Ripley, OH, in the Presiding Officer's old congressional district, became the highest ranking African-American commanding officer in the U.S. Army in 1894--120 years ago--and the first African-American superintendent of a national park. This month we celebrate these and other pioneering Ohioans: two Pulitzer Prize winners--Nobel Prize-winning writer Toni Morrison from Lorain and former Poet Laureate of the United States Rita Dove from Akron. Olympic Gold Medalist Jesse Owens grew up in Cleveland. Jesse Owens spoke at my brother's high school graduation in Mansfield. Howard Arthur Tibbs from Salem served with the Tuskegee Airmen, and I was honored to meet his family in 2007 when this body posthumously awarded him the Congressional Gold Medal. Congressman Louis Stokes, who so many in this body know, rose from one of the first Federal housing projects in the Nation, in Cleveland, to prominence as a lawyer and legislator. Yesterday Louis Stokes celebrated his 90th birthday. He argued before the Supreme Court in his legal practice, and during his two decades in Congress he was a forceful advocate for the city he loves. This month we honor them and many others. These achievements have come in the face of centuries of oppression, making these achievements all the more remarkable. They have not come to be recognized simply through chance. It took a century of concerted effort--longer than that, really--led by Black Americans such as Dr. King, to give voice to the struggles and the stories, the triumphs and the traditions of the African Americans who have shaped who we are as a country and as a people. These stories are the ones we celebrate this month and the ones we must do more to honor and tell. This month I am introducing legislation to begin the process of designating the Parker House in Ripley, OH, as a national monument. John Parker was a slave who purchased his freedom, became a successful businessman, and helped many others to freedom on the Underground Railroad through crossing the Ohio River and heading north, some to Oberlin and ultimately many to Canada. Stories such as these are too often untold and overlooked. They show us how African Americans have shaped their own destiny in this country. I hope today my colleagues will join me in honoring the African Americans who have made us who we are as a nation. I would add that I hope this 50th anniversary, this trip that a number of colleagues and I will take to Selma, will mark progress in voting rights. We took huge strides in voting rights in the last 50 years. In fact, in 1964 it was a conservative Republican Congressman from north of Dayton by the name of William McCullough, who was the senior Republican on the House Judiciary Committee--Jacqueline Kennedy and others credited Congressman McCullough, perhaps more than any other single Member--even more than Hubert Humphrey or Everett Dirksen--for the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act passing the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate and being signed by the President. Unfortunately, in the last few years we have seen State legislators and far too many Members of this body try to scale back and roll back some of those gains in voting rights--all in the name of stopping fraud, when in fact voting fraud is much exaggerated by them. It barely exists. But the efforts to roll back voting rights has resulted from that. It is wrong, and it is shameful, especially as we celebrate the 50th anniversary. I am hopeful we can move forward in spite of what this very conservative Supreme Court has done, move forward in voting rights as we honor Black History Month, as we honor 50 years of Selma, and as we honor the work African Americans and Whites have done to make this country a better place to live. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, we have made great strides in recent years ensuring that Americans of all ages have access to quality health care. Part of this success comes from the Children's Health Insurance Program created in 1997 as a joint State-Federal health insurance program for low- to moderate-income children and pregnant women. Because of CHIP, 10 million children, including 130,000 children in my State--most of whom are sons and daughters of working parents who are in low-income jobs and not making enough money to afford insurance and for employers that typically don't offer insurance--have access to health care today--health care they may not have received otherwise. We know CHIP works not just in the number of children insured under the program but because of the flexibility CHIP provides States and the quality of care children receive. It works. It works for children, it works for parents, and it works for communities. That is the good news. The bad news is, even though the law is on the books until 2019, the funding for CHIP will expire in September. That is why I am proud to introduce legislation today with my colleagues Senators Stabenow, Wyden, Casey, and Leader Reid to protect the CHIP program and to extend its funding to match the authorization until 2019. The Protecting and Retaining our Children's Health Insurance Program--PRO-CHIP--Act is straightforward, it is common sense, and will provide much needed budget predictability for our States. The Republican Governor of my State supports CHIP. He understands they need it in Ohio and across the country sooner rather than later so they can properly budget and plan and avoid gaps in health care for vulnerable children. Again, these 130,000 children in my State alone are overwhelmingly sons and daughters of working parents who don't make enough money to pay for health insurance out of pocket, and who are working at companies and businesses that don't provide health insurance. I am honored that 30 of our Senate colleagues have already joined as cosponsors. Providing health insurance to low-income children isn't just the right thing to do, it is the smart thing to do. Children stay healthier, families function better, neighborhoods are better off, and children do better in school as a result, with fewer sick days. They feel better when they are at school because they have a family doctor, because they have health insurance. We know it works. Listen to these numbers: Thanks to CHIP, the number of uninsured children has fallen by half, from 14 percent in 1997--when this bill passed with bipartisan support, and it has been extended and reauthorized a couple of times since--to a record low of 7 percent in 2012. In nearly every State of the Union, Governors planning their State budgets and parents planning their family budgets are relying on us to extend CHIP now. We should not go right up to the deadline, as some are now talking about in terms of shutting the government down. We should not go up to the deadline but do it now. It would provide a sigh of relief for parents, not only for financial reasons but because CHIP means better access to comprehensive care for their kids. Think about the anxiety parents face knowing they have insurance today under CHIP but not being certain they will have it this time next year. We should act together to protect this vital program that provides comprehensive health care coverage for 10 million children. States will start to roll back their CHIP program and funding for the program will expire at the end of September if we don't act soon. This has always been bipartisan. It should continue to be. I look forward to working with all my colleagues to prioritize children's health and help pass this PRO-CHIP legislation as soon as possible.

