Benjamin Cardin

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, before Senator Kyl leaves the floor, I would like to join the Republican leader in congratulating him on his public service. He and I came to the Congress the same year, after the 1986 elections--we are part of the 100th Congress--and we became friends. I couldn't agree more with the Republican leader and his example of following your convictions with the highest degree of integrity in the work you have done. I had a chance to serve with you on the Judiciary Committee, and I can tell you that you added greatly to the respect for that committee and our respect for the process and for the rule of law and for civil liberty issues. And most recently, with the work you did on the Magnitsky bill, the Republican leader is absolutely right--you did not seek the headlines on that legislation, but it could not have been done without your direction and your help. I just want to thank you for what you have done to advance the reputation of the Senate and public service, standing by your convictions, yet doing so in a way that we could work together, respecting everyone's right to be heard and our right to work together. You are indeed a model Senator, and it has been an honor to serve with you in the Senate.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, as the Senate chair of the Helsinki Commission, I have a longstanding interest in Central Europe. For many years the Helsinki Commission was one of the loudest and clearest voices to speak on behalf of those oppressed by communism and to call for democracy, human rights, and freedom from Soviet oppression. It has been a great triumph and joy to see the peoples of this region free from dictatorship. Over the past two decades I have been profoundly heartened as newly freed countries of Central Europe have joined the United States and NATO and have become our partners in advocating for human rights and democracy around the globe. Leadership on those issues may be especially important now as some countries in the Middle East undertake transition, the outcome of which is far from certain. Even in Europe, in the western Balkans, there is a crying need for exemplary leadership, not backsliding. Americans know from our own history that maintaining democracy and promoting human rights are never jobs that are finished. As my friend and former colleague Tom Lantos said, ``The veneer of civilization is paper thin. We are its guardians, and we can never rest.'' For some time I have been concerned about the trajectory of developments in Hungary, where the scope and nature of systemic changes introduced after April 2010 have been the focus of considerable international attention. At the end of November, Hungary was back in the headlines when Marton Gyongyosi, a member of the notorious extremist party Jobbik and also vice chairman of the Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee, suggested that Hungarian Jews are a threat to Hungary's national security and those in government and Parliament should be registered. The ink was barely dry on letters protesting those comments when another Hungarian member of Parliament, Balazs Lenhardt, participated in a public demonstration last week where he burned an Israeli flag. The fact is that these are only the latest extremist scandals to erupt in Budapest over the course of this year. In April, for example, just before Passover, a Jobbik MP gave a speech in Parliament weaving together subtle anti-Roma propaganda with overt anti-Semitism blood libel. After that, Jobbik was in the news when it was reported that one of its members in Parliament had requested and received certification from a DNA testing company that his or her blood was free of Jewish or Romani ancestry. At issue in the face of these anti-Semitic and racist phenomena is the sufficiency of the Hungarian Government's response and its role in ensuring respect for human rights and the rule of law. And the government's response has been, to say the least, wanting. First, it has been a hallmark of this government to focus on blood identity through the extension of Hungarian citizenship on a purely ethnic basis. The same Hungarian officials have played fast and loose with questions relating to its wartime responsibilities, prompting the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum to issue a public statement of concern regarding the rehabilitation of fascist ideologues and political leaders from World War II. I am perhaps most alarmed by the government's failure to stand against the organized threats from Jobbik. For example, in late August a mob estimated at 1,000 people terrorized a Roma neighborhood in Devecser, taunting the Romani families to come out and face the crowd. There were reportedly three members of Parliament from the Jobbik party participating in that mob, and some people were filmed throwing bricks or stones at the Romani homes. The failure to investigate, let alone condemn such acts of intimidation, makes Prime Minister Orban's recent pledge to protect ``his compatriots'' ring hollow. Of course, all this takes place in the context of fundamental questions about democracy itself in Hungary. What are we to make of democracy in Hungary when more than 360 religious organizations are stripped of their registration overnight and when all faiths must now depend on the politicized decisionmaking of the Parliament to receive the rights that come with registration? What are we to make of the fact that even after the European Commission and Hungary's own Constitutional Court have ruled against the mass dismissal of judges in Hungary's court-packing scheme, there is still no remedy for any of the dismissed judges? What is the status of media freedom in Hungary, let alone the fight against anti-Semitism, if a journalist who writes about anti-Semitism faces possible sanction before the courts for doing so? What are we to make of Hungary's new election framework, which includes many troubling provisions, including a prohibition on campaign ads on commercial radio and TV, onerous new voter registration provisions, and limits on local election committees, which oversee elections? I find it hard to imagine that Jews, Roma, and other minorities will be safe if freedom of the media and religion, the rule of law, the independence of the Judiciary, and the checks and balances essential for democracy are not also safeguarded. With that in mind, I will continue to follow the overall trends in Hungary and the implications for the region as a whole. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN. Senator Kyl is absolutely right. I get my best information from Myrna as to what is going on in the Senate. So I appreciate his comments. Hungary

