Benjamin Cardin

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I applaud the Senate passage of H.R. 876, the Notice of Observation Treatment and Implication for Care Eligibility, NOTICE, Act. Representative Lloyd Doggett of Texas introduced H.R. 876. Senator Enzi and I introduced an identical companion bill in the Senate, S. 1349, which the Finance Committee reported unanimously by voice vote on June 24, 2015. This important legislation requires hospitals to give notice to Medicare beneficiaries who are classified as ``outpatient observation'' status for more than 24 hours rather than being admitted to the hospital as inpatients. Being classified as ``outpatient observation'' status may result in higher out-of-pocket costs for Medicare beneficiaries and makes those beneficiaries ineligible for Medicare coverage of post- acute care in a skilled nursing facility after they are discharged from the hospital. The use of ``outpatient observation'' status has become more prevalent in recent years, and the duration of these ``outpatient observation'' stays has grown longer--meaning that an increasing number of Medicare beneficiaries are spending more and more time in the hospital without being admitted as inpatients. According to the Department of Health & Human Services's, HHS, inspector general, in 2012, Medicare beneficiaries had more than 600,000 ``outpatient observation'' stays that lasted 3 nights or more. These ``outpatient observation'' stays can have serious financial consequences for seniors. Medicare beneficiaries classified as ``outpatient observation'' status are responsible for outpatient co- payments and prescription drug costs that they would not have had as an inpatient--and there is no out-of-pocket cap on these costs. Perhaps most importantly, Medicare will only cover post-acute care in a skilled nursing facility, SNF, if the beneficiary had 3 consecutive days of hospitalization as an inpatient--even though ``outpatient observation'' patients may spend multiple nights in the hospital and receive the same type and level of care as inpatients. This means Medicare beneficiaries classified as ``outpatient observation'' status who require skilled nursing care after discharge from the hospital must pay the entire cost themselves--an average out-of-pocket cost of more than $10,000 per beneficiary. Understandably, Medicare beneficiaries spending several nights in the hospital often simply assume that they have been admitted as inpatients. Many seniors are unaware that they have actually been classified as ``outpatient observation'' status and what that means in terms of the financial consequences for them and their families. In some cases, these seniors only become aware of their ``outpatient observation'' status after they receive a bill from the nursing home for tens of thousands of dollars. Under the NOTICE Act, within 36 hours or, if sooner, upon discharge, hospitals are required to provide written notice to the Medicare beneficiary explaining, No. 1, that he or she has been classified as an outpatient under observation status, instead of being admitted as an inpatient; No. 2, the reason for that classification; and, No. 3, the implications on cost-sharing and eligibility for Medicare coverage of post-acute care in a skilled nursing facility. The NOTICE Act is a no-cost, commonsense approach that will help ensure our seniors are fully informed about their hospital status and the financial implications. I thank my colleagues for joining with me and Senator Enzi to support this important legislation.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I wish to pay tribute to Samuel Shapiro & Company, a Baltimore-based customs broker and freight forwarder, on the occasion of the firm's 100th anniversary. Founded by Samuel Shapiro in 1915, Shapiro & Co. has since become one of our country's leaders in domestic and international shipping, with locations across the eastern seaboard. From navigating the intricacies of international cargo management to providing client consultation on import and export compliance, Shapiro & Co. has distinguished itself as a center of innovation, extensive business acumen, and creativity. Strong family and community ties lie at the real heart of the company, which has been family-owned since its founding. Samuel Shapiro, a son of Russian immigrants, founded Samuel Shapiro & Company at age 20 just as our Nation was beginning to emerge onto the global stage, economically, politically, and socially. Our European allies were in the midst of war, driving the need for American-made goods ever higher. Designated by the U.S. Government as the Port of Baltimore's distribution broker for grain exports, Shapiro & Co., though small, began to build a reputation for effectiveness and reliability among European businesses during the postwar reconstruction period. Throughout the 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s, Shapiro & Co. continued to expand, helping to cement the city of Baltimore as one of the Nation's premier commercial ports. In the 1950s, Shapiro & Co., driven by the strong leadership of Samuel and his son Sigmund, emerged as an influential force in lobbying for the establishment of the Maryland Port Authority in 1956 and in advocating for the growth of the port, supporting the construction of the Dundalk Marine Terminal in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Shapiro & Co. continued to serve as an economic force through some of Baltimore's most difficult times, throughout the eras of upheaval and relocation in the 1960s and 1970s. After a lifetime of devotion to the city of Baltimore, Samuel Shapiro passed away at the age of 92 in the mid-1980s. Today, the company is headed by president and CEO Marjorie Shapiro, Samuel's granddaughter. Shapiro, as the company is known today, has evolved from a one-room office with a $5 roll-top desk to a well-respected and highly regarded industry leader and Baltimore institution. The Port of Baltimore is more vibrant than ever, due in part to the stewardship of Shapiro & Co. In 2014, the Port brought in 29.5 million tons of foreign exports at a value of $52.5 billion. I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating the legacy of this outstanding company, which embodies the values that we honor most as Americans: hard work, a commitment to family, and tireless dedication.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I wish to speak about the ongoing civil war in South Sudan. July 9 marks the fourth anniversary of South Sudan's independence. This should be a day of celebration, but it is instead a day marred by violence and suffering. For the last 19 months, hostilities between the government and the opposition have brought the world's newest country to the brink of ruin. Regional mediation efforts have failed, and the international community has yet to come up with a viable plan to end the violence. Unless we jumpstart diplomatic efforts immediately, this conflict is destined to become another long-running war in Africa that is ignored by the rest of the world. As some of my colleagues may know, ongoing political tensions between forces loyal to President Salva Kiir and forces loyal to former Vice President Riek Machar, coupled with preexisting ethnic tensions, erupted in violence on the night of December 15, 2013. Both sides in the conflict have committed and continue to commit serious human rights violations. The nature and scale of the abuses in the first days, weeks, and months of the conflict prompted the African Union to establish a Commission of Inquiry in March of last year to investigate. However the Commission's report, while completed, has never been publicly released. We have seen the contents of a version of the report that was leaked in March and the findings are truly disturbing: indiscriminate killing of civilians, burning and looting of hospitals and humanitarian assets, attacks on United Nations compounds, and rape on a massive scale. Similar findings have been reported separately by the U.N. and various human rights organizations. Tragically, increased fighting this spring has been characterized by an even greater level of brutality. According to the United Nations Children's Fund, UNICEF, as many as 129 children were killed in May in Unity State alone--boys were castrated and left to bleed to death, girls as young as 8 years old were raped and killed, some children had their throats slit or were thrown into burning buildings by government- allied militia. This is in addition to the estimated 13,000 children being forcibly recruited to fight by government and opposition forces. The behavior of armed groups is beyond inhumane. As a result of the war, 1.5 million people are internally displaced. More than 730,000 have crossed borders into Sudan, Ethiopia, Uganda, and Kenya as refugees. The number of people facing severe food insecurity has almost doubled since the start of the year from 2.5 million to an estimated 4.6 million people, including approximately 874,000 children under the age of 5. The recent uptick in hostilities has made it extremely challenging for humanitarian organizations to reach populations in need. Aid workers continue to be harassed, detained, and abducted. The Government of South Sudan expelled the United Nations Deputy Special Representative and Humanitarian Coordinator Toby Lanzer in June. His expulsion comes at a time of increasing humanitarian need. The ruthless means through which troops are executing the war, the parliament's passage of an NGO law hinders the delivery of much needed services, the expulsion of the head of the U.N. humanitarian arm and obstruction of U.N. peacekeeping operations to protect civilians, and the refusal of the parties to engage in good-faith negotiations to end hostilities all paint a picture of two opposing sides that have very little regard for the needs or wellbeing of South Sudanese citizens. In light of the gravity of the situation on the ground, we must urgently consider taking several steps: First, we should push for a United Nations arms embargo on South Sudan to stop the flow of arms to all warring factions. We may or may not be successful in convincing all of the Permanent Five members of the Security Council to agree with us on this, but we will never be successful if we don't make the attempt. On July 1, the United Nations Security Council imposed personal targeted sanctions on six South Sudanese generals it believes are fueling the fighting. I welcome this move, but I have doubts that this alone will prove a game changer. Strangling the supply of arms and materiel of the actors on the ground could prove far more effective than sanctioning military leaders who don't travel outside the country or hold assets internationally. Second, we must undertake a review of the military training and assistance we are providing to countries in the region to determine whether soldiers we have trained and equipment we have supplied are being used to either commit human rights abuses in South Sudan or prolong hostilities. We should also consider whether extra safeguards are warranted to ensure that U.S. security assistance is not being used to support the warring factions or otherwise contributing to the conflict. Third, we must expand our investments in reconciliation efforts. USAID has joined with international partners and is doing a tremendous job on the humanitarian front. But our aid should, to the extent possible, be coupled with an increase in peace and reconciliation activities. The vicious nature of the attacks on civilians will make post-war, community-level reconstruction efforts and national healing enormously difficult. We cannot wait until the war is over to begin to bring people together. These programs should also include activities that support justice at the local level so that people who have borne the brunt of the violence can obtain some measure of closure. Fourth, we must begin to look at how we put accountability mechanisms in place. During his trip to east Africa in May, Secretary Kerry announced $5 million to support accountability efforts. I applaud this move, and am pleased to hear that we are supporting the collection of evidence of gross human rights violations and preserving records for use in the future. We must take each and every opportunity we can to make clear that the United States is committed to bringing human rights abusers to justice. However, we can do more. We should push regional actors to move forward with efforts to establish the parameters and modalities of a court or other transitional justice mechanism. Initiating such mechanisms now--rather than waiting for an end to the war--more adequately demonstrates the international community's commitment to justice for victims than empty statements on the importance of accountability. Finally, I urge President Obama to convene a meeting with the Secretaries General of the Africa Union and United Nations while he is in Addis Ababa this month to discuss a way forward that involves those two bodies and members of the Troika. And these talks must involve key regional players who could prove spoilers to any process, including Sudan and Uganda. The cost of this war has been astronomical. The U.N. Mission to South Sudan has cost over $2 billion in the past 2 years alone. The international community has provided nearly $2.7 billion in humanitarian assistance. The United States alone has provided more than $1.2 billion for those purposes. This is money that should have been invested in building a country that had already been devastated by decades of war with Sudan. However, the real tragedy is not the dollars lost--it is in the thousands of lives lost, the seeds sown of ethnic hatred and division and the squandering of an opportunity to build a nation that could provide a future to millions of people that were marginalized, attacked and abused by Khartoum. We must take action now to stop the war and prevent the deaths of thousands more South Sudanese.