Tammy Baldwin

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, today I recognize and honor Marty Beil of Madison, WI, for his 30 years of leadership as executive director of AFSCME Council 24. I have known Marty for many years, and have been proud to stand in solidarity with him. Marty has been a leader in the labor community, and his passion for the rights of working persons will be missed by all who have worked alongside him and who have benefited from his strong leadership. Marty began his professional life in service to his union as a member of the WSEU Professional Services Bargaining team in 1973. He continued his service as a member, leader and activist in Council 24 until 1985, when he was appointed executive director. Throughout that time, Marty has been passionate in his advocacy for the rights of working people, to the honor and value of public service, and to insuring that working people have a level playing field on which to compete. Marty has dedicated his career to protecting and serving his members in the collective bargaining and political process, always with a sense of fairness and compassion. Marty's work is exemplified by his long-term efforts in support of American workers, the American labor movement, and those fighting for civil rights for all Americans. Among many other important priorities, he supported the expansion of antidiscrimination laws to protect the LGBT community, and defended workers from discrimination and retaliation for political activities. He was a staunch defender of labor's right to back candidates who made a commitment to support the goals and activities of union members regardless of partisan affiliation. His 30 years of service at the helm of Council 24 has inspired a new generation of workers to lead the union into the 21st century I am proud to call Marty a friend, and I am grateful for his important contributions to our State and the labor community. I know that his passion and dedication, in the model of his forebears such as Roy Kubista and John Lawton will serve as a lasting example for generations of future labor leaders. I wish him all the best in his future endeavors.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the Student Non-Discrimination Act, which Senator Franken is offering as an amendment to the Every Child Achieves Act. The Student Non- Discrimination Act would help protect our students from bullying, harassment, and discrimination. I am a proud cosponsor of this amendment and hopeful the Senate will agree to this amendment this week. As we consider the Every Child Achieves Act, as we did in committee back in April, and as we have discussed it on the floor over the last week, I have been guided by a core principle: that this law should ensure that every child, regardless of his or her background, regardless of his or her family's income, has access to the opportunities provided by a great education, a high-quality education. Now, part of providing that opportunity is ensuring that every student is able to come to school and succeed in an environment that is safe, supportive, and free from discrimination. While the Every Child Achieves Act helps advance opportunity for students in numerous ways, it falls short in addressing a significant problem limiting the achievement of some of our most vulnerable students. Unfortunately, there are still far too many stories of harassment, of bullying, and of discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students at the hands of their peers but also, sadly, sometimes at the hands of their teachers or administrators as well. There remains no Federal law that explicitly protects these students and provides them and their families with recourse when they face bullying and harassment that limits their educational opportunities. No student can achieve if he cannot feel safe at school. No student will excel if she spends each day in fear of just being herself. I hear from so many students in my State about the need for us to stand up against bullying. For example, a young woman in Madison wrote to me, and I quote from her letter: [A]s a student myself, I hear the words ``gay'', ``faggot, ``queer'' and others get tossed around . . . daily, and I do what I can to deter these words from being used in negative ways by others, but one voice can't make much of a difference. . . . I'm asking you to help raise awareness in schools anyway that you can. I would tell this young woman in Madison that her voice speaking out on this matter can make a difference. Another young woman from Kimberly, WI, contacted me about her friend who committed suicide after suffering bullying. She wrote: He made everyone else come alive and be the better people that they were inside. But he killed himself because he thought he had no way out of the pain, no way to make those kids stop, other than to make sure he was not living anymore. Across the country, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender or LGBT youth experience bullying harassment at school more frequently than their non-LGBT peers. According to a national survey by the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network, in the past year, nearly three- quarters of students were verbally harassed and more than 16 percent were physically assaulted because of their sexual orientation. More than 60 percent of students who reported an incident of harassment said that school staff did nothing in response. It is unsurprising, then, that nearly one-third of students reported missing school at least once in the last month because they did not feel safe. I believe we must fix this immediately. That is why I support including Senator Franken's Student Non-Discrimination Act as an amendment to the Every Child Achieves Act currently being debated before the Senate. Senator Franken's amendment would provide real and strong protections for LGBT students in public, elementary, and secondary schools. It would also provide recourse through the Department of Education and, if necessary, in the courts to help students vindicate their rights. This amendment is closely modeled on existing Federal education protections, which have helped ensure that students have remedies when they face unfair treatment based on race, ethnicity, sex, and disability. LGBT students are just as deserving of the opportunity to succeed in the school environment that is supportive and nurturing rather than discriminatory and unwelcoming. If we are truly to ensure through this legislation that every child achieves, we must act to address the bullying, harassment, and discrimination that limits educational opportunities of too many students. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I yield the floor.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in strong support of an amendment to this underlying bill that addresses resource equity in our Nation's schools. I am proud to have worked across party lines to join my colleagues in supporting this bipartisan amendment, particularly to have worked with Senators Kirk, Reed of Rhode Island, and Brown on this measure. It is an improvement to the long-overdue reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act that we have been debating over the course of this week. The Every Child Achieves Act importantly focuses on ensuring that those students most in need have access to a high-quality education. It continues to ensure that title I funds flow to school districts where Federal support can make the greatest impact and the most difference. It requires States to report key information that will help us identify disparities such as per-pupil expenditures, school discipline, and teacher and educator quality. But I believe we must further strengthen those reporting requirements in order to fully ensure that the range of critical school resources--from quality teachers, to rigorous course work, to well-conditioned and equipped school facilities--is being equitably distributed among school districts in a given State. And we must require States to demonstrate how they will act to address disparities among schools. Despite the advances we have seen since President Johnson signed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act into law 50 years ago, significant gaps in achievement and opportunity still exist. The U.S. Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights recently published data from a comprehensive survey of schools across the Nation that illustrated the magnitude of the problem. For example, the report describes how Black, Latino, American Indian, and Native Alaskan students and English learners attend schools with higher concentrations of inexperienced teachers. Furthermore, nationwide, one in five high schools lacks a school counselor, and between 10 and 25 percent of high schools across the Nation do not offer more than one of the core courses in the typical sequence of high school math and science. In my home State of Wisconsin, higher poverty and higher minority school districts remain more likely to have inexperienced teachers. The Department of Education has data that shows that, for example, in Milwaukee, where there are the most high-poverty and high-minority schools in our State, 8 percent of teachers are in their first year of teaching and 19 percent of teachers lack State certification. The State average is 5.6 percent for first-year teachers and 0.3 percent for those who lack certification. As with the Nation, achievement gaps follow these disparities. According to data from the National Center for Education Statistics, there are startling differences in student proficiency and graduation rates both in Wisconsin and nationally. For example, the average math proficiency in low-performing schools in my home State is 12 percent. The average in all other schools in the State is 51 percent. That is a huge gap; it is a 40-percent gap. There is also a 37-percent gap for reading and language arts proficiency and a 31-percent gap in graduation rates. We cannot close those achievement gaps if we do not provide all students with equal access to core educational resources. That is why I am pleased to join Senators Kirk, Reed, and Brown in offering this opportunity dashboard of core resources amendment. This amendment requires each State to report what key educational resources are currently available in districts with the highest concentrations of minority students and students in poverty. Then it requires them to develop a plan to address the disparities that are shown to exist. It gives States flexibility to develop those plans and lay out a timetable with annual benchmarks for taking action, and it protects a parent's right to know about the critical educational resources that are available to his or her child. As we work to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in its 50th year, we have yet to see its promise of equal access to educational opportunity fulfilled for all of America's students. As we look to the next half-century of supporting public education, it is critical that we take steps to ensure that all children have access to the educational resources that will help them succeed, regardless of race, ethnicity, or family income. I understand there may be a vote on this amendment early next week. I certainly hope so. I urge my colleagues to support this very important bipartisan effort. Thank you, Mr. President. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize and honor Gary Hollander of Milwaukee, WI, for 20 years of guiding Diverse & Resilient as its founder and CEO. I have known Gary for many years and have been proud to work with and support his efforts at Diverse & Resilient throughout that time. Gary has been a leader in the mental health and LGBT communities, and his passion for serving people will be missed by all who have worked with him and who have benefited from his guidance and passion. A licensed psychologist, Gary received his degrees in education and psychology from the University of Wisconsin--Milwaukee. His professional career began in the Milwaukee Public Schools, where he was a classroom teacher and school psychologist. He later served in the education division at Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin and later as an educational consultant to Planned Parenthood Federation of America. Gary developed an HIV mental health program and HIV clinic in conjunction with Aurora Health Care, a leading health care provider in Wisconsin. He later directed their medical education programs and was the founding administrator of the Center for Urban Population Health. In 1995, Gary founded Diverse & Resilient as a way to build the capacity of LGBT groups across Wisconsin, filling a void in the public health sphere. Gary recognized that public health organizations and community groups were not rising to meet the needs of the LGBT community, and he became the driving force behind greater community engagement and recognition of the LGBT community in Wisconsin. During his tenure, Diverse & Resilient has expanded many times over and currently serves more than 5,000 LGBT people each year, helping them to thrive by living healthy, satisfying lives in safe, supportive communities. His tireless work on behalf of Wisconsin's LGBT community has led to greater understanding, improved access to care, and new ways of looking at the unique and divers needs of the LGBT community. Gary and his team have focused their work in six priority areas: acceptance, cultivating leaders, mental health, sexual health, partner and community violence, and substance abuse--areas in which they hope to eliminate health disparities between LGBT people and the general population. They have made many impressive strides over the past 20 years, and I know that the future is bright for Diverse & Resilient, as well as Wisconsin's LGBT community, because of Gary's work. I am proud to call Gary a friend, and I am grateful for his important contributions to our State and the LGBT community. I know that his passion and dedication to improving the lives of others will continue long after he steps down from his leadership role at Diverse & Resilient. I wish him all the best in his future endeavors.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Madam President, I rise not to speak about an issue that divides this Chamber but rather one that unites us; that is, the care of those who have served and sacrificed for our Nation, America's veterans. Today, I take great pride in the fact I have worked across the aisle to introduce bipartisan VA reform legislation, the Jason Simcakoski Memorial Opioid Safety Act. I am pleased to be joined in offering this legislation by my friend and colleague Senator Capito of West Virginia. This legislation is aimed at addressing the problem of overprescribing practices at the VA and providing safer and more effective pain management services to our Nation's veterans. It is named in honor of a Wisconsin veteran, U.S. Marine veteran Jason Simcakoski. On August 30, 2014, Jason tragically died at Wisconsin's Tomah Veterans Affairs Medical Center as a result of what was medically deemed mixed-drug toxicity. I call this a failure to serve someone who has faithfully served our country. At the time of his death at the VA, Jason was on 14 different prescription drugs. Yet this Marine's heartbreaking story is just one example of the overprescribing problem at the VA. After two, decade-long, wars, a large number of our servicemembers are coming home with the damage of combat, and our veterans and their families are facing the difficult challenge of physical injuries, PTSD, and other mental illnesses. Unfortunately, I believe the VA's overreliance on powerful and highly addicting opioids has resulted in getting our veterans hooked rather than getting them help. Jason's story is a tragic example of the devastation caused by addiction--addiction whose roots are, regrettably, at the VA. To me, overprescription of opioids at the VA is a root problem, and it is growing into a weed--a weed of addiction whose impact is being felt beyond the walls of VA facilities. The ripples are indeed being felt across America in the communities we work for every day in our Nation's Capital. The families whom we have a responsibility to represent--families of those who have bravely served our country--are struggling with the loss of a son or a daughter, a father or a mother, a sister or a brother to addiction whose root is planted within the VA system. It is our job to make sure they do not feel alone, and I believe we have a shared responsibility to do everything we can to pull out this weed by its roots. Jason's family is in Washington today, and I am so honored to have worked with them and others in putting these reforms together to provide the VA with the tools it needs to help prevent this type of tragedy from occurring to other veterans and their families. I what to thank the Simcakoski family and let them know I have a tremendous amount of respect for the courage they have shown in telling theirs and Jason's story and working to make a difference in the lives of other veterans and their families. Their story is one of a sacred trust we must have with our veterans and their families. It is a story of how that trust has been broken, and it is a tragic story of loss. My message to my colleagues comes from Jason's widow Heather, who has said: When I look back at the past, I want to know we made a difference. I want to believe we have leaders in our country who care. I want to inspire others to never give up because change is possible. Her words have inspired me, and it is my hope they will inspire my colleagues to join us in taking action. I hope I speak for all of us when I say there is no room for politics when it comes to ensuring that our Nation's veterans receive the timely, safe, and highest quality care that they have earned. Our legislation takes steps to give veterans and their families a stronger voice in their care by strengthening opioid prescribing guidelines and other measures. It also works to improve coordination and communication throughout the VA and puts in place stronger oversight and accountability for the quality of care we are providing our veterans. Our goal is simple: put these bipartisan reforms in place to prevent tragedies like Jason's from occurring to other veterans and their families. I wish to thank and recognize Senators Blumenthal, Brown, Hirono, Johnson, Kaine, Manchin, Markey, Moran, Murray, Sanders, and Tester for joining Senator Capito and me, signing on as original cosponsors of this bipartisan effort. I also wish to thank the many veterans service organizations and medical professionals for their invaluable support, insight, and input as we crafted this legislation. Today, I ask the rest of my colleagues to join us in working to confront the problems of overprescribing practices at the VA and to provide more safe and effective pain management services to our Nation's veterans. Let us work together to fix what has been broken and restore that sacred trust with our veterans and their families. Let us work together to give our veterans and their families a voice--a voice that is heard, respected, and recognized. Let us be inspired by that voice to take bipartisan action on solutions to prevent these problems and tragedies from ever happening again and to provide our veterans and their families with the care they have earned and the care they deserve. Madam President, I yield time to my coauthor on this bill Senator Capito.