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I want to congratulate Maryland Legal Services Corporation on their 30th anniversary. Established in 1982 by the Maryland General Assembly, Maryland Legal Services Corporation raises and distributes funds to nonprofit organizations that provide civil legal assistance to low-income persons. As chairman of Maryland Legal Services Corporation from 1988-1995, I know firsthand the extraordinary service they provide to Marylanders. Maryland Legal Services Corporation's grants have enabled 35 Maryland- area nonprofits to assist individuals in matters such as eviction, foreclosure, domestic violence, child custody, veteran's benefits, and health care. To date, Maryland Legal Services Corporation has awarded more than $164 million in grants, assisting Marylanders in 2 million different legal matters. In recent years Maryland Legal Services Corporation's mission has become even more critical, as more and more people have turned to our nonprofit community for civil legal services. Studies have shown that poor households will on average face from 1 to 3 legal problems a year, and Maryland is fortunate that Maryland Legal Services Corporation has worked tirelessly to ensure that our nonprofit civil legal service providers can assist its clients. In the Western part of our State, a couple who were 2 months behind on their mortgage and close to foreclosure was provided a volunteer attorney from Allegany Law Foundation who helped them save their home. In Harford County, Legal Aid successfully advocated for a woman who was being sued by her credit card company after she had paid thousands of dollars to a debt settlement company believing that the company would pay off her credit card debt. Legal Aid helped her cancel her contract, get a refund and have the lawsuit dismissed. A man on the Eastern Shore contacted his local Maryland Legal Aid Bureau with concerns about black mold that was growing in his rental unit. The landlord refused to remedy the mold situation, so Legal Aid staff investigated the situation and helped the man escrow his rent. Had these Marylanders not had access to civil legal assistance, what would have happened? I submit that inevitably justice suffers. Judges are put in the position of trying to provide some assistance and advice--while remaining impartial--to one or two unrepresented parties before them. Social service agencies absorb additional costs from those that are unfairly denied health care or social services benefits. Neighborhoods and communities are damaged due to unjust evictions. Families are torn apart, and domestic violence and abuse continues unabated. Public health and law enforcement costs rise. The rule of law is undermined, and Americans come to believe that justice is only for the rich, not the poor. According to one study, each Legal Aid attorney serves over 6,800 people, while there is one private attorney for every 525 people in the nation. This is not ``Equal Justice Under Law'', as promised by the etching at the entrance to the United States Supreme Court. I am committed to help close the justice gap by giving the Federal Legal Services Corporation the resources it needs from Congress. This must include increasing its authorized level of funding and removing harmful funding restrictions regarding class action lawsuits and attorneys fees. Maryland Legal Services Corporation's successes over the last 30 years are impressive, and while we celebrate all they have been able to do, we also recommit ourselves to ensuring that all people have access to quality legal representation, regardless of income.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Janet Jacqueline Emanuel, a fellow in Senator Mark Udall's office, be granted the privilege of the floor for the remainder of the Senate's session of the 112th Congress.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I wish to thank and to honor an invaluable member of my Senate team, Michael Burke. As my Maryland projects director, Mike has been the key liaison between the Federal legislative process and the critical institutions of my home State of Maryland. As my top environmental adviser, Mike has been vital to each of my environmental priorities, from climate change to the Chesapeake Bay. Mike is a substantive expert, a keen strategist, a wise counselor, and an attentive mentor and friend to my entire team. He is a diligent public servant who leads quietly, by example, with the strength of his knowledge and skill. As he retires after an exemplary career of service, I am pleased to pay public tribute to this remarkable man. Mike has devoted much of his career to protecting the natural splendor of Maryland and the Mid-Atlantic, particularly our iconic Chesapeake Bay. Before joining my team, Mike was associate director of the Environmental Protection Agency's Chesapeake Bay program. There, he dedicated himself to implementing solutions for the bay, which is the world's largest estuary, one of the most important water bodies in the Nation, and a natural resource that all Marylanders treasure. Shortly after I was sworn into the Senate, Mike joined my office as an EPA fellow. He demonstrated an incredible knowledge and understanding of the wide range of issues affecting Maryland, and I knew I needed to hire him as a permanent member of my staff. He brought his passion for the environment to his work in the Senate, skillfully leading efforts on environmental issues from Chesapeake Bay health to clean air, and from climate change