Mr. BROWN

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

Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, we have made great strides in recent years ensuring that Americans of all ages have access to quality health care. Part of this success comes from the Children's Health Insurance Program created in 1997 as a joint State-Federal health insurance program for low- to moderate-income children and pregnant women. Because of CHIP, 10 million children, including 130,000 children in my State--most of whom are sons and daughters of working parents who are in low-income jobs and not making enough money to afford insurance and for employers that typically don't offer insurance--have access to health care today--health care they may not have received otherwise. We know CHIP works not just in the number of children insured under the program but because of the flexibility CHIP provides States and the quality of care children receive. It works. It works for children, it works for parents, and it works for communities. That is the good news. The bad news is, even though the law is on the books until 2019, the funding for CHIP will expire in September. That is why I am proud to introduce legislation today with my colleagues Senators Stabenow, Wyden, Casey, and Leader Reid to protect the CHIP program and to extend its funding to match the authorization until 2019. The Protecting and Retaining our Children's Health Insurance Program--PRO-CHIP--Act is straightforward, it is common sense, and will provide much needed budget predictability for our States. The Republican Governor of my State supports CHIP. He understands they need it in Ohio and across the country sooner rather than later so they can properly budget and plan and avoid gaps in health care for vulnerable children. Again, these 130,000 children in my State alone are overwhelmingly sons and daughters of working parents who don't make enough money to pay for health insurance out of pocket, and who are working at companies and businesses that don't provide health insurance. I am honored that 30 of our Senate colleagues have already joined as cosponsors. Providing health insurance to low-income children isn't just the right thing to do, it is the smart thing to do. Children stay healthier, families function better, neighborhoods are better off, and children do better in school as a result, with fewer sick days. They feel better when they are at school because they have a family doctor, because they have health insurance. We know it works. Listen to these numbers: Thanks to CHIP, the number of uninsured children has fallen by half, from 14 percent in 1997--when this bill passed with bipartisan support, and it has been extended and reauthorized a couple of times since--to a record low of 7 percent in 2012. In nearly every State of the Union, Governors planning their State budgets and parents planning their family budgets are relying on us to extend CHIP now. We should not go right up to the deadline, as some are now talking about in terms of shutting the government down. We should not go up to the deadline but do it now. It would provide a sigh of relief for parents, not only for financial reasons but because CHIP means better access to comprehensive care for their kids. Think about the anxiety parents face knowing they have insurance today under CHIP but not being certain they will have it this time next year. We should act together to protect this vital program that provides comprehensive health care coverage for 10 million children. States will start to roll back their CHIP program and funding for the program will expire at the end of September if we don't act soon. This has always been bipartisan. It should continue to be. I look forward to working with all my colleagues to prioritize children's health and help pass this PRO-CHIP legislation as soon as possible.