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I wish to speak about the successes of the Millennium Challenge Corporation, or MCC, which is one of the U.S. Government's newest and most potent resources in the war against global poverty. MCC was founded by a bipartisan act of Congress in 2004 as a new way to deliver foreign assistance. While the U.S. Agency for International Development, USAID, remains a critical tool for working with countries in need, MCC was given a very specific and focused goal: to reduce poverty through economic growth. The countries receiving MCC grants would be partners with a strong say in how their money would be spent. And, countries would need to compete for MCC dollars--only the best governed countries that performed better than their peers on matters of economic freedom, ruling justly, and investing in their people, would be worthy of MCC funding. The MCC model is working. Countries are taking a hard look at their problems and poring over their performance scorecards so that they can become MCC-eligible. Academics have confirmed that the so-called ``MCC Effect''--MCC's ability to incentivize significant policy reforms from countries seeking a compact--is real and meaningful. MCC countries are reforming in vital ways to be part of MCC. Ghana, for example, is reforming its entire power sector in order to receive MCC assistance. In Lesotho, women were fundamentally unequal citizens, unable to open a bank account without a man's permission. MCC made the Lesotho partnership contingent upon removing those barriers, and women now enjoy economic freedoms unavailable to them before. With 11 years under its belt and a proven record of success, the MCC is looking towards the future and assessing how it can amplify its already significant effects on fighting poverty. One way we can do that is to give MCC the flexibility to coordinate its work on a regional basis. That is why I introduced S. 1605, the Millennium Compacts for Regional Economic Integration Act, or the M-CORE Act, along with Senators Flake, Coons, and Isakson on June 18, 2015. The M-CORE Act would enable MCC to establish concurrent compacts in eligible developing countries, enhancing their ability to promote economic growth and cross-border engagement between and among nations. Through the greater regional economic collaboration that MCC regional compacts will achieve, countries can address deficiencies in communications, transportation, and energy networks. MCC's bilateral compacts have increased access to reliable power, built highway corridors, and improved business climates, thereby promoting economic growth and cross-border engagement within MCC partner countries. Regional investments can have an even greater rate of return. In Central America, for example, MCC's work on road infrastructure could have had an even greater impact if the roads connected across borders. And in Africa, neighboring countries could collaborate on a regional power pool, connect land-locked countries to transportation infrastructure, or address other policy, institutional, and logistical challenges that hamper economic growth and development. MCC has, by mandate, always focused on economic analysis and rigorous data; and its approach to regional investments has been no exception. MCC's extensive analysis has concluded that a regional approach to poverty reduction, under the right circumstances, can present opportunities to take advantage of higher rates of return on investment and larger scale reductions in poverty. In short, MCC regional investments have the potential to greatly enhance economic growth in well-governed regions of the developing world. I urge my Senate colleagues to join me in supporting this commonsense legislation.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Now, as I travel around Baltimore, and particularly the neighborhoods that are trying to recover, I hear a recurring theme from constituents: They don't feel their government truly represents them and their interests. They don't feel government has fully invested in recovery efforts in their communities. They don't feel fully enfranchised. So what steps have the local government and Federal Government taken so far? We have seen our State's attorney in Baltimore indict several police officers on numerous criminal charges as a result of the death of Freddie Gray. Mr. Gray suffered a severe spinal cord injury while in police custody, which ultimately led to his death. The judge in this case has scheduled a trial to begin in October. At the Federal level, even before the Freddie Gray case, I had called for the Justice Department to intervene regarding allegations of brutality and misconduct by the Baltimore Police Department. In October 2014, the Maryland congressional delegation sent a letter to the Justice Department in support of greater Federal involvement with our local police force. DOJ agreed to this request and opened a collaborative review process with their COPS Office in Baltimore City. Shortly after the Freddie Gray case came to light in April of 2015, I sent a letter, along with the Maryland congressional delegation, asking the Justice Department to open a pattern or practice investigation into civil rights violations in the Baltimore Police Department. DOJ agreed to this request and opened the investigation, which is still ongoing, at the same time that the State trial for the police officers is occurring. For those of us who live in Baltimore, the events over those last couple of weeks have been heartbreaking. The city we love has gone through very difficult times. I wish to thank my colleagues who have contacted Senator Mikulski and me for offering their help, for offering their understanding, and for their willingness to work together so we can deal with the issues that have been raised in Baltimore and other cities and other places around our country. It is our responsibility to move forward. The people of Baltimore understand that. We understand the national spotlight will be leaving, and we are going to deal with the issues that are left behind. I want to thank the administration for their high-level involvement as Baltimore gets back on its feet. Our congressional delegation and Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake has had the opportunity to meet at the White House with senior administration officials and Cabinet Secretaries to support our local priorities, including jobs, economic growth, education, housing, and law enforcement. I thank President Obama for making Baltimore a top priority. Team Maryland is committed to working with the White House and Cabinet agencies to ensure that the tools and resources available from the Federal Government--from improving housing and increasing quality jobs to supporting our schools and small businesses, to providing citizens with second chances and expanding programs to rebuild the trust between neighborhoods and law enforcement--are brought to bear in Baltimore as a national model for the restoration of hope and opportunities in our cities. As Congressman Cummings has said: This is a transformational moment for Baltimore. It is finally time that we look at comprehensive steps to restore hope and trust in our neighborhoods. We need to ensure that all our citizens' rights are preserved, while giving police the tools they need to reengage with families and individuals that they are there to protect. Last week, I introduced the BALTIMORE Act, S. 1610, with Senator Mikulski as my cosponsor. The legislation stands for Building and Lifting Trust in Order to Multiply Opportunities and Racial Equality. The components of the BALTIMORE Act are powerful antidotes to many of the long-term ills facing our city and others. We must simultaneously promote economic development and opportunities for our cities. But this bill gives individuals and law enforcement a second chance to do the right thing and contribute in a positive way to their families, their neighborhoods, and the larger community. The BALTIMORE Act contains legislation from this Senator and other Senators as well as new legislative ideas. The BALTIMORE Act consists of four titles. The first title deals with law enforcement. The BALTIMORE Act contains the text of my legislation, S. 1056, which is the End Racial Profiling Act. I have talked on the floor before about ending racial profiling. It should have no place in law enforcement in our communities. It is counterproductive, it turns communities against law enforcement, it is costly, and it can be deadly. Now, if you have specific information about a person who has committed a crime, you can use that. That is not profiling. But when you target a community solely because of race, that has to end. The first title of the BALTIMORE Act also contains several reforms championed by Senator Mikulski, as part of the Commerce, Justice, Science appropriations bill, approved by the committee for fiscal year 2016. The legislation would require local law enforcement officials receiving Byrne-JAG and COPS Hiring Program funds to submit officer training information to the DOJ, including how their officers are trained in the use of force, countering racial and ethnic bias, deescalating conflicts, and constructive engagement with the public. It requires State and local police departments to promptly submit the use- of-force data to the FBI. The legislation requires the Department of Justice to issue a report on a plan to assist State and local law enforcement agencies to improve training in the use of force, in identifying racial and ethnic bias, and in conflict resolution through the course of officers' careers. The final piece of this title I act establishes a pilot program to assist local law enforcement in purchasing or leasing body-worn cameras and requires privacy study. I thank Senators Schatz and Paul for introducing this legislation as the CAMERA Act, S. 877. The second title involves voting rights reform and civil rights restoration. It includes the text from my legislation, S. 772, the Democracy Restoration Act. My legislation will restore voting privileges for those who have completed their prison terms. I know I have support on both sides of the aisle. We have had a vote on this, and a near majority have agreed on it. Those who opposed it said it was on the wrong bill. Well, let's move it forward. Once individuals have completed their sentencing, they should be welcomed back to our community so that they can be productive, law- abiding citizens, so they know they have become part of our community and they believe they have a future. They should be able to serve on our juries. There is not a person in the Senate who didn't have a second chance sometime in their life. We should look at second-chance opportunities. In part our legislation provides additional funding for second-chance type programs that would employ those who have had criminal convictions. We also have the sense of Congress to end ``check-the-box'' so that in Federal contracts all persons have an opportunity to participate. The third title deals with sentencing reform. I have spoken to some of my colleagues about some of the sentencing guidelines we have in this country. We need to take a look at our criminal justice system and the sentencing guidelines to recognize that if a person is of a certain race, a certain religion or ethnic background, that person is much more likely to end up in prison today even though the instance of violating the laws are not different in that community than in other communities in the country. We have to deal with it. The country has to deal with it. The fourth title of the bill--the last title--deals with the reentry programs that I have already talked about. We need to finance those. It may take time for Baltimore to recover fully from the damage done to its business and national image by the tragic events following the recent death of Freddie Gray, but this great city will come back. I am optimistic when it comes to Baltimore's future. From its earliest days, Baltimore's industrial and financial business sectors have proven themselves resilient and innovative, and these same qualities will be vital in the days ahead. I am confident that together we can find ways to help Baltimore recover and grow all sectors of its diverse economy, spurring community improvements along way. We also need to have a serious discussion about sentencing reform and finding ways to restore the lost trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve. The BALTIMORE Act will allow us to move decisively in that direction by ending racial profiling, increasing accountability, collecting critical crime data such as officer-related shootings, and providing real strategies and resources to strengthen police-community relations. These measures will help protect the rights of every American on every side of our justice system. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I rise today to discuss my hometown of Baltimore and the city's recovery after the civil unrest related to the Freddie Gray case. But first let me say a few words about the heartbreaking events in South Carolina. Words are inadequate to express the heartache of yet another mass shooting. Gun violence regularly takes far too many victims in Baltimore and other cities across the country, but to have a place of worship violated in such a hateful way is inexplicable. My prayers are with the Mother Emanuel AME Church, its congregants, and the people of Charleston, SC, at this difficult time. I appreciate the Department of Justice's swiftness in opening a hate crimes investigation of this tragedy. Despite the alarming frequency of such shootings, we as a nation cannot become complacent and immune to the pain and anguish caused by these instances. Every time a senseless shooting takes place, there should be more and more of us who shout to the Heavens in protest as loudly as we can. As parents, we have a responsibility to teach our children to focus on things that unite all people and to view differences as strengths, rather than seeds for hatred and resentment. As lawmakers, we need to move from a place of political inertia to stop guns from getting into the hands of people who use them for the wrong reasons. We have mourned too many good people--men, women, and children--to stand idly by. I am pleased State leaders have come together for the removal of the Confederate flag from the grounds of South Carolina's statehouse. I urge the State legislature to move quickly to permanently remove this symbol of intolerance from government facilities.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, as our Nation continues to mourn the tragic loss of life at the Mother Emmanuel AME Church in Charleston, I wish to discuss international efforts that can assist in addressing the prejudice and discrimination that fuels violence and acts of extremism in our country and abroad. Following the horrific attacks in Paris and Copenhagen earlier this year, the president of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, Ilkka Kanerva, appointed me to serve as the assembly's first special representative on anti-Semitism, racism, and intolerance. As a Member of Congress, the U.S. Helsinki Commission, and the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, I have long fought to counter prejudice and discrimination and to advance more effective measures against hate crimes. I was therefore extremely honored that President Kanerva entrusted me with this responsibility. Given the breadth of my mandate, I am focusing my work this year on three areas: first, the urgent issue of anti-Semitism and community security; second, discrimination against Muslims and anti-Muslim backlash; finally, in light of events in our own country and the salience of these struggles for minorities in Europe, discriminatory policing. As my first initiative, I visited the sites of the Paris and Copenhagen tragedies in April, where I met with people directly affected by the violence as well as government officials and civil society representatives. In my consultations with Jewish, Muslim, African-descent, and other community leaders, we discussed Jewish community security and civil society coalition efforts to combat all forms of prejudice and discrimination. The horrific attacks in those two capitals--simultaneously targeting Jewish communities and expressions of free speech--underscored the urgent need to address security threats to Jewish individuals and communities. The pervasiveness of anti-Semitism is one of the main reasons I last year called on the OSCE to hold a High Level Conference to mark the 10th anniversary of the seminal OSCE Berlin Conference on Anti-Semitism and adopt a ministerial decision calling on all 57 participating states of the OSCE to implement commitments to combat anti-Semitism. In this vein, I recently led efforts to provide funding for U.S. and European civil society to work with youth to combat anti-Semitism and other forms of intolerance. Of course, we must be vigilant to ensure that such efforts do not degenerate into anti-Muslim backlash. Measures that are framed in ways that fuel anti-Muslim prejudice will ultimately be counterproductive. Moreover, we need diverse coalitions working together to address the threats we face today. This month, fringe extremist parties from seven different countries formed a block in the EU Parliament. They are now eligible to receive EU money to disseminate toxic views that combine anti-Semitism