Benjamin Cardin

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I am going to withdraw the amendment. Let me point out that this amendment was offered in an effort to make sure we can continue overnight delivery in most of our country by keeping open processing centers that are necessary. The underlying substitute that Senator Lieberman, Senator Collins, Senator Carper, and Senator Brown brought forward accomplishes that goal. I don't believe this amendment is necessary. For that reason, I will not offer the amendment.

Mr. CARDIN. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I concur with my friend from Mississippi on the importance of passing the RESTORE Act. It is in our transportation reauthorization bill, and it is an important part. It not only helps the Gulf States but all the States that border oceans in this country. It is an important part of the bill that we worked out in a consensus manner in the Senate. I take this time and ask unanimous consent that I may speak as in morning business.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, we need to pass a long-term transportation reauthorization bill. The Senate has done this. The Senate passed its bill 2 months ago by a very strong margin of 74 to 22. I call it a consensus bill and not a bipartisan bill, because we went beyond bipartisan. This bill came out of the two committees of jurisdiction, the Banking Committee and the Environment and Public Works Committee, by a unanimous vote. The Finance Committee dealt with the financing provisions. This bill gives us predictability in transportation funding. Here is the problem: The other body, the House, is currently working on a bill that would basically be a short-term extension of our transportation program. We need a long-term commitment as to the Federal partnership in transportation. We need that for many reasons. We need it for predictable funding so our local governments can commit to do the types of transportation programs that are necessary for our safety, necessary for economic expansion, and necessary for our communities. We are missing the construction season by the failure to enact a long-term transportation reauthorization plan. Major projects cannot be planned--whether it is to replace a bridge, major maintenance programs, new highways, or expansion of our transit systems. This translates into jobs. We are in a recovery. We all want to do everything we can to maintain and expand job opportunities in this country so our economy can recover at a quicker pace. The transportation reauthorization bill that passed the Senate is responsible for 3 million jobs. In my State of Maryland, 28,700 jobs are connected to the passage of the transportation reauthorization program--21,000 in highways and over 7,000 in transit. The Senate bill, as I pointed out, was a consensus bill. It was done in the finest manner of legislating. I compliment Senators Boxer and Inhofe on the Environment and Public Works Committee, on which I serve, for marshaling this bill through. There were numerous challenges in the Senate, and a number of committees had to consider it and, of course, there was floor consideration. During that entire process, we maintained the consensus and the balance that is important. Let me point out that here you have a bill that invests in transit and roads and bridges. We were able to reach a compromise to make sure that both priorities were preserved in the transportation reauthorization bill. I authored an amendment, with Senator Cochran, that dealt with local input into the transportation decisions. We had the right balance between the Federal Government's partnership working with our States but allowing the locals to have input particularly on transportation enhancement programs. We have reform in our bill that consolidates a lot of specific programs into broader programs, providing greater flexibility, but still maintaining accountability on the Federal partnership. During this most recent work period, when we were off for Easter and Passover, I visited various parts of Maryland. I was down in western Maryland, Appalachia country. I heard firsthand how important reauthorization of this transportation bill is to the economy of western Maryland. This is a rural part of our State. They need to build a north-south highway that will connect Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Maryland. The bill we passed--the transportation reauthorization bill--contains some very important provisions to allow that highway to be constructed. It provides toll credits so Pennsylvania can complete an important segment of this north-south highway. It also contains a stronger match so that it makes it more feasible that we can move this highway to completion. The completion of the north-south highway means jobs and hope to the people of that region of America. It is very important to get that done. It will mean jobs. They told me--the companies that are directly dependent upon that highway being constructed--if we don't pass a multiyear reauthorization bill, that project gets delayed. Once it is delayed, we lose job opportunities. I also spent part of the work period visiting other parts of Maryland. I was a few miles from here at the Metro Command, at the Carmen Turner facility in New Carollton, where they operate the bus and rail command center for the Nation's transit system, which is both bus and rail in this area. It is the Nation's system. The Federal Government depends upon this, upon the Washington transit system. Many people who work in the Capitol come to us through the transit program. It is true in all of the Federal facilities. That is an aging system. The rail system needs to be repaired. It is the second busiest rail transit system in the Nation. It is in desperate need of repair. Without predictable funding, major projects will be delayed. I will give you a list of some of the projects we need to do for the Washington metro transit system: Overhauling the Landover and Southern Avenue bus maintenance shop in Prince George's County, MD; improving perimeter security at the Bladensburg bus garage, also in PG County; complete the design and construction of 10,000 feet of test track at Greenbelt that is needed to test the new, safer 7,000 series railcars due to arrive in 2014. I remind my colleagues that we had a tragedy on the transit system here not too long ago. There was a study done as to improvements that need to be made, including replacement of railcars to safer cars. These changes need to be done to improve safety of people who depend upon the transit system in this region. Also we need to continue to implement systemwide switch testing and replacement needed to comply with the National Transportation Safety Board's safety recommendations following the June 2009 red-line crash. All of that will be delayed. Yes, safety will be put at risk if we do not pass a reauthorization of the transportation program. It is interesting that one part of my State is very rural, which I visited, and the other part of the State is urban, and it is important to that region. It is important to the entire country. We need to get this done. Every State is impacted by bridge replacement, highways, and transit. The Maryland Department of Transportation tells me that due to the uncertainty, they are planning on a 20-percent reduction in the projects that would otherwise be done in this year. That will have a huge impact on our workforce--a huge impact on our economy. As I am speaking, the House is taking action. It is going to pass a short-term extension. That is not good enough. That doesn't solve the problem. That doesn't give us the predictability or allow us to complete the north-south highway in western Maryland, or make the improvements we need to in the WMATA system, or in any State, to be able to move forward with transportation projects. That is not good enough. We need to do more. However, I am pleased to see the House taking some action. I urge that as soon as they complete action, let's get into conference and resolve the differences between the House and Senate and get a bill back on the floor as quickly as possible. We did our work. We passed a bipartisan consensus bill. They are passing a partisan bill in the other body. They are delaying things again. That is not good. Let's get together and complete a conference as quickly as possible. Let's get Americans back to work building roads and transit systems that are vital to the continued economic recovery of this Nation. With that, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