Mr. BROWN

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

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, this week we celebrate Salute to Veterans Week to honor all those who have served our Nation in uniform and their families who sacrificed so much for our country. This week is a particularly appropriate time for us to reflect on the importance of fulfilling our commitment to all veterans. Just as we invest in and train our men and women during their military service, we must make the same investments when they return to our communities, hang up their uniforms, and embark on the next phase of their lives. This institution always seems to be willing to vote for money so we can send people to war, but is a bit less generous in taking care of those veterans when they return home. That should stop. This morning I visited Eastern Gateway Community College in Youngstown and met with local veterans, including community college graduate Lisa Thomas. She graduated last May and is now pursuing a 4- year degree--after getting a 2-year degree--at Franklin University using her GI benefits. Community colleges like Eastern Gateway are an important way we provide our veterans with the necessary skills to find decent-paying jobs. They serve as pipelines for veterans so they can attend 4-year universities. The GI bill's education benefits are critical to investing in returning servicemembers. They help the veterans who have returned from war to learn new skills, and as a result these men and women have helped to build our middle class and led to our Nation's dominance in the second half of the 20th century and into this century. But veterans, as some find out unwittingly, have a limited amount of time before their GI benefits expire. At crowded colleges, general education requirements and prerequisites often fill up quickly, and it can take several semesters for that veteran to secure a spot. Waiting for a spot in a required course is a luxury many veterans don't have because those veterans benefits could expire. If student veterans are unable to finish their degrees before these benefits expire, they may end up being forced to pay thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket tuition and fees. The veterans who served our Nation without delay should not face delays in getting their education. Many colleges and universities--Youngstown State, which is the same place where the Eastern Gateway campus in Youngstown is located, is where many Eastern Gateway students complete their degrees. They offer veterans priority registration so they can get the courses they need before their benefits run out. All of our colleges and universities--2-year, 4-year, public and private--need to follow Youngstown State's lead. If student athletes have priority registration, we can surely extend that privilege to those who have served our Nation. That is why in the coming months I will introduce legislation to ensure that all veterans, all servicemembers, and their qualifying dependents can use their GI benefits to their full potential and be guaranteed priority registration. Our veterans have earned these benefits, and we must ensure that all of our veterans, such as Lisa Thomas, are able to take full advantage of those benefits for themselves and for their families. It is our duty to ensure that when veterans return home, they have the education and training and access to jobs they need to fulfill their potential. We have a duty to ensure that those returning from service to our Nation get the care they need when they come home. As the first Ohioan to serve a full term on the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee, I have worked to ease the VA backlog and put in place a better system. The shortage of care providers has been especially pressing for veterans struggling with a brain injury--the so-called invisible injuries. When our country went into Iraq a dozen years ago, our leader said that this will be a short war. Our country, our government, our administration, and our Congress failed to scale up veterans hospitals and veterans care and increase the capacity, and we now find it is too small. That is the importance of making sure we do this right. Nearly 300,000 veterans in this country struggle with post-traumatic distress. Out of an estimated 300,000 traumatic brain injuries, there are 25,000 cases of mild traumatic brain injuries. These cases are hard to diagnose and document since there is often a lack of visible evidence. Without proper care, each year some 8,000 veterans take their own lives--154 a week, 22 veterans a day commit suicide. What a tragedy. Last week I was proud to stand with my colleagues in this body in support of the Clay Hunt Suicide Prevention for American Veterans Act. I look forward to President Obama signing that bill later this week. It is our duty to take an active role in increasing veterans' access to quality mental health care, and the Clay Hunt Act will help ensure that those who put their lives on the line for us have a lifetime of their own upon returning home. We have a sacred trust between our government and those who protect us all. I yield the floor.