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. My colleagues and I gathered here on the floor today to share some good news--something we unfortunately don't get to hear quite enough on the Senate floor. I am here today with Senators Murphy and Stabenow to talk about how the Affordable Care Act is working to strengthen and improve the economic security and the health security of our families all across the United States. Before the Affordable Care Act, over 50 million Americans were uninsured, and seniors paid higher out-of-pocket costs for their prescription drugs. Insurance companies wrote their own rules and jacked up premiums. They denied coverage to people with preexisting health conditions. And in too many cases they dropped your coverage because you got sick, got older or had a baby. Making the Affordable Care Act the law of the land marked a critical turning point that was essential to stopping these predatory practices and to giving our families the quality, affordable health care they deserve and they need. Now the story has changed. As my colleagues have noted, we have seen a historic reduction in the number of uninsured since Congress passed the Affordable Care Act in 2010. Thanks to the law, over 16 million previously uninsured Americans have received health coverage. This year more than 10 million individuals have an affordable, quality health plan through the law's new health care marketplaces. Nearly 8.7 million people are benefiting from the health insurance cost assistance provided under the new law. I want to make it clear that the law's important benefits are making a real difference in my home State of Wisconsin. In Wisconsin, over 180,000 people have a quality insurance plan through our Federally facilitated Affordable Care Act marketplace. More than 90 percent of these Wisconsinites are receiving support to make their coverage more affordable. More importantly, the insurance companies don't get to make their own rules anymore. Because of the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies can no longer deny coverage to the more than 2 million Wisconsinites who have some type of preexisting health condition. Insurance companies can no longer charge copays or deductibles for critical preventative services such as contraception or cancer screenings for over 1 million Wisconsin women. Thanks to the new law, 89,000 Wisconsin seniors on Medicare will see their prescription drug doughnut hole closed by 2022. In the meantime, these same seniors on average have saved $913 each on prescription drugs. I could continue on to share more numbers that prove that the ACA is working for our families in Wisconsin and in States across the country. But the real proof, the real story is about the faces and the people behind these numbers. It is about real people, real Wisconsinites, who are realizing the benefits of this law every day--real Wisconsinites such as Doug from Colgate, WI. At age 62, Doug was worried about becoming uninsured. He and his wife had been insured through her employer, but she was about to apply for Medicare. Fortunately, Doug was able find an affordable health plan on the Affordable Care Act marketplace. He did not have to lie awake at night worrying about being denied coverage due to his recent heart surgery or another preexisting condition. There are real Wisconsinites such as Kim of West Allis. Kim runs a small costume shop. She lost Medicaid coverage when her son turned 18 years old. She went without medical care because she could not afford it, even though Kim's doctor had found an indication of cancer during a hysterectomy. But then she signed up for the affordable coverage on the Affordable Care Act's marketplace that costs only $79 a month. And when she renewed her coverage this year, her premium dropped to $20 a month. Without this coverage and the premium tax credits, she wouldn't have been able to afford the extra checkups she needed to keep track of the possibility of the cancer emerging. Joelisa is a real Wisconsinite. She is a community health worker. Joelisa lost her health insurance when she switched jobs but was able to quickly find a new plan through the ACA marketplace. The plan cost only $87 per month with premium tax credits--a tremendous tax savings from her $500 monthly premiums through her previous job. Joelisa's health care coverage helps her manage several chronic conditions, including a metabolic syndrome that carries a high risk of progressing to diabetes, and it also makes sure that her daughter gets immunizations and stays as healthy as possible. One part of this story has not changed, and that part is that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle don't want the Affordable Care Act to work. In fact, they continue to root for its failure. They don't want you to know about Joelisa's lower health insurance premiums or about Kim's affordable plan that is helping her prevent cancer. Regrettably, what they do want is crystal clear. They want to repeal the law and turn back the clock to the days when only the healthy and wealthy could afford the luxury of quality health insurance. Since its passage, Republicans have spent countless days trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act by any and all means. They have tried to repeal the law in Congress by voting over 50 times--that is 5-0--to repeal all or parts of the Affordable Care Act. They have also tried to repeal the law by advancing politically motivated lawsuits, including the most recent one that would rob millions of Americans of the health insurance they have today. In Wisconsin alone, this would mean that over 160,000 hard-working Americans would see their taxes increase if they were stripped of their health insurance subsidies. That is enough to fill historic Lambeau Field twice. It is one thing to say the numbers, it is another thing to imagine the number of Wisconsinites that affects. It is not only Wisconsin families who would be impacted by this devastation but also families in our neighboring States--neighboring States with Federal exchanges--such as Michigan, Illinois, and Iowa. Republicans have tried to say they have an answer, but their answer is really nothing more than another tired attempt to dismantle and repeal the Affordable Care Act. One of these proposals was put forth by a Republican colleague from my home State of Wisconsin. It would eliminate the health insurance subsidies in all States, including the federally facilitated and State-run marketplaces. His proposal would rob over 166,000 Wisconsin constituents of their premium support. His plan would attack the health care security of Kim and Joelisa. According to the American Academy of Actuaries, it would expand the ranks of the uninsured and raise premiums. Naturally, his proposal would hand over the reins to the insurance companies and allow them the freedom to take us back to the days when they offered bare-bones plans without essential health care coverage. In Wisconsin, this means going back to the days when there were no-- none, zip, zero--individual health care plans in the entire State that offered maternity coverage for families. We cannot go back, we must not go back, and we will not go back. We know the Affordable Care Act is providing access, affordability, and quality in the State of Wisconsin. We also know that in the United States of America, health care should be a right guaranteed to all and not just a privilege reserved for the few. That is what we have fought for, and that is what we are going to continue to fight for as we move the Affordable Care Act forward. I wish to once again thank my colleagues, Senator Stabenow and Senator Murphy, for joining me on the floor this afternoon. We have a case that is about to be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. There has been effort after effort in the Congress of the United States to repeal or defund all or part of the Affordable Care Act, but it is providing lifesaving coverage and good news for Wisconsinites and people across America. I yield back my time. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, before I begin my focus on the Affordable Care Act, I want to simply state that my heart goes out to the victims of last night's shooting in Charleston, SC, as they participated in a prayer service at Emanuel AME Church. The victims and their families and the entire community are in my thoughts and prayers in the wake of this unspeakable hate crime.