to wildlife conservation. I will continue to fight hard for the issues and programs that Mike helped initiate. Mike knows the ecological importance of the Chesapeake Bay and the impediments harming the bay's ecology because he has seen it all and experienced it firsthand. From Poplar Neck to Elk Neck, from Catoctin Mountain to Calvert Cliffs, from the Nanticoke to the Pocomoke, from Rocky Gorge to Sandy Point, Mike has experienced the natural wonder of our great State. It is his deep appreciation for the importance of protecting our State's natural resources that has made him such a valuable member of my staff. In addition to his critical environmental work, Mike led my team in charge of instate projects. The key institutions of Maryland's public life our universities, our hospitals, our local governments, and community organizations have benefitted from Mike's expertise in navigating the legislative process and his commitment to fighting on behalf of the people of Maryland. Mike's substantive knowledge and political acumen extend well beyond the bay and Maryland. His policy expertise led Senator Barbara Boxer, the chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, to ask me if I would ``lend'' Mike to her committee during the committee's arduous work on both the 2010 climate bill and the 2012 Transportation bill. While his full-time service to my office was missed during those periods, I was pleased to see how much my colleague from California valued Mike's input and skill, and I was happy to see him brought in to help the chairman with these important committee initiatives. In addition to his wealth of knowledge and strategic skill, Mike will be missed most of all for the warmth, integrity, and generosity of spirit that he brings to every encounter. When he first joined my office, he would occasionally send Maryland trivia questions around to the staff. His enthusiasm helped to broaden my team's--and even my own--knowledge of the great State of Maryland, and endeared him to everyone in the office. No matter how tough the circumstance and here in the Senate, we often face tough days--Mike is quick to declare with a smile that he has ``never had a bad day.'' He has committed himself to mentorship, voluntarily and enthusiastically spending hours working with more junior colleagues, guiding and advising them with a selflessness that is remarkable for being all too rare. During the years, I am proud to say that I have come to value Mike not just as a staff member, but as a friend. He and his wife Pat have become favorites within the Cardin team, and I am pleased to have this opportunity to acknowledge Pat publicly as well. Her strong commitment to Maryland is evident not only in her own work in children's health care, but in her support of Mike's efforts here in these Halls, and I thank her for her contribution to the people of Maryland. Mike's knowledge of the environmental issues of the day does not just stem from his professional experience, but also from his personal interest as an avid naturalist, bird watcher, kayaker, and overall lover of the outdoors. Mike is most at home among the natural spaces he treasures, either on the water in a sea kayak or walking along a nature trail. For several years, Mike has shared that passion with the community by writing a column featuring different species of Mid- Atlantic native and migratory birds in the ``Chesapeake Bay Journal.'' As with everything he does, Mike's columns always manage to include some of the quiet wisdom that is uniquely his. In a column about the common song sparrow, a local bird that is often overlooked in favor of those with brighter colors and flashier songs, Mike urges his readers to look beyond the bird's plain exterior to appreciate its unique contribution to the natural community. His words manage to capture something about his own steady, unassuming service to those around him. Mike writes, ``We lead quiet lives until some rare person decides to listen with abiding patience, waiting for us to finally step out from behind protective cover and softly announce our presence. And then anonymity gives way to the individuality that has been there all along.'' For me, for my team, Mike has always been both the quiet presence and the patient listener, working with steady determination for the people of Maryland. As he looks forward to a retirement filled with relaxation and the outdoor recreation that he loves, I am humbly grateful for his service. He will be missed.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I join with Senator Hutchison in paying tribute to Senator Daniel K. Inouye. I rise to pay tribute to our dear colleague. Senator Inouye was not one of the tallest Senators; in fact, he had a slight build and a quiet demeanor. But he was a giant. He will be missed by all in the Senate. The people of his beloved Hawaii will miss him. All Americans will miss him. In the immediate aftermath of the attack on Pearl Harbor, Senator Inouye was declared an enemy alien because of his Japanese ancestry. But in 1943, when the U.S. Army dropped its enlistment ban on Japanese Americans, he enlisted in the Army and volunteered to be part of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team. The 442nd became the most highly decorated infantry regiment in the history of the U.S. Army. The 442nd, known by its motto, ``Go for Broke,'' was awarded eight Presidential Unit Citations and 21 of its members, including Senator Inouye, were awarded the Medal of Honor for their heroism during World War II. Following World War II, Senator Inouye finished his undergraduate studies at the University of Hawaii and then earned a law degree from George Washington University. In 1953, he was elected to the Hawaii Territorial House of Representatives and was immediately elected majority leader. He served two terms there and was elected to the Hawaii Territorial Senate in 1957. Midway through his first term in the Territorial Senate, Hawaii achieved statehood. He won a seat in the House of Representatives as Hawaii's first full Member and took office on August 21, 1959, the same date Hawaii became a State, and