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, today the House of Representatives held yet another vote--I think they are maybe up to 50-some--to repeal the Affordable Care Act, showing once again their objective is to dismantle the health care law. House Republicans voted to repeal the law. They like to say ``repeal and replace,'' but the ``replace'' doesn't ever really quite come forward. Think what that would be like. It would take us back to the day when children with preexisting conditions such as cancer or asthma could be turned away from health coverage. Let me illustrate. Several months ago a couple came to my coffee, which I hold every Thursday when the Senate is in session. It is open to anyone from Ohio who wants to stop in. A woman came from Cincinnati. She lives in one of the most conservative parts of the State. We talked for a few minutes about home schooling and her desire to be able to get some support from the Federal Government in a variety of different ways for home schooling. Then she said: I want to thank you for the Affordable Care Act. I said: Certainly. I was proud to support it. She said: You see, my son--and she pointed across the room. He was about 15. He was diagnosed with diabetes when he was 7 or 8 years old. She hesitated. She said: I counted them, 33 times, we were turned down for health insurance because of his preexisting condition. We signed up last week for the Affordable Care Act. So if the House's effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act had come to the Senate and become law, someone would have to explain to her why she loses her health care. Again, if this is repealed, insurers could place lifetime or annual caps on health coverage. We know that tens of thousands of people in this country have gotten sick and their insurance has been cancelled because their insurance was so expensive. That is prohibited under the Affordable Care Act. That would be back if we repealed the Affordable Care Act. Seniors were forced to pay huge out-of-pocket costs when they hit the gap in prescription drug coverage known as the doughnut hole. A decade ago, when I was a Member of the House of Representatives, I voted against that Medicare plan in part because it had this huge gap in coverage. So if you have an illness or a series of illnesses and buy a lot of prescription drugs, between the second thousandth dollar and the fifth thousandth dollar, there is a gap in coverage. In other words, you continue to pay the premiums for prescription drug coverage but get no assistance from the government. Under the Affordable Care Act, we have closed that gap. We have already cut it better than half, and over the next 3 or 4 years it will be eliminated entirely. We know the Affordable Care Act is working. In my State, 100,000 young Ohioans, a little older than these pages, between the ages of 18 and 26, are on their parents' health insurance plans right now. They would be dropped from that coverage if the Affordable Care Act were repealed. Ohio seniors have saved $65 million in prescription drug costs by the closing of the coverage gap, the so-called doughnut hole. Those savings would end. Those with preexisting conditions would no longer be covered or would be charged higher premiums, and 700,000 Ohioans--people in my State--now have health insurance they did not have 5 years ago. So if we repeal the Affordable Care Act, somebody has to explain to those 700,000 people why they no longer have insurance, why those 100,000 young people are getting dropped from coverage; those families like the woman's who would lose her insurance because her child has a preexisting condition, and all the consumer protections the Affordable Care Act has been part of. Last month I spoke with Charles McClinon, a Cincinnati resident who suffered from severe epilepsy and, as a result, was unable to work. After Ohio chose to expand Medicaid--and I give Republican Governor Kasich credit for that--Mr. McClinon qualified for health care coverage and was able to schedule surgery. Thanks to this lifesaving coverage, he has returned to work. Isn't that what we want? If people are ill, injured, sick, don't we want to take care of them so they can return to work? Mr. McClinon never wanted to miss work, but he had to. Because of the expansion of Medicaid, because of the Affordable Care Act passed by a Democratic Senate, signed by a Democratic President, because of a Republican Governor in Ohio expanding Medicaid, unlike Republican Governors in many States, people such as Charles McClinon can now go back to work and live a healthier, more productive life and pay taxes. Since its creation in 1965, Medicaid has been a joint Federal and State program, providing free or low-cost health coverage to qualified individuals. One of the key components of the Affordable Care Act expanded both the eligibility and the Federal funding for Medicaid. States were given the opportunity to expand Medicaid to individuals with incomes of up to 130 percent of the Federal poverty level. Many people on Medicaid who are now on the expanded Medicaid in Ohio and Kentucky and many other States hold jobs, just like the parents of the 130,000 Ohio children who now have insurance because of the Children's Health Insurance Program. Their parents are working at places such as Walmart and McDonald's, making $8, $9, $10 an hour. Those companies generally don't provide health insurance and don't pay wages high enough to be able to buy health insurance. What kind of society do we want to be? Where people are working every bit as hard as all of us as U.S. Senators work, with very little compensation, without health insurance, generally without pensions? Do we want to say: Well, we don't care about you? If you weren't smart enough, if you weren't educated enough, if you weren't smart enough to get a good-paying job with insurance, then we are going to turn our backs on you? Of course we are not that kind of society. That is what the Affordable Care Act is about. The expansion of Medicaid has saved Ohio about $350 million. It also helped Ohioans who already have insurance. When people lack health insurance, someone has to pay for their care. The Presiding Officer's State of Colorado is not much different, just smaller dollar amounts because it is a smaller State. But Ohioans spend over $2 billion on care for people who can't pay. It is a hidden tax on the insured estimated to be about $1,000 a year per insured family. So prior to the Affordable Care Act, somebody who went to a hospital in Denver, Cleveland, Dayton or Colorado Springs