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

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

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I take this time to inform my colleagues of a hearing that took place this morning before the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights of the Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator Durbin. Senator Durbin has been a leader in this body on making sure we have a committee that focuses on the issues of human rights. Today's hearing on racial profiling, ending racial profiling in America, was the first hearing we have had in Congress on racial profiling since the attack on our country on September 11. I congratulate Senator Durbin for holding this hearing. I thought the hearing was very informative as to a problem we have in America on the use of racial profiling. I know the Nation has been focused on the tragedy that took place in Sanford, FL, in which 17-year-old Travon Martin was killed, a clearly avoidable death, by Mr. Zimmerman. We first and foremost want to make sure justice prevails in this case. I know there is a case pending in Florida. We are all going to be watching that very carefully. There is a Federal investigation underway by the Department of Justice to look into circumstances concerning Travon Martin's death, to see what role race played in regard to that tragedy, not only as it related to Travon Martin's death but also as to the investigation that ensued. A few weeks ago, I spoke about this issue at the Center for Urban Families in Baltimore. That is a group that is interested in urban family life. We came together shortly after Travon Martin's tragic death to talk about what had happened. I was very much moved by so many people who came forward at that meeting and explained how they had been victims of racial profiling. A young woman talked about the time she went to a basketball game with her father and her father was pulled over and stopped by police for no apparent reason other than the color of his skin and how that impacted this girl, seeing her father held, unable to go to the basketball game. These types of victimization occur too frequently in our community, where people are picked out solely because of their race, their religion, their ethnic background. We have a problem in this country, and we need to do something about that. The question that needs to be answered in regard to Travon Martin is was he initially pursued because of the color of his skin. Would Mr. Zimmerman have done the same if it was a White child rather than an African American? In October of 2011, I introduced S. 1670, the End Racial Profiling Act. I am proud to have many colleagues as cosponsors, including Senator Blumenthal, Senator Boxer, Senator Durbin, Senator Gillibrand, Senator John Kerry, Senator Lautenberg, Senator Levin, Senator Menendez, Senator Mikulski, Senator Harry Reid, Senator Stabenow, and Senator Mark Udall. I thank my cosponsors for joining me in this legislation. This legislation would make it clear that racial profiling will not be allowed in this country. Racial profiling is un-American. It is against the values of our Nation. It is contrary to the 14th amendment of the Constitution, which provides for equal protection under the law. It is counterproductive, and it doesn't keep us safe. We are using valuable police resources in a way that is wasting those resources. It is sloppy police work if you try to identify a problem by race rather than looking for good police work to identify the real perpetrator of a crime. It also creates a mistrust in the community they are trying to protect, a community that they need to help and to cooperate with as far as keeping the community safe. For all of those reasons, racial profiling should have no place in modern law enforcement. We need a national law. I was impressed that in the hearing today there was general consensus that we have a problem in this country, that there is a problem of law enforcement using racial profiling, which should not be done. The bill, S. 1670, would prohibit the use of racial profiling. By making a decision based upon race, ethnicity, national origin, or religion, basically what you are doing is subjecting an individual to a spontaneous investigation. That should have no place. What we are talking about is someone being stopped for a routine traffic stop, subjected to a search, interrogated, or investigated based on that person's race or the scope and substance of law enforcement activities following an initial investigative proceeding are determined because of race. That should have no place in America. My legislation would apply to all levels of government, not just Federal but State and local law enforcement. It requires mandatory training. And here is an issue on which I think we should all agree. Perhaps the tragedy that happened with Trayvon Martin would not have happened if Mr. Zimmerman had been trained on the issues of what is good police work and what is not good police work and how racial profiling needs to be eliminated. We feel very strongly about the need for mandatory training. The legislation requires data collection by local and State law enforcement. State and local law enforcement must maintain adequate policies and procedures designated to eliminate profiling, and they must eliminate any existing practices that present or encourage racial profiling. The Department of Justice has granted authority to make grants to promote best practices, so one jurisdiction can learn from another as to what the best practices are in order to make sure that this practice is not being used and that we are doing everything possible to keep communities safe by good police work, not by sloppy police work. I wish to point out that the overwhelming majority of people who are in law enforcement do it the right way. We have dedicated men and women who work every day to keep us safe--our first responders. We owe them a debt of gratitude, we owe them our support, and we cannot say enough complimentary things about what they do every day by putting their lives on the line to keep us safe. So for the sake of what is right for America and for the sake of the overwhelming majority of the people who are professionals in law enforcement, we need to make it clear that racial profiling has no role in American law enforcement. I am proud of the many groups that are supporting this legislation, including the NAACP, the ACLU, the Leadership Conference of Civil and Human Rights, and numerous other organizations. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks the list of organizations that are supporting the legislation.