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I wish to recognize and salute Larry Arft, the city manager for Beloit, WI, on the occasion of his retirement. It has been my pleasure to work closely with Larry since he started in this role in 2003. Throughout that time, he has been a tireless and effective leader of the community. He has been a model public servant, and his talent and passion will be missed by all who have worked with him. A Missouri native, Larry served in the U.S. Army in Vietnam. Following his military service, he graduated magna cum laude from the University of Missouri--St. Louis. It was there that his interest in local government was sparked by an internship with a St. Louis-area municipality. Since then, Larry has served with distinction in multiple communities in three States for more than 40 years. As Beloit city manager, Larry Arft has been the driving force behind extensive economic development. During his tenure, Beloit has experienced strong and sustained revitalization of its downtown, in the Gateway Business Park, and along its riverfront. He has always been an enthusiastic partner with the business community, and Larry proved that Beloit was--and continues to be--a good place to do business. He also engaged other government leaders in the area, around the State, and in the Federal Government. He set an example of how things should be done and how people could come together to address challenges. I had the privilege of working closely with him in efforts to secure Federal funding for the construction and improvement of local roads and bridges, allowing for safer and more rapid transport and economic development. In addition, I had the pleasure of working with him as he led efforts to create good jobs and attract visitors to the area through the development of a Beloit casino. Larry's work extended well beyond the city limits. He actively engaged other communities in the region and served as the president of the Wisconsin League of Municipalities, advocating for issues important to cities and villages. I am grateful for Larry Arft's contributions to the people of Beloit and to the people of Wisconsin, and I thank him for his service. I know his presence and personal commitment will be missed. I wish him and his wife Karen all the best in the years ahead.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, trade is a major issue for a manufacturing State such as Wisconsin. I am very proud of the fact that the State I represent has had a rich history of making things. In fact, I don't think we can have an economy that is built to last that doesn't make things as a key part, a key sector of the overall economy. So this debate on trade promotion authority and the trade bills that may follow to the floor of the Senate and the House take on a particular disproportionate impact in a State such as Wisconsin that makes things. We have lost a lot of those manufacturing jobs in recent years. We can't lay the entire blame on trade policies, but certainly some of our past trade deals have had a significant impact. It is hard to find folks in the State of Wisconsin who don't recall that in a negative way, who haven't suffered the results of mistakes we have made in the past. That brings me to this debate we are having this evening and I hope tomorrow and beyond on trade promotion authority. What trade promotion authority asks us to do as Senators in the United States and Representatives over in the House is to cede some of our usual powers-- our usual powers to amend bills to make them stronger, to make them more informed, to improve them, to perfect them--fast-track trade promotion authority asks us to relinquish those powers and to take a simple up-or-down, yes-or-no vote on a future trade deal that comes before us under this fast-track authority. Now, that may bring up the question of why would one ever support ceding those powers and relinquishing those powers, and I think that, ultimately, one hypothetically can do that because what we can do is take the time in the fast-track debate to set the conditions, to set the negotiating principles that have to be met in order to be able to relinquish that power later. That is where we get into this issue of process right now. It is so critical that we take the time to debate the conditions that we need to see present as representatives of people from States across this country, that we take the time to debate thoroughly these amendments so that we know the trade deals that will come before us later will be fair--not just free but fair. So I hope we take the time to debate all of these provisions because they matter in people's lives. They matter to middle-class, working Wisconsinites, some who have lost jobs in recent years and decades because of mistakes we have made in prior trade deals. I come to the floor this evening to share with my colleagues that I have filed nine separate amendments to this trade promotion authority. I know we won't have the chance to fully debate and vote on all of them, but I think it is important that we try to have a thorough and comprehensive consideration. So far, we have only voted on two amendments, and there are only a handful that are pending for consideration. So on that point, I wish to take a few moments to address just four of the amendments that I think are crucial to my State of Wisconsin and the middle-class workers whom I have the honor of representing. My first amendment is No. 1317. It is cosponsored by my colleagues Senator Franken and Senator Blumenthal. It strengthens the principle negotiating objective with respect to trade-remedy laws. This is talking about enforcement and having teeth in that enforcement. These trade remedies ensure that American manufacturers and their workers would compete on a level playing field globally. American manufacturers fight an uphill battle to keep their prices low while foreign companies sell goods in the United States often at subsidized prices. U.S. manufacturing has already suffered financial losses--and thousands of jobs, I might add--as a result of unfair trade practices. My amendment would strengthen our ability to fight on behalf of our American manufacturing workers. A second amendment I have offered is No. 1365, and I am proud to have joined forces with Senator Blumenthal. It would restrict trade promotion authority for any trade agreement that includes a country that criminalizes individuals based on sexual orientation or otherwise persecutes or punishes individuals based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. These countries are identified for us in the State Department's annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. At least 75 countries across the globe continue to criminalize homosexuality, subjecting lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people to imprisonment, various forms of corporal punishment and, in some countries, the death penalty. For example, in Brunei, a newly adopted law provides for execution by stoning for homosexuality. As we all know, Brunei is part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership free-trade agreement that is now under negotiation. Senators voting here on this legislation should know and understand this. If we do not adopt my amendment, we will be granting our highest trading status to a country that executes people based on whom they love. This is not hyperbole. This is a fact. The United States should not reward countries that deny the fundamental humanity of LGBT people by subjecting them to harsh penalties and even death simply because of who they are or whom they love. My third amendment, No. 1320, would add a principal negotiating objective to ensure that any trade agreement actually increases manufacturing jobs and wages in the United States. Many Wisconsin communities, as I mentioned earlier, bear the scars of NAFTA and other flawed so-called free-trade agreements. From closed factories to foreclosed homes to devastated communities, Wisconsinites know all too well what happens when politicians in Washington tell them that they know what is best for them in Wisconsin. Let me give a few numbers on trade from Wisconsin's perspective. On jobs, according to the Economic Policy Institute, NAFTA has led to the loss of more than 680,000 jobs, most--60 percent of them-- manufacturing jobs in the United States as a whole. Since China joined the WTO in the year 2000, there has been a net loss of over 2.7 million U.S. jobs. Of that amount, Wisconsin has lost around 68,000 jobs between the years 2001 and 2013 because of our trade deficit with China and their currency manipulation. Now, in 2011 we passed the South Korea Free Trade Agreement. In the years since, the growth of the U.S. trade deficit with South Korea has cost us more than 75,000 U.S. jobs. On wages, competing with workers in China and other low-wage countries, it has reduced wages of 100 million U.S. workers without a college degree, a total loss of about $180 billion each year. Since China joined the WTO, U.S. workers who lost their jobs because of trade with China have lost more than $37 billion in wages as a result of accepting lower-waged jobs. The final amendment I wish to describe is amendment No. 1319, cosponsored by my colleague Senator Merkley, who was speaking with all of us earlier this evening. This amendment would require the administration to notify the public when it waives ``Buy American'' requirements. Wisconsin workers make things, and we have been one of the top manufacturing States in the Nation for generations. Now, if we hope to continue making things, we think we should continue to have our own government as a customer. Or, put another way, U.S. taxpayer dollars should