or Pueblo or Youngstown--because those without insurance would go to hospitals and get care; that is what we do; we take care of people if they show up in an emergency room--because they were not paying, because they were low income, they were unemployed, and they had no insurance, the cost of their treatment got shifted onto those of us with insurance. Economists say pretty much everybody pays about $1,000 additional for their health insurance because of the problems of the uninsured. So when we expand Medicaid, when we pass the Affordable Care Act, when we get people into the health exchanges, it means we are not charging people that $1,000 hidden tax, so it is a savings to those of us with insurance. Ultimately it is better for taxpayers, ultimately it is better for our health care system, and ultimately, most importantly, it is better for a healthier society. We should be helping Ohioans gain health care, not cutting them off. That is the importance of expanding Medicaid. I urge the Ohio legislature to work with the Governor to include Medicaid expansion in the budget. I urge my colleagues here in this Chamber to end their grandstanding attacks on a law that is helping Americans such as Charles McClinon get the care they need. It helped him go back to work. It will help others live more healthy lives. It will help all our communities. We should be helping Ohioans gain health care, not cutting them off. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BROWN

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

Mr. BROWN

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

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, 1 year and 1 week ago, on a cold, snowy morning in Cleveland, OH, not much different from what I woke up to this morning in Cleveland, OH, I attended the Dr. Martin Luther King Memorial Breakfast in that city, which is also my hometown. A minister at that breakfast said something that we all know but probably have not thought about and rarely put in such succinct, meaningful words. He said: Your life expectancy is connected to your ZIP Code. Think about that. Whether you grew up on the east side of Cleveland or Gary, IN, or whether you grew up in Appalachia, OH, or southern Indiana, or whether you grew up in a city, suburb, small town, affluent, less affluent, low income, rural, or urban, your ZIP Code often determines whether you have access to quality health care, to a good, solid education, and the social support that is necessary to succeed. It is up to this body to help ensure--not to do it and not to do it alone--that every ZIP Code is one that provides opportunity, not inequality. Ten years ago, the ZIP Code where my wife and I live in the city of Cleveland had the highest foreclosure rate of any ZIP Code in America. Think about what that means for a 12 year-old-child of a family where the father gets laid off from work and the mother has her hours cut back. Even though they were doing everything right, they can't pay their mortgage. They sit down with their 12-year-old daughter and say: Honey, we are going to have to move, but we don't know where we are going yet. We don't know what school district you are going to be in, and we don't know if you will be close enough to be able to stay with your friends. Those kinds of decisions happen far too often. Those kinds of scenarios happen far too often. But we know that in many ways we have made progress. Fifty years ago the poverty rate was 26 percent, and today it is around 15 percent thanks in large part to what people in this institution have done with social insurance programs, such as the Affordable Care Act, Medicaid, and today's Children's Health Insurance Program, so-called CHIP. There was no greater champion in the Senate for children's health care than my predecessor, the Senator from West Virginia who actually sat at this desk on the Senate floor, retired Senator Jay Rockefeller. He helped to write CHIP in 1997. I was a member of the House Health Subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee at that time. I believe the Presiding Officer sat on that committee when he was in the House many years ago. We worked on writing CHIP in 1997 when it was a joint State-Federal health insurance program for low- to moderate- income children and pregnant women. Keep in mind that in most cases the children who are in today's Children's Health Insurance Program have at least one working parent in their family. CHIP provides health insurance to low-income families who fall into a coverage gap: They make too much to qualify for Medicaid, but they don't make enough to qualify for private insurance. Many employers don't offer the insurance. They don't make enough money and are not able to afford to buy the insurance due to the high copays and the high premiums they would typically face. Today's CHIP, the current CHIP program, bridges that gap. I am honored to continue the fight to protect this program and ensure that Congress acts to extend funding for the current program before it expires at the end of September. You may have noticed that I said today's CHIP, the current program. When CHIP started in 1997, it was a good program. It was started in the Senate by Senator Rockefeller, Senator Kennedy, and Senator Hatch. It was very bipartisan, and it passed overwhelmingly. Those of us who worked on it in the House--Congressman Billirakis and I, as leaders on the Health Subcommittee, and others--made sure that it was bipartisan and that it worked very well. But understand that over the 20 years of CHIP, each time it has been reauthorized, we made it better. We extended the benefits because we have seen where the coverage gaps are. We made it more efficient, we made it work better, we have kept the bipartisan nature to it, and that is why I referred to it as today's CHIP, as the current program. Providing health