with anti-Muslim bigotry. I have also introduced legislation to end racial profiling in the United States. The End Racial Profiling Act, S. 1056, prohibits racial profiling by law enforcement, mandates law enforcement bias training, requires data collection on all police stops, and creates procedures for receiving, investigating, and resolving profiling complaints. Tragic events in Baltimore and New York, North Charleston and Ferguson, and elsewhere around the country have shown us that Federal legislation finally ending racial profiling is essential. It is also essential that we restore confidence between communities and the police, and the criminal justice system at large. To that end, I have also introduced the ``Baltimore Act,'' S. 1610 named after my home city, to provide strategies and resources to strengthen police- community relations and restore justice. Discriminatory policing is undoubtedly a challenge that many governments face. In some European countries, minorities are 10 times more likely to be stopped by the police than members of the majority. In France--the country with some of Europe's largest Muslim and Black populations--police officers were recently acquitted in connection with the death of two teenagers. That incident 10 years ago sparked riots across France; the acquittal this year has prompted protests and comparisons with Ferguson. In Germany, a human rights group is petitioning the government to end profiling after a Black student was arrested solely because his skin color led them to presume he was in the country illegally. In Slovakia, 10 police officers were acquitted in February of forcing Romani boys to strip and fight each other, even though this notorious incident was captured on cell phone video. As we know from our own experience, racial bigotry, if unaddressed, only metastasizes. The United States and our European partners have a lot to learn from one another. We have learned--and continue to learn--from the civil rights struggle and, as a country founded and built by people seeking freedom and opportunity, about immigration and integration. Many European countries are working hard to address discrimination and advance civil rights through the creation of national human rights institutions and targeted strategies. Additionally, there are many lessons learned from hate-based violence reduction and gun laws. The United States and Europe have worked on both sides of the Atlantic to address issues of prejudice and discrimination and foster diversity, but on a largely ad hoc basis. I recently introduced provisions in the Senate for a Joint Action Plan between the United States and European Union to formalize and coordinate such consultations and ensure that the necessary experts and stakeholders from the public and private sectors are involved. It would also improve transparency and access to information generated by these exchanges. I have also urged the OSCE chair-in-office to convene a high-level conference on racism and xenophobia to elevate understanding of these issues and advance additional concrete steps by the OSCE participating states. The recent events in Charleston, Paris, and Copenhagen underscore the urgent need for shared efforts to combat hate and foster inclusion on both sides of the Atlantic. In 1991, just days after the failed Moscow coup, the United States met in Russia with other OSCE participating states. Our countries agreed that ``issues relating to human rights, fundamental freedoms, democracy and the rule of law are of international concern, as respect for these rights and freedoms constitutes one of the foundations of the international order.'' Such matters are ``of direct and legitimate concern to all participating States and do not belong exclusively to the internal affairs of the state concerned.'' That is as true today as it was 20 some years ago. It is in that spirit that I will continue to work with other parliamentarians to combat anti-Semitism, racism, and other forms of intolerance--in the United States and elsewhere in the OSCE region.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, as you know, when Senators converse in the cloakroom between votes, we often claim bragging rights--who represents the State with the best crab cake, which State has the best hiking trails, and which baseball team will win the American League East division for example. Everyone likes to chime in and claim his or her State as the best in some regard. But if anyone mentions leaders in higher education, the conversation just stops. Every Senator knows what the senior Senator from Maryland and I are going to say--Dr. William E. ``Brit'' Kirwan. That ends the competition right there. Today I wish to honor this man who can rightfully be called one of the Nation's most respected leaders in higher education. After 51 years in the field of education--spending 25 years as a faculty member and administrator at the University of Maryland, College Park, president of both the University of Maryland, College Park and The Ohio State University, and now as the chancellor of the University System of Maryland for the past 12 years--Dr. Kirwan will be retiring on June 30, 2015. Under Dr. Kirwan's extraordinary leadership, the University System of Maryland has thrived. Our State's universities are among the best in the Nation, with cutting-edge research programs which support the work of private businesses and Federal agencies located nearby, internationally renowned academic programs, and diverse student bodies. Dr. Kirwan also paved the way for innovative solutions to cut the university system's costs while improving quality, expanding educational access for minorities, and initiating other successful strategies, such as the University System of Maryland's ``Closing the Achievement Gap'' program. Outside of Maryland, Dr. Kirwan's expertise has been sought by Presidents of both parties and the U.S. Congress to offer his input on national higher education efforts. Even after he announced his retirement, Dr. Kirwan cochaired the Task Force on Federal Regulation of Higher Education, and currently serves as the cochair of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics; chair of the College Board's Commission on Access, Admissions, and Success in Education; a member of the Business Higher Education Forum and as chair of the National Research Council Board of Higher Education and the Workforce. His work is not without recognition by the citizens of our State. Among his many accolades but not an exhaustive list after his numerous years of service, Dr. Kirwan is the recipient of the TIAA-CREF Theodore M. Hesburgh Award for Leadership, the Carnegie Corporation Leadership Award, the 16th recipient of the Maryland House of Delegates Speaker's Medallion in recognition of his contributions to the State of Maryland, the Maryland Senate First Citizen Award in recognition of his ongoing commitment and service to our State, the Lifetime Achievement Award in Education from the Tech Council of Maryland, the Champion of Children Award from the Maryland State Department of Education, the Regional Visionary Award of the Greater Baltimore Committee, and the Public Service Award from the Maryland Chamber of Commerce. As impressive as Dr. Kirwan's resume may be, it does not define who he is as an individual. Dr. Kirwan is a man of integrity and loyalty who maintains a passion for ensuring access to a quality education for all. He has been visionary in all things academic and believer in the well-being of young men and women. I would also like to thank Dr. Kirwan's family for the support they have given to him throughout his academic career and for allowing him to so greatly share his talents with the people of Maryland. Dr. Kirwan's efforts have left the University System of Maryland and the State of Maryland both stronger academically and better prepared to educate students for the challenges of tomorrow. He has made social justice a genuine priority, which has elevated the university system even further. Through his vision and actions to establish the then Center for Academic Innovation at the University of Maryland, College Park, and the legacy of the newly commissioned William E. Kirwan Center for Academic Innovation will advance the priorities of Dr. Kirwan to address barriers to a college education for decades to come. Today, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Dr. Kirwan on his well-deserved retirement and thanking Dr. Kirwan for his service and commitment to higher education.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise today to submit a resolution to mark World Refugee Day, June 20, and to address the growing global crisis of people forcibly displaced by persecution or conflict. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, for the first time since World War II, over 60 million people have been forced from their homes and displaced in their own countries or forced to flee abroad. Last year alone, 14 million people were uprooted by violence and persecution, most escaping conflicts in Syria, Iraq, South Sudan, Ukraine, Burma, and Afghanistan. There are more and more protracted crises, and the result is an exponential increase in humanitarian needs. The worldwide displacement from wars, conflict, and persecution in 2014 was the highest level recorded and accelerating fast, escalating to 60 million last year from 51.2 million in 2013, and a dramatic increase from the 37.5 million of a decade ago. We are on course to over double the number of refugees worldwide. The increase since 2013 was the highest ever seen in a single year. Syria is still the world's largest producer of internally displaced persons at 7.6 million and refugees at nearly 4 million. The 60 million that I previously mentioned can be broken down to 20 million refugees, over 38 million internally displaced persons, and 1.8 million asylum seekers. The magnitude of the Syrian disaster is perhaps the most shocking. After 4 years of conflict, the situation is increasingly desperate for both the refugees and the host countries such as Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, and northern Iraq. Since 2011, 4 million people have fled Syria. The futures of over 3 million Syrian children have been stolen because they have no access to education. Over 2 million Syrian women are in the neighboring countries trying to survive. Dangerous coping mechanisms are on the rise. More and more families are forced to send their children to work or marry off their young daughters. In the tiny country of Lebanon alone, there are over 300,000 Syrian refugee children who have no access to school. It is hard to comprehend the demographic, economic, and social impact of millions of refugees in Lebanon, Jordan, and Turkey. The number of refugees in Lebanon will be equivalent to 88 million new refugees arriving in the United States. Turkey has already spent $6 billion in direct assistance for refugees in its care. At the same time, many countries in the West have been extraordinarily reluctant to admit the most vulnerable Syrians as refugees. While contributing generously to humanitarian funding, the United States has only accepted about 900 Syrian refugees. Because Syrians are finding it increasingly difficult to find safety, they are being forced to move further afield. Since January, over 100,000 people, mostly from Syria, have crossed the Mediterranean in boats in search of protection in Europe--an extremely dangerous journey. We know that the Syrian humanitarian disaster, which has destabilized an entire region, is not the accidental byproduct of conflict. It is instead one result of a strategy pursued by the Assad regime. The United Nations Commission of Inquiry in Syria has documented that the Assad regime intentionally engages in the indiscriminate bombardment of homes, hospitals, schools, and water and electrical facilities in order to terrorize the civilian population. ISIL and al-Nusra have also shelled areas with high concentrations of civilians. In Syria's neighbor next door, Iraq, the number of people requiring humanitarian assistance has grown to 8.2 million people. Three million people have been forced from their homes. Half of the displaced are children. To the south, in Yemen, there is a grave and escalating humanitarian crisis. The country was particularly vulnerable even before this conflict. Now civilians throughout the country are facing alarming levels of suffering and violence. Over 1 million have been forced from their homes and are now living in empty schools and other public buildings or along highways. We are also witnessing religious and ethnic persecution become part of the violent conflict that has pushed millions of people out of the regions of Sub-Saharan Africa. The unfolding human tragedy in South Sudan, which is perhaps the most frustrating to me, never should have happened. The violence engulfing that small country is entirely manmade and wholly the responsibility of the President and opposition leader and their affiliate militias and armed groups. Each leader refuses to prioritize the well-being of his own people and instead continues to seek military advantage, violating multiple ceasefire agreements and refusing to meet numerous deadlines for reaching a peace deal. It is hard to overstate the gravity of conditions in South Sudan. I fear there is no end in sight to the suffering of the people there. The 18-month conflict in South Sudan has already killed an estimated 50,000 people and has displaced over 2 million more, including one-half million who fled to neighboring countries and over 120,000 sheltering in United Nations peacekeeping bases across the country. A nationwide famine was averted in 2014, thanks largely to the assistance from international community. But the World Food Programme recently warned that 4.6 million people, nearly half the population, will need food aid by the end of this month. Conditions in the country of Sudan are hardly better for those affected by the continuing conflict in Darfur. Attacks on U.N. peacekeepers are on the rise in Darfur. Military offenses by the Khartoum have caused well over 50,000 people to flee their homes this year. The Khartoum has also expelled international nongovernmental organizations, NGOs, and is trying its best to drive out the U.N. peacekeeping mission in Darfur. This number does not include the hundreds of thousands of people who have fled the violence in the South Kordofan and Blue Nile states. But there has been little information about conditions in government-held areas in both of these states, as Sudan has not allowed human rights investigators access. In northeastern Nigeria, 1.5 million people have fled their homes due to attacks by the terrorist group Boko Haram. Boko Haram is estimated to have killed over 12,000 people, kidnapped thousands, including 276 girls from the Chibok School whose whereabouts remain unknown. Over 74,000 Nigerians are refugees in Cameroon, another 100,000 refugees are in the area. The global refugee trends are indeed alarming. The international assistance being provided is not keeping pace with the scale of the problem. For example, almost halfway through 2015, the United Nation's humanitarian appeal for Syria is only 20 percent funded. Yet, in the spirit of World Refugee Day, we must redouble our efforts to prevent conflicts that force families to flee their homes, villages, and cities. We must also then create the conditions to get these refugees safely back home. First, we need to ask ourselves hard questions about how we can increase the effectiveness of the assistance we provide. Most refugees live in urban areas, not in traditional refugee camps. Refugees who live in cities face unique vulnerabilities, which