support U.S. jobs. That is why I am a strong supporter of ``Buy American'' provisions that require Federal agencies to purchase American-made products. Free-trade agreements have historically allowed foreign nations way too much leeway when bidding for our government projects and contracts while not affording American companies the same access. Now, I believe the issues I have brought up this evening and these four amendments are really important issues--important to our country, important to our standing in the world, and important to my State of Wisconsin. These are issues that the Senate should debate. I urge the majority leader to allow an open and robust amendment process so that we can vote on these critical provisions. With that, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, in the closing days of last Congress, I was proud to see this body include a provision in the Carl Levin and Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act, P.L. 113- 291, to transfer a parcel of land at the former Badger Army Ammunition Plant near Baraboo, WI, from the Department of Defense to the Department of the Interior. I worked throughout the drafting of this legislation to include this provision, which is of great importance to Wisconsin. During discussions on the specific legislative text to be included in the bill, a question was raised as to how the language might apply to Department of Defense contractors, particularly any Badger Army Ammunition Plant operators. I understand the legislative language that refers to ``activities of the Department of Defense'' to include activities undertaken by the officers and agents employed or contracted by the Department of Defense, meaning that under the terms of this provision, the Army retains responsibility for remediation of environmental contamination resulting from activities undertaken by the Department of Defense and its contractors. This clarification is critical because Badger Army Ammunition Plant was operated by the Department of Defense contractors, and contamination at the site was caused as a direct result of their activities. I wrote to the Department of Defense to request their clarification on this matter, and I ask unanimous consent that my letter and their response be printed in the Congressional Record.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Madam President, the American people have consistently and overwhelmingly voiced their concern that our country is moving in the wrong direction, whether that be with regard to wage stagnation, unemployment or simply realizing the American dream. Unfortunately, the budget resolution before us sends a strong message to the American people that Washington isn't listening. Instead of taking the opportunity to work together across party lines and move our country in the right direction, the Republican budget resolution continues to take our Nation down a road where Washington again stacks the deck against the middle class and rewards the wealthiest families and largest corporations in America. There isn't a single tax expenditure or loophole that is closed in the Republican budget. This budget refuses to ask the wealthy to contribute a single dollar more to deficit reduction. It does nothing to eliminate the carried interest loophole at a time when Wall Street billionaires pay a lower effective tax rate than some truckdrivers, teachers, and nurses. In fact, this budget would eliminate the estate tax for wealthy families who inherit over $10 million. This budget doesn't just give a tax cut for the wealthiest 1 percent, it also calls for lowering the top individual tax rate at a time when the top 1 percent already earns more income than the bottom 50 percent. What is more, the Republican budget resolution actually delivers a tax break for the wealthiest 0.2 percent of Americans over the next decade, providing an average tax break of $3 million to multimillionaires and billionaires. In fact, there are more Senators who will be voting later this afternoon on this budget proposal than the number of Wisconsin families who would benefit from the tax provision of this tax break I just cited. Who picks up the tab for these giveaways? In my home State of Wisconsin, an estimated 158,000 hard-working families would pay $1,000 or more in taxes under the Republican budget resolution. I wonder, do my colleagues on the other side of the aisle really believe this budget gives Americans ``the right to rise''? Is this their idea of an ``American revival'' for our middle class? Not only does the Republican budget resolution fall short when it comes to making strong investments in education to create a strong path to the middle class, it actually falls flat by actually cutting these investments, failing to make college education affordable, and ignoring the huge student debt crisis across America. For Wisconsin families, the cost of college education will increase for up to 117,000 students because of the Republican budget's substantial cuts to the Pell Grant Program. At a time when our national economy moves forward with a slow and steady recovery, my State's economy has continued to lag behind. So I can't support this Republican budget resolution when it doesn't make the strong investments America desperately needs in our roads, in our bridges, and in our ports that will create jobs, boost our local economies, and provide businesses with the quality transportation system they need to move their goods to market. I can't support this Republican budget resolution when about 46,000 Wisconsin jobs would be eliminated because of cuts to investment in transportation, education, and other programs. At a time when both parties should be working together to pass a budget that grows our economy for the middle class and gives everyone a fair shot at getting ahead, this Republican budget resolution cuts investments in workforce readiness, leaving 40,000 Wisconsinites without the training that prepares them to put their hard work ethic to work moving our economy forward. Many of the Wisconsin workers I hear from every day are really struggling to make ends meet. They are working more, taking home less, and worried--worried that for the first time in American history, their kids will have fewer opportunities than they did. The Republican budget doesn't address those worries, it doesn't address those anxieties or those fears. It doesn't respond to this insecurity. Rather, the Republican budget continues the same failed, top-down economics, where Washington rigs the rules in favor of special interests, in favor of millionaires and billionaires. Unfortunately, the Republican proposal seeks to balance the budget on the backs of the middle class and those struggling to one day become a part of America's middle class. This budget proposal marks another missed opportunity for the majority. The American people are right to believe this budget takes our country another step in the wrong direction because it turns its backs on building a stronger future. We can do better. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, my amendment would create a free community college program, making a bold investment in our Nation's students, its workforce, and the future of our economy. It pays for this investment in a balanced way, and my amendment would actually reduce the deficit by enacting the Buffett rule, asking millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share of taxes while giving our students a fair shot at the opportunities a higher education brings. Inspired by programs in Tennessee and Chicago, this spring President Obama proposed a program that would allow students to attend community college for 2 years at no cost. This was a bold step. Passing my amendment will show that Congress is ready to act to give every student a fair shot at an affordable education. Voting for this amendment means you believe a college education should be a path to the middle class and not a path into debt. I urge all of my colleagues to vote yes on the Baldwin-Schumer- Sanders-Stabenow amendment to support free community college and invest in our students and our workforce. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, amendment No. 436 is also cosponsored by Senators Warner, McCaskill, and Whitehouse. This amendment is very simple. It would strike section 405 of the chairman's mark. Section 405 eliminated a point of order against reconciliation legislation which either increases the deficit or would reduce a surplus. I see no good reason why we should be making it easier to increase the debt and deficit that the majority claims to care so much about. If their reconciliation legislation is so important, then they ought to pay for it. If this amendment fails to be adopted, we will find ourselves in the same situation we were in the early 2000s. In 2001 and 2003, the then-Republican majority used reconciliation to pass a $1.3 trillion tax cut in 2001 and then another $350 billion tax cut in 2003. Both of these efforts were entirely unpaid for. Not a single dime was offset. So much for fiscal responsibility. It was not until 2007, when Chairman Conrad took control of the Senate Budget Committee, when a point of order was put into place to stop reconciliation from being used as a tool to add to the deficit. Let's not use the reconciliation process to add to our deficit. I urge my colleagues to support my commonsense amendment. I yield the floor.

