Benjamin Cardin

Mr. CARDIN

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I take this time to urge my colleagues to let us proceed on the reauthorization of the surface transportation act, S. 1813. This is a critically important bill, and I am proud to be on two committees that have had jurisdiction over this bill. One is the Environment and Public Works Committee, where Senator Boxer and Senator Inhofe have worked together to bring out a bill that received the unanimous support of our committee. I also serve on the Senate Finance Committee, where Senator Baucus and Senator Hatch have worked together so we have the sufficient revenues in order to be able to finance the reauthorization bill during its 2-year reauthorization. This bill is so important to our country. First, it gives predictability to our State and local governments. It gives predictability to the highway engineers. It gives predictability to contractors to know the funding will be there in order to advance our transportation programs. When we do these short-term extensions, it really does cause significant problems for planners. If you are trying to plan a transportation project, you need to know the funding is going to be there for more than just a few months. You need to have some degree of predictability. This legislation will allow us to give that predictability to those who are involved in the decisionmaking. It has been 2009 since we last reauthorized the surface transportation act. It is time for us to act. This bill will also help us as far as American competitiveness is concerned. We need to have modern transportation infrastructure, whether it is our highways, our bridges, or our transit systems. We need to make sure we can meet the challenges to today's society. I could talk about just in this region our needs in the transit area. We have one of the most congested communities in the Nation in Washington, DC. Many of my constituents who live in Maryland go to work every day in Washington, DC, working for the Federal Government, using the mass transit system. That system is aged and needs attention. We need to provide the financing nexus in this area in order to be as competitive as we can with transportation options for the people of this country. This bill is important for jobs. You hear that over and over. In Maryland, the passage of this bill will preserve or expand 10,000 jobs for its people. I expect the Acting President pro tempore would have similar numbers in New Mexico. It is important in every State in this Nation. It is also important for safety. I will give you one number in Maryland that really has me concerned. There are 359 bridges in the State of Maryland that have been rated structurally deficient and 4.6 million motorists travel over those bridges every day. The State of Maryland is taking steps to make sure the motorists are safe, but we need to fix those bridges in a more permanent way. The longer we wait, the more it costs. Deferred maintenance means we are not doing what we should to protect the future needs of our communities. This legislation puts a heavy priority on maintaining our transportation infrastructure so it is safe and we can move forward into the future. The legislation is balanced between transit and highway. I know that in certain regions of this country, highways are the principal means of transportation, and their interest in transit is not quite as great as it is if you represent the people of New York or you represent the people of Maryland or you represent the people in an urban center where public transit becomes a very important part of our transportation needs. This legislation is balanced to take care of the needs of our highways and the needs of our transit systems. I think it is a credit to that balance that in the Environment and Public Works Committee and in the Banking Committee--the two committees that have principal jurisdiction over the highway program and over the transit program--we had unanimous support on bringing this bill forward. That is how we should be proceeding to consider legislation. We have that type of bipartisan cooperation because this bill is properly balanced. Let me also point out that we have received hundreds of letters from organizations that support the passage of the surface transportation reauthorization act. We have the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, we have the AFL-CIO, we have businesses, we have labor groups, we have local communities, we have national groups. This bill has been put together in a way where we can get it done this year, and it would be very important for the people of this country and for our economy. Let me talk a little bit about my State of Maryland and the Maryland department of transportation. They have given us a list of projects that will move forward if we can get this bill reauthorized, from the beltway around Baltimore, to critical roads in Montgomery and Prince George's Counties, to our rural areas. I could share some of those specific examples. But this will affect the ability of Maryland to move forward with critical roads and transit needs, and we need to get that done. I want to talk a little bit about some of the specific issues that are in the bill that I want to highlight. The Appalachian Development Highway System is one for which we have put a separate provision historically in the code because we recognize that in bringing economic opportunity to that part of our Nation, which includes West Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania--and it also includes some of our Southern States that are in the Appalachia highway region--it is tough to get jobs there. I was just recently in the most western part of Maryland up in Garrett County, and I can tell you it is difficult to get companies to move into that region. One of the problems is that you have to go over the mountains. It is not easy to get over the mountains. We have a real opportunity around Cumberland, MD, to be able to expand dramatically the economic opportunities and jobs by completing the north-south highway that goes through Pennsylvania, Maryland, and West Virginia. Now there is reason to celebrate that in this bill that can become a reality. There is an amendment I had offered that is included in this legislation that provides the toll credits so we can advance this project. It was a major issue needed, particularly in the Pennsylvania part of this north-south highway. So we do have reason to celebrate that in this legislation we have a way of completing the Appalachian Development Highway System in my part of the country. Senator Rockefeller has been working very closely on this issue, and I really applaud his leadership. We are going to be looking to see whether we might be able to strengthen it more, through amendments to this bill, to make sure these projects get the priority to which they are entitled. For the sake of flexibility, we have combined many of the specific programs into more general programs. That is part of the balance in this legislation--to give greater flexibility to local governments. That is important. But we also want to make sure the national priorities receive the attention they need, and the Appalachian Development Highway System is a national priority. We want to make sure that is, in fact, done. I wear another hat as chair of the Water and Wildlife Subcommittee on the Environment and Public Works Committee, and I want to do everything we can to make sure the Federal Government, as a partner in developing highways and roads and transit systems, does what is important for clean water in our communities. A large part of the pollutants that enter into our waters comes from storm runoff. In the Chesapeake Bay region, the largest growth source of pollutants going into the Chesapeake Bay comes from storm runoff. Well, highway construction can help or hurt storm runoff. If you do it the right way, you actually can help keep pollutants out of our streams and rivers and bays. So I am hopeful that during the discussion of this bill on the floor of the Senate, we will look for ways we can make this bill helpful in the best practices being used in order to deal with storm runoff, as we deal with major transportation programs in this country. One of the programs I have spent a lot of time on is the Transportation Enhancement Program, the TE Program. That has been used by local governments to do what is critically important to our communities. I could talk about bicycle paths. I could talk about paths that have connected communities, which has allowed us to take cars off the roads. This is a small amount of money, but it becomes very important for getting motorists off the roads. We have the use of the Transportation Enhancement Program so it is safe for motorists who want to pull off to the side of the road to see the vistas. We have used funds for that. That is a safety issue. So transportation enhancements are important programs. We want to make sure the flexibility and funding opportunities remain. Chairman Boxer has been very careful to work out an arrangement so we can advance that, and I thank her for it. I have been working with Senator Cochran, and we are hoping to offer an