must change how international assistance is now being given. Moreover, protracted crises are the new normal. Seventy-five percent of the world refugees are caught in long-term crisis situations, with many refugees displaced for an average of 17 years. We need to use our humanitarian and development dollars more skillfully so we are providing durable solutions to chronic vulnerabilities. Second, the international community must get serious about protecting the most vulnerable refugees: women and children. Women are facing horrible threats in conflicts across the globe, where rape and sexual assault are being used as weapons of war, and as vulnerable refugees they continue to be targets of gender-based violence. Moreover, children now make up half of all refugees worldwide. We must do more to protect them from sexual exploitation and abuse, recruitment as child soldiers, and early marriages. The United Nations Population Fund, Mercy Corps, the International Rescue Committee, and Catholic Relief Services know how to provide targeted support and protection to women and children refugees, but we in the international community must fund them adequately to do the job. Third, we must strengthen the capacity of U.N. peacekeeping. As David Miliband, former British Foreign Secretary, now head of the International Rescue Committee noted: At a time of cuts in defense budgets, new and asymmetric threats, and record numbers of people fleeing conflict, the case of strengthened and more fairly shared UN peacekeeping is overwhelming. Peacekeepers, properly resourced and led, have never been more needed and the consequences of inaction never more evident. Finally, we must do more to hold accountable the leaders who are responsible for mass humanitarian atrocities. The U.N. Commissioner for Refugees recently commented that he continues to be shocked by the indifference of those who carry the political responsibility for millions of people being uprooted from their homes. They accept forced displacement, with an impact on individuals, on countries, communities, and entire regions, as normal collateral damage of the wars they lead. They act with the conviction that humanitarian workers will come and pick up the pieces. It is clear the international humanitarian community can no longer stanch the human misery brought on by this callous indifference and criminal leadership. The international community must hold those responsible accountable, those who break all the rules in pursuit of their war aims. To that end, it was a grave mistake that between October 2011 and July 2012, Russia and China vetoed three Security Council resolutions which were designed to hold the Syrian Government to account for its mass atrocities. It was also unfortunate that Sudanese President Umar al-Bashir was allowed to depart South Africa earlier this week without being detained again, escaping an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court, where he would be on trial for crimes against humanity in Darfur. In closing, we must recognize that as these conflicts proliferate, no corner of the world will be left unaffected. On World Refugee Day, we recognize that every person fleeing his or her home deserves compassion and help and to live in safety and dignity. We must recommit to work smarter and harder to assist the world's most vulnerable people. Next year on this day, I want to stand before the Senate again and speak of the progress we have made and the lives we have saved by our collective efforts. History will judge us accordingly if we fail.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, in the interests of moving the defense bill forward I withdraw my amendments, Nos. 2038 and 2056. These amendments were intended address a set of issues where I share a concern with the chairman and ranking member of the Armed Services Committee that the U.S. needs to make additional concerted effort and provide additional focus to our maritime partner capacity building efforts in the Asia-Pacific region. Indeed, the chairman included a significant provision in this bill for a South China Sea initiative which I support. My efforts were intended to compliment the work of the chairman and assure that we have a fully articulated and whole-of- government approach to this issue, with both the Department of Defense and the Department of State fully and appropriately engaged. The chairman and I have had some positive discussions on this issue in recent days, and I have received his assurances that my concerns will be addressed as this legislation moves forward. And I also intend to make sure that other aspects of this issue are addressed in legislation that the Foreign Relations Committee will take up, and where I look to the chairman for his partnership and continued leadership on this issue. With those assurances--and given the deep and shared commitment the chairman and I have on this issue--I do not see a need to press forward for a vote on my amendments at this time.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise to ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing June as National Alzheimer's and Brain Awareness Month. Every 67 seconds someone in our country develops Alzheimer's disease. It is the sixth leading cause of death in the United States. Yet it is the only disease in the top 10 that cannot yet be prevented, cured or slowed. Of the 5.3 million Americans with Alzheimer's disease, 5.1 million are 65 and older, accounting for 96 percent of the diagnosed population. By 2050, the number of people 65 and older with Alzheimer's disease may nearly triple from 5.1 million to an estimated 13.8 million Americans. The disease will take the lives of an estimated 700,000 seniors in the United States this year, and that number is rapidly rising. While deaths from other major causes have decreased in this country, deaths from Alzheimer's disease have increased significantly. Between 2000 and 2013, deaths attributed to Alzheimer's disease increased 71 percent, while deaths attributed to heart disease, the No. 1 cause of death in the United States, decreased by 14 percent. This devastating disease is also one of our country's most expensive diseases. Nearly one in every five Medicare dollars is spent on people with Alzheimer's and other dementias. Unless something is done, by 2050 it will be $1 out of every $3. We cannot afford to overlook Alzheimer's disease. Both the human cost and the cost to our health care system are simply too great. We must invest more in research to develop treatments to prevent or delay the progression of Alzheimer's disease and ultimately to find a cure. Of all the statistics and data regarding Alzheimer's disease, perhaps the most upsetting is the immense gap between the amount we spend on Alzheimer's research and the cost of caring for those with Alzheimer's disease. In 2014, the total cost of Alzheimer's was $214 billion, including $150 billion to Medicare and Medicaid. During that same year, the National Institutes of Health invested only one-quarter of 1 percent of that amount--$566 million--in Alzheimer's research. This year, cancer research will be allocated an estimated $5.4 billion in Federal funds and heart disease will get $1.2 billion, while Alzheimer's and other dementias will receive a fraction of that, at $586 million. Simply put, it is imperative we provide NIH with robust and sustained funding, which will allow it to support Alzheimer's research that is so desperately needed. Let me make it clear. I strongly support the research dollars going into cancer and would like to see more funds put into it. I strongly support the amount of funds we are putting into heart disease and would like to see more funds put in. I know there is bipartisan support in this Congress to increase the pie that NIH has--the funds NIH has-- because we understand it advances the humanitarian need in our country to find the answers to cures for diseases but also creates good jobs. We need to dramatically increase the amount of resources that we make available for Alzheimer's research. We must also support innovative, evidence-based models to address the needs of those currently living with Alzheimer's disease and their family caregivers. I am proud to tell you about the Maximizing Independence at Home--or MIND at Home Program--developed at Johns Hopkins in my home State of Maryland. In the MIND at Home Program, an interdisciplinary team provides home- based assessments, care coordination and support to individuals with Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, allowing them to remain in their homes longer, improving their quality of life, and supporting their family caregivers. During an 18-month pilot project, the MIND at Home Program helped participants stay safely in their homes for an average of 9\1/2\ months longer than would have been otherwise possible, while also improving their quality of life. We have an opportunity to improve the lives of millions of Americans suffering from Alzheimer's, and the lives of their family members, by building on the success of programs such as MIND at Home. This June, in honor of National Alzheimer's and Brain Awareness Month, let us pledge to provide robust, sustained funding for NIH, so it can support much needed research on this devastating disease, and let us pledge to support innovative programs such as MIND at Home to improve the quality of life of those currently living with Alzheimer's and their family caregivers. With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I wish to speak about the political crisis in Burundi, and to urge continued action by the administration and the international community to prevent violence and mass atrocities. As my colleagues may be aware, the country has a troubled history of violence and instability. A 12-year civil war resulted in 300,000 deaths. Though the past 10 years have been relatively stable, there have been troubling reports of murders, harassment, and intimidation in rural areas carried out by the Imbonerakure, an armed youth group believed to be associated with the ruling party. According to the United Nations, U.N., over 90,000 refugees have fled Burundi since April, concerned about potential violence in the runup to the July 15 Presidential election. Some of the refugees claim they fear being targeted by government-allied militia. More than 27,000 refugees have fled to Rwanda, a country with its own troubled history of ethnic conflict. President Pierre Nkurunziza's announcement on April 25 that he was running for a third term--a move which appears to violate the Burundian constitution--has caused over 1 month of protests in the Burundian capital, Bujumbura. The Burundian Red Cross has stated that at least 21 people have died during the protests, most reportedly killed by police who have fired live ammunition at protesters. Others have been killed by a series of grenade attacks by unknown parties and more than 500 have been injured. On May 23, opposition leader Zedi Feruzi was killed by unidentified gunmen, and private radio and television stations have been raided, burned, and shut down. Social media websites used to organize protests have been blocked and prominent journalists and activists have been arrested. While some of these individuals have since been released, the crackdown on dissenting voices is disturbing. There are also reports of smaller protests outside of the capital, which signals the potential for the violence to spread, should the police respond in a similarly heavyhanded way. The situation is volatile and analysts are increasingly concerned that the situation could suddenly erupt into wide-scale killings resulting in hundreds of deaths. The Obama administration has been actively engaged in an effort to avert mass atrocities in Burundi for more than a year. Various senior- level administration officials--including former U.S. Special Envoy for the African Great Lakes Russ Feingold, Ambassador Samantha Power, Assistant Secretary Linda Thomas-Greenfield, Under Secretary Wendy Sherman, Under Secretary Sarah Sewall, and even Secretary of State John Kerry--have spoken with Burundian officials, regional leaders, and other international donors in an effort to dissuade President Nkurunziza from running for office again. In the wake of the protests, regional leaders are playing an active role in trying to calm the situation. The countries of the East African Community, EAC, have sent Foreign Ministers to Bujumbura to discuss the crisis with a range of stakeholders. The organization held two emergency meetings in May, one of which Assistant Secretary of State Thomas-Greenfield attended. The African Union and the International Conference of the Great Lakes have also convened to discuss the crisis. I applaud ongoing administration and regional efforts. I am concerned, however, that they may not be sufficient. The U.N. Special Envoy for the Great Lakes, Said Djinnit, was dispatched to bring the parties together to find a negotiated solution, but he has stepped down after being accused by opposition groups of being biased toward the government's position. Despite the delay in the polls from June to July, conditions for a democratic contest do not exist. There is no space for the opposition to campaign and the media cannot operate freely. And even in the face of the international community's repeated visits, calls, and messaging on the importance of putting the good of the country before personal political ambitions, President Nkurunziza still has refused to do the right thing and step aside as his party's candidate. I recommend that we take three additional steps. No. 1, urge U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and African Union, AU, Chairperson Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma to work with regional leaders to achieve a common approach to a political settlement for Burundi that includes Pierre Nkurunziza stepping aside as his party's candidate. It should also include a postponement of elections until a way forward is agreed to by the ruling party and the opposition that lays the groundwork for a legitimate contest. The current delay in the polling date gets us nowhere if conditions for credible elections still are not in place. A show of solidarity on these issues will powerfully signal the international community's commitment to a transparent, fair democratic process, and could serve to alleviate tension on the ground. President Nkurunziza should be urged to hold police responsible for killing protesters, ensure that media can operate freely, and allow for some means of verification that he is disarming the Imbonerakure and other armed militia as called for by the EAC and referenced by the African Union. No. 2, I urge President Obama to appoint a Great Lakes Special Envoy to replace Russ Feingold as soon as possible. Having a senior-level State Department official working fulltime toward a negotiated settlement at this volatile time will greatly enhance the efforts that administration officials are making to ensure peace. Finally, I call upon the administration to refrain from beginning new training of, or making additional plans to provide military equipment to, the Burundian military at this juncture. While the military has not been accused of violence against civilians or abuses related to the protests, I see no advantage in moving forward with additional programs given the volatile situation on the ground. We can resume assistance once we are confident that the security situation is stable. The situation in Burundi is troubling, but I do not believe it is hopeless. I stand ready to support the administration's efforts to prevent another tragedy from unfolding in the Great Lakes region of Africa.