insurance to low-income children is not just the right thing to do, it is the smart thing to do. It is the right thing to do because these are families where the parents are working hard and taking responsibility but simply can't afford health insurance for their child. Today I was in Cleveland with a couple of people--Shonte Saunders and her daughter Amari. Ms. Saunders is a young woman with two children. Amari is 9 years old. Ms. Saunders told me she is working, raising her children, and she is in school studying to become a nurse at Cuyahoga County Community College. She is doing the right thing, but she said: If CHIP expires, I don't want to be in the position where I have to choose between taking my daughter to a doctor for an ear infection versus having to provide enough food to put food on the table, or a more serious illness or injury than that. Why should she be subjected to that? Listen to these numbers. Thanks to CHIP, the number of uninsured children has fallen by half. It went from 14 percent almost 20 years ago when Senator Hatch, Senator Kennedy, and Senator Rockefeller wrote this program in the Senate and Congressman Billirakis and I and others in the House wrote it to a record low of 7 percent. Because of today's CHIP, 10 million children--130,000 children in my State of Ohio alone-- have access to health care they may not have received otherwise. Over the past week I met with parents across Ohio. I met with Jennifer Huit in Cincinnati and listened to her story. In Dayton, I listened to a family talk about what CHIP means to them. Think about this: It provides a sigh of relief for parents like Shonte and Jennifer, and not only for financial reasons. CHIP means better access for preventive and comprehensive care. Too often, if you are right on the edge and making $12 or $13 or less an hour and don't have Medicaid, think about the choices you know you have to make. You can't take your child to the doctor if they are only kind of sick. If you had insurance, you would take her in. But she is kind of sick, and it may get worse, but you will only take her in if it gets worse because you really can't afford those out-of-pocket expenses. Think of the tension and the difficult life that people generally have anyway at that income level. Think of how much more difficult that is. CHIP-- which in Ohio is administered through Medicaid--means that a child in Cleveland or Cincinnati or Gallipolis or Troy or Pickaway, OH, can see a family doctor when they need it, thereby preventing a costly ambulance ride and emergency room visit. CHIP means a bunch of things. It means vaccines, shots, dental coverage, and better treatment if kids get sick. Think about this: It is not just the health care. It means they do better in school. It means they miss fewer days in school so they don't fall behind their classmates who perhaps have better health insurance. It means they perform better in school because they feel better. We know the stories of how a hungry or sick child can't focus on what they need to do in the classroom. CHIP means that children from Bowling Green will get the health care they need to become healthy, active adults. We know that the current CHIP--today's 2015 version of CHIP--works not just because of the number of insured children under the program but because of the flexibility it provides States and the quality of care children receive. Ohio's conservative Republican Governor supports CHIP. It is called Healthy Start in Ohio because the Governor and legislature have been given flexibility under CHIP to make it work for that State. The flexibility that CHIP provides States is the result of 20 years of watching, observing, quantifying, and analyzing CHIP. We have had 18 years of experience in seeing what works best, and we have worked together to make improvements. As a result, under the current CHIP program, more children are covered and the coverage they get is better. If we don't act, understand that CHIP--the authorization, the language, the law governing CHIP is in effect until 2019, but the funding for CHIP runs out in September of this year. You have to have both. You have to have the law governing CHIP--how it works, who is eligible, how the States have flexibility--but obviously you also need the money to implement it. If Congress doesn't act now, first of all, Ohio, my State, would lose $146 million in Federal funds in 2016 alone, and the Presiding Officer's State of Indiana would lose tens of millions of dollars in CHIP funding. We know another thing: Whether it is Governor Pence in Indiana or Governor Kasich in my State, they need the flexibility of knowing what Congress is actually going to do. We should not wait until July or August; we should reallocate money for CHIP today. If we don't act, parents like Shonte and Jennifer may not be able to get the quality, affordable care for their children as States would start to roll back CHIP programs. That is why I will soon introduce legislation to protect the program and extend its funding so it runs out at the same time as the authorization--the roadmap, if you will, of how CHIP will work. If we let the program run out of funding, the number of uninsured children will increase, the quality of health care will decrease, and States will see a significant increase in cost-sharing services. Providing health insurance to low-income children isn't just the right thing to do, it is the smart thing to do. If the program works, it works for children, it works for parents, it works for communities, and it works for our great country. I call on my colleagues to work with me to extend funding for the current CHIP program before it is too late. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BROWN

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

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business for up to 5 minutes.