amendment that will make it clear we need to work with the local governments as we look at how the transportation enhancement funds are being used. Let me tell you about another opportunity I think we could have in the consideration of this bill, and that deals with our veterans. There is a way we could use the training veterans receive while in military service to help when they come back here as far as truckdrivers are concerned. We are looking for an amendment in regard to that area where we could advance that issue. There are many areas in this bill that we think are extremely important to advance our needs. It is a bipartisan bill. We have to get this done. I know Senator Boxer is on the floor. Once again, I compliment her for her patience and leadership in working through each of these issues. We are looking forward to a robust debate on the floor of the Senate. I hope Members who have amendments will allow us to proceed. Let's take a look at amendments, but let's proceed in the spirit in which the Environment and Public Works Committee, the Banking Committee, and the Finance Committee reported the bills to the Senate; that is, listen to each other, do not lose sight of the prize of getting this bill done, and be willing to compromise so that we can maintain the type of bipartisan cooperation we need in order to get this bill enacted. If we do that, we will be doing something so important to our country. This bill will create jobs. This bill will help our economic recovery. This bill will help our future. I am proud to be part of the group that has brought this bill forward to the floor of the Senate. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

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

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, as we start Black History Month, I rise to discuss a national hero I have spoken about many times on the Senate floor. With this year's Black History Month focused on African-American women, it is all the more appropriate for me to talk about Maryland's Harriet Ross Tubman and her dedication to justice, equality, and service to this country. In my career, I have spoken on the Senate floor, at events in Maryland, in meetings with constituents, and with my colleagues about Harriet Tubman's legacy. While I hope each opportunity I have taken to discuss the life of this remarkable woman helps raise the awareness about her importance to the history of our great Nation, my ultimate goal is to properly commemorate her life and her work by establishing the Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad National Historical Park on the eastern shore of Maryland, and, in working with my colleagues from New York, to establish the Harriet Tubman National Historical Park in Auburn, NY. A year ago this week, I reintroduced the Harriet Tubman National Historical Park and the Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad National Historical Park Act with Senators Schumer, Mikulski, and Gillibrand as original cosponsors. I am happy to say since that time the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committees held a positive hearing on the bill, the Energy Committee favorably reported the bill, and it has been placed on the Senate calendar. I thank my colleagues on the committee for their support, particularly Chairman Bingaman and Ranking Member Murkowski, and the chairman of the National Park Subcommittee, Senator Udall of Colorado. The establishment of the Harriet Tubman Historical Park has been years in the making and is long overdue. The mission of the National Park Service has evolved over time, from preserving our natural wonders across the United States for recreational purposes to commemorating unique places of significance to historical events and extraordinary Americans who have shaped our Nation. The woman who is known to us as Harriet Tubman was born in approximately 1822 in Dorchester County, MD, and given the name Araminta--Minty--Ross. She spent nearly 30 years of her life in slavery on Maryland's eastern shore. She worked on a number of different plantations on Maryland's eastern shore, and as a teenager she was trained to be a seamstress. As an adult, she took the first name Harriet, and when she was 25 years old she married John Tubman. In her late twenties, Harriet Tubman escaped from slavery in 1849. She fled in the dead of night, navigating the maze of tidal streams and wetlands that to this day comprise the eastern shore's landscape. She did this alone, exercising incredible courage and strength. Not satisfied with attaining her own freedom, she returned repeatedly for more than 10 years to the places of her enslavement in Dorchester and Caroline Counties, where under the most adverse conditions she led away many family members and other slaves to freedom in the Northeastern United States. She helped develop a complex network of safe houses and recruited abolitionist sympathizers residing along secret routes connecting the southern slave States and the northern free States. No one knows exactly how many people she led to freedom or the number of trips between the North and South she led, but the legend of her work was an inspiration to the multitude of slaves seeking freedom and to abolitionists fighting to end slavery. Tubman became known as ``the Moses of her people'' by African Americans and White abolitionists alike. She is the most famous and the most important conductor of the network of resistance known as the Underground Railroad. During the Civil War, Tubman served the Union forces as a spy, a scout, and a nurse. She served in Virginia, Florida, and South Carolina. She is credited with leading slaves from those slave States to freedom during those years as well. Following the Civil War and the emancipation of all Black slaves, Tubman settled in Auburn, NY. There she was active in the women's suffrage movement and established one of the first incorporated African-American homes for the aged to care for the elderly. In 1903, she bequeathed the Tubman Home to the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in Auburn where it stands to this day. Harriet Tubman died in Auburn in 1913, and she is buried in Fort Hill Cemetery. Fortunately, many of the structures and landmarks in New York remain intact and in relatively good condition. Only recently has the Park Service begun establishing units dedicated to the lives of African Americans. Places such as the Booker T. Washington National Monument on the campus of Tuskegee University in Alabama, the George Washington Carver National Monument in Missouri, the Buffalo Soldiers at Guadalupe Mountains National Park, the National Historical Trail commemorating the march for voting rights from Selma to Montgomery, AL, and, most recently, the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial on The National Mall. These are all important monuments and places of historical significance that help tell the story of the African-American experience. As the National Park Service continues its important work to recognize and preserve African-American history by providing greater public access and information about the places and people that have shaped the African-American experience, there are very few units dedicated to the lives of African-American women, and there is no national historical park commemorating African-American women. I cannot think of a more fitting hero than Harriet Tubman to be the first African-American woman to be memorialized with a national historical park that tells her story and her fight against institutions of slavery and the work on the Underground Railroad. I hope my colleagues will support my effort to honor Harriet Tubman and support the passage of my bill to authorize the creation of the Tubman National Historical Parks in New York and Maryland. Let me just point out that the landscapes in which she lived still exist today, and that will be an incredible part of the national park that can tell the story, particularly to young people, about the courage of this extraordinary woman. A number of structures exist in Auburn, NY, which complement her life as the conductor of the Underground Railroad, as well as her later life in helping to advance the rights of all people. This is an incredible opportunity for us to honor her with this national park and to help future generations understand the history of America and the courage of this extraordinary leader and hero of our Nation, Harriet Tubman. Mr. President, these parks will hopefully pave the way for the Park Service to develop more National Historical Park commemorating the lives of many other important African-American women in our history. The vision for the Tubman National Historical Parks is to preserve the places significant to the life of Harriet Tubman and tell her story through interpretative activities and continue to discover aspects of her life and the experience of passage along the Underground Railroad through archaeological research and discovery. The buildings and structures in Maryland have mostly disappeared. Slaves were forced to live in primitive buildings even though many slaves were skilled tradesmen who constructed the substantial homes of their owners. Not