Benjamin Cardin

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. With that, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I thank Senator Boxer for her extraordinary leadership as chair of the Environment and Public Works Committee. She has stood for legislation that will allow us to rebuild our roads, our bridges, our infrastructure in this country, to create jobs, and make America competitive. I rise to oppose the McCain amendment, and I will give three reasons why: First, jobs; secondly, the transportation enhancement programs help our traveling public. It is what they want, what they need; third, there is a safety issue. First, on jobs. Let me point out that the Transportation Enhancements Program represents 1.5 percent of the annual Federal surface transportation funds--1.5 percent--a relatively small amount of money of the total pie. But it is interesting that the projects funded by the Transportation Enhancements Program actually yield more jobs per dollar spent than the funds that are used for the traditional transportation programs. So on a jobs basis, we actually get more jobs from a lot of the projects that are in the Transportation Enhancements Program. Secondly, let me talk about the type of programs involved. We are talking about bicycle paths. We are talking about when people travel on a road and there is a pulloff where one can safely view the scenery. These types of projects we are talking about could be jeopardized by the McCain amendment. I know my colleague from Alaska talked yesterday about the safety issue, but let me underscore it. Today, more accidents are caused from our pedestrians and our bicyclists. They are on the rise. There are actually an increased number of fatalities related to cyclists and pedestrians. Fourteen percent of roadway fatalities involve cyclists or pedestrians and two-thirds of these accidents occur on Federal highways. Accidents involving pedestrians and cyclists result in far more serious injuries. While motorist fatalities are on the decline, pedestrian and cyclist fatalities are on the rise. When we have a pulloff on a highway where someone can pull their car safely off in order to look at the vista, that is the way it should be. In my own State of Maryland, we are constructing the Harriet Tubman scenic byway so people can visit the Eastern Shore of Maryland and see firsthand where Harriet Tubman operated the Underground Railroad. These roads are county roads. These are roads which are narrow and on which we have a lot of commercial traffic as well as people who just want to look at the scenes. The State of Maryland should have the flexibility of using these transportation enhancement funds in order to do what the traveling public wants them to do; that is, to provide a safe experience for the motorists to be able to enjoy our transportation highways. That is what the Transportation Enhancements Program allows our States to be able to do. The McCain amendment would jeopardize those funds. So the Transportation Enhancements Program offers flexibility to our States to be able to provide the whole array of transportation options. It is a very small part of the overall transportation budget. It provides those enhancements that the traveling public wants and needs. It creates jobs, and it allows for greater public safety. So for all those reasons, I urge my colleagues to reject the McCain amendment. With that, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I rise to remember the 10th anniversary of the anthrax attacks on our country. During the weeks following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2011, our Nation was exposed to chemical warfare for the first time. Two anthrax attacks were delivered through our country's postal system. The first set of letters was mailed to media outlets, including ABC, CBS, NBC, the National Enquirer, and the New York Post in September. Three weeks later, two other anthrax letters were mailed to U.S. Senators--Senator Daschle and Senator Patrick Leahy. The letter to Senator Leahy never made it to Capitol Hill. The envelope addressed to Senator Daschle, however, was opened on October 15 in the Hart Senate Office Building in the mailroom of the office I use today. Emergency responders rushed to join Capitol Police to evaluate the situation and determine the extent of contamination. It was 10 years ago this week on October 17, 2001, the Capitol was evacuated. At that time I was a Member of the House of Representatives. I remember the fear and trepidation all Americans felt in the days and weeks following September 11. I take this time to honor the courage of our Nation's Federal employees. Two made the ultimate sacrifice, dying from the exposure of the deadly anthrax toxin at the postal facility that handled all the mail that came to the Senate and House offices. U.S. postal workers Thomas L. Morris, Jr. and Joseph P. Curseen, Jr. gave the ultimate sacrifice after being exposed to the infected Senate mail while they worked in the Brentwood post office facility here in Washington, DC. Mr. Morris and Mr. Curseen were Maryland residents. Like so many other Federal employees, they went to work every day, serving the American people and trying to earn a living for themselves and their families. Less than a week after being exposed to the deadly anthrax at the mail facility, both men died of their exposures. The Brentwood postal facility, which was shuttered for months while the building was disinfected, now proudly bears their names, honoring two Federal employees who died doing their jobs. Literally thousands of other Federal employees bravely went back to work, making sure our government continued to function in the most uncertain of times. While most Federal workers crammed together in small makeshift office space, other brave Federal employees put themselves in harm's way trying to contain the spread of the weaponized spores and to clean up the deadly bacteria. It has been fashionable of late to criticize the Environmental Protection Agency, but I remind everyone that members of the EPA's region 3 led the emergency response efforts following the anthrax attacks. They were joined by a small army of other EPA emergency responders from around the country who responded to the call for extra personnel to manage the massive decontamination efforts. The EPA's headquarter staffers were fully engaged as well. The EPA national pesticide program worked quickly to develop new methods necessary to wipe out the anthrax. Scientists worked primarily out of EPA's pesticide lab, which is located 20 miles away in Fort Meade, MD. It was not just EPA employees who answered the call to duty. Capitol police were the first ones to respond, and they continued to provide protection to legislative branch employees as well as the emergency responders and the public. The Department of Defense lent its expertise. As the cleanup progressed, thousands of tests were taken and then sent to Fort Detrick in Maryland where chemical weapons specialists analyzed samples and reported results to the emergency command center. Defense Department personnel were also engaged in the decontamination efforts, working side by side with EPA emergency responders. The photos I brought to the floor today show some of the emergency responders wearing specialized protective gear, working on the decontamination of Senator Daschle's office. Each desk, chair, filing cabinet, and piece of paper in the office was removed. The last item to be removed from room 509 at the Hart Building was an American flag that hung in Senator Daschle's front office. Emergency responders are seen here folding the flag that was placed in a special sealed bag and sent off to be decontaminated. Countless employees at the Sergeant at Arms, the Architect of the Capitol, and Senate and House staffers continued the business of running our government and the legislature. It was critical that Congress continue to function, demonstrating to the Nation and the world that terrorist attacks could not cripple the institution of democracy. Other Federal employees put themselves in harm's way during and after the anthrax attacks. These Federal employees worked hard to do what many thought impossible, putting public buildings back into use after a chemical attack. At great risk to themselves, they bravely met the challenges to ensure our government continued to function. Today I honor the memory of Thomas L. Morris, Jr. and Joseph P. Curseen, Jr. who gave their lives while engaged in public service. Today I salute those Federal employees who risked their own lives so that the legislative branch of the greatest government on Earth could continue, and those who continued to work every day in the face of grave danger and uncertainty. Today I simply want to give a heartfelt thank you to all of America's Federal employees. You recognize that public service is an honorable calling and you work every day to keep this Nation the great Nation it is. With that, let me once again thank our Federal workforce and what they do for our country. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