Mr. CARDIN

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

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, we have 2 more weeks remaining before the scheduled district work period with regard to the Fourth of July. Then, when we come back from there, in the next work period there will be another deadline. The deadline I am referring to is the enactment of a 6-year transportation reauthorization bill. We have been talking about finding a 6-year reauthorization solution now for over a year--well over a year. We have been working with short- term extensions. We had a 10-month extension that expired just recently. We did another 2-month extension with a commitment that our committees would work to come together, that Democrats and Republicans would work to come together for a 6-year reauthorization of the transportation programs for this country. My constituents are frustrated. I am frustrated. You see, I commute between Baltimore and Washington every day. This community or this area has the second worst traffic congestion in the country. We desperately need a more robust Federal partner in dealing with the transportation challenges of my State and of every State in this country. We need to move forward with transit projects. Every person we can get to use mass transit is one less car on the road. It helps all of us. It helps our transportation infrastructure and the wear and tear. It helps our environment. We have bridges that literally must be replaced. In the southern part of my State, the Nice Bridge desperately needs to be replaced. That costs money. You need a Federal partner to do that. We have road maintenance and expansion issues in every State in this country. We have safety concerns that are not being addressed today. I would like to take my colleagues to some of the overpasses in Baltimore that need to be upgraded for the purposes of safety. Route 1 through College Park desperately needs attention. In my State, there is Georgia Avenue and Randolph Road in Montgomery County and 301, a major artery on the Eastern Shore of Maryland, which need real serious safety upgrades that are important. Each one of these is extremely expensive. I know that every Senator could list dozens of projects in their own State that need to move forward for safety reasons. Then there is the issue of jobs. We all know that without the predictability of a 6-year program, transportation construction is delayed. That costs us not only construction jobs--and there are literally millions of construction jobs that depend upon the Federal partnership in transportation--but the economic impact of a reauthorization of the surface transportation program. So many projects in Maryland are affected by this. But let me talk about one part of Maryland that does not always get the same attention, and that is the western part of our State. It is not where the real population of Maryland is located. But the completion of the Appalachia Highway, the north-south highway, is critically important to the economic future of western Maryland--and I might tell you also Pennsylvania and West Virginia. We need to get that done. Quite frankly, without a long-term reauthorization of the surface transportation program, I do not know if we will get that done. That means jobs. That means our economy. We know that we have to be more competitive as a country. We know we are involved in global competition. The countries that we compete with are putting much more of their economy into transportation than we are into infrastructure. We must do a better job. Well, the Federal partnership in constructing the roads, the bridges, and the transit systems is called MAP-21. It expires at the end of July--again. This is not the first time. We have not reauthorized the 6-year program for a long time. We need a 6-year program. Why? Because when you enter into a transportation project, it is more than just a 2- month commitment or a 10-month commitment. Our States cannot go into these multiyear projects unless they know they have a Federal partner. The only way they know they have a Federal partner is if we give them the certainty of a 6-year reauthorization bill. So it is critically important. So what should we do? Starting now, the committees of jurisdiction need to have hearings and working sessions and report out legislation. That should be done now. There needs to be a commitment as to what schedule will be followed so we do not miss this deadline. That was the commitment that the leadership gave us--that we will get this done in this 2-month period. Well, unless our committees are working to come together with legislation--in the Environment and Public Works Committee, which both the Presiding Officer and I serve on, we need to bring out a bill. We have done it before. The Senate Finance Committee, which I serve on, is responsible for the financial aspects on how we get together on that. I am going to come back to that in one moment. Of course the banking committee is responsible for the transit section, as are other committees involved. But let me make an observation; that is, yes, we have to come out with a 6-year reauthorization. That is critical. We do not want any more short-term extensions. Secondly, it has to be a robust program. We know that if we just reauthorize at the current level, it will be inadequate. We know that. We know that, each of us in talking to our State transportation agencies. They tell you they need a more robust Federal partnership and that the challenges today are more expensive. And we have delayed for so long that it is even more expensive. So we need to come to grips with a 6-year reauthorization but at a level that will allow for a stronger Federal partnership. The President's number is $478 billion over 6 years. I think that is a reasonable level. If we just have a level-funded adjusted-for- inflation program, it would be $331 billion. I would hope that we would recognize that the additional $147 billion the President is talking about over 6 years is a modest increase but an important increase to the Federal share to deal with our urgent needs of safety, economic development, jobs, and competitiveness. Now, here is the problem. As to the current revenues in the transportation trust fund, if we just use the $331 billion, which is basically a freeze adjusted for inflation for the next 6 years, there is a $97 billion gap. We do not have enough money projected in the transportation trust fund for a basically stand-still 6-year reauthorization. We are $97 billion short. So we need to come to grips as to how we are going to fill that void. I said I serve on the Senate Finance Committee. There are lots of revenues that go into the trust fund that we should look at adjusting. There are other ideas about how we can bring in transportation revenues. I hope we look at all of that. Then there has been the recommendation that has been done by both Democrats and Republicans. We have to find a way to bridge the gap here. It does not do any good if we just have one party that agrees on how to deal with this. We all have to deal with it. It is incumbent upon the Republican leadership to get engaged in that debate--and the Democratic leadership. We have already said that we are open to the current revenues that go into the transportation trust fund. But there is one area that seems to be in agreement between Democrats and Republicans, and that is looking at international reform. We have all talked about the fact that we have a lot of earnings from our corporations--American corporations--that are trapped overseas because the companies have made a decision not to repatriate the money back into the United States because it would be subject to a higher U.S. corporate tax rate. They do not want to pay that higher tax. That is a business decision made by U.S. businesses. Now, obviously, the way to solve that is to reform our business taxes here. Senator Thune and I are cochairing a working group of the Senate Finance Committee to try to come to grips with that. It is going to be difficult for us to do that. You heard the numbers I have already given you. But every 1-percent reduction in the corporate tax rate costs about $100 billion over 10 years. If you include relief for those who pay the personal tax rates for their business income, it is probably closer to $150 or $160 billion to get a 1-percent reduction in the corporate tax rate. So that is going to be challenging. In the meantime, there have been recommendations in order to unleash those funds: Why don't we find a charge that is less than the full corporate tax for those revenues that are returned to the United States? We have Democrats and Republicans working together on a bill, including the President, who has submitted that in his budget. He has submitted a toll charge for the revenues that are trapped overseas that corporations would have to pay. That toll charge would be at a 14-percent rate. Then he has projected a minimum tax on foreign earnings at 19 percent that would have to be paid with certain reforms on trying to move the United States more to a territorial corporate tax rate. I mention that because I think there is interest by both Democrats and Republicans to take a look at reforming the way we tax foreign income for American companies so that we can have greater economic activity here in the United States. These proposals generate a significant amount of revenue, both one-time-only and permanent revenue. I mention that because we could take a look at the international tax reform proposals. Democrats and Republicans have both submitted proposals on this. That could help us get to a robust 6-year reauthorization of the surface transportation bill. We could get that. My reason for mentioning it right now is this: Let's talk about it. Let's have the Republicans come to the table and talk about it also. Let's not just wait these next 2 weeks, go into the work period, come back, and be faced with another deadline with no game plan on how we are going to resolve it and say: We have to pass another short-term extension so we can get together and talk about it. Let's start talking about this now. I tell you that there are viable options. The one thing I found is that Democrats and Republicans agree that infrastructure is important and we have to have a stronger program in this country for infrastructure. I always enjoy hearing from Senator Inhofe, the chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, a person with whom I came to the Congress. He says frequently that he may be a conservative but when it comes to infrastructure spending, it is important that we have a robust Federal program. Under his leadership and under Senator Boxer's leadership, we have been able to bring out bills from the Environment and Public Works Committee to reauthorize a 6-year program. The challenge is this: Can we find the revenue? Of course, there we need to work together as Democrats and Republicans. So I come to the floor to urge my colleagues: Let's work together. That is what the American people expect us to do. They expect us to work together to solve the problem. I don't think there is a Member of the Senate who would disagree that we should have a robust reauthorization of a 6-year transportation program for this country, that our States need it, that our country needs it, and that we need it for our economy. Let's put aside our own individual differences. Let's sit down and work out a bill. Let's start working it out now. Let's not wait until the next deadline. I urge my colleagues to do this. That is what the American people want us to do. That is what we need to do to move this country forward. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I wish to take this opportunity to recognize a special Baltimore company--B. Green & Company--on its 100th anniversary, which will be celebrated this Saturday, June 13. Benjamin Green founded this great Baltimore company one century ago. He was an immigrant from Lithuania who worked as a street peddler before starting a wholesale grocery business in 1915 in a rowhouse located at 828 West Baltimore Street. He made deliveries to Baltimore-area grocery stores by horse-drawn carts and later by ``tin lizzy'' type trucks. One hundred years ago, warehouses were multistoried buildings, record-keeping, inventories, and billing were done by hand, and most items--even commodities like butter--were sold in bulk. Today, we have sprawling one-story warehouses accessible by tractor-trailer trucks. ``Just in time'' inventories are tracked by barcode. Computer software has automated much of the book-keeping and billing. And products of all types are sold in more convenient packages. B. Green & Company was--and remains--a family business. All of Benjamin Green's children--his sons Sam and Bernie and his daughters Rose, Anna, Sarah, and Dora ``Duckye'' and their spouses joined in supporting the business, learning it from the ground up. As they developed their own areas of expertise, the size and nature and status of the company grew. The third generation of the family joined their parents in the business in the 1960s and 1970s. Today, the remaining family members in the business are chief executive officer Benjamin ``Benjy'' Green and his cousins Ben Sigman, chairman emeritus; and Bernice Sigman, a retired physician and board member. For a company to survive and prosper for 100 years, it needs to evolve and change with the times. During World War II, the company started supplying food to military bases and grew into the largest military commissary supplier on the east coast. In 1948, B. Green & Company was one of the first food wholesalers to use data processing equipment. Also, that year, the company relocated to the first single- story warehouse in the area at 2200 Winchester Street. A catastrophic fire destroyed the entire warehouse and most of the corporate offices in 1959, but the company had such strong relations with its suppliers and customers that it was able to resume delivering groceries from a rented warehouse within a few days. In 1966, B. Green & Company purchased Capital Wholesale Grocery Company, which allowed it to add the Cash & Carry business. The corporate offices were moved to 400 West Conway Street where the Cash & Carry was located. In 1968, the company acquired Colonial Foods Distributing Company to add gourmet and specialty foods and snack items to the main grocery products, and to add some national chains as customers. In 1972, the company acquired property at 3601 Washington Boulevard from Westinghouse to expand warehousing capacity, and the corporate offices relocated there in 1975. Three years later, the company acquired Southern Beef Company to expand its line of meat products. B. Green & Company eventually became the largest grocery wholesaler on the east coast. In 1979, it helped pioneer warehouse-style, low- price, no-frills supermarkets by opening the York Warehouse Food Market. In 1983, using state-of-the-art technology, it became one of the first wholesalers to use a mechanized warehouse system. In 1989, the Maryland Stadium Authority, by the ``right of eminent domain'', condemned the 400 West Conway location to build Oriole Park at Camden Yards. Cash & Carry moved to its current location at 1300 South Monroe Street. By 1991, with annual sales of $675 million, B. Green & Company ranked 263d on Forbes magazine's list of the Nation's largest private companies. But the company continued to evolve, shifting its focus from wholesaling to retailing. In 1992, it sold its military distribution business to Nash Finch, a Minnesota-based wholesale grocery distributer. In 1993, it sold its civilian distribution business to Richfood of Richmond, VA. Today, B. Green & Company runs several different food operations. It still distributes groceries to food retailers who are too small for the big wholesalers. It continues to run Cash & Carry from the warehouse at 1300 South Monroe Street and another one located at 2401 Belair Road. Cash & Carry is a members-only warehouse where many corner grocers in the area can shop for goods. And it operates two ``everyday-low-price'' Food Depot stores in Baltimore at the Belair Road site, which opened in 1996, and at 2495 Frederick Avenue, which opened in 2008. These stores ushered in a new generation of urban full-service supermarkets, featuring a fresh seafood and fish department, one of the largest and most diversified produce departments in Baltimore City, a full-service deli and bakery, and a meat department with a great variety of products and cuts of meat. The stores succeed as independent grocers by customizing their products and services to the neighborhoods they serve. Store managers and associates are encouraged to suggest products and merchandising strategies. In 2011, the company expanded into Howard County with a new format, the Green Valley Marketplace at 7280 Montgomery Road in Elkridge, MD. Green Valley Marketplace is a new suburban supermarket. I am proud that B. Green & Company launched a campaign to expand healthy food choices in the city's poorest neighborhoods in a partnership with the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health that encourages shoppers to buy healthier items and fewer highly processed foods. Many Food Depot customers rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. The stores have licensed dieticians onsite who teach customers how to shop for and prepare healthy meals on a budget. Today, B. Green & Company employs nearly 500 associates, who are considered extended family. Benjy Green knows most of them by name and can recount their backgrounds. The company thrives 100 years after its creation because, as Benjy put it, ``we know the neighborhood we serve better than the other guy''. It thrives because it treats its employees and its customers with respect. It thrives because it fulfills a vital function in communities across Baltimore and the surrounding area. I would ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating B. Green & Company on its 100th anniversary and sending best wishes for the next 100 years.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, a few weeks ago, I spoke on the floor about two of the outstanding Federal workers at the National Institutes of Health and I indicated at the time that I would be speaking periodically about other Federal workers who are doing extraordinary things on behalf of the American taxpayer. People wonder where their tax dollars go; I would like to provide a few examples. As I said at the time, ``Government workers guard our borders; protect us from terrorists; treat our wounded veterans; dispense Social Security checks to our retirees; find cures for diseases; guide the Nation's air traffic; explore the tiniest particles and the vast expanse of outer space; ensure our air is safe to breathe, our water is safe to drink, and our food is safe to eat; support our servicemen and women in harm's way; and promote our interests and ideals abroad. Who does the government work for? Government Works for America.'' The Partnership for Public Service announced the finalists for the 2015 Samuel J. Heyman Service to America Medals, also known as the ``Sammies,'' last month during Public Service Recognition Week. As the Partnership notes, ``Federal employees are responsible for many noteworthy and inspiring accomplishments that are seldom recognized or celebrated. The Samuel J. Heyman Service to America Medals highlight excellence in our Federal workforce and inspire other talented and dedicated individuals to go into public service.'' Also last month, on May 5, the Washington Post, citing an Office of Personnel Management--OPM--exit survey of senior government managers who have retired or moved to other, nonfederal jobs, reported that the single biggest factor for leaving is the ``political environment'', which was blamed as a contributing factor ``to a great extent'' or ``to a very great extent'' by 42 percent of the individuals surveyed. The article, by Post columnist Joe Davidson, quoted Brian M. Kent, a retired senior-level Federal scientist, who said, ``Expect to be overworked, undercompensated and mistreated by both parties on the Hill, who do not appreciate the value of our expertise, our dedication and our talents.'' Congress and the American people need to realize that the Federal workforce is a crucial asset. There are some people who dislike government so much that they want to demonize and demoralize the workforce and deter young people from considering a career in public service. That is counterproductive. Find and remove the bad apples-- yes, but acknowledge that they are few and far between. Overwhelmingly, Federal workers are hard-working and patriotic Americans. Rather than denigrate them, we should treat them with respect in acknowledging their service to our Nation. One way to acknowledge that service is through the Sammies. I am proud that so many of the finalists this year work and/or live in Maryland, spread across several agencies and several of the award categories. I would like to mention a few today. Dr. Gretchen K. Campbell and Dr. Ronald Ross The mission of the National Institute of Standards & Technology, NIST, which is headquartered in Gaithersburg, MD, is to ``promote U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science, standards, and technology in ways that enhance economic security and improve our quality of life''. NIST's weights and measures services, a job assigned to the Federal Government in the Constitution, provide the basis for the fairness and efficiency of sales. These services underpin the efficiency of about one-half of the U.S. economy, or about $7 trillion of the U.S. gross domestic product--GDP. Eighty percent of global merchandise trade is influenced by testing and other measurement-related requirements of regulations and standards. U.S. companies increasingly depend on NIST to help ensure access to global markets that create new business and jobs. Gretchen K. Campbell is a physicist at NIST and is a finalist in the 2015 ``Call To Service'' Medal. This medal recognizes a Federal employee whose professional achievements reflect the important contributions that a new generation brings to public service. We are all familiar with electronics. Now, scientists like Dr. Campbell are exploring a new frontier--a circuitry system that uses the flow of atoms rather than electrons that may lead to a wide range of future technological advances. Dr. Campbell, who is just 35, is a pioneer and intellectual leader in this new and theoretical field of physics known as atomtronics, and has conducted a series of seminal experiments that show its promise and possibilities. Using light to control matter, Dr. Campbell created the first controllable atomtronic circuit in 2011 by moving ultra-cold atoms through a wire made of light--just as electrons flow through a metal wire. She added a permeable barrier to this circuit, also made of light, to serve as the control element, much as a transistor can control the current in an electronic circuit. Just as electronic devices manipulate the flow of electrons, atomtronic devices manipulate the flow of atoms, which are made up of electrons, protons, and neutrons. Since atoms have properties that are very different from electrons--they do not have charged particles, for instance--atomtronic devices have the potential to go beyond the capabilities of electronics. Atomtronics will not supplant electronics, but may offer new kinds of functions and applications. An atomtronic circuit, for example, could be useful in applications such as rotation sensors, improving the functioning of gyroscopes used to stabilize spacecraft and airplanes. Atomtronic circuitry may be able to perform quantum computations that could offer a significant leap forward in computing speed, performance, and capability and lead to the next generation of technology that will enable smaller and cheaper devices. Dr. Ronald Ross, a Fellow at NIST, is a finalist for the 2015 Homeland Security & Law Enforcement Medal. This medal recognizes a Federal employee for a significant contribution to the Nation in activities related to homeland security and law enforcement. Mr. Ross, called the ``rock star of cybersecurity'' by his colleagues, developed and implemented a state-of-the-art system to assess risks and protect Federal computer networks from cyberattacks, helping secure information critical to the Nation's national and economic security. Most recently, Dr. Ross helped to establish the government-wide program for cloud security assessment and authorization. The Federal Government used to rely on a rigid checklist approach to securing computer networks, often ignoring changing threats and evolving technology, and not always distinguishing what information needed higher security and what data was of lesser importance. Dr. Ross, belying the image of a hidebound bureaucrat, designed the Risk Management Framework as a way for government agencies to decide how critical their various data sets are and to pick the right level of protection. With the framework Dr. Ross developed, agencies can go through an assessment process and decide where to concentrate resources and tighten security. The impact of Dr. Ross's work includes reducing the cost of implementing cybersecurity controls and demonstrating compliance with multiple security requirements, and enhancing system interoperability among Federal agencies. Dr. Ross and his team have worked with the General Services Administration, the Department of Defense, and the Department of Homeland Security to test and validate the risk framework unveiled earlier this year that will be used by cloud computing service providers, allowing them to host some of the Federal Government's most sensitive information. And as the principal architect of a new national testing program and infrastructure, Dr. Ross also has been collaborating with the National Security Agency to develop the first- ever network of commercial testing laboratories capable of evaluating the security of information technology--IT--products. Robert Bunge, Michael Gerber, Mark Paese, and Gregory Zwicker The National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration--NOAA--is headquartered in Silver Spring, MD. NOAA's mission is ``Science, Service, and Stewardship''. The agency attempts ``to understand and predict changes in climate, weather, oceans, and coasts; to disseminate that knowledge and information; and to conserve and manage coastal and marine ecosystems and resources''. NOAA's research, services, and products--ranging from daily weather forecasts, severe storm warnings and climate monitoring to fisheries management, coastal restoration and supporting marine commerce--affect more than one-third of America's GDP. Robert Bunge, Michael Gerber, Mark Paese, and Gregory Zwicker of the National Weather Service's Wireless Emergency Alerts Team at NOAA are also finalists for the 2015 Homeland Security & Law Enforcement Medal. They have developed a fast and geographically targeted cell phone alert system, launched in 2012, for weather emergencies such as tornadoes, flash floods, and hurricanes that reaches millions of people, saving lives and preventing injuries. So far, the system has transmitted more than 13,000 warnings for the most dangerous types of severe weather to the cell phones of millions of people potentially in harm's way across the United States. While other weather alert systems have been in use for years, this new method of using mobile devices and targeting very precise geographic areas is a significant improvement. It took many years of coordination with the Federal Communications Commission, DHS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and the major wireless telecommunications providers. Previously, weather emergency alerts from one of the 122 weather service offices around the country were emailed to the Washington, D.C. office and then forwarded to FEMA, which sent the alert to affected counties using television and radio broadcast technology. Cellular companies could independently text the warning information to their cell phone customers in the affected county, but the system was slow and too broadly targeted. The new weather alert system structures the information into concise messages--90 or fewer characters--and uses geo-targeted data to broadcast the messages rapidly over cell phones only in the affected areas. The team worked with six of the largest cell phone companies to build the sophisticated technology needed to make the system work. They developed the infrastructure and protocol for the alerts, facilitated the decision-making for the weather alerts to be transmitted, and conducted extensive public awareness and educational programs. Mr. Bunge led the technical team, overseeing the software development, the data specialists, the coding, the host servers and other information technology needs, and helped create a system that targets the cell phone alerts to specific geographic locations. Mr. Gerber is a meteorologist and a specialist in how the weather service information is disseminated, and he played a critical role in making sure the right kind of weather alerts would be available and properly transmitted. He also is credited with convincing the wireless carriers to participate and make the needed investments. Mr. Paese handled many of the complicated management issues while Mr. Zwicker was involved in training some 2,000 