surprisingly, few of the structures associated with the early years of Tubman's life still stand. As I mentioned, the landscapes of the Eastern Shore of Maryland, however, remain similar to the time Tubman lived there. Farm fields and forests dot the lowland landscape, which is also notable for the extensive network of tidal rivers and wetlands that Tubman, and the people she guided to freedom, would have traveled under the cover of night. In particular, a number of properties--including the homestead of Ben Ross, her father, Stewart's Canal, where he worked, the Brodess Farm, where she worked as a slave, and others are within the master plan boundaries of the Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge. Similarly, Poplar Neck, the plantation from which she escaped to freedom, is still largely intact in Caroline County. The properties in Talbot County, immediately across the Choptank River from the plantation, are currently protected by various conservation easements. Were she alive today, Tubman would recognize much of the landscape that she knew intimately as she secretly led black men, women and children to freedom. There has never been any doubt that Tubman led an extraordinary life. Her contributions to American history are surpassed by few. Determining the most appropriate way to recognize that life and her contributions, however, has been exceedingly difficult. The National Park Service determined that designating a Historical Park that would include two geographically separate units would be an appropriate tribute to the life of this extraordinary American. The New York unit would include the tightly clustered Tubman buildings in the town of Auburn. The Maryland portion would include large sections of landscapes that are representive of Tubman's time and are historically relevant. Harriet Tubman was a true American patriot. She was someone for whom liberty and freedom were not just concepts but values she fought tirelessly for. She lived those principles and achieved freedom with hundreds of others. In doing so, she has earned the Nation's respect and honor. Harriet Tubman is one of many great Americans who we honor and celebrate every February during Black History Month. In schools across the country, American History curriculums teach our children about Tubman's courage, conviction, her fight for freedom and her contributions to the greatness of our Nation during a contentious time in U.S. history. Now it is time to add to Tubman's legacy by preserving and commemorating the places representative of her extraordinary life. Every year, millions of school children, as well as millions of adults, visit our National Historical Parks and gain experiences and knowledge about our Nation's history that simply cannot be found in history books or on Wikipedia. Our Nation's strength and character comes from the actions of the Americans who came before us and the significant events that shaped our Nation. The National Park Service is engaged in the important work of preserving where American history has taken place and providing a tangible experience for all people to learn from. It is one thing to learn about Harriet Tubman from a book, it is a completely different and fulfilling experience to explore, to see, to listen, and to feel the places where she worked as a slave, where she escaped from, and where she lived her days as a free American. The National Park Service is uniquely suited to honoring and preserving these places of historical significance, and I urge my colleagues to join me in preserving and growing the legacy of Harriet Tubman by establishing the Harriet Tubman National Historical Parks in her honor. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

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

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

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

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I rise to honor former Czech President and renowned human rights activist Vaclav Havel. Vaclav Havel died last month, and I was sad to note that the news of his death was overshadowed by not only the holidays but also by media coverage of Kim Jong Il's death. The irony--that one of the great leaders of the third wave of democracy, passed at virtually the same time as one of the century's most dangerous, repressive tyrants--is striking. Eulogies to Havel from everyday Czechs, European and world leaders, and admirers across the globe have poured forth in the past month, and for me, some of the most touching have come from the Czech Romani community. The Roma community, which is often ostracized from and disenchanted with mainstream politics, embraced Havel as a leader and a friend. And indeed Emil Scuka, the Czech president of the International Romani Union, said ``Vaclav Havel was not afraid to publicly stand up for Romani people even though he knew he could lose a great deal politically by doing so because the public wouldn't like it. He never made such political calculations in advance . . . With the death of Vaclav Havel, all of us Romani people are losing a great defender, a fighter for freedom and human rights. We are losing the certainty that when things are at their worst, Vaclav Havel will help us. However, I believe his ideals, his ideas, and his philosophy will live on.'' I was also inspired by the eloquent tribute of Gabriela Hrabanova, a former advisor to the Czech government on Romani issues, who said ``Everyone has been writing about how this is the end of an era. I firmly hope that is not the case. The legacy of Vaclav Havel must remain with us, and the space for truth and love in society must continue to increase.'' Just a few days before his death, Havel was actively following protests in Moscow, and published an opinion in the independent Russian newspaper Novaya gazeta, and called the current Russian government a ``specific combination of old stereotypes and a new business-mafia environment.'' He encouraged Russian citizens to see that the current regime, which presents itself as democratic, is in fact not democratic at all. Exposing the truth of the repressive Communist regime lead to the victory of his peaceful Velvet Revolution, and Havel was convinced this experience could be replicated in Russia, if the citizens were committed. I am not at all surprised by a report from Aung San Suu Kyi, who said she received a letter in the days following Havel's death from Havel himself. Suu Kyi said that Havel wrote from his deathbed that he was thinking of her and how the transitional experience from Czech Republic might prove useful to her in Burma's transition and her own quest for freedom and truth. Even in the last moments of his life, Havel was thinking about the imperiled human rights defenders around the world, from Russia to Burma, whom he could help. And so it strikes me that in addition to the resolution honoring Havel, introduced by Senators Rubio and Lieberman, on which I am a proud cosponsor, we should also take this moment to rededicate ourselves to the principles so clearly visible in the life of this virtuous man. We must aid the Havels of this generation in their efforts to live in truth and freedom. We must do an even better job of prioritizing respect for human rights whenever we engage other governments, whether we are dealing with the transitional regime in Egypt, long-established rulers in Bahrain, newly elected leaders in Honduras, or strategic allies in Europe. Vaclav Havel was a hero of the twentieth century, and I was very fortunate to have met him. I am also very proud of all that the Helsinki Commission and the United States did in Eastern Europe to support Havel and his friends in their quest to live in truth. We must strive to honor that commitment in the rest of the world, so that Havel's legacy, and our own, lives on in the twenty-first century.