Ms. BALDWIN. I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment and call up my amendment No. 432, which is cosponsored by Senators Schumer, Sanders, and Stabenow.

Ms. BALDWIN. I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, my amendment would create a free community college program, making a bold investment in our Nation's students, its workforce, and the future of our economy. It pays for this investment in a balanced way, and my amendment would actually reduce the deficit by enacting the Buffett rule--asking millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share of taxes while giving our students a fair shot at the opportunities a higher education brings. I believe every student in America deserves a fair shot and an affordable education, and I believe a college education should be a path to the middle class, not a path into debt. Inspired by programs in Tennessee and Chicago, this spring President Obama proposed a program that would allow students to attend community college for 2 years at no cost. This will give students who are willing to work hard the opportunity to obtain a certificate, an industry- recognized credential, or associate's degree. That provides the skills they need to access in-demand jobs or earn credits they can transfer into a 4-year institution. I would urge all my colleagues to support the Baldwin, Schumer, Sanders, Stabenow amendment in order to support higher education, to support free community college, and invest in our students and our workforce. Amendment No. 436 Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside in order to call up Baldwin amendment No. 436.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I thank Senator Whitehouse for his commitment to addressing the threats that climate change poses globally, to our country, and to our States. I thank him for highlighting some of those threats to my home State of Wisconsin. Let there be no doubt that global climate change is real. It is a fact. The question is not whether it is happening, but rather how we are going to address it. Are we going to do all we can to leave the next generation a safer and healthier world? As my friend from Rhode Island just noted, climate change will be costly to our economy and to our very way of life, and the longer we wait to act, the more costly these impacts will be. Throughout our history, the State of Wisconsin has been a proud home to environmental leaders who have worked to pass on a stronger environment to future generations--Aldo Leopold, John Muir, and Senator Gaylord Nelson, founder of Earth Day and the namesake for the Nelson Institute at the University of Wisconsin, which my colleague from Rhode Island just mentioned in his remarks. As a representative of our great State, it is one of my top priorities to follow in this legacy and to preserve our natural resources and quality of life for future generations. It is not hard to see why Wisconsinites have always deeply valued environmental protection. Looking out at the crystal clear waters of Lake Superior from its south shore, or standing atop Rib Mountain gazing at the forests and farmlands of central Wisconsin, to casting your fishing rod in the world-class trout streams of the Driftless region in southwestern Wisconsin, there is no question that we are blessed by the natural beauty of our State. But even now, the impact of climate change can be seen on each of these landscapes and in the economies they support. We see it in our agriculture--growing seasons are shifting, and extreme weather harms our crops, and we have increasing concerns about drought and our groundwater. In fact, NASA recently warned that within a few decades--within our lifetimes--the United States may enter a megadrought that could last 30 years. In my home State, the resulting decreased soil moisture will put additional stress on farmers, on private wells, and on municipal drinking water systems. These prolonged droughts, combined with increased intensity of storm events and changing temperature patterns, will force farmers to make changes to how and what they grow. This is extremely troubling, as agriculture is an $88 billion industry in my home State of Wisconsin. We also see the negative effects of climate change on our Great Lakes. In Lake Michigan, for example, lake levels are largely driven by precipitation. Changes in precipitation patterns due to climate change may cause more dramatic fluctuations or prolonged changes in lake levels. In addition, data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration shows that summertime surface water temperatures have increased 8 degrees Fahrenheit since 1980. Warmer surface water temperatures disrupt the food chain, which threatens our fish population. As these adverse effects are expected to worsen in the coming decades, they will inevitably lead to more wildlife disease, and warmer waters that will drive out native fish. Changing water levels also create new challenges for property owners and communities along the Great Lakes. Infrastructure may need to be redesigned, insurance demands may change, and new health risks may emerge or be exacerbated as additional stress is imposed on our sewer systems. Each of these will hurt our local economies. Tourism is also a major part of Wisconsin's economy, and the Northwoods is a favorite destination to fish, camp, hunt, and snowmobile. But projections show that by midcentury, the climate of areas such as Bayfield and Vilas County in the Northwoods will be more similar to what we have known in the southeastern part of the State of Wisconsin in counties such as Waukesha County. Meanwhile, Waukesha County's climate could be more similar to what we used to expect hundreds of miles south in the neighboring State of Illinois. The impacts on tourism, recreation, and the landscapes we hold near and dear may be dramatic, and the threats may be daunting. But we cannot continue to let the challenges overwhelm us and cause inaction on our part. Wisconsin's State motto is ``Forward.'' The people of Wisconsin have never been afraid of the challenges we face or what the future holds. We have a strong progressive tradition of confronting our challenges and working together to shape our future for the next generation. In fact, analysis by the World Resources Institute in 2013 found that Wisconsin is well positioned to meet national goals for carbon pollution reduction. By extending existing clean energy policies, Wisconsin could reduce its emissions substantially in coming years. In addition, many of Wisconsin's most successful companies are leaders in energy efficiency, renewable energy, and clean technology. They are vital sources of innovation and will provide opportunities for the workers of today and tomorrow. I believe smart investments by government, by companies and institutions, and by citizens will help us confront the challenge of climate change, while positioning Wisconsin for 21st century economic and ecological resiliency. This opportunity is great. We must meet the challenge head on--going forward the Wisconsin way. I once again thank Senator Whitehouse for his laser focus on this issue that is so critical to all of our home States, as well as, frankly, the entire global community. I yield the floor.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, as President Obama has noted in his State of the Union, the American economy is growing again. We are creating jobs at the fastest pace since 1999, and unemployment is lower than before the financial crisis. American businesses are posting large profits and boosting the stock market along with them. Yet for many working Americans, this good news is only that, news-- something they see in the paper or on TV, not in their paychecks or at the kitchen table. Many of the Wisconsin workers I hear from every day are struggling to make ends meet. They are working more, taking home less, and worried that for the first time in American history their kids will have fewer opportunities than they did. For the last 5 years the Obama administration has been negotiating with 11 nations in the Asia-Pacific region on a free-trade agreement known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Some of these countries have values similar to ours and some do not. I fear this agreement could allow some nations to take advantage of the values we as Americans place on our environment, on labor laws, on human rights, and on free enterprise rules. These nations would be competing against American workers on an uneven playing field. This unfair game would continue the downward pressure on wages that has plagued American workers since before NAFTA. The interests of Wisconsin workers are being represented in these negotiations by unelected officials in the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. I am here to let these negotiators know that Wisconsinites don't want more of the same failed promises from free- trade deals. Wisconsin workers make things. We have been one of the top manufacturing States for generations. If we hope to continue making things, we think we should continue to have our own government as a