he was reelected in 1960. Then, in 1962, he was elected to the Senate and was reelected eight times, only once with less than 69 percent of the vote. Senator Inouye had been in the Congress since Hawaii became a State. He was the second longest serving Senator in our Nation's history, and he served with distinction, just as he served with distinction in the U.S. Army. Others on this floor have already detailed his bravery in battle, his service on the Watergate and Iran-Contra Committees and his accomplishments as the first chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and as chairman of the Commerce and Appropriations Committees. I would like to highlight his work on behalf of the victims of racial and economic and social inequality and his commitment to making the Senate operate as the Founding Fathers envisioned. A statement on Senator Inouye's Web site says: ``Dan Inouye was always among the first to speak out against injustice whether interned Japanese Americans, Filipino World War II veterans, Native Americans and Native Hawaiians.'' How true. A few hundred yards from this Chamber is the Smithsonian's magnificent National Museum of the American Indian. Senator Inouye introduced the legislation to create that museum and fought for Native American and Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander recognition and rights and restitution as chairman of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. In the Senate, Senator Inouye treated all his colleagues with respect and courtesy and always reached across the aisle to forge bipartisan solutions to our Nation's biggest challenges. His friendship with former Republican leader Bob Dole, whom he met while the two of them were recuperating from grievous combat injuries--along with, I might say, another wounded veteran who became a giant in the Senate, Senator Philip Hart of Michigan--serves as an example we should strive to emulate. He was a member of the so-called Gang of 14, again reaching across the aisle at a time when partisan tempers were particularly high. There are few--if any--Americans who have been more heroic in battle, more accomplished as a public servant, more dedicated to family and country and humanity than Daniel K. Inouye. Yet he was also one of the most humble and self-effacing people. What a tremendous example of a life well lived he has left for all of us as we mourn his death, celebrate his life, and give thanks for his service to the people of Hawaii, the Senate, and the United States of America. To Senator Inouye we say aloha. With that, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to extend morning business until 3 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I know we have pending the supplemental appropriations bill. I urge my colleagues to act on this as quickly as we can. Sandy was a devastating storm. Eight million people were without power. There were over 100 deaths, including 7 in the State of Maryland. Maryland was hit hard, not as hard as New Jersey or New York--and our prayers go out to all the communities that have been affected--but Maryland was hit pretty hard. We had sustained winds for hour after hour after hour after hour. We had rainfall records--9 inches. We had storm surges with 7 foot waves. We had flooding of the Eastern Shore of Maryland. We had a storm in the western part of our State that dropped 30 inches of wet snow. So we suffered from the flooding on the Eastern Shore and the storms in western Maryland. In many of the communities, people who live below the poverty line are elderly. Senator Mikulski was just on the floor and talked about the circumstances in the city of Crisfield. In that city, 32 percent of the population lives below the poverty line. Mr. President, 585 homes were severely damaged, 71 sustained major damage. The watermen, which is one of the major industries for that community, found that they were literally unable to work, and they are still unclear as to what is going to happen to their crops. We have a serious problem. I will give you just two examples of people who have lived through this storm. In Crisfield, Mary lived in an apartment with Cody, her trained medical dog. Mary suffers from epileptic seizures, and Cody serves as her lifeline when these seizures occur. Mary has no family in the area. She cannot work due to her disability. Her only source of income is a small Social Security check. When Hurricane Sandy hit Crisfield, the water rose rapidly in her apartment. Mary was forced to grab Cody--and nothing else--jump out the window and swim to safety. She lost all her belongings, including all her records, which might be helpful for her to be able to get the benefits she is entitled to. She is now in temporary housing at a local motel, paying $60 a night, which she cannot afford, until she can qualify for the assistance. In an area that has a high number of low-income elderly persons, Federal assistance is needed to help deserving senior citizens severely impacted by this storm. Then there is Diane, who also lives in Crisfield with her family in her childhood home. According to Diane, she has weathered many storms over the years but never in her lifetime has she ever seen the water rise so high and so quickly, inundating the first floor of her home and creating huge whitecaps around her neighborhood. Diane decided to ride out the storm in her home, fearing the possibility of drowning if she left. The family lost all their possessions. With housing vouchers, they are now living in temporary housing. A church group gutted her home, but she still needs building materials in order to be able to rebuild her home. She does not have the resources to do that. She needs Federal assistance in order to get her life back in order. They are just two stories, and I could give you numerous others in the State of Maryland. In the western part of our State, in Garrett County--Garrett County is a community of 30,000--15,000 homes were without power. That is just about every home. Trees fell everywhere. This is a remote Appalachian community, where people were isolated because of the storm. They need help. They