Mr. CARDIN. Let me conclude by quoting our former colleague Senator Kennedy, who said that civil rights is the great unfinished business of America. Let's continue to fight to make sure we have equal justice under the law for all Americans. That is what the legislation I have introduced will do. The End Racial Profiling Act will continue us on that journey to provide equal justice in the law to all Americans. Exhibit 1 Group Endorsements of End Racial Profiling Act National Organizations A. Philip Randolph Institute; African American Ministers in Action; American Civil Liberties Union; American Humanist Association; American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee; American Probation and Parole Association; Asian & Pacific Islander American Health Forum; Asian American Justice Center; Asian Law Caucus; Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance; Bill of Rights Defense Committee; Blacks in Law Enforcement in America; Break the Cycle; Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law; Campaign for Community Change; Campaign for Youth Justice; Center for National Security Studies; Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice at Harvard Law School; Council on American-Islamic Relations; Council on Illicit Drugs of the National Association for Public Health Policy. Disciples Justice Action Network; Drug Policy Alliance; Equal Justice Society; Fair Immigration Reform Movement; Fellowship of Reconciliation; Human Rights Watch; Indo- American Center; Institute Justice Team, Sisters of Mercy of the Americas; Japanese American Citizens League; Jewish Labor Committee; Jewish Reconstructionist Federation; Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law; The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights; League of United Latin American Citizens; Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service; Muslim Advocates; Muslim Legal Fund of America; Muslim Public Affairs Council; NAACP; NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.; National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd. National African American Drug Policy Coalition, Inc.; National Alliance for Medication Assisted Recovery; National Alliance of Faith and Justice; National Asian American Pacific Islander Mental Health Association; National Asian Pacific American Bar Association; National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum; National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; National Association of Social Workers; National Black Justice Coalition; National Black Law Students Association; National Black Police Association; National Congress of American Indians; National Council of La Raza; National Education Association; National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Action Fund; National Korean American Service and Education Consortium; National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health; National Lawyers Guild Drug Policy Committee; National Legal Aid and Defender Association; National Organization of Black Women in Law Enforcement; National Organization of Sisters of Color Ending Sexual Assault; National Urban League Policy Institute. NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby; 9to5, National Association of Working Women; North American South Asian Bar Association; Open Society Policy Center; Organization of Chinese Americans; Pax Christi USA: National Catholic Peace Movement; Prison Policy Initiative; Rights Working Group; Sentencing Project; Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund; Sikh Coalition; SOJOURNERS; South Asian Americans Leading Together; South Asian Network; South Asian Resource Action Center; StoptheDrugWar.org; The Real Cost of Prisons Project; Treatment Communities of America; U.S. Human Rights Network; Union for Reform Judaism; United Methodist Church, General Board of Church and Society; UNITED SIKHS; Women's Alliance for Theology, Ethics and Ritual. State and Local Organizations A New PATH (Parents for Addiction Treatment & Healing) (California); Adhikaar (New York); Advocare, Inc. (Ohio); Arab American Action Network (Illinois); Arab-American Family Support Center (New York); CASA de Maryland (Maryland); Casa Esperanza (New Jersey); CAUSA--Oregon's Immigrant Rights Organization (Oregon); Center for NuLeadership on Urban Solutions (New York); Counselors Helping (South) Asians/ Indians, Inc. (Maryland); Desis Rising Up and Moving (New York); Drug Policy Forum of Hawaii (Hawaii); Drug Policy Forum of Texas (Texas); Florida Immigrant Coalition (Florida); Healing Communities Prison Ministry and Reentry Project (Pennsylvania); Korean American Resource and Cultural Center (Illinois); Korean Resource Center (California); Legal Services for Prisoners with Children (California); Legal Voice (Washington). Maryland CURE--Citizens United for the Rehabilitation of Errants (Maryland); National Alliance for Medication Assisted Recovery, Delaware Chapter (Delaware); 9to5 Atlanta Working Women (Georgia); 9to5 Bay Area (California); 9to5 Colorado (Colorado); 9to5 Los Angeles (California); 9to5 Milwaukee (Wisconsin); Perspectives, Inc. (Minnesota); Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste; Northwest Treeplanters and Farmworkers United (Oregon); Public Justice Center (Maryland); Rights for All People (Colorado); Safe Streets Arts Foundation (Washington, DC); Sahara of South Florida, Inc. (Florida); Satrang (California); Sneha, Inc. (Connecticut); South Asian Bar Association of Northern California (California); St. Leonard's Ministries (Illinois).

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

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Reserving the right to object, and I was listening to the distinguished Republican leader, let me challenge some of the assumptions so maybe we can get to a consent. In talking to Members of the House of Representatives, I am very confident there is ample support to pass not only the bipartisan surface transportation bill that passed this body by an overwhelming vote but a consensus bill that came out of our committees by unanimous vote in both the Environment and Public Works Committee and the Banking Committee. There is general agreement that this bill should be enacted into law. I am confident that if the Speaker of the House brings this bill to the floor of the House of Representatives, it will be passed. There are adequate votes for it. To my friend, the distinguished Republican leader, here is the problem: If we pass another short-term extension, we are going to lose jobs. In my own State of Maryland, we cannot let the contracts on major maintenance projects with a 90-day extension. We cannot move forward with the planning of our highways, our bridges, our transit systems with another short-term extension. This takes us to the middle of the summer. We lose the construction season on getting transportation work done. I urge the distinguished leader that we do have the opportunity to pass the bill right now, and if we stand firm and tell the House of Representatives we want to do what is right for the American people, that in the Senate we had a bipartisan bill, a consensus bill--what's happening in the House is extremely partisan. Let's get together on the most important jobs bill we can pass. It is thousands of jobs in Maryland, and it is millions of jobs in this Nation that are affected by passing a surface transportation bill. With that, I am hoping I convinced the distinguished Republican leader. I ask unanimous consent that the request be modified so that an amendment, which is at the desk, the text of S. 1813, the surface transportation bill, passed by the Senate on March 14, 2012, by a large bipartisan majority vote of 74 to 22, be agreed to; the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed; and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. CARDIN. Reserving the right to object.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. When Congress returns to session on Monday, April 16, 2012, we will recognize an important anniversary and holiday here in Washington. That day will be the 150th anniversary of District of Columbia Emancipation Day. Nine months before President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation in January 1862, the President signed the District of Columbia Compensated Emancipation Act. The act ordered the release of the 3,100 enslaved persons of African descent held in the Nation's capital. District of Columbia residents were therefore known as the ``First Freed'' slaves by the Federal government during the Civil War. In 1865 the Confederacy surrendered and the Civil War ended, and later that year the 13th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified, which states that: ``Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.'' Emancipation Day celebrations were held annually in the District of Columbia from 1866 through 1901, and resumed in 2002. In 2005 Emancipation Day was made an official public holiday in the District of Columbia. On March 6, 2012, the District of Columbia City Council adopted ceremonial resolution 19 207. The resolution finds this anniversary to be ``an important, historic occasion for the District of Columbia and the nation and serves as an appropriate time to reflect on how far the District of Columbia and the United States have progressed since institutionalized enslavement of people of African descent. Most importantly, the 150th anniversary reminds us to reaffirm our commitment to forge a more just and united country that truly reflects the ideas of its founders and instills in its people a broad sense of duty to be responsible and conscientious stewards of freedom and democracy.'' I ask unanimous consent to place a copy of this resolution in the Record at the end of my statement. (See exhibit 1.) In the recent past, we have been blessed to celebrate numerous historic achievements for African-Americans in Washington, DC and throughout the Nation, including the election of the first African- American President of the United States, the dedication of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial, and the groundbreaking for the National Museum of African American History and Culture. I congratulate the District of Columbia government and its residents on this historic anniversary. Exhibit 1