customer. That is why I have been a big and strong supporter of ``Buy American'' provisions that require Federal agencies that use taxpayer dollars to purchase American-made products. Free-trade agreements have historically allowed foreign nations too much leeway when bidding for our government projects and contracts, while not affording American companies that fair access, that same access. I have asked the GAO to study this and report back to Congress so we can know the effect skirting ``Buy American'' laws have and the cost it has to American manufacturers. Currencies that reflect their true value are also vital to the conduct of global trade. When foreign countries cheat by manipulating their currencies to price their goods cheaper, Wisconsin workers--in fact all American workers--lose. Seven years ago, then-Senator Obama, speaking about the Bush administration's inaction on currency manipulation said it best: Refusing to acknowledge this problem will not make it go away. . . . The Administration's refusal to take strong action against China's currency manipulation will also make it more difficult to obtain congressional approval for renewed Trade Promotion Authority, as well as additional trade agreements. That statement is as true today with the Obama administration as it was with the Bush administration. Currency manipulation is essentially cheating. That is why I support including strong and enforceable currency manipulation provisions in any trade agreement. Without these rules, we will allow countries to engage in a race to the bottom that leaves everybody worse off. One of the things that has made America great is our entrepreneurial spirit. This spirit has attracted immigrant entrepreneurs from all over the world, but all too often I hear from Wisconsin businesses whose patented ideas are being stolen and replicated in Asia. I believe any agreement must include high standards for protecting intellectual property to encourage risk-taking investments that turn into profitable companies and jobs in the United States. In the same way, I believe our ideas should be protected, I also believe that what we call our foods should be protected from foreign interference. Let me explain what I mean by that. In fact, the European Union has sought to restrict the use of cheese, meat, and alcohol names that American producers have used for generations. For instance, cheese producers in Wisconsin would not able to call their cheese ``feta'' because it is not made in Greece, while a brewer in Wisconsin couldn't label his dark beer a ``Bavarian Black'' because it isn't made in Bavaria, in Germany. I have worked hard to urge the U.S. Trade Representative to reject any attempt by the European Union or any foreign nation to restrict the use of common food names in order to protect our food manufacturers and processors across this country--and especially as Wisconsin is a major producer of beer and brats and cheese, this is an issue that is very close to home. Finally, I have concerns about the value systems of some of the nations that are party to the TPP. By way of example, Brunei recently adopted new sharia laws that include death by stoning for acts of adultery, homosexuality, and forced amputations for other offenses, including consuming alcohol. These laws go so far as to outlaw public Christmas celebrations. In fact, the act of wearing a Santa Claus hat in public could lead to a fine of more than $15,000, a 5-year imprisonment sentence or both. Amnesty International has called the new rules in Brunei ``shocking.'' They have been declared illegal by the U.N. High Commissioner For Human Rights. We should not be affording our highest trading privileges to nations that do not value basic human rights. I have heard from so many constituents who are rightly skeptical of the promises this new generation of trade agreements offer. I appreciate having this opportunity to express my concerns about free- trade agreements that are currently under negotiation. After seeing decades of jobs going overseas while the ones that are left pay less, who can blame the critics? Until it is clear to me that the gains from these agreements will go to the middle class and not just multinational corporations, millionaires or billionaires, I will continue to oppose them. I thank my colleagues for organizing this opportunity to speak on trade. I yield the floor.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, it is no secret we are living in dangerous times and that we face a variety of threats. We face the threat of ISIL, a barbaric and despicable terrorist organization. We face threats to the security of our personal information both online and in our daily life. We still face threats from Al Qaeda and rogue nations such as North Korea. With all of these ongoing threats to our Nation and its citizens, shouldn't our colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to work together in a bipartisan manner in order to fund the government agency responsible for protecting us from those threats? Evidently they do not. Instead, they are playing a partisan game while threatening to shut down the Department of Homeland Security. They are playing politics with our homeland security. The vote the Senate just took relates to a bill that put partisan politics ahead of our national security while also needlessly creating another manufactured budget crisis, and that is why I voted no. I understand our Republican colleagues have concerns about the President's Executive actions on immigration, and I believe there is a time and place for this body to debate those issues, as we have in the past and we must in the future. But to jeopardize our Nation's security by playing politics with this vital funding measure is extremely disappointing. I would actually like to remind our colleagues that the President's actions on immigration reform devote even more resources to securing our Southwest border and to deporting felons, not families, and identifying threats to our national security. The President's Executive action on immigration also provides certain undocumented immigrants temporary relief, after background checks and other security measures are passed, bringing families out of the shadows so they can work and pay taxes like everyone else. I remain committed to finishing the job on bipartisan and comprehensive immigration reform here in Congress, but until we can achieve that goal, I support the President keeping his promise to take action and do what he legally can to fix our broken system. Consistent with the actions by previous Presidents of both parties, President Obama is right to follow in the footsteps of every President since Eisenhower to address as much of this problem as he can through Executive action. The status quo is simply unacceptable. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office--also known as the nonpartisan scorekeeper--recently found that including a reversal of these Executive orders in the homeland security funding bill would actually increase our deficit. Instead of attaching these transparent attacks on the President, the Congress should pass a clean, straightforward, bipartisan bill. And there is such a bill. That bill was previously negotiated and it was just introduced by the vice chairwoman of the Committee on Appropriations, Barbara Mikulski, and the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Homeland Security, Senator Shaheen. As a new member of the Subcommittee on Homeland Security of the Committee on Appropriations, I am a strong supporter of the Mikulski- Shaheen bill because it would fund programs that are critical to our Nation and to my home State of Wisconsin. Their straightforward funding bill funds essential Departments such as the Coast Guard, which keeps the Great Lakes safe and open for business; and it funds FEMA grants, which have helped communities in western Wisconsin, for example, plan and prepare for floods; and it funds fire grants that help rural fire departments with equipment they could never afford through the proceeds of annual pancake breakfasts. These are critical assets that my constituents rely on, and putting them at risk is simply irresponsible. It is time for our colleagues to drop this dangerous political stunt and to join with Democrats to pass a bipartisan bill that gives the Department of Homeland Security the resources it needs to keep Americans safe. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. BALDWIN

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