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I wish to take this opportunity to congratulate Mr. Steven D. Garbarino of Owings Mills, MD, on the completion of a highly successful 27-year career as a civilian employee within the Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Baltimore District, on January 31, 2012. Mr. Garbarino's entire career was marked by his daily demonstration of the Army's values. His performance reflected a strong loyalty to the organization and its members; a selfless dedication to duty, his customers and the Corps' public service mission; and a no-nonsense ``can-do'' attitude built upon honor, integrity, superior competence, and the personal courage to strive for excellence in his job performance. I applaud his commitment to public service and recognize the sacrifices he has made for the good of our Nation. Mr. Garbarino highlights the importance of hard-working Federal workers who strive to keep us healthy, safe, informed, and free to enjoy the lifestyle that we, as Americans, have grown to appreciate and expect. He is a model Federal employee who readily deserves recognition for his distinguished career as a professional member of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. As a project manager, Mr. Garbarino made significant personal efforts to become a subject matter expert on policy, procedures, and processes associated with the Civil Works Program and projects. This expertise led him to serve as a mentor to project team members and other Civil Works project managers. Mr. Garbarino has also authored several environmental technical report/papers and made numerous presentations related to his work. Forums for these presentations have included numerous workshops, conferences, public meetings, televised interviews, radio talk shows, and the United Nations 1995 conference on environmental restoration. Over his career he has developed a strong public speaking presence and is recognized for his outstanding professional representation of the Corps. I also want to thank Diane, Steve's wife of over 30 years, and their two sons, Garret and Zachery. The families of outstanding Federal employees have to make sacrifices, too, as they share their loved ones with a job serving the American people. I know they join me in my best wishes to Steve for a happy and well-earned retirement. Mr. President, it is my sincere pleasure to congratulate Mr. Garbarino on the occasion of his retirement. He was a highly valued employee of the Baltimore District and well deserves recognition in 2012 for his outstanding public service career as a distinguished member of the Federal workforce. He is an outstanding example of the Federal workforce who worked tirelessly day in and day out for the American people.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the Democracy Restoration Act. The Democracy Restoration Act, or DRA, had been introduced in previous Congresses by former Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and I am proud to follow his example. I want to thank Senator Durbin for joining me as an original co-sponsor of this legislation. As the late Senator Kennedy often said, civil rights is the ``unfinished business'' of America. The Democracy Restoration Act would restore voting rights in federal elections to approximately 5 million Americans who have been released from prison and are back living in their communities. After the Civil War, Congress enacted and the states ratified the Fifteenth Amendment, which provides that ``the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.'' Unfortunately, many states passed laws during the Jim Crow period after the Civil War to make it more difficult for newly-freed slaves to vote in elections. Such laws included poll taxes, literacy tests, and disenfranchisement measures. Some disenfranchisement measures applied to misdemeanor convictions and in practice could result in lifetime disenfranchisement, even for individuals that successfully reintegrated into their communities as law-abiding citizens. It took Congress and the states nearly another century to eliminate the poll tax, upon the ratification of the Twenty-Fourth Amendment in 1964. The Amendment provides that ``the rights of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.'' Shortly thereafter Congress enacted the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which swept away numerous State laws and procedures that had denied African-Americans and other minorities their constitutional right to vote. For example, the Act outlawed the use of literacy or history tests that voters had to pass before registering to vote or casting their ballot. The act specifically prohibits states from imposing any ``voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure . . . to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.'' Congress overwhelmingly reauthorized the Act in 2006, which was signed into law by President George W. Bush. In 2011, I am concerned that there are still several areas where the legacy of Jim Crow laws and state disenfranchisement statutes lead to unfairness in Federal elections. First, state laws governing the restoration of voting rights vary widely throughout the country, such that persons in some States can easily regain their voting rights, while in other States persons effectively lose their right to vote permanently. Second, these state disenfranchisement laws have a disproportionate impact on racial and ethnic minorities. Third, this patchwork of state laws results in the lack of a uniform standard for eligibility to vote in Federal elections, and leads to an unfair disparity and unequal participation in Federal elections based solely on where an individual lives. In 35 States, convicted individuals may not vote while they are on parole. In 10 States, a conviction can result in life-time disenfranchisement. Several States requires prisoners to seek discretionary pardons from Governors, or action by the parole or pardon board, in order to regain their right to vote. Several States deny the right to vote to individuals convicted of certain misdemeanors. States are slowly moving or repeal or loosen many of these barriers to voting for ex-prisoners. But studies show that a growing number of African- American men, for example, will be disenfranchised at some point in their life, partly due to mandatory minimum sentencing laws that have a disproportionate impact on minorities. Congress recently addressed part of this problem by enacting the Fair Sentencing Act to partially reduce the sentencing disparity between crack cocaine and powder cocaine convictions. While I welcome these steps, I believe that Congress should take stronger action now to remedy this problem. The legislation would restore voting rights to prisoners after their release from incarceration. It requires that prisons receiving federal funds notify people about their right to vote in federal elections when they are leaving prison, sentenced to probation, or convicted of a misdemeanor. The bill authorizes the Department of Justice and individuals harmed by violation of this Act to sue to enforce its provisions. The bill generally provides State election officials with a grace period to resolve voter eligibility complaints without a lawsuit before an election. The legislation is narrowly crafted to apply to federal elections, and retains the States' authorities to generally establish voting qualifications. This legislation is therefore consistent with Congressional authority under the Constitution and voting rights statutes, as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court. I am pleased that this legislation has been endorsed by a large coalition of public interest organizations, including: civil rights and reform organizations; religious and faith-based organizations; and law enforcement and criminal justice organizations. In particular I want to thank the Brennan Center for Justice, the ACLU, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and the NAACP for their work on this legislation. This legislation is ultimately designed to reduce recidivism rates and help reintegrate ex-prisoners back into society. When prisoners are released, they are expected to obey the law, get a job, and pay taxes as they are rehabilitated and reintegrated into their community. With these responsibilities and obligations of citizenship should also come the rights of citizenship, including the right to vote. In 2007, President George W. Bush signed the Second Chance Act into law, after overwhelming approval and strong bipartisan support in Congress. The legislation expanded the Prison Re-Entry Initiative, by providing job training, placement services, transitional housing, drug treatment, medical care, and faith-based mentoring. At the signing ceremony, President Bush said: ``We believe that even those who have struggled with a dark past can find brighter days ahead. One way we act on that belief is by helping former prisoners who have paid for their crimes. We help them build new lives as productive members of our society.'' The Democracy Restoration Act is fully consistent with the goals of the Second Chance Act, as Congress and the States seek to reduce recidivism rates, strengthen the quality of life in our communities and make them safer, and reduce the burden on taxpayers. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that letters of support be printed in the Record.