need partners. I wish to congratulate Governor O'Malley and our State leaders and our county leaders. FEMA did a great job. I want to thank the Red Cross and other private sector groups. But now it is time for the Federal Government to act as a true partner. I thank President Obama for the disaster declaration for our State, including individual relief for the County of Somerset. This legislation strengthens the Federal partnership. It provides the resources so we can help people such as Mary and Diane who have been devastated by the storm. It will provide the resources necessary so they can put their lives back together. I particularly note the $17 billion in CDBG funds. Those are flexible funds that will help people such as Mary and Diane so they can get their lives back together. I also wish to point out how important the mitigation funds are that are in the supplemental appropriations bill. That will allow us to build to prevent this type of damage in the future. For those who may question the feasibility of this type of investment, let me point to one in Maryland: Assateague Island. We widened and put more beach down on Assateague Island. It was kind of pricey, many people thought, but it acted as a buffer for Sandy coming in and causing more damage in Ocean City. Literally millions of dollars were saved because of Assateague Island acting as a bumper to the storm. Mitigation is important, and we should invest in mitigation. The next step should be the passage of the supplemental appropriations bill. I have heard many of my colleagues come to the floor who represent States that are directly affected. I have listened as my colleagues around the Nation have talked about disasters in their communities, and we have always come together as a nation. I know we are in the last days of this legislative session. I just urge my colleagues to let us move this bill forward now. Let's get it done so the Federal Government can be there to help the communities that have been affected by this storm. It is the right thing to do, and I hope my colleagues will support that effort. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, first let me thank Chairman Leahy for those words in his exchange with Senator Durbin. I wish to offer my deepest condolences on behalf of all of the people of Maryland to the 20 students who lost their lives, and the 6 adults, at the hands of a single shooter at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT. It is heart-breaking to listen to the stories of innocent lives cut cruelly short. The pain and grief of the families and friends of these students and teachers is unimaginable. I want to echo some of the comments Senator Durbin and Senator Leahy made. We know the teachers and the aides put their lives on the line in order to try to save the children, as well as the unbelievable task of the first responders coming to the scene and not knowing what they would find. We send our prayers to all. This is a tragedy beyond words. I think President Obama said it best last night that our hearts are broken. But as Senator Durbin has said-- and I say to Senator Leahy, I particularly want to thank the Senator-- we need to take action. Congress needs to come together and take action to protect the safety of our children. We must do better. There have been too many episodes in which children's lives--and others--have been lost that we must figure out ways to prevent these types of tragedies. This conversation must include a discussion about the culture of violence that permeates our culture today, including the glorification of violence to our children and young adults. We see too much of this violence, and it has to have an impact on young children. We need to know how we can responsibly deal with this circumstance. It must include a discussion of the mental health services provided to Americans, including our students. Many of us have talked about this in the past. We have to be more aggressive in dealing with the mental health needs of all the people in our community. As Chairman Leahy pointed out, we must discuss the issue about the ready access of individuals to weapons. I know there are different views in this Congress. I must tell you, I do not understand why we need to allow access to military-style assault weapons and ammunition. I strongly support Senator Feinstein's efforts to reinstate the expired 1994 ban on assault weapons, including a ban on ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. Senator Durbin has raised a very valid point: We regulate automobiles. We regulate consumer products. We regulate a lot, as we should, for public safety, and we should regulate firearms for public safety reasons. There is no need for assault weapons to be held by the public. In my view, there is no legitimate reason for a civilian to possess a military-style weapon or to have large capacity ammunition clips. Congress should also examine whether we can strengthen our background check system for gun buyers, along with criminal penalties for those who illegally purchase or transfer guns. We need to take a look at safety locks for children. We need to look at those who make multiple purchases. We need to look at the gun show purchases. I think we should examine all those to see whether we can make our communities safer, without infringing upon the legitimate right of individuals to possess guns, sportsmen to be able to use guns for hunting. I think all that, obviously, will be protected. But we can do a much better job of protecting public safety. We have talked about this before, and we need to act. We need to act in a comprehensive way to make our society safer. I pledge to the chairman of the Judiciary Committee--I have had the honor of serving on that committee for 4 years. He is an extremely fair leader who believes in letting all sides be heard, and I very much appreciate his commitment in so many different areas that have dealt with public safety. We have great confidence in his leadership on that committee, and other committees of the Senate need to act as it relates to the safety of our children. (Mr. BEGICH assumed the chair.)