weather forecasters in more than 122 offices around the country to use the system in coordination with Federal emergency management officials. Here's an example of how effective the new system is: on July 1, 2013, a tornado obliterated a dome in East Windsor, CT, where 29 children had been playing soccer. Seconds before the tornado struck, a cell phone alert prompted the camp manager to rush the children out of the dome and into an adjacent building, preventing injuries and quite possibly fatalities. Dr. Hyun Lillehoj The Agricultural Research Service--ARS--is the U.S. Department of Agriculture's USDA chief scientific in-house research agency, with headquarters colocated here in Washington, DC and in Beltsville, MD. The agency's job is ``to find solutions to agricultural problems that affect Americans every day from field to table''. ARS conducts research to develop and transfer solutions to agricultural problems of high national priority and provide information access and dissemination to: ensure high-quality, safe food, and other agricultural products; assess the nutritional needs of Americans; sustain a competitive agricultural economy; enhance the natural resource base and the environment; and provide economic opportunities for rural citizens, communities, and society as a whole. Dr. Hyun Lillehoj, a senior research molecular biologist at ARS in Beltsville, is a finalist for the 2015 Career Achievement Medal. This medal recognizes a Federal employee for significant accomplishments throughout a lifetime of achievement in public service. Dr. Lillehoj has pioneered industry-leading research to improve the health of commercial poultry without the use of antibiotics, protecting consumers and making the U.S. poultry industry more competitive by saving it billions of dollars. There is growing concern over the widespread use of antibiotics in poultry and other food industries, which health experts say contributes to the development of drug-resistant bacteria. These so-called ``superbugs'' infect hundreds of thousands and kill tens of thousands of Americans each year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. During three decades as a molecular biologist at ARS, Dr. Lillehoj has helped mitigate the use of antibiotics in poultry, finding that certain food supplements, probiotics, and nutrients can replace antibiotics as an effective means of enhancing the immune system and fighting common parasitic diseases and bacterial infections. The USDA estimates that the poultry diseases Dr. Lillehoj is working to combat cause more than $600 million in losses in the United States and $3.2 billion worldwide. Dr. Lillehoj has developed novel diagnostic and therapeutic products and discovered DNA markers for the genetic selection of disease- resistant chickens, paving the way for breeding healthier chickens that will benefit both consumers and the Nation's $45 billion poultry industry. She has done this by creating one of the first gene libraries from commercial chickens and depositing more than 55,000 individual gene sequences from this database into the public domain, providing other researchers with information that could lead to breeding poultry with superior resistance to parasites. She also has identified natural antimicrobial molecules that have anti-cancer properties and kill infectious parasites; discovered a second-generation parasite vaccine with an improved protection profile over current vaccines; developed therapeutic antibodies that boost immunity for poultry; formulated health-promoting probiotics for veterinary use; and discovered organic, plant-derived herbal extracts and essential oils that fight infectious diseases affecting animals and humans. She is recognized as a world leader in understanding host-pathogen interactions of an avian parasite closely related to human malaria that is a major cause of disease affecting poultry and livestock. She also has done original research on a bacterium that is one of the most common causes of food-borne illness in the U.S. Her scientific breakthroughs are documented in 10 U.S. and international patents, more than 350 peer-reviewed scientific papers, 14 book chapters, and 230 worldwide collaborations with academia, foreign governments and private industry. She has mentored more than 120 young scientists. Dr. Lillehoj embodies the American Dream. She is from South Korea. She came to the United States in 1969 after her father died, when she was just out of high school, and with just $200 in her pocket. At first, she wanted to be a cancer researcher, but her focus soon turned to immunology and she received a government scholarship. After she received her Ph.D., she went to work at the National Institutes of Health. USDA successfully recruited her in 1984, and she has been at ARS ever since. The government's investment in her has paid enormous dividends. These are just a few of the Nation's talented, creative, dedicated, and hard-working Federal employees. I ask my colleagues and all Americans to join me in congratulating them on their successes and thanking them for their public service. We are a strong and prosperous Nation, in part, because of our Federal workforce. We cannot take it for granted.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing May as National Mental Health Awareness Month. Sadly, mental health is a subject that often does not receive the attention it deserves in our society, despite the fact that mental illness touches the lives of tens of millions of Americans each year. Nearly 50 percent of American adults will develop at least one mental illness in their lifetimes, and in a given year, one in four American adults, more than 60 million people, experiences some form of mental illness. Of that number, approximately 5.8 percent suffer from a serious mental disorder like schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or major depression. Mental illness can have a devastating impact on an individual's overall health and quality of life. Those suffering from serious mental illnesses are not only at increased risk for chronic medical conditions, but they also die, on average, 25 years earlier than other Americans, due in large part to treatable medical conditions. Adults with severe mental disorders are also much more likely to be impoverished, further limiting their access to health care services needed to help manage their illnesses. A 2012 study published in the Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics found that the presence of a household member with a severe mental illness was shown to increase the likelihood of poverty in a home by more than three times. Mental illness also has a significant impact on our country's economy. According to the CDC, the economic cost of mental illness in the United States was a staggering $300 billion in 2002. The good news is that high-quality, evidence-based treatment for mental illnesses can be very effective. However, fewer than half of those in need receive any mental health care in the United States. This is simply unacceptable. Stigma, cost, and other barriers, such as limited capacity in some areas to serve all those in need, prevent many individuals from receiving necessary mental health care. It is imperative that we act to improve access to high-quality, evidence- based mental health care services in our country. Several weeks ago, I had the opportunity to attend the ribbon-cutting ceremony for the Mosaic Integrated Healthcare Center, a state-of-the- art facility in Baltimore that will provide essential mental health services, substance abuse treatment, and primary care services to the community. Mosaic Community Services is the largest community-based behavioral health service provider in Maryland, serving thousands of children, adolescents, and adults annually. The new Integrated Healthcare Center will allow full implementation of Mosaic's integrated care model, which addresses patients' physical and behavioral health needs in a comprehensive, coordinated, and cost-saving manner. A pilot program based on this model, supported by a 2010 grant from Maryland's Community Health Resources Commission, resulted in an impressive 78 percent reduction in emergency room visits and urgent inpatient care. Mosaic's innovative system is a perfect example of the ways in which integrated care can improve quality of care, result in better health outcomes, and help generate long-term cost savings. I am also excited to be working on an initiative to improve access to, and quality of, mental health care in our country by facilitating the integration of mental health care services into the primary care setting through the collaborative care model, developed by the late Dr. Wayne Katon, at the AIMS Center at the University of Washington. In the collaborative care model, primary care providers treat patients with common mental health disorders, such as depression or anxiety, with help from a care manager and a psychiatrist who acts a consultant, reviewing patients' progress, making treatment recommendations and sharing his or her expertise with the primary care provider and care manager. The collaborative care model not only improves patient care experiences and outcomes, it has also been shown to reduce overall health care costs. One large trial, which focused on depression care in primary care clinics in five States, found substantial reductions in overall health costs, with an overall rate of return on investment of $6 in health care costs saved for each $1 spent on depression care. Mental illness affects the lives of so many Americans. This May, in honor of National Mental Health Awareness Month, let us commit to working together to improve mental health care in our country by building on the success of integrated care models like the collaborative care model and the innovative system at Mosaic's Integrated Health Center.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, let me first say that I thank Senator Wyden for his hard work. I am one of those who believe it is important for Congress to pass trade promotion authority. I don't believe we can complete the TPP without trade promotion authority. I think TPP is an important strategic partnership for the United States as well as an economic partnership for the United States. Having said that, I listened carefully to Senator Wyden where the administration has raised an objection to a particular amendment and saying if that gets on the bill, they would veto the trade promotion authority. I say that because many of us who support TPA have said: Look, let's make sure we get it right. Let's make sure that we have an open amendment process so that we can try to make this the strongest possible bill, because we don't get that many opportunities to take up trade legislation. I just mention that because yes, I come to the floor to say that we need trade promotion authority. When you look at the fact that we are a democracy with separation of the branches of government, we cannot negotiate--535 of us--with our trading partners and enter into an agreement. We have to delegate that negotiating authority, and that is what TPA does. At the time we delegate that, we also must make it clear what our trade objectives are about, and we also must take advantage of that opportunity to protect workers' rights legitimately and make sure we have a level playing field for American companies. I think that is our responsibility. In the discussion of this bill, I want to acknowledge that we do have part of this--the trade adjustment assistance. That is important to American workers. We have Customs legislation that I wish was in this bill, because I am concerned as to whether both will reach the finishing line. But it deals with strong enforcement, and ``level the playing field'' currency issues are all dealt with in a separate bill that we passed earlier. I guess last week we passed the legislation on the Customs. Let me just talk for a moment about trade promotion authority, and say that we have to be very clear about our expectations. I want to compliment Senator Wyden and Senator Hatch and the Senate Finance Committee. In reading this legislation--and I hope you all had a chance to do it--you are going to find that this really does take our delegation of authority and our expectations to a much higher level than we have ever done on areas that have not been traditionally as clear on Congress. I will just mention a few of those. Our overall trading objective is very clear to deal with labor standards. In quoting from the bill that is before us, on the overall negotiating objectives: ``to promote respect of worker rights and the rights of children consistent with core labor standards of the ILO (as set out in section 11(7))''-- defined as the International Labour Organization--``and an understanding of the relationship between trade and worker rights . . . to promote universal ratification and full compliance with ILO Convention No. 182 Concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labor . . .'' That is in our overall objective. I want to talk a moment about the principal negotiating objectives, because there is greater consequence to the principal negotiating objectives. There are provisions included in the principal negotiating objectives that are different from what we have done in any other TPA bill. First, yes, it does deal with the core labor rights. The principal negotiating objective that the administration must show us that they have done deals with the ``adopts and maintains measures implementing internationally recognized core labor standards . . .'' that is included in there. Included in the principal negotiating objectives is the requirement for environmental law: ``its environmental laws in a manner that [cannot weaken] or reduces protections afforded in those laws in a manner affecting trade or investment between the United States and that party . . .'' So what we have done is that we also put in there: ``does not fail to effectively enforce its environmental or labor laws, through a sustained or recurring course of action or inaction . . .'' I read that into the record because I want to make it clear that if you believe we should be negotiating trade agreements and you believe that it only can be done through the administration and can't be done through Members of Congress individually negotiating a trade agreement, and you believe you need to be clear as to what we expect, the principal negotiating objective is where you include that language. And we have been very clear in the principal negotiating objectives in regards to core labor standards and environmental standards, because we know that to have a level playing field--the countries we are negotiating with do not have the same high