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the Democracy Restoration Act. The Democracy Restoration Act, or DRA, had been introduced in previous Congresses by former Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and I am proud to follow his example. I want to thank Senator Durbin for joining me as an original co-sponsor of this legislation. As the late Senator Kennedy often said, civil rights is the ``unfinished business'' of America. The Democracy Restoration Act would restore voting rights in federal elections to approximately 5 million Americans who have been released from prison and are back living in their communities. After the Civil War, Congress enacted and the states ratified the Fifteenth Amendment, which provides that ``the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.'' Unfortunately, many states passed laws during the Jim Crow period after the Civil War to make it more difficult for newly-freed slaves to vote in elections. Such laws included poll taxes, literacy tests, and disenfranchisement measures. Some disenfranchisement measures applied to misdemeanor convictions and in practice could result in lifetime disenfranchisement, even for individuals that successfully reintegrated into their communities as law-abiding citizens. It took Congress and the states nearly another century to eliminate the poll tax, upon the ratification of the Twenty-Fourth Amendment in 1964. The Amendment provides that ``the rights of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.'' Shortly thereafter Congress enacted the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which swept away numerous State laws and procedures that had denied African-Americans and other minorities their constitutional right to vote. For example, the Act outlawed the use of literacy or history tests that voters had to pass before registering to vote or casting their ballot. The act specifically prohibits states from imposing any ``voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure . . . to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.'' Congress overwhelmingly reauthorized the Act in 2006, which was signed into law by President George W. Bush. In 2011, I am concerned that there are still several areas where the legacy of Jim Crow laws and state disenfranchisement statutes lead to unfairness in Federal elections. First, state laws governing the restoration of voting rights vary widely throughout the country, such that persons in some States can easily regain their voting rights, while in other States persons effectively lose their right to vote permanently. Second, these state disenfranchisement laws have a disproportionate impact on racial and ethnic minorities. Third, this patchwork of state laws results in the lack of a uniform standard for eligibility to vote in Federal elections, and leads to an unfair disparity and unequal participation in Federal elections based solely on where an individual lives. In 35 States, convicted individuals may not vote while they are on parole. In 10 States, a conviction can result in life-time disenfranchisement. Several States requires prisoners to seek discretionary pardons from Governors, or action by the parole or pardon board, in order to regain their right to vote. Several States deny the right to vote to individuals convicted of certain misdemeanors. States are slowly moving or repeal or loosen many of these barriers to voting for ex-prisoners. But studies show that a growing number of African- American men, for example, will be disenfranchised at some point in their life, partly due to mandatory minimum sentencing laws that have a disproportionate impact on minorities. Congress recently addressed part of this problem by enacting the Fair Sentencing Act to partially reduce the sentencing disparity between crack cocaine and powder cocaine convictions. While I welcome these steps, I believe that Congress should take stronger action now to remedy this problem. The legislation would restore voting rights to prisoners after their release from incarceration. It requires that prisons receiving federal funds notify people about their right to vote in federal elections when they are leaving prison, sentenced to probation, or convicted of a misdemeanor. The bill authorizes the Department of Justice and individuals harmed by violation of this Act to sue to enforce its provisions. The bill generally provides State election officials with a grace period to resolve voter eligibility complaints without a lawsuit before an election. The legislation is narrowly crafted to apply to federal elections, and retains the States' authorities to generally establish voting qualifications. This legislation is therefore consistent with Congressional authority under the Constitution and voting rights statutes, as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court. I am pleased that this legislation has been endorsed by a large coalition of public interest organizations, including: civil rights and reform organizations; religious and faith-based organizations; and law enforcement and criminal justice organizations. In particular I want to thank the Brennan Center for Justice, the ACLU, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and the NAACP for their work on this legislation. This legislation is ultimately designed to reduce recidivism rates and help reintegrate ex-prisoners back into society. When prisoners are released, they are expected to obey the law, get a job, and pay taxes as they are rehabilitated and reintegrated into their community. With these responsibilities and obligations of citizenship should also come the rights of citizenship, including the right to vote. In 2007, President George W. Bush signed the Second Chance Act into law, after overwhelming approval and strong bipartisan support in Congress. The legislation expanded the Prison Re-Entry Initiative, by providing job training, placement services, transitional housing, drug treatment, medical care, and faith-based mentoring. At the signing ceremony, President Bush said: ``We believe that even those who have struggled with a dark past can find brighter days ahead. One way we act on that belief is by helping former prisoners who have paid for their crimes. We help them build new lives as productive members of our society.'' The Democracy Restoration Act is fully consistent with the goals of the Second Chance Act, as Congress and the States seek to reduce recidivism rates, strengthen the quality of life in our communities and make them safer, and reduce the burden on taxpayers. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that letters of support be printed in the Record.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, it is time for Republicans to end their war on dedicated, hard-working middle-class Federal employees. Who are these Federal workers? They are the Veterans' Administration's nursing assistants who care for our wounded warriors; the Department of Defense civilian employees who support our military troops at home and abroad; Social Security Administration claims representatives who process benefits to our Nation's senior citizens and people who qualify for disability payments. They also include Nobel prize-winning scientists who are conducting groundbreaking research at the National Institutes of Health and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration on everything from fighting cancer to understanding the origins of the universe; the Environmental Protection Agency and Food and Drug Administration staff who keep our air and water clean and our food and drugs safe; the Federal Aviation Administration's air traffic controllers who keep the skies safe; also, the Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and United States Marshal Service attorneys and law enforcement officers who track down and arrest and convict terrorists and drug cartel and gang members. The list of those who are on the front line of public service goes on and on. Federal employees are dedicated and hard-working, and like many other Americans, many of them are struggling to deal with their family budgets. And yet Federal employees are already contributing $60 billion to the deficit reduction through a 2-year pay freeze. They have already contributed to deficit reduction. They were the first in line to try to help balance our budget. Like their private sector counterparts, Federal employees haven't been immune to the country's economic woes. They are confronting similar hardships: disabled or unemployed spouses, declining home values, rising gasoline and living expenses. Many Federal employees head single-parent families. As do other Americans, many Federal employees struggle to pay their mortgages and find ways to send their children to college. H.R. 3630, the House Republicans' payroll tax cut bill, would require 2 million Federal employees to shoulder nearly one-half of the cost of a tax reduction that benefits 160 million Americans. So what the Republican bill is doing is extending the payroll tax reductions for working families, but saying to the middle-class Federal worker: You are going to pay most of the burden. That is not going to help our economy. That is not the right way to extend the payroll tax reduction. The current Republican assault on our Federal employees is piled on top of the current 2-year pay freeze, which is piled on top of a workforce already lagging behind the private sector when it comes to pay. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, average wages among all workers in our economy have risen over 600 percent since 1969, while salaries for civilian Federal employees have grown by a little over 400 percent since 1969. There is a widening gap between public sector employees and the private sector. What these proposals would do is widen that gap even further. Republicans want to extend the current pay freeze for another year. That would cost a Federal employee who makes $50,000 annually about $800 a year. A 3-year pay freeze would cost GS-5 employees almost $4,000 in cumulative lost salaries; for GS-7 employees, almost $5,000 in cumulative lost salaries; and for GS-9 employees, almost $6,000 in cumulative lost salaries. The Republican bill would require massive increases in the contributions current and future Federal employees make to their retirement system--a system that is currently fully funded--while slashing benefits. That is rubbing salt in the wound of the additional pay freeze. So the Republican bill takes a 2-year pay freeze and adds a third year pay freeze and tells our employees to triple their contributions to their retirement system, which is another pay cut. It is not only a freeze, Republicans are proposing. It's a pay cut for our Federal workers. In addition to these assaults, we are already asking the federal workforce to do more with less. As my colleagues have noticed, when it comes to job growth numbers, the public sector numbers aren't going up; they're going down. But the workload isn't going down. We are asking our Federal workers to do more with less, to have a 2-year pay freeze, and now to take a pay cut. That is not fair. The Republicans save their most severe punishment for future Federal employees, making it clear that their intention is to provide as many disincentives for people to consider a career in public service as possible. Increasing pension contributions for future hires by 3.2 percent would force an employee making $30,000 a year to pay $1,200 rather than $400. We should be embracing people who are willing to engage in public service. The Republicans are doing just the opposite. It is time for the Republicans to stop their war on hard-working Federal employees. Increasingly, the Federal workforce is being asked to do more with less. Increasingly, the Federal workforce is being asked to shoulder a disproportionate share of deficit reduction. It is time to stop that assault. I think it is time we all properly recognize the dedication, hard work, valor, sacrifice, and professionalism of our Federal workers. With that, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. I withdraw my request.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Let me thank my colleague for yielding. I wish to thank Senator Sanders, Senator Whitehouse, and Senator Boxer, who were on the floor on this issue. I just wish to underscore the point that was just made about having a level playing field, where we have tilted the scales in favor of fossil fuels over renewables. My colleagues have already talked about the direct difference in our subsidies. I would like to add an additional element; that is, when you look at the subsidies we give to the fossil fuel industries, they are permanent. They are in the Tax Code. They do not go through the annual exercise of an extender. What does that mean? That means the lack of predictability in sustainable energy means there is a higher cost for investment. It tilts the scale in favor of oil and gas, rather than on sustainable, renewable energy sources. I would just mention three. The Congressional Research Service did a report on this, just three of the provisions that benefit the oil industry: the excess of percentage over cost depletion, the expensing of exploration and development costs, and the amortization of geological and geophysical expenditures. Just those three provisions that are permanent in our Tax Code, between 2010 and 2014, will cost the taxpayers over $10 billion. We are subsidizing the oil industry, and we should not be doing that. We should be encouraging a transformation to sustainable energy issues as my colleagues have pointed out for the purposes of national security. It is good for our environment and it is good for jobs. This is about jobs. That is why we cannot go home until we have extended the tax provisions, particularly 1603 but others of the energy-related, sustainable energy provisions. I wish to talk for one moment, if I might, about the production tax credit we need to extend because I want to talk about one specific project in Maryland, on a brownfields site that we are dealing with that relates to energy. Some might say: OK. That does not expire until 2013. But here is the problem. You have to have it in production by that date. Our waste-to-energy projects--it is not going to be in production by that date. So if we do not extend it this month, the project will be at a standstill in Baltimore. There are 1,900 jobs at stake--1,900 jobs are at stake on just that one project which, by the way, helps our environment, helps our energy, and also helps our economy. That is why it is critically important that before we leave, we extend these sustainable energy tax credits, so we can get the investment. Quite frankly, I would like to see us make some of these permanent. We make them permanent, we get predictability. We get predictability, it is less cost, it encourages more activity in this area. That is what we should be about, creating jobs for our country. The wind energy credit alone would allow us to create another 54,000 jobs. So this is about job growth for America. It is about our energy security, and it is about a cleaner environment. It is about America's future. That is why we have taken the time to point out to the American people that Congress needs to make sure it is active on these areas before we adjourn for the year. We owe that to the people of this country. With that, I will yield to my friend from Vermont.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I rise today to mark International Human Rights Day, a day which celebrates the adoption of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights by the UN General Assembly on December 10, 1948. In the immediate after math of World War II, and reacting with revulsion to the horrors of that global war and the Holocaust, the community of nations organized itself with the goal of protecting international peace and security. Although the United Nations founding Charter recognized the protection of human rights as one of the UN's most basic purposes, it was quickly recognized that it would be necessary to further elaborate these fundamental freedoms in order to ensure their protection. The resulting document--the Universal Declaration of Human Rights--has since served as the foundation upon which all other human rights work at the international level has stood. It remains to this day an enduring guide for human rights advocates around the globe. This has been an exciting and dramatic year that will be remembered for the triumphs of the Arab Spring. The fall of so many dictators who have been responsible for the deaths, torture, and other atrocities meted out against so many has opened up the exhilarating prospect of real reform and meaningful human rights improvements. But the final chapter of the Arab Spring has not yet been written, and nothing can be taken for granted. Progress in this field is not necessarily linear. As Ronald Reagan said in his inaugural address, ``Freedom is a fragile thing and is never more than one generation away from extinction.'' I believe it is especially critical, at this historic moment, for the United States to remain vigilant in the protection and promotion of human rights--abroad and at home. Overseas, the United States must continue to use our voice to speak on behalf of those silenced by brutal regimes. We must continue to lift up those who cannot stand on their own. And while we must inevitably pursue a multifaceted foreign-policy that advances American goals in a broad range of areas including hard security and the economy, we must never treat human rights as something expendable. I take particular note of the countries that stand shoulder to shoulder with us in that effort. I welcome Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski's call for a ``European endowment for democracy,'' similar to the National Endowment for Democracy which the United States has supported since 1983. I commend Poland for the leadership it has shown on human rights issues during its presidency of the European Union. In all of these efforts, the role of civil society remains critical. On the 50th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the United Nations adopted a declaration on the rights of human rights defenders. They are the first line of defense and they often pay the highest price. There are, unfortunately, too many cases of human rights defenders who are imprisoned, persecuted or worse, for me to raise them all here. But I would like to mention one in particular that maybe emblematic of many others: the case of Evgenii Zhovtis, Kazakhstan's most well-known human rights activist. Zhovtis is the Director of the Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law and even a member of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights' panel of experts on freedom of assembly. But he was involved in a tragic car accident in which a pedestrian was killed and, after a trial widely condemned for lacking due process, he was sentenced in 2009 to 4 years in prison. A year ago, at the OSCE Summit in Astana, civil society activists called for Zhovtis' release. As one NGO participant remarked: Evgenii is the human rights Everyman. If this can happen to him, it can happen to anyone. A year later, Evgenii Zhovtis remains in a Siberian penal colony, even as Kazakhstan prepares to host an OSCE election observation mission. In the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, I once again urge President Nazarbayev to review his case and to release him. Thank you.