Mr. CARDIN

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

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I want to concur with Senator Schumer about his comments on the passage of Senator Menendez's legislation, S. 2204. This legislation is very important for America's energy needs, and I urge my colleagues to allow us to take up this legislation and let's act on it and let's move it to the other body. There is one commodity just about everyone knows the price of: a gallon of gasoline. People will have a rough idea what a gallon of milk or a dozens eggs or a loaf of bread costs, but they will know to the penny what a gallon of gasoline costs. The price is rising, and people are understandably upset. They are upset because it costs more to fill up at the pump. But they are also upset because crude oil and gasoline price increases affect the price of every other commodity--including milk, eggs, and bread--that has to be transported from where it is produced to where it is consumed. Petroleum is a feedstock used in the production, not just transportation, of so many critical products, including fertilizer. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, EIA, the retail price of a gallon of regular unleaded gasoline was 27 cents higher for the week ending March 5, 2012 than it was a year ago. EIA reports that vehicle fueling costs for the average U.S. household will be about $238 higher in 2012 than 2011. According to EIA, the price of gasoline has increased dramatically every year--in 2011, higher than 2010, and 2012 is projected to be higher than 2011. This price increase is occurring despite the fact that the United States has stepped up its crude oil production considerably over the past 4 years by 1.3 million barrels per day. Production is at an 8-year high. The United States is the third largest producer of oil, behind the Saudis and Russia, and domestic oil consumption is at a 15-year low. Americans are driving 35 billion fewer miles today than they did in 2010. If we were producing more and consuming less, then why are prices going up? Supply and demand would tell us that they should be going down. The answer is straightforward: Crude oil and all of the products derived from it, including gasoline, are fungible commodities traded on world markets. Increasing global demand for these commodities is putting a relentless upward pressure on prices. Growing demand for oil in developing countries has reshaped the global market. Developing nations now consume 47 percent of the world's oil. In 1970, it was 25 percent. The number of cars in the world exceeded 1 billion for the first time in 2010, with one-half of the global growth occurring in China. Beijing adds 1,500 new cars every day. Another reason for price increases is market uncertainty over crude oil supplies. Much of the world's crude oil is produced in the Middle East and North Africa, regions plagued with turmoil. Right now, the United States accounts for about 9 to 11 percent of the world's crude oil production. This is despite the fact that we have less than 2 percent of the world's total proven oil reserves. We have 2 percent of the world's reserves and we are producing 9 to 11 percent. We are, in fact, drilling here and drilling now, with more oil rigs in operation than the rest of the world combined, according to the Baker-Hughes rig count. According to economist Steve Baker at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, even if U.S. production could be increased by one- third overnight, that would increase world supply by 3 percent which would lower the price of oil by 7 to 8 percent. As Baker notes: This is not trivial, but it is not the difference between $2 a gallon gas and $4 a gallon gas. T. Boone Pickens said it best: I've been an oil man all my life, but this is one emergency we can't drill our way out of. A recent Associated Press fact check analysis found that there is no correlation between domestic oil production and the price at the pump. I am for reasonable oil production. We need as much as we can get in a reasonable manner. As reported in the Washington Post of March 28: A statistical analysis of 36 years of monthly, inflation- adjusted gasoline prices and U.S. domestic oil production by The Associated Press shows no statistical correlation between how much oil comes out of U.S. wells and the price at the pump . . . More oil production in the United States does not mean consistently lower prices at the pump . . . U.S. oil production is back to the same level it was on March 2003, when gas cost $2.10 a gallon when adjusted for inflation. But that's not what prices are now. That's because oil is a global commodity and U.S. production has only a tiny influence on supply . . . Factors far beyond the control of a nation or a president dictate the price of gasoline. The United States is incapable of having a significant impact on world crude oil and gasoline prices from the supply side of the equation, but domestic oil production does play an important role in bolstering our energy and economic security. We should produce where we can, in a safe and environmentally sensitive manner. While increasing domestic production and decreasing domestic demand may not be lowering world prices, it does have a significant effect on imports. Our dependence on foreign oil is at its lowest level in 16 years. As a share of total consumption, oil imports declined from nearly 60 percent in 2005 to 45 percent last year, the lowest level since 1995. And nearly one-half of our imports come from the Western Hemisphere nations such as Canada and Mexico, while the Persian Gulf countries account for only 18 percent of our net imports. The biggest impact the United States could have on oil and gasoline prices is not on the supply side, it is on the demand side. We account for close to 25 percent of the world's petroleum consumption, even though we account for less than 5 percent of the world's population. The best way to continue reducing our demand for crude oil and gasoline would be to: Promote fuel efficiency with higher CAFE standards. We have made progress. We are doing better. We know we can do better than our current standards; Replace conventional fleet fuels with alternative fuels such as propane, natural gas, and biofuels. That will help us consume less oil; Electrify transportation, focusing on hybrid and plug-in electric technologies. Here you get jobs in the United States helping our economy as well as helping our energy security; Boosting transit ridership by increasing funding for the Federal Transit Administration. People don't like to be stuck in traffic jams. Let's have a modern transit system that can help move our people; Eliminating the tax expenditures that benefit Big Oil could generate over $20 billion over the next 10 years. This is the bill we are talking about, S. 2204, the Menendez bill. It takes the revenues we are giving to the oil industry and uses them to help pay for these green energy measures. This makes a lot of sense. It will hardly be noticed by the big five oil companies--BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, or Shell. They made record profits in 2011, $137 billion. I talked about $20 billion over 10 years. They made $137 billion in 1 year. That was up 75 percent from 2010. From 2001 through the last year, Big Oil has made more than $1 trillion in profits. Every penny increase in the pump increases their profit by another $200 million. So as we are suffering with prices going up, the big oil companies are making more and we are still giving them the subsidies, where we could be using those subsidies to help America develop alternative energy sources. Big Oil has been getting big subsidies for 100 years. It is time to use that money for developing alternatives to oil. That is the best and most sustainable way to address the high cost of gasoline at the pump. S. 2204 will help us bring down the cost at the pump. It is good for our economy, good for our environment, and good for our national security. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