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I rise today in recognition of International Human Rights Day. Sixty-four years ago this past Monday, on December 10, 1948, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This declaration enunciates a doctrine that serves as a foundation for human rights initiatives internationally and as an enduring guide for human rights advocates around the globe. On this annual celebration of International Human Rights Day, human rights defenders, champions of democracy, promoters of civil rights, and advocates of free speech across the globe can also be encouraged by Congress's recent passage of landmark human rights legislation. Last week, the Senate passed the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act, which the House passed in September in conjunction with approving permanent normal trade relations for Russia. The Magnitsky Act was inspired by the tragic case of Sergei Magnitsky, a 37-year-old Russian lawyer who uncovered massive corruption in Russia and then was arrested for his whistleblowing. Magnitsky died in 2009 after suffering torturous conditions in pretrial detention. Those implicated in the corruption Magnitsky exposed and those responsible for his torture and death have not been brought to justice, and some have even been decorated and promoted. The Magnitsky Act goes beyond the specific violators in this case to prohibit all gross violators of human rights in Russia from traveling to the United States and from using our financial system. President Obama is now poised to reaffirm our Nation's commitment to universal human rights by signing the Magnitsky Act into law. With the stroke of a pen, the President will set a new global standard that other nations are sure to follow. The act sets a precedent that can be applied to human rights abusers around the world, and I am committed to working with my colleagues in the next Congress to apply the Magnitsky sanctions globally. Human rights violators from Kinshasa to Beijing are now on notice that the United States stands in solidarity with those whose rights are trampled and will deny the legitimizing privileges of travelling to our country and accessing our financial system to those who violate fundamental freedoms. The United States remains the global leader in promoting and protecting human rights, but we need to do more. We need to ensure that women across the world have the liberty to determine the course and scope of their own lives and futures and that they have the tools to achieve their full potential. The horrific and cowardly attempt by assassins to silence the brave leadership of 15-year-old Malala Yousufzai must not be left unchallenged. We must take up her cause--the education of girls and women--and support both that goal and its advocates, and we must redouble our efforts to protect the rights of ethnic, linguistic, and religious minorities, from the Christians in Egypt to the Roma population in Europe. As the legendary Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel has said, ``Wherever men and women are persecuted because of their race, religion, or political views, that place must--at that moment--become the center of the universe.'' This International Human Rights Day, the U.S. Congress sends a strong message to human rights defenders around the world that we stand in solidarity with them as they dare to stand up to injustice and oppression.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I take this time to share the views of many people who I have talked to in Maryland, and I am sure the same has been said in Oregon and around the Nation. People are frustrated by the inability of Congress to come together on solving the so-called fiscal cliff. We understand this needs to be avoided. Going off the fiscal cliff could cause major damage to our economy. If we take no action by January 1, as I am sure most people are now aware, tax rates will revert back to the pre-Bush tax rates. The alternative minimum tax that shields tens of millions of Americans from paying extra income taxes will expire and tens of millions of Americans will be subject to extra taxes. The unemployment insurance program, the extended benefit program, will come to a halt. The payroll tax holiday will end, and individuals' take-home pay will be reduced. We would have a serious problem on Medicare reimbursement to our physicians. They would be subjected to a significant cut, close to 30 percent, which would have an impact on seniors and our disabled population having access to physician care, and we would go through what is known as sequestration, which is across-the-board cuts to almost all Federal programs, ranging from 8 percent to about 10 percent. That would have a major impact on our entire country. We have looked at the numbers in Maryland, and it could mean as many as 60,000 jobs lost in our own State of Maryland. We have a large Federal workforce, with 5.6 percent of our workers working for the Federal Government. That type of across- the-board cut would have an incredibly negative impact on the people of Maryland and throughout the entire country. We have to avoid that. The impact on our economy is estimated to be about 3 percent. We would go from a positive growth to a negative growth, throwing us into a recession. I understand the frustration of why so close to the end of the year we haven't resolved these issues. We should have resolved them. We should come together, work together to get it done. But I want to point out to the people I represent in Maryland and to the people of this Nation that we have to get this done right. There is a lot at stake. We have to make sure our country can grow, that we can create the jobs we need to be competitive in the future. We must make sure we