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 take this time because we are in the last, we hope, few days before we adjourn for the holidays. There are certain pieces of legislation we must get done before we leave town. We call these the must-pass bills that we have to make sure are enacted before Congress adjourns for the year. One, of course, is what President Obama has been talking about. We need to deal with the payroll tax issue. We don't want to see middle- income families finding that on January 1 their paychecks--the actual amount of money they take home--are reduced. During this economic time, we want to make sure the money remains constant, and we don't want to see additional burdens placed on middle-income families. We all know we have to deal with the Medicare extenders, including the physicians problem. We have a flawed system for reimbursing physicians that causes a substantial reduction in rates physicians receive--a 27-percent reduction. That would affect not only the fairness of our reimbursement system to our doctors, but it would also affect the access Medicare patients have to physicians. So we need to absolutely take care of that issue. We have the Omnibus appropriations bill. I certainly hope that is going to be an appropriations bill so we can give some predictability through the remainder of this fiscal year. We have to get that done before we adjourn for the holidays. We also need to pass the tax extenders. I know the Presiding Officer has been very actively involved in the energy extenders, knowing full well the importance not only to New Mexico but to our entire country. Those extenders need to be passed because, if not, we lose jobs. This involves the ability to move forward with sustainable energy projects that will mean jobs in our communities and energy self-sufficiency for America. But I wish to take this time to talk about another must-pass bill before we adjourn for the year; that is, the extension of the unemployment insurance. It is absolutely essential that we get that done before Congress adjourns for the year. I think we have to make it clear that this extension will mean providing the same number of weeks of unemployment insurance for those who are currently in the system--those who have lost their jobs--that we have had for the last couple of years for those who have been caught up in this economic downturn. We are not extending beyond what the unemployed have already received. So we are basically extending the current policy because we are still in a very difficult economic circumstance. For every job that is open, there are four people who apply for it. So it is very difficult for someone who is unemployed to be able to find employment. As I know and as the Presiding Officer knows, if a person is unemployed and looking for work, it is much more difficult. For all of those reasons, the right thing to do is to acknowledge that the number of weeks of benefits should not be reduced at this period, that those who are currently in the system who have lost their jobs should be able to get the same number of benefits that earlier unemployed people were able to get during this economic period. That is what this legislation would do. Unemployment insurance is an insurance program. During good times, we pay more into the system. During economic downturns, we take the money out of the system. It is countercyclical so that we help our economy as well as help our families. This is the right thing to do. This is the only lifeline for many families. This represents their ability to be able to put food on the table for their families or to keep their home from going into foreclosure or to pay their rent or to take care of their family needs. This is the right thing to do from the point of view of families who have been caught up in this economic period. It also, by the way, would affect millions of our families. Over the next year, if we were not to extend the unemployment insurance benefits, it is estimated that 6 million families would be denied their full benefits that they are receiving currently--6 million families-- and each one is a family in our community who would be adversely affected. It also helps our economy. Mark Zandi, who was the economic adviser for then-Presidential candidate Senator McCain, said that for every dollar we put out into the economy for unemployment benefits, we get back $1.61 in our economy. The multiplier effect of unemployment compensation is positive to our economy. So, once again, when we are trying to stimulate job growth, this helps us. How does it help us? The people who receive unemployment benefits visit our local shops, our small businesses in our communities, keeping our economy moving, keeping our path forward to job growth. For all of those reasons--for the fact that it is the right thing to do for families and for what the intent of unemployment insurance is all about--it is the right thing for us to do because it helps our economy. This must be on our list of must-pass legislation. We have to get this done before we adjourn for the year. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I rise to celebrate the distinguished career of Dr. Hal Cohen, an internationally renowned economist and professor, devoted husband, father, and grandfather, and my good friend. Harold Allen Cohen was born in New York on April 21, 1938. After earning his B.A. from the college that is now known as SUNY-Binghamton and his M.A. from Cornell University, Hal began his career in health care financing and public policy by earning a Ph.D. from Cornell University in 1967. After completing his education, he was awarded a prestigious fellowship with the National Science Foundation from 1969 to 1971, which he followed with a year-long stint as an associate at the Danforth Foundation while teaching economics at the University of Georgia, first as an assistant and then as an associate professor. Hal then took a position that would come to define his career. In 1972, he moved to Baltimore to become the executive director and founding member of the Health Services Cost Review Commission, or HSCRC, the State agency that regulates hospital rates in Maryland. As a member of the Maryland House of Delegates, I worked closely with Dr. Cohen during the formative years of the HSCRC, and while he is quick to say that he was surrounded by a tremendous group of colleagues, it was his leadership that cemented the HSCRC as a Maryland institution. His insight was and continues to be invaluable in containing hospital cost growth. Dr. Cohen worked to ensure that hospitals could provide efficient, high quality care to every Marylander as he focused on ensuring that hospital financing options were fair, accessible and equitable. Since 1976, the HSCRC has financed nearly $1 billion in uncompensated care, improving access for underinsured and uninsured Marylanders, and supporting hospitals' social mission while providing them greater financial stability. Since 1977, Maryland hospitals have been paid on the basis of the rates established by the HSCRC, ensuring that Maryland's health costs are kept low, and that its health system is tailored to the needs of its citizens. Under Hal's leadership, the State of Maryland has saved over $47 billion since 1976. The HSCRC has been essential in ensuring that each hospital in Maryland provides comprehensive care that includes assistance for the underinsured, as well as incorporating teaching and research programs into the structure of the hospital center. As Executive Director of the HSCRC, Dr. Cohen ushered the organization through its first 15 years. He worked to ensure that the agency would work well with Maryland hospitals, the Maryland State Legislature, and most importantly, for Maryland's citizens in a transparent and accountable fashion. The independent nature of the HSCRC allows the agency the ability to advocate for and support a legislative agenda, and Dr. Cohen used this ability over the length of his career to fight for fair and sustainable pricing structures that support hospitals and patients. The system set up by the HSCRC was so well-conceived that it has succeeded for nearly 35 years. All-payer rate setting is now being discussed by many leading health economists as an effective way to control the unsustainable growth in health care costs. Dr. Cohen's base of knowledge has been widely sought. He has served on three Federal committees, and he was a founding appointee to the Prospective Payment Assessment Commission--ProPAC. He has also served as a member of the National Committee on Rural Health, the National Committee of Vital and Health Statistics, and he served as Commissioner of the Maryland Health Care Access and Cost Commission from 1993 to 1998. As Commissioner, he played a key role in improving quality and expanding health care access, by initiating HMO report cards to evaluate quality and establishing a small group market system to make insurance more affordable for small businesses. In 1985, 2 years before he would step down as the Executive Director of HSCRC, he founded Hal Cohen, Inc., a health care consulting firm located in Baltimore, MD to offer consulting services in the areas of hospital financing and public policy. He has served clients from every corner of the industry and all over the country, from the Federal Government to private insurers, from HMOs to self-insured companies. In addition to his significant and long-lasting professional impact, Dr. Hal Cohen is known throughout Baltimore as a loving husband and father. Hal and his wife, Jo, have been married for more than 50 years, and their family has grown to include their children--Robb, Gail, David, Heather, and Amy--and their five grandchildren--Lizzie, Alex, Max, Zhi, and Olive. Dr. Cohen's extensive work will continue to make Maryland a better place to live. His essential leadership was crucial in building the HSCRC as a force for fairness in health care pricing and for expanding patient access to health care. I thank him for his long service, and I congratulate him on his many years of putting the people of Maryland first--he is a public servant of the highest caliber, and I am proud to call him my trusted advisor and dear friend.