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

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the tragic death of Trayvon Martin and the larger issue of racial profiling. On Monday I spoke about this issue at the Center for Urban Families in Baltimore. Joining me were representatives from various faith and civil rights groups in Baltimore, as well as graduates from the center's program. This weekend we saw numerous rallies take place across the United States, including rallies called Million Hoodie Marches where individuals wore hoodies in solidarity with Trayvon Martin. I was touched by what President Obama said on Friday about this case. He said: If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon. And I think every parent in America should be able to understand why it is absolutely imperative that we investigate every aspect of this. I think all of us have to do some soul searching to figure out how something like this happened. That is why I am so pleased that the Justice Department, under the supervision of Attorney General Eric Holder, has announced an investigation into the avoidable shooting death of Trayvon Martin on February 26, 2012. As we all know from the news, an unarmed Martin, 17, was shot in Sanford, FL, on his way home from a convenience store by a neighborhood watch volunteer. I am pleased that the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department will join the Federal Bureau of Investigation in investigating the tragic, avoidable shooting death of Trayvon Martin. In particular, I also support the Justice Department's decision to send the Community Relations Service to Sanford to help defuse tensions while the investigation is being conducted. I join all Americans in wanting a full and complete investigation into the shooting death of Trayvon Martin to ensure that justice is served. There are many questions we need the Justice Department to answer. One is whether Trayvon was the victim of a hate crime by Zimmerman. One is whether Trayvon was a victim of racial profiling by the police. In other words, was Trayvon targeted by Mr. Zimmerman because he was Black? Was Trayvon treated differently by local law enforcement in their shooting investigation because he was Black and the aggressor was White? Would the police have acted differently with a White victim and a Black aggressor? The Department of Justice has the authority to investigate the potential hate crime as well as whether this is a pattern or practice of misconduct by local law enforcement in terms of applying the law equally to all citizens and not discriminating on the basis of race. Tom Perez is the Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice. I want to make sure we have both Federal and State investigations that ultimately prosecute offenders to the fullest extent of the law as well as make any needed policy changes, particularly to local police practices and procedures. Trayvon's tragic death also leads to a discussion of the broader issue of racial profiling. I have called for putting an end to racial profiling, a practice that singles out individuals based on race or other protected categories. In October of last year, I introduced legislation--the End Racial Profiling Act, S. 1670--that would protect minority communities by prohibiting the use of racial profiling by law enforcement officials. The bill would prohibit State and local law enforcement officials from using race as a factor in criminal investigations, including in ``deciding upon the scope and substance of law enforcement activity following the initial investigatory procedure.'' The bill would mandate training and provide grants on racial- profiling issues and data collection by local and State law enforcement. Finally, the bill would condition the receipt of Federal funds by State and local law enforcement on two grounds. First, under this bill, State and local law enforcement would have to ``maintain adequate policies and procedures designed to eliminate racial profiling.'' Second, they must ``eliminate any existing practices that permit or encourage racial profiling.'' The legislation I introduced is supported by the NAACP, the ACLU, the Rights Working Group, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and numerous other organizations. I look forward to the April 18 advocacy day these civil rights groups are planning on Capitol Hill to lobby on racial-profiling issues and raise awareness about this issue and the legislation I have introduced. Racial profiling is bad policy. Given the state of our budgets, it also diverts scarce resources from real law enforcement. Law enforcement officials nationwide already have tight budgets. The more resources spent on investigating individuals solely because of their race or religion, the fewer resources we have to actually deal with illegal behavior. Racial profiling has no place in modern law enforcement. The vast majority of our law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line every day handle their job with professionalism, diligence, and fidelity to the rule of law. However, Congress and the Justice Department can and should still take steps to prohibit racial profiling and finally root out its use. The 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees equal protection of the law to all Americans. Racial profiling is important to that principle and should be ended once and for all. As the late Senator Kennedy often said, ``Civil rights is the great unfinished business of America.'' Let's continue to fight here to make sure we truly have equal justice under law and equal protection of law as guaranteed by our Constitution. I yield the floor.