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Madam President, this is not the time for another government shutdown. The American people have had enough of Washington's dysfunction. They want us to do our job and work together to get the job done. Since the Budget Committee, on which I serve, crafted a bipartisan agreement that ended last year's government shutdown and paved the way for a cease-fire on recent budget wars, the economy has gained an average of 240,000 jobs per month. In Wisconsin, our economy continues to lag behind, so we need to build on this progress and strengthen the economic security of families and businesses that are working hard to move our economy forward. This bipartisan appropriations bill will help do that by increasing the Child Care and Development Block Grant funding by $75 million; increasing the maximum Pell grant award; providing a cost of living pay raise for our men and women in the Armed Forces; increasing funding for science and research at the National Institutes of Health by $150 million; providing grants to States for job training and assistance to dislocated workers; extending Trade Adjustments Assistance for workers who lose their jobs due to international trade; and moving bipartisan Manufacturing Hubs legislation forward that I support to keep our country on the leading edge of advanced manufacturing. I also fought to include in this legislation a number of provisions that will help us build a stronger made in Wisconsin economy, including support for our shipbuilding industry and transportation infrastructure. With all of these benefits, I am the first to admit that this bill is far from perfect. But we have a divided government and I recognize that I can't get everything I want in this bill, just as my colleagues across the aisle can't get everything they want in this bill. This bill is a compromise. Let me be very clear here: Republicans' insistence on including a Wall Street giveaway is extremely objectionable to me. I also strongly oppose a provision that weakens our already loose campaign laws and the changes made to multiemployer pensions deserved a full debate in the Senate, as separate legislation, not tucked into an appropriations bill by the House of Representatives at the last minute. I agree with my colleagues who have said these provisions represent the very worst of creating an uneven playing field for those hard working Americans who ask for nothing more than a voice in Washington and fair shot at getting ahead. I would also add that these provisions in particular are a direct assault on our proud progressive traditions in Wisconsin. But what would have happened if we did not pass this bill now? I can tell you what will happen because we saw the path the Republican controlled House of Representatives wanted to take. Republicans tried to add more than 30 additional harmful policy provisions--from more Wall Street giveaways to rolling back workers' rights to eroding environmental policy--but Senate Democrats were able to use their current leverage as the majority party in the Senate to keep them out. If this bill did not pass now, Republicans would have had the power to add more objectionable provisions when they will hold majorities in both the House and Senate next year. I supported this bipartisan compromise because I believe it is our job to deliver progress for the American people, not an endless drift from one crisis to the next or a government shutdown.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Oklahoma for his courtesy, and I am delighted to rise today to mark the passage of the Fiscal Year 2015 National Defense Authorization Act. This bill is a product of bipartisan negotiations between the House and Senate Armed Services Committees, and I thank Chairman Levin and Ranking Member Inhofe, Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member Adam Smith in the House for their hard work. This critical bill establishes our national security policy and supports our dedicated men and women in uniform and their families. I am particularly pleased that the legislation supports Wisconsin manufacturers and workers who build ships and engines and military vehicles that help our Nation meet its national security needs. On the eve of his retirement from the Senate, I want to offer a special thank you to Senator Carl Levin for his magnificent work as chairman of the committee on this bill and for working with me to include a military land transfer in Wisconsin at the site of the former Badger Army Ammunition Plant. I have been working on this project since my election to the House of Representatives 16 years ago, and I am extremely grateful to Chairman Levin and his staff for helping me push this legislation across the finish line. The extraordinary piece of land I am talking about consists of some 7,500 acres. It is bordered by the rolling Baraboo Hills, which hosts the largest flock of upland forest of oak and maple and basswood still standing in southern Wisconsin. It is bounded also by Wisconsin's beautiful Devils Lake State Park and a segment of the Ice Age Trail, which is part of the National Trails System. To its east it is skirted by the mighty Wisconsin River that flows toward the Mississippi. For the better part of the past century, it has been the site of a bustling manufacturing plant, once the largest munitions plant in the world which produced munitions for American troops that they used from World War II through Vietnam. We can see a historic aerial photograph to my left of what that property looked like with the Baraboo Bluffs and the Wisconsin River. Before that, the site was home to 90 landowners who farmed the land, and well before that, the land was cherished ground for the Ho-Chunk Nation, whose people grew traditional crops and gathered medicinal plants from the land. This land is revered by the Ho-Chunk Nation and is connected to their ancestral history, with oral history of the land dating back hundreds of years. In 1997 discussions began on the future of this land after the Army closed the plant, declaring it to be surplus to its needs, and began the process of remediation of the contaminated soil at the site. Some thought it should be sold for commercial development, but the local community opposed that option, understanding that the land's unique attributes needed to be preserved and wishing to see it restored to its natural beauty. I always felt that the community--and not bureaucrats in Washington-- should be empowered to make decisions about the future of this site. I regarded this as a once-in-a-generation and maybe a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for this community. So as a freshman Member of Congress, I secured a Federal grant to establish a community consensus process to recommend a reuse plan. This process brought every stakeholder to the table. In 2001, after nearly 2 years of hard work, the Badger Reuse Committee issued a report supported by all the participating parties-- including State and Federal and tribal entities--outlining agreement on future uses. Some said that consensus would be nearly impossible, but we proved that local stakeholders, working together, could achieve a visionary future for this incredible property. What was that consensus? The consensus was that the property should be comanaged in perpetuity as one property for agricultural, recreational, educational, and conservation purposes. The photo to my left shows a stark contrast to the photo you just saw of the Badger Army Ammunition Plant, as the property has been gradually restored over time. Since that time, most of the parcels at this site have been transferred--one parcel to the U.S. Department of Agriculture for dairy forage research, another to the State of Wisconsin to provide opportunities for low-impact recreation. But one major parcel essential to the community's vision at this site has been caught in bureaucratic disagreement for nearly a decade. This legislation will finally allow that parcel to be transferred from the Army to the Department of the Interior, which will hold the land in trust for the Ho-Chunk Nation. This transfer has been stalled by an interagency dispute over which Federal agency would have responsibility for future environmental cleanup at the site. The legislative intent of this provision follows the legislative intent of our environmental superfund laws: The polluter must pay for contamination they caused. As to future uses, the Ho-Chunk Nation participated in the consensus process that culminated in the Badger Reuse Plan, where they expressed interest in holding the lands in trust in order to preserve native prairie habitat and graze bison. Since that time, the Ho-Chunk Nation has reaffirmed their interest in receiving this land for prairie restoration--a reuse that reaffirms the vision of the Badger Reuse Committee that all the new holders of these lands--the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the State of Wisconsin, and the Ho-Chunk Nation--would manage the property in coordination with one another, reflecting the site as a whole. In October of this year the tribe updated its land use plan for the parcel in this transfer. I ask unanimous consent to have that document and a technical description of this transfer printed in the Record.

Ms. BALDWIN. These 1,553 acres represent the last major parcel at the Badger Army Ammunition Plant site to leave Army management. The resolution this transfer will bring is long overdue, and I am proud to have played a role in defining the community's vision and bringing it to a reality. The action we take this week--hopefully later today--will benefit many generations to come. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Ms. BALDWIN. Senator, less than 10 minutes.