Mr. CARDIN

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

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise to address the human rights issue of deep concern. For 2 years, since December 3, 2009, an American citizen and a Marylander, Alan Gross, has been imprisoned by the Cuban Government. For 2 years, he has been held by the Cuban authorities. Alan was in Cuba to help the country's small Jewish community establish an Internet and improve its access to the Internet, which would allow the community to go online without fear of censorship or monitoring. After being held for 14 months without charge and then a cursory 2- day trial, he was convicted and sentenced to 15 years in prison. His appeal to the Cuban supreme court was denied in August of this year. Alan Gross is a caring husband and a father, a devoted man who has dutifully promoted U.S. foreign policy interests while serving the needs of thousands of foreign citizens, from Afghanistan to Haiti, over a career that has spanned more than 25 years of public service. Unfortunately, Alan has been caught in the middle of a conflict between two nations with a long and difficult relationship. But it is entirely unacceptable that his personal freedoms have been violated every day he continues to be incarcerated. Alan's health has deteriorated during his imprisonment. He has lost 100 pounds and suffers from a multitude of medical conditions, including gout, ulcers, and arthritis, that have worsened without adequate treatment. Last night, I had a chance to talk to his wife Judy, who had a chance to visit with her husband in Cuba earlier last month. Judy informs me that Alan Gross's health conditions are deteriorating and that he is in need of adequate health care. In addition, his mother and daughter are both struggling with serious health care issues, and his wife is struggling to make ends meet. The Gross family should not have to suffer through such a trying period of time without Alan for support. Sentencing Alan Gross to 15 years behind bars also sentences his family to 15 years without a husband, father, and son. There is no reason for the Gross family to continue to suffer the consequences of political gamesmanship any longer. I urge the Cuban Government to remember that this is a real man and a family who are suffering. I have already written the Cuban Government urging them, in the strongest possible manner, to immediately and unconditionally release Alan Gross. His continued imprisonment is a major setback in our bilateral relations, and it is unlikely any positive steps to improve that relationship can or will happen while he remains in prison. As a Senator and as a Marylander and as a fellow human being, I urge the Cuban Government to see Alan Gross, who has dedicated his life to serving others, for who he is--a man who believed he was helping others by stepping in when he saw a need. Enough is enough. I call on the Cuban Government to release Alan Gross immediately and to allow him to return to his family.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise in support of the amendment offered by our colleagues, Senators Menendez and Kirk, and I thank them for their leadership on this issue. To me, this is an extremely important amendment that I hope will get the support of all the Members of the Senate. It tightens the restrictions we already have against Iran. I compliment the Obama administration for the work they have done internationally by expanding the sanction against Iran and against Iran's petroleum and petrochemical industries. It has been effective, because we have gotten other countries to follow the leadership of the United States. I think everyone in this body understands the risks of Iran to the security of not only its region but the entire world. Iran is a very dangerous nation. It has ambitions to spread terrorism in the region and to affect U.S. interests. It is for that reason that we cannot allow Iran to become a nuclear weapons state. Our most effective way to deal with this is to isolate Iran and to make sure the sanctions that are imposed actually will accomplish the objective of penalizing the country but not the individual people of Iran. The amendment offered by Senator Menendez and Senator Kirk would allow us to expand the sanctions against Iran to the Central Bank of Iran. The amendment requires the President to prohibit all transactions and property and interest in property of the Iranian financial institutions that touch U.S. financial institutions, and to prohibit the maintenance of correspondence or payable-through accounts by foreign banks that have conducted financial transactions with the Central Bank of Iran. What does that mean? It means we are trying to put the sanctions where they will have the most impact, and that is on the financial system of Iran itself. The Iranian Central Bank depends upon other banks around the world, and this amendment would allow us to have an effective way to isolate the Central Bank of Iran, putting additional focus on the Iranian policies that have violated the United Nations' resolutions. Iran has violated their commitments. They violated their commitments as they relate to their nuclear programs. They haven't complied with agreements they have entered into. It is important that the international community stand united. This is important for the stability of the region, it is important for the security of Israel, our closest ally in that region, it is important for the Arab states that have talked to us about the danger of Iran, it is important for U.S. interests. So it is important that we get this moving. Iran's complete disregard for its obligations under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and its directives of the multiple U.N. Security Council Resolutions belies the government's continued insistence that its nuclear program is one based upon its energy needs. It is not based upon its energy needs. It is trying to become a nuclear weapons state, something we must make sure does not occur. We need to take all steps we can in order to deny Iran the ability to have international legitimacy while they are violating their international commitments. This amendment continues the U.S. leadership on this issue and follows up on the work our Nation has done in getting international support to make clear to Iran that if they continue along these policies of violating their international commitments, they are going to continue to be isolated and it is going to affect the economy of their nation. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. Mr. President, I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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 the pending amendments be set aside so I may offer my first amendment, No. 1073.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I am going to yield the floor in just a moment. Let me say to my friend from Wyoming, I am going to do my best to make sure the Senator gets all the information he needs. I wish to make sure every Senator has all the information they need. I think this is a very important position to be filled. Mr. Kopocis has the qualifications and confidence. I wish to make sure that is done as quickly as possible. I respect my colleague's views, and I will work to make sure he gets all the information he needs. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, in a moment, I am going to be asking unanimous consent that the Senate take up to confirm the nomination of Ken Kopocis to be Assistant Administrator for the Office of Water for the Environmental Protection Agency. Before I make that unanimous consent request, I wish to just take a moment to say a few words about this nominee and the process that has taken place in Senate. I have known Ken Kopocis since I was first elected to Congress in 1986 and have worked personally with him on a number of water-related issues. Ken has extensive background in water policy and legislative issues, having worked at the Congress for 25 years. I worked with him first when I was in the House of Representatives. I know the Presiding Officer also, when he was in the House, remembers the good work Ken did for the House of Representatives. He has now worked, of course, in the Senate. He has played a role in crafting and defending numerous pieces of environmental legislation, including the Clean Water Act. At a time when there are so many controversial issues concerning water issues in the Congress, I think it is important we have someone at the helm who has the confidence of Senators on both sides of the aisle. I have the honor of chairing the Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife in the Environment & Public Works Committee. Ken Kopocis enjoys the confidence of all the members of our committee. When his nomination was considered in the Environment & Public Works Committee back in July--that is when we took it up--Ken was praised by both Republicans and Democrats alike. Most of my colleagues have had the opportunity to work with him, and they are enthusiastic about his credentials and his levelheaded bipartisan approach to every issue. It is time the Senate take up this confirmation. It is the right thing to do. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 403, that the nomination be confirmed with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to the nomination; that any statements related to the nomination be printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate then resume legislative session.

Mr. CARDIN. As to the floor privileges, Mr. President, let me just comment how valuable these Navy fellows are in our offices. I am very grateful for LCDR Knisley's service in my office, and I know Senator Wicker feels the same. LCDR Shane Knisley will be leaving my office next month, and I wish to thank him very much for the service he has provided in the Senate. Unanimous Consent Request--Executive Calendar