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, today I am introducing a joint resolution which would remove the deadline for the states' ratification of the equal rights amendment, ERA. I thank Senators Boxer, Durbin, Gillibrand, Harkin, Landrieu, Lautenberg, Menendez, and Mikulski for joining me as original cosponsors. When Congress passed the ERA in 1972, it provided that the measure had to be ratified by \3/4\ of the States, 38 States, within 7 years. This deadline was later extended to 10 years by a joint resolution enacted by Congress, but ultimately only 35 out of 38 States had ratified the ERA when the deadline expired in 1982. Congress can and should give the States another chance. In 1992, the 27th Amendment to the Constitution prohibiting immediate Congressional pay raises was ratified after 203 years. Article V of the Constitution contains no time limits for ratification of constitutional amendments, and the ERA time limit was contained in a joint resolution, not the actual text of the amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution requires ``equal protection of the laws,'' and the Supreme Court has so far held that most sex or gender classifications are subject to only ``intermediate scrutiny'' when analyzing laws that may have a discriminatory impact. In 2011 Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia gave an interview in which he stated that ``certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn't.'' Ratification of the ERA by state legislatures would provide the courts with clearer guidance in holding gender or sex classifications to the ``strict scrutiny'' standard. The ERA is a simple and straightforward constitutional amendment. It reads: ``Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.'' The amendment gives power to Congress to enforce its provisions by appropriate legislation, and the amendment would take effect two years after ratification by the States. March is Women's History Month. And today is the 40th anniversary of passage by the Senate of the joint resolution to extend the ERA ratification timeline on March 22, 1972. Today, nearly half of the States have a version of the ERA written into their State constitution. My own State of Maryland's constitution reads that ``Equality of rights under the law shall not be abridged or denied because of sex.'' I am therefore pleased to introduce this joint resolution today, which is endorsed by a wide variety of groups, including United 4 Equality, the National Council of Women's Organizations, the National Organization for Women, and the American Association of University Women. I urge my colleagues to support this joint resolution.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing a joint resolution which would remove the deadline for the states' ratification of the equal rights amendment, ERA. I thank Senators Boxer, Durbin, Gillibrand, Harkin, Landrieu, Lautenberg, Menendez, and Mikulski for joining me as original cosponsors. When Congress passed the ERA in 1972, it provided that the measure had to be ratified by \3/4\ of the States, 38 States, within 7 years. This deadline was later extended to 10 years by a joint resolution enacted by Congress, but ultimately only 35 out of 38 States had ratified the ERA when the deadline expired in 1982. Congress can and should give the States another chance. In 1992, the 27th Amendment to the Constitution prohibiting immediate Congressional pay raises was ratified after 203 years. Article V of the Constitution contains no time limits for ratification of constitutional amendments, and the ERA time limit was contained in a joint resolution, not the actual text of the amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution requires ``equal protection of the laws,'' and the Supreme Court has so far held that most sex or gender classifications are subject to only ``intermediate scrutiny'' when analyzing laws that may have a discriminatory impact. In 2011 Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia gave an interview in which he stated that ``certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn't.'' Ratification of the ERA by state legislatures would provide the courts with clearer guidance in holding gender or sex classifications to the ``strict scrutiny'' standard. The ERA is a simple and straightforward constitutional amendment. It reads: ``Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.'' The amendment gives power to Congress to enforce its provisions by appropriate legislation, and the amendment would take effect two years after ratification by the States. March is Women's History Month. And today is the 40th anniversary of passage by the Senate of the joint resolution to extend the ERA ratification timeline on March 22, 1972. Today, nearly half of the States have a version of the ERA written into their State constitution. My own State of Maryland's constitution reads that ``Equality of rights under the law shall not be abridged or denied because of sex.'' I am therefore pleased to introduce this joint resolution today, which is endorsed by a wide variety of groups, including United 4 Equality, the National Council of Women's Organizations, the National Organization for Women, and the American Association of University Women. I urge my colleagues to support this joint resolution.