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I rise to discuss the Children's Health Insurance Program. This Congress 20 years ago passed CHIP. It was an invention of Senator Kennedy and Senator Hatch, both Senators who cared a lot about what we do to help low-income children. I was at Mercy Health Clinic in Cincinnati late last week, and early this week I was at Dayton Children's Hospital, talking to families who have benefitted from the Children's Health Insurance Program. In the great majority of cases, the parents of these children have full-time jobs--often two jobs. They typically make significantly less than what we would call a living wage. They rarely have any kind of health insurance, although now they are entering the exchanges or perhaps Medicaid--more likely the exchanges--but their children are not getting health insurance except through CHIP. It has been around for 20 years, and there are about 10 million children in the United States who benefit from the Children's Health Insurance Program. The Children's Health Insurance Program is law. It has been reauthorized up through 2019, but the funding for it expires this September. I have spoken with members of the Senate Finance Committee, including my colleague here, Senator Nelson from Florida, who has been a big supporter of the Children's Health Insurance Program. Senators Casey and Stabenow have been very involved, Senator Gillibrand, and as I said, Senator Hatch was one of the founders of this program, along with Senator Kennedy. It is so important that we move as quickly as possible, in part because the States need to budget these dollars--this Federal passthrough--so that it directly goes to the Children's Health Insurance Program. There are a few things we can do that are even more important than that. In closing, I will add that it is not just the right thing to do, to fund the Children's Health Insurance Program, it is also a smart thing to do because it means that parents will take their child who has an earache to the family doctor because they have insurance, instead of waiting a week, when the pain is unbearable, and taking that child to the emergency room and costing all of us more as taxpayers and perhaps causing that child some hearing loss. In addition to helping these families with health insurance and saving money, it also makes a big difference in schools. The children are less likely to miss school and children will be better able to learn if, in fact, they have better health insurance. We know that is the case for our own children. All of us here have government health insurance, if you will, as Members of the Senate, and it is important that we do what we ought to do for the Children's Health Insurance Program. It matters for so many families in North Dakota, the Presiding Officer's State, and my State of Ohio. I yield the floor.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I rise today to honor a couple of people with Ohio ties who have dedicated much of their careers to public service, Rob Lehman and Luke Albee. Rob Lehman served more than two decades on Capitol Hill and in the executive branch most recently, and that is when I got to know and work with him as chief of staff to my colleague from Ohio, Senator Rob Portman. Rob Lehman served as chief of staff when Senator Portman was the U.S. Trade Representative, so he understands why trade and enforcement of trade rules are such important issues to a State such as Ohio. He was helpful when Senator Portman and I testified together before the International Trade Commission on behalf of Ohio Steelworkers. Fortunately, in this case the ruling was on the side of Ohio manufacturers. In some cases China and now in other cases Korea have not played fair and have broken trade rules. Rob Lehman provided breadth and insight to Senator Portman on this issue and so many others that are important to Ohio during my colleague's 4 years in the Senate. I wish to also honor Luke Albee. Luke is a native Ohioan and long time Senate aide. He is a Cleveland native and, like myself, a die-hard Cleveland Indians fan. Luke Albee had a long tenure in the office of Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont, rising from an entry-level position to become his chief of staff. He served in the same role--which he is about to leave--for my colleague Senator Mark Warner of Virginia. He began in Senator Leahy's office answering mail and later guided the office through the September 11 attacks, the anthrax discovery on Capitol Hill, and other memorable events while chief of staff--like a 5-hour dinner with Senator Leahy and Fidel Castro while on a trip to Cuba in 1999. Like Rob Lehman, Luke Albee likes to bring people together and reach common ground so the Senate can move forward the way it should.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. I wish to also say a few words about another career public servant. He is not leaving public service, but he is leaving the chief of staff's position in my office. Mark Powden has been my chief of staff since 2009. He started with Senator Jeffords when Senator Jeffords was a Republican and then became an Independent. Mark Powden grew up in Vermont, where he worked for his own State congressman and senator. Mark later became the staff director for the Republicans. In fact, he was the staff director for the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee as it went through its transition to a new name. He was with Senator Jeffords when Senator Jeffords switched parties in 2001. Mark, as I said, has served as my chief of staff for more than 6 years now and will move over and be the staff director for the banking committee. At the same time, he will take with him Graham Steele, who served ably as my legislative assistant, and will also take his assistant Megan Cheney to the banking committee. Graham will be chief counsel, and Megan will be a legislative aide in the Senate banking committee. My thanks especially to Mark Powden for the terrific work he has done as my chief of staff, and I am thrilled he is going to stay with me to do the very important job of staff director as I become ranking member of the Senate banking committee.