deal with this budget crisis in a way that allows us to invest in education, in job training and in rebuilding our highways, our bridges, and our energy grids. We have to make sure we can compete as a nation. That is why so many of us have said we have to have a balanced approach to dealing with the fiscal cliff. This morning, I listened to Speaker Boehner say the ball is in the President's court. I couldn't disagree more with the Speaker of the House. I think it is important to point out that since we have been working on trying to deal with this deficit issue, we have already agreed to over $1 trillion in spending cuts--in discretionary domestic spending--in some of the most challenging areas that affect our most vulnerable people. We have implemented that, and this is since the recommendations of the Simpson-Bowles Commission came out. We took action and we imposed caps on discretionary domestic spending. Our Federal workforce has been through years, a couple years of pay freezes. We have seen programs that have been cut back and the support they give to people who need help. We have already contributed on the spending side. Is it enough? No. Do we need to do more? Absolutely. But we have done that. The next piece that must be done is the revenue piece. We can't have a balanced approach unless we have the revenues. So many of my colleagues have talked about this. Historically, our revenues are around 20 percent of our economy. They are now in the 15-percent range. We have a way to do this. The Senate has come together on a way to do this. The Senate passed legislation that has been in the House of Representatives where Speaker Boehner is the Speaker of the House. It has been in the House now for months. What that legislation does, first, it gives predictability to the taxpayers of this country. It says the first $250,000 of taxable income will be subject to the current tax rates and will not go back to the pre-Bush tax rates. That gives certainty to the taxpayers in this country. I have heard people say: That affects 98 percent of the taxpayers in this country. You know what. It affects 100 percent of the taxpayers of this country. I wish to stress that. If we pass the bill that was sent by the Senate to the House that continues in January the current tax rates for those with taxable incomes up to $250,000; yes, for the typical taxpayer in Baltimore City earning $20,000 to $30,000 of income, they will save $1,400 in taxes; and, yes, for a taxpayer earning $40,000 to $65,000 of taxable income, they will save $2,000. But guess what. A person with $250,000 of taxable income will save about $7,000; and if they earn $500,000 in taxable income, they will save that same $7,000. If they earn $1 million of taxable income, they will get that tax break also. It affects 100 percent of the taxpayers of this country. What we are saying is we have to have some revenue in this equation. We understand that. Those who are the most well off, do they truly deserve larger tax breaks than that? I would suggest not. It is not just the tax rates we sent over to the House of Representatives, we also corrected the marriage penalty so that wouldn't change on January 1, the child tax credit, and the AMT--the alternative minimum tax I mentioned earlier. As to the alternative minimum tax, if we don't correct that, tens of millions of Americans will pay extra taxes in the thousands of dollars starting January 1. I have heard many debates on the floor of the Senate and in the House where no one wants that to happen. Then pass the bill we sent over from the Senate. If we do that, taxpayers don't have to worry about those rates going up and it gives them a little bit of confidence, hopefully, before Christmas, which would make the season a happier season for all. This is a balanced approach. As I said before, we started with spending cuts. We have done that. The next step, Speaker Boehner has to deal with the revenue side. If the House passes the Senate bill, it provides about $850 billion in revenue from not extending additional tax relief for those whose incomes are above $250,000. I mentioned we already did over $1 trillion of discretionary domestic spending cuts, which would give us $850 billion of revenue, and that is not enough. We are going to need more revenue. It is not going to be easy to find. But by closing loopholes, we can get some additional revenues. We have all talked about tax reform. We can get some additional revenue from tax reform. That brings us to additional savings, and we agree we can get additional savings. I have taken to the floor and talked about the fact that we are bringing our troops home from Afghanistan. I applaud the efforts of the chair to try to get those troops home sooner, and I agree with him. But our troops are coming home and our baseline budget reflects a much higher Active troop level than we need. It is called the overseas contingency accounts. We know there are savings there that can be achieved and we can use in that balanced approach to bring our budget under better control. Just as we have gone through base realignment and closures in the United States, we believe we can do that throughout the world and that can also save us some money in the military budget. So there are military savings that can be achieved. Yes, we can and must achieve savings on the entitlement side. I was listening to my friend from Iowa talking about the cost of health care. I agree with him. Health care costs have gone up too dramatically in this country. We have to bring down the cost of health care. We started doing that with the Affordable Care Act by investing in prevention-- preventing readmissions to hospitals and dealing with high-cost interventions. That will help us bring down the cost of health care. We have to