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I am glad we could get that straight. Let me first thank all of our colleagues who are here to pay honor to the senior Senator from Maryland, Senator Mikulski. This is March Madness in basketball. Sweet 16 is starting. We are very proud in Maryland of our Lady Terps. They are in the Sweet 16. But I want you to know that we are all getting our fantasy teams, and I want Senator Mikulski on my fantasy basketball team because she is a true leader, she understands the importance of working together, and she is a winner. We are proud of her roots in Maryland. She is the great-granddaughter of Polish immigrants who owned a bakery. She began her public service in high school, where she helped deliver groceries to seniors who were locked in their apartments and she helped the homebound seniors get the food they needed. She went to the University of Maryland School of Social Work because she wanted to be a social worker. She wanted to help other people. She knew that she was good at that and she could make a difference in people's lives. She worked for Catholic Charities and dealt with children at risk and helping seniors with Medicare. As you have heard from several of my colleagues already, she gained her reputation by taking on a highway that was scheduled to be built that would have gone through Canton and Fells Point, disrupting a neighborhood in Baltimore. This was a 16-lane highway. It was considered to be a done deal; it was going to happen. The powers that be said we are going to have a highway coming through downtown Baltimore. The powers to be did not know Barbara Mikulski. That highway never happened. Senator Mikulski stopped that highway from being built. She then went on to serve in the Baltimore City Council with great distinction. Then in 1976 she was elected to the Congress for the Third Congressional District, a seat that was vacated by our esteemed colleague Paul Sarbanes, who then came into the Senate, and Barbara Mikulski followed in the great tradition of Senator Paul Sarbanes. In 1986, when Senator ``Mac'' Mathias's seat became vacant, Senator Barbara Mikulski was elected to the Senate. She has many firsts: The first female Democrat elected in her own right to serve the United States Senate. At the time she was elected to the Senate, she was only one of two female Senators. Today, we have 17 female Senators in the Senate in large part because of Senator Barbara Mikulski. I know the Presiding Officer was part of that expansion. You will hear how Senator Mikulski was not only a role model and an inspiration but an incredible help to get more women elected to the Senate. Last year we joined in this body to celebrate Senator Mikulski becoming the longest serving woman in the history of the Senate, surpassing Margaret Chase Smith from the State of Maine. Then on this past Saturday, on St. Patrick's Day, she became the longest serving woman in the history of the Congress, replacing Edith Nourse Rogers from Massachusetts who served, as the majority leader pointed out, from 1925 to 1960. Marylanders understand longevity records. We are very proud of Cal Ripken and the record he held in baseball. Senator Mikulski's, like Cal Ripken's, legacy is what she has done in office to make a difference, not the length of her service. She is a fierce and effective advocate for so many causes. We have heard about her accomplishments in education and health care, what she has done to advance sensible health care to improve quality for the people of this country. That was her mission in the Affordable Care Act, to make sure that we had the delivery systems in place that would deliver quality health care, and Senator Mikulski's leadership was critical in that regard. She has been a leader in women's health care issues. I will never forget her reminder to all of us in the caucus: Don't forget women's health care issues when you bring that bill to the floor. And we didn't. We put that in under Senator Mikulski's leadership. We talked about breast cancer and cervical cancer screenings. Senator Mikulski has been in the leadership on all those issues. We in Maryland are proud to be where the National Institutes of Health is headquartered. Its growth in large measure has been the result of Senator Barbara Mikulski. We are proud of HOPE VI and housing. Senator Mikulski has been in the forefront of that program, making it possible for many people in our community to have decent, affordable, and safe housing. Senator Mikulski has been critically important to America's space program. I have been with her many times at Goddard and seen firsthand the results of her advocacy and what it has meant. The Hubble space telescope is another legacy of which Senator Mikulski can be rightly proud. We in Maryland are also proud to house NSA, the National Security Agency, with its new mission with the cyber command located in Maryland. Senator Mikulski, as Senator Feinstein pointed out, has been one of the real leaders on national security issues. We can't issue press releases on this. She is a member of the intelligence committee. She works behind closed doors to keep us safe. But we all know that she is one of the key leaders in this Nation on national security issues. We know about pay equity and the Lilly Ledbetter law, the first bill signed by President Obama. It was Senator Mikulski's leadership that got that bill to the President's desk, recognizing that we are still not where we need to be on gender pay equity in America. In our region, the Chesapeake Bay is center to our way of life and our economy. Senator Mikulski has been one of the real champions on water quality and the Chesapeake Bay. She understands the respect for State and local government, that we have to work together as a team. I know the Governor of Maryland, Governor O'Malley, would agree with me that there is no better friend to the people of Maryland working with the State than Senator Barbara Mikulski, getting the Federal Government on the same page as the State and local governments to get things done for the people of Maryland. That is true with what she has been able to do for all of us working across the Nation. I think the Baltimore Sun put it best when it said: There is nobody more feisty, more willing to take on big business, big government, or anyone when it is time to look out for the interests of her constituents. I think all of us would agree. On a personal note, I thank Senator Mikulski for her friendship, I thank her for being my buddy and my adviser. Whether she is with Presidents or Kings or the patrons at Jimmy's Restaurant in Fells Point, you get the same common sense, the same down-to-earth person-- you get Senator Barb. We are so proud of her. Thank you, Senator Barb, for what you have done to make this Nation a better place to live. Thank you for being such a role model for young people, especially young women, to get involved, to make a difference. Thank you on behalf of my two granddaughters. Their future is much brighter, their opportunities are much greater because of you, Senator Barb. Congratulations. Your colleagues here want to express our love and respect and admiration for your incredible service.