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, tomorrow, Friday, January 30, is Earned Income Tax Credit Awareness Day. It is a day to highlight a vital tool for Americans working--and I emphasize ``working''--their way out of poverty. Too many Americans work hard, play by the rules, take responsibility for their lives, but simply can't get ahead. They are in low-wage jobs--sometimes two low-wage jobs--and don't really have much opportunity where they live or due to their circumstances to get a job that pays closer to a living wage. There are millions of Americans living in this situation. The EITC helps provide for their children, to build economic security to allow them to pursue the American dream. Signed into law in 1975, expanded by every single President since then, the EITC was created to make sure we have a tax system that provides an incentive to work. That is what it has done. EITC's expansion in the 1990s led more than half a million single mothers to move from cash welfare assistance to work, making it twice as effective--without the side effects, I might add--as welfare reform. Since its creation, EITC has lifted more children above the poverty line than any other government program. I will emphasize that it rewards work, most importantly. In 2012, 28 million American households--almost 1 million from my State of Ohio-- benefited from the EITC with an average credit of more than $2,300. I met Juanalicia Duran in Cleveland last year. She told me she lives paycheck to paycheck not because she overspends, not because she is irresponsible, but simply because she does not make a lot of money. She said receiving the EITC is the one time of year she pays off her bills. She is barely making it, getting a little bit behind week after week, month after month, then she gets that check of--I don't know how much Juanalicia Duran gets, but on average she gets a check for a little over $2,000. It helps her to pay her bills and maybe get a little bit ahead. Rosa Olea of Toledo works as a manager of a fast food restaurant and makes $9.35 an hour. Imagine that--a manager of a restaurant making $9.35 an hour. She said her family struggles to pay bills. The EITC has been a lifesaver since she found out about it through her local VITA center. There are thousands of stories like this, and we hear hundreds and sometimes thousands of them from Ohioans. In last week's State of the Union Address, President Obama laid out plans to reform the Tax Code by making the current earned-income tax credit and child tax credit permanent by expanding credit for middle- class families to raise children and save for retirement. Some in this town responded--not surprisingly--by saying that reforming the Tax Code starts with cutting taxes for big business. Think about that. Most of the time, I hear people in this town--people with good titles, paid well, dressed well, getting a good government pension and health care benefits--say that the first thing we need to do with tax reform is lower the corporate tax rate. It is all about trickle-down economics. You cut taxes on big companies, you cut taxes on the wealthy, and maybe it will trickle down and help workers and families. Well, the experience of the last 25 years doesn't really say that. The one time we tried trickle-down for a decade--from 2000 to 2010--we had no net private sector job gain in this country. Zero. But when we tried focusing on the middle class and growing the economy from the middle out during the Clinton years, we had a 22-million--it may have been almost 23 million--private sector net increase in jobs. And since the auto rescue, when we have focused on the middle class for the last 5 or 6 years by building the economy out, we have had job growth for 56 or 57 months in a row. If we are going to reform the Tax Code, we need to draw a line in the sand: No tax breaks for corporations without tax breaks first for working families. There is one glaring hole with the earned-income tax credit. Under current law, workers without children who are making minimum wage barely receive any EITC. Childless workers under 25 don't qualify at all. That makes young people and workers without children the only group who can be taxed deeper into poverty. My State of the Union guest was Jason Jacobs, a Cincinnati resident and paraprofessional. He is a college graduate. He went to Ohio University. He has a degree to teach. He has not found a full-time teaching job. He is a paraprofessional in the West Clermont School District who works with special needs students and does the kinds of things people should be rewarded for. Last year he made less than $16,000. I believe he is paid hourly. He is obviously not paid in the summer. He is not paid on nonschool days. Because he doesn't have children, he will miss out on this critical tax credit. That is why my legislation, the Working Families Tax Relief Act, will nearly triple the size of the earned-income tax credit for workers without children, expand access to young workers, and will make permanent enhancements to the EITC to 2017. We know what this will do. We know that children from low-income families where the families are eligible and qualify and earn the EITC--and I say earned the earned-income tax credit. That is why it is called earned--because these are always working families who are playing by the rules, doing the right thing, and taking responsibility. We know that children from families who have earned the EITC have higher test scores, higher high school graduation rates, and higher college attendance rates. Expanding EITC means more people attending college and more people getting GEDs. It means working more hours and higher salaries. Why wouldn't we invest in the earned-income tax credit? It means stronger communities. If we fail to act to renew the provisions that expire in 2017, 50 million Americans would lose all or part of the EITC and CTC--50 million Americans who are doing the right thing. They are working hard and taking responsibility for their lives. We would just give up on them? We would be glad to do corporate tax breaks, but we would give up on the 50 million working Americans? Sixteen million of them--including 8 million children, if we don't renew--will be pushed into poverty or deeper into the poverty they are already in. It is the worst kind of class warfare aimed at working families. These workers need help to get out of poverty, not to be taxed into it. Renewing the expanded EITC will help so many people in this country. It is not just the right thing to do; it is the smart thing to do because it will bring more wealth to our communities. They will spend the money locally. It will help small businesses, and it will make a big difference in a lot of lives. While we work to renew and expand this program, I encourage Ohioans who may be eligible for the EITC to visit the IRS Web site irs.gov or call 1-800-906-9887 or find a local Volunteer Income Tax Assistance Center, VITA. It is a vital and free resource for working families. To receive EITC, all you have to do is file your taxes. That is it. You have earned it; just ask for it. Spread the word about EITC. It is a bridge out of poverty and serves millions of American families across Ohio and across the Nation. I yield the floor.