standards that we have for labor, do not have the same high standards we have for the environment--we want to make sure we are not placed at a disadvantage. So it is in the principal negotiating objectives. But we have gone further than that. In the principal negotiating objectives we put for the first time anticorruption provisions. That is in the principal negotiating provisions: ``to obtain high standards and effective domestic enforcement mechanisms . . . [to] prohibit such attempts to influence acts, decisions, or omissions of foreign government officials or to secure any such improper advantage''--these are anticorruption provisions--``to ensure that such standards level the playing field for United States persons in international trade and investment. . . .'' Why is this important? Because in some countries, including those countries with which we are negotiating, there are practices where companies that want to participate in government contracts have to deal with kickbacks or have to deal with bribery. Well, American companies cannot do that. We have laws that prohibit that, but there should not be anyone dealing with that. In the principal negotiating objectives, we instruct our negotiators to deal with these anticorruption issues. The administration must show we have made progress--not only progress, that we have enforceable standards against corruption that would disadvantage American companies doing business in those countries. That is a huge step forward on our anticorruption issues, but we go further than that. I am very proud of an amendment I offered that was adopted to the trade promotion authority dealing with good governance, transparency, the effective operation of legal regimes, and the rule of law of trading partners. This is, again, a principal negotiating objective which says we have to strengthen good governance, transparency, the effective operation of legal regimes and the rule of law of trading partners of the United States, through capacity building and other appropriate means, and create a more open Democratic society and--let me add this, this is in the bill--to promote respect for internationally recognized human rights. That is a principal negotiating objective. We are talking about freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, association, religious freedom. We have instructed the administration--if they accept our bill and sign it into law--come back to us on how we have dealt with advancing good governance, transparency, and respect for internationally recognized human rights in the trade agreement that we brought forward. This is the first time we have included anything similar to this in a trade promotion authority act. So this is a new level of expectation of what we expect to do in our trade agreements. I really want to emphasize that because we have not been bashful in the past using trade to promote human rights. We usually do it when we have a specific opportunity. We did it well before our time in Congress when Jackson- Vanik was passed, dealing with Soviet Jewry being able to leave the former Soviet Union. We also used trade as a hammer to bring down the apartheid government of South Africa. Most recently, we used trade as a hammer when we needed to deal with normal trade relations with Russia in regard to a WTO issue--where we attached the Magnitsky law to it--that I was proud to work on with Senator McCain. I thank Senator McCain for his strong leadership on the Magnitsky law. We used that opportunity, a trade bill, to advance international human rights issues in holding Russia accountable to its standards and what it did in regard to Sergei Magnitsky. So we should take advantage of the trade promotion authority act to advance basic human rights, particularly when we are dealing with countries that, quite frankly, are challenged in that regard. I want to read one other provision that is in the current bill dealing with trade promotion authority and dealing with the principle negotiating objectives. It spells out very clearly that it is a principal negotiating objective. We have enforcement in it. It says: To seek provisions that treat United States principal negotiating objectives equally with respect to the ability to resort to dispute settlement under the applicable agreement, the availability of equivalent settlement procedures, and the availability of equivalent remedies. What does that mean? What that means is that this is not NAFTA agreement. In NAFTA, we did make advances on labor and environment, but we did not include it in the core agreement. It was not effective. We had no enforcement. We had these sidebar agreements. We learned that was not the way to do it. Well, this TPA says that in regard to human rights and good governance, in regard to labor and the environment, that they are in the principal negotiating objectives and there will be trade sanctions in regard to violations--if there are violations. We hope there are not. We hope they will make the progress. But we have effective ways of dealing with our principal negotiating objectives that include the good governance issues that I think are critically important. I started my remarks by saying thank you to Senator Wyden. I thank him very much because he has really done an incredible job in where we are today. He points out that we are not there yet. I agree. We need an open amendment process here. We need to take up more amendments on the floor of the Senate. I say that as one of those Members who have not been bashful about trying to change the rules of the Senate. I am told by people who have been here longer than I that the rules of the Senate work. You just have to be a little patient. OK. We will be a little patient. But let's figure out a way that we can have more votes on the floor of the Senate in regard to this bill. We do not get a chance to take up trade bills very often. I have an amendment that I want to see acted upon. I do not think it is controversial, but it is extremely important. What that amendment would do is require the President, before commencing negotiations with potential trading partners, to take into account whether that potential trading partner has engaged in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights. This amendment appropriately puts gross violations of human rights on par with prenegotiating requirements of other principal negotiating objectives. So before we start picking countries with which we are going to do trade agreements, let's make sure they are not gross violators of human rights. Now, so everybody does not get nervous--because TPP is so far advanced--it would not be possible to have the free negotiating objectives certified by the President on TPP. I understand that. There is a blanket exemption in TPA in that regard, which applies also to the amendment I am offering. But I would hope our colleagues would agree that moving forward we would want the President to take that into consideration, to make sure we have a game plan, if we are dealing with a country that has violated human rights, as to how we are going correct that activity through the opening of trade. Trade with our country is a benefit. It should be with countries that share our basic values. Lowering trade barriers should come with further commitments to our basic values, and that is what my amendment would do. I would urge my colleagues, at the appropriate time, to make sure this amendment is considered. I would ask their support on this amendment. Let's continue to work through the process. Let's continue to improve the bill. Hopefully, we can reach a point where we can send to the President the appropriate legislation. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I wish to recognize Esther B. Newman, the founder and chief executive officer of Leadership Montgomery, a not-for-profit community organization dedicated to public service and management training in Montgomery County, MD. Mrs. Newman's vision of compassionate outreach, effective and inspirational leadership, and community improvement have long nurtured the people of Montgomery County, effecting positive change for nearly 40 years. Ms. Newman was born and raised in Washington, DC. She began her secondary education while balancing the responsibilities of motherhood. She graduated from Montgomery College, one of Maryland's premier community colleges, with an associate's degree in mental health in 1975. She later earned a B.A. in human service administration from Antioch University and an M.S. in applied behavioral science from Johns Hopkins University. The foundations of Ms. Newman's legacy of public service were established shortly after her graduation from Montgomery College when she established the Family Life Center of Montgomery County in 1976, where she served as director until 1979. She then transitioned into work at Olney, MD's Montgomery General Hospital as a public relations consultant, simultaneously contributing to the local Courier-Gazette newspapers as a community correspondent and serving as an officer on the Upper Montgomery Community Mental Health Center Citizens Advisory Committee. Throughout the 1980s, Ms. Newman continued to serve in an extensive capacity across Montgomery County, encompassing a diverse portfolio of health care focused outreach, volunteer service, and civic leadership positions. In 1981, Ms. Newman joined the Olney Chamber of Commerce and became a board member in 1984. By 1983, she had moved into a leadership role as the program director of the YWCA of Montgomery County and later joined the Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce, where she held the role of executive director from 1986 through 1988. As the decade drew to a close, Ms. Newman drew on her years of public service and leadership experience and formulated a curriculum of management training retreats, lectures, and educational guidelines. She worked with the late Larry Pignone of the United Way to establish Leadership Montgomery in 1989, where she has served as director ever since. The core program of Leadership Montgomery, which incorporates youth, business executive, senior, and emerging leader training modules, is aimed at inspiring the next generation of business and civic leaders in Montgomery County and beyond. Above all, Leadership Montgomery strives to establish a more inclusive management community, comprised of leaders of diverse backgrounds and perspectives. In the 26 years since its founding, Leadership Montgomery has enriched and educated more than 2,000 graduates. The success of this mission is reflected in the program's accomplished alumni, with local Board of Education members, Circuit Court judges, members of both the Maryland Senate and House of Delegates, and Montgomery County Councilmembers among them. Throughout her career in public life, Esther Newman has also helped to raise more than $5 million in contributions for scholarships and programs, in addition to nearly $3 million of in-kind donations. For her unparalleled commitment to service, generosity, and tireless devotion to the betterment of Montgomery County, she has been recognized with numerous accolades, including Jewish Women International's Women to Watch Community Leadership Award in 2011, the Corporate Volunteer Council President's Award in 2009, the Victims' Rights Foundation's Game Changer Award in 2014, and an honorary degree in public service from her alma mater Montgomery College in 2002. Ms. Newman will be retiring from her position as director of Leadership Montgomery in September, after more than a quarter-century of education and guidance. Her compassionate spirit, inspirational leadership, and unwavering devotion to civic improvement have long inspired the greater Montgomery County community. Many of the people Ms. Newman have touched have taken the lessons that they have learned at Leadership Montgomery into business and government. Though she will soon step down as a director, I have no doubt that Ms. Newman will continue to be involved in the community and will continue to inspire others to enter leadership roles. I ask my colleagues to join me is wishing her all the best for a restful and fulfilling retirement.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I wish to recognize WBAL-TV 11 anchorman Rod Daniels for his career of journalistic service to the residents of the Greater Baltimore area. Mr. Daniels has been a trusted voice on WBAL-TV 11 for more than 30 years, and his steady and colorful reporting has remained consistent and creative throughout that time. On the occasion of his final nightly broadcast, which will occur this Friday, I would like to thank Mr. Daniels both for his years of service and his dedication to bringing viewers the nightly news with a regular measure of hope. At the time of his retirement, Mr. Daniels will have distinguished himself as the longest continually serving nightly news anchor in the Baltimore media market, no small accomplishment against the backdrop of industry-wide newsroom downsizing that has characterized the media business during much of his career. Mr. Daniels came to Baltimore in 1984 and has been there for the city through tragedies like the 9/11 attacks and all-too-recent riots following the death of Freddie Gray. His exclusive coverage when the Roman Catholic Church elevated Baltimore archbishops to its College of Cardinals rightly garnered national awards. So it was no surprise, then, that Baltimore turned to Mr. Daniels when it was time to host the welcome celebration for Pope John Paul II at Camden Yards, an enormous compliment and honor. Throughout his career, Mr. Daniels has shown an ongoing commitment to craft, charity, and community. He has spent countless hours speaking to school groups, serving on the boards of organizations like the National Aquarium in Baltimore, and hosting events to battle deadly diseases like cystic fibrosis and cancer. Mr. Daniels even has taken the Polar Bear Plunge into the frigid waters of the Chesapeake Bay to help a worthy cause, while finding the time to film public service announcements against animal cruelty. Mr. Daniels began his career as a weekend sports anchor at WIS-TV in Columbia, SC. He then moved to WTAE-TV in Pittsburgh as a weekend anchor and reporter, and then moved to WISN-TV in Milwaukee. Mr. Daniels is an alumnus of William Patterson University in Wayne, NJ, and received the Legacy Award for Distinguished Alumni from the William Patterson University Foundation in 2011. He also has completed enrichment programs through the Community Film Workshop Council. I ask my colleagues to join me in expressing sincere appreciation and congratulations to Mr. Daniels for his many contributions and accomplishments throughout his distinguished career.