do more in that regard. If we bring down the cost of health care, we save money in Medicare and Medicaid, and we save taxpayer costs, but we also help our economy. What a lot of us are concerned about is just trying to shift the cost to beneficiaries. That doesn't help our economy and that doesn't help solve the problem. I take the floor now just to challenge Speaker Boehner and say to him it is time to act on the bill we sent over months ago. Let us take the next step and let us work together and develop a framework so our committees can work and achieve policy changes that can bring in the additional revenues we are going to need and the additional savings we know we can achieve. We can do that working together. I started by saying there are many people in our communities who are frustrated we haven't gotten this done by now. I share that frustration. We should have gotten this done a long time ago. I agree with them. But let's now move this week with the House passing the Senate bill we sent them providing predictability for the taxpayers of this country going into this holiday season. Let's reassure them that next year their rates will not be increased, particularly in this fragile economy. Let's set up a framework where we can responsibly work to reduce health care costs--in greater amounts, I agree--reduce some military spending, and do what is right in a real balanced approach to get our budget in better balance so our economy will grow and create the jobs we need. It is most important for us to have a climate where we can create more jobs and the type of jobs we want--invest in education, construction, et cetera. That is what we need to do. That is where we need to come together as Democrats and Republicans to get the job done. I urge my colleagues, let's work and get this done as soon as possible.

Mr. CARDIN

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

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that morning business be extended until 4 p.m., with all other provisions of the previous order remaining in effect.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I see my distinguished colleague from Utah is on the floor, so I yield the floor and look forward to listening to his comments.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. That is exactly right. Those who violate the human rights of such citizens through torture, extrajudicial killings, or other gross violations of international human rights will come to our attention. And I look forward to working with my friend from Oregon to help maintain this vigilance and oversight in the years to come.

Mr. CARDIN. I couldn't agree more with my friend from Oregon. As some of my colleagues know, I am the original sponsor of Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act, the standalone bill that then became the human rights title in this combined PNTR bill. I am enormously proud of the work we have done on the bill, and I think it has real potential to not only hold people accountable who have committed past human rights abuses, but also potentially to prevent future human rights abuses from occurring. Those who are responsible for gross human rights abuses such as torture or extrajudicial killings, whether as private citizens or within organs of the State, now know that we, our markets, and our financial system will remain closed to them if they do so. These are real material consequences.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. I further ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and that any statements relating to the measure be printed in the Record.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, the time from 10 a.m. until 11 a.m. tomorrow will be for speeches by our retiring Senators. At approximately 12:10 p.m., there will be two rollcall votes, the first on the passage of H.R. 6156, the Russia trade bill and the Magnitsky bill, and the second on confirmation of the Walker nomination.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. on Thursday, December 6, 2012; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; that following the leader remarks, the Senate be in a period of morning business until 11:45 a.m., with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each, with the previous order regarding retirement speeches remaining in effect; and that following morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session under the previous order.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, first, let me thank Senator Kyl for his leadership on this issue. He knows I share his views on the global aspect of the legislation. I wish to thank him for his extraordinary leadership as we have been working this issue. We have worked it hard to try to get as far as we possibly could. He will be missed in the next Congress. We will take up this cause again, but I wanted to thank Senator Kyl for his commitment on this issue and finding a way that we could advance this bill to the floor. I do look forward to the day we will make this bill global. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. We have not yet gotten to the bill. I believe we are now prepared to go to H.R. 6156. I know the Senator from Connecticut would like to speak for 5 minutes, and I was hoping we could get some time where we could go back and forth and talk about the Magnitsky aspects of that legislation now. Am I correct, Mr. President, that the bill has not yet been reported or it will be reported now and that perhaps we can enter into a consent agreement as to the next 30 or 40 minutes?

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. I think my initial comments would be about 10 minutes.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements be printed in the Record as if read.