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I know there are a lot of us who want to pay our tribute and respect to the senior Senator from Maryland, Senator Mikulski. I want to make sure everybody has their opportunity. Are we operating under a consent order?

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. President Theodore Roosevelt established Pelican Island in Florida as the first national wildlife refuge on March 14, 1903. He was responding not only to an urgent need to conserve our vulnerable natural resources but also to the passionate advocacy of Americans who understood that our Nation's strength lies in the conservation of our wild lands and unique species. Over the course of his Presidency, Roosevelt established 53 wildlife refuges, from Key West's mangrove islands and sand flats to Flattery Rock along Washington State's coast. Today, on the refuge system's 109th birthday, the National Wildlife Refuge spans more than 150 million acres, across 556 wildlife refuges and 38 wetland management districts. The National Wildlife Refuge System is the Nation's premier network of public lands dedicated to the conservation of America's land and waters, its fish, wildlife, and plants. From the Arctic to the Caribbean, the Atlantic to the Pacific, America's wildlife refuges are in every State and U.S. territory. Wildlife refuges conserve habitat that is essential to more than 700 species of birds, 220 types of mammals, 250 varieties of reptiles and amphibians, more than 1,000 species of fish, and uncounted invertebrates and plants. They sustain nearly 300 of the Nation's more than 1,300 endangered or threatened species. The National Wildlife Refuge System does not only benefit wildlife. The refuges also play a critical role for our communities. By protecting wetlands, grasslands, forests, wilderness, and other natural habitats, wildlife refuges improve air and water quality, relieve flooding, improve soil quality, and trap greenhouse gases. Wildlife refuges also benefit local economies, drawing visitors to local communities and supporting jobs tied to conservation and outdoor recreation. I am especially proud of the Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge in my home State of Maryland. Blackwater contains roughly one-third of all of the tidal wetlands in the State of Maryland and provides critical storm protection to lower Dorchester County, MD. Home to one of the largest breeding populations of American bald eagles on the east coast, Blackwater Refuge is recognized as a ``Wetlands of International Importance'' by the Ramsar Convention and has been called one of the ``Last Great Places'' by the Nature Conservancy. Blackwater also plays a critical economic role in Maryland, attracting approximately 200,000 visitors annually and providing an important economic engine for our Eastern Shore communities. The Blackwater Refuge is a place of great ecological and economic value, but more than that, it is a place of deep historic value. One of the most important heroes in our Nation's history lived and bravely worked within the boundaries of Blackwater. To commemorate this history, I have introduced legislation to create two national historical parks--one within the Blackwater Refuge and one in New York to honor the legacy of Harriet Ross Tubman for her work on the Underground Railroad. Harriet Tubman was born within the Blackwater boundary and conducted much of her courageous work there leading other slaves northward to freedom. I am deeply committed to ensuring that her legacy is celebrated within the Blackwater Refuge. This is part of the beauty of the National Wildlife Refuge System: by preserving the ecological integrity of our treasured lands, we also preserve an important link to our Nation's past. In an increasingly urban and high-speed world, our national wildlife refuges--islands of natural beauty--offer Americans priceless places to soothe or stir the soul, educate the mind, and invigorate the body. I am pleased today to recognize the anniversary of this valuable system.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for 1 additional minute.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, let me concur in everything Senator Stabenow said in opposition to this amendment. There are many reasons to oppose it, but let me add one additional reason, in that it violates the agreement we reached on the debt ceiling on the budget caps for this year and does it on the backs of our Federal workers. Once again, the Republicans are coming forward with another attack on the Federal workforce. Enough is enough. Every amendment, they are picking on the Federal workforce. I urge my colleagues to defeat this amendment.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I thank Senator Murray for her comments, and I concur in her observations. What we have seen on women's health care issues in this body is how some are trying to turn the clock back on the progress we have made. I was listening to my colleague talk about ultrasounds. Virginia just enacted an ultrasound bill this week. The Governor signed it into law, so this is spreading to other States. We talk about big government, but the government mandating ultrasounds for pregnant women? This is outrageous and something that on International Women's Day, it is right that we bring this to the attention of our colleagues. We have seen the same type of action taken against family planning, contraceptives, those who want to repeal Roe v. Wade. We have to stand strong with women and women's health care issues as we in America lead the international community. Around the world, International Women's Day is an occasion to honor and praise women for their accomplishments. On this International Women's Day, I stand with my colleagues to celebrate women who are making a difference both in America and around the world, in countries where they lead in the fight for justice, equality, and fairness for all women. All of us, women and men alike, can help by supporting women's efforts to claim their legal rights, live free from violence, earn a decent income, get an education, grow food for their families, and make their voices heard in their communities and beyond. I believe in the power of women to change the world and to help them hasten that change. U.S. international assistance policies should address and remove barriers between women, women's rights, and economic empowerment. Empowering women is one of the most critical tools in our toolbox to fight poverty and injustice. Integrating the unique needs of women into our domestic and international policies is critical. As chairman of the Foreign Relations Subcommittee on International Development and Foreign Assistance, Economic Affairs, and International Environmental Protection, I can attest that this must be the bedrock of our foreign assistance programming if it is to be successful. I defy anyone's assertion that women's empowerment should take a backseat to so-called more important priorities. Decades of research and experience prove that when women are able to be fully engaged in society and hold decisionmaking power, they are more likely to invest their income in food, clean water, education, and health care for their children. This creates a positive cycle change that lifts entire families and communities and nations out of poverty. Simply put, when women succeed, we all do. Accordingly, I was very pleased by last week's release of the new USAID ``Policy on Gender Equality and Female Empowerment,'' which makes integrating gender and including women and girls central to all U.S. international assistance. This policy, which updates guidelines that were over 30 years old, recognizes that the integration of women and girls is basic to effective international assistance across all sectors such as food, security, health, climate change, science, technology, economic growth, democracy and governance and humanitarian assistance. It aims to increase the capacity of women and girls and decrease inequality between genders and also decrease gender-based violence. This new policy is as welcomed as it is necessary. As Secretary Clinton declared earlier this year: Achieving our objectives for global development will demand accelerated efforts to achieve gender equality and women's empowerment. Otherwise, peace and prosperity will have their own glass ceiling. Unfortunately, as we know, there are still places this glass ceiling exists and there are major obstacles to women. Worldwide, one in three women will experience some form of violence in her lifetime. Women and girls in emergencies, conflict settings, and natural disasters often face extreme violence, including being forced to exchange sex for food. The World Health Organization has reported that up to 70 percent of women in some countries describe having been victims of domestic violence at some stage in their lives. The United States has the potential to be a true leader in preventing and responding to violence against women and girls--an issue that is inextricably linked to U.S. diplomacy, development, and national security goals. What many people fail to realize is that violence against women and girls is both a major consequence and cause of poverty. Violence and poverty go hand in hand. Violence prevents women and girls from getting an education, going to work, and earning the income they need to lift their families out of poverty. We know that one in three women will be the victim of sexual abuse in her lifetime. But we also know that women have the potential to lift their families and communities out of poverty. Violence against women and girls is an extreme human rights violation, a public health epidemic, and a barrier to solving severe challenges such as extreme poverty, HIV/AIDS, and conflict. It devastates the lives of millions of women and girls--in peacetime and in conflict--and knows no national and cultural barriers. Today let's reaffirm our commitment to end gender-based discrimination in all forms, to end violence against women and girls worldwide, and to encourage the people of the United States to observe International Women's Day. On this day and every day, I am proud to stand in support of women across America and worldwide. Investing in and focusing on empowering women and girls is one of the most efficient uses of our foreign assistance dollars and one of the best ways to make the world more peaceful and prosperous. As Secretary of State Clinton pointed out more than 15 years ago, ``Women's rights are human rights''--and nothing is more fundamental, in my opinion. With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.