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

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I know the Senator from Missouri is here, and I am going to make a unanimous consent request that I anticipate he will object to on behalf of other Senators. So let me do that formally and then make my comments. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nomination: Calendar No. 112; that the nomination be confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to the nomination; that any related statements 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. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I certainly understand that my friend from Missouri is doing this on behalf of other Senators. I want to express my disappointment that these Senators are objecting to the confirmation of William J. Boarman, an individual who is eminently qualified to be our Nation's 26th Public Printer and head of the Government Printing Office. President Obama nominated Bill Boarman 18 months ago. The Senate Committee on Rules and Administration reported the nomination favorably in July of 2010. The nomination languished because of Republican objections so President Obama made a recess appointment on January 3, 2011, and renominated Mr. Boarman on January 27, 2011. Again, the Senate Rules Committee reported the nomination favorably by voice vote this past May. The Public Printer is not a controversial position. Previous Printers have been confirmed without controversy or delay. This obstruction is unprecedented. Bill's career in the printing industry spans 40 years. He started as a practical printer, trained under the apprenticeship program of the International Typographical Union and served his apprenticeship at McArdle Printing Company in Washington, DC. In 1974, he accepted an appointment as a journeyman printer at the GPO. Mr. Boarman was elected president of his home Local 101-12 when he was 30 years of age. He later served as a national officer with the ITU, where he was a key architect of the merger between the ITU and the Communications Workers of America. He was elected ITU president shortly before the merger and has been reelected to seven successive terms since. He has served as an unpaid consultant to several Public Printers and has testified before various congressional committees regarding GPO programs and policies. He is an expert in this field. He is eminently qualified. I think the Members of this body know that. Mr. Boarman served as chairman of the $1 billion CWA/ITU Negotiated Pension Plan and the $125 million Canadian Negotiated Pension Plan. He has experience in management. He was among the union leaders who spearheaded the creation of the AFL-CIO Capital Stewardship Program and the Center for Working Capital in the Federation. Because of his experience in the field of pension administration, he was chosen to represent CWA on the Council of Institutional Investors, serving 12 years as a member of the CII Executive Board and three terms as its cochairman. He has also served on the Maryland Commission on Judicial Disabilities and as cochair of the Taft-Hartley Northern American Study Group educational investment conference. He has served as president of the Union Printers Home, a 122-bed skilled nursing facility in Colorado Springs, CO. I mention his extensive background to underscore the point that Bill Boarman is, perhaps, uniquely qualified to serve as the Nation's Public Printer, and there is absolutely no good reason to hold up his confirmation. All we are asking is, let's bring this nomination forward for a vote--a person who has eminent qualifications. There is no substantive objection to his confirmation. I hope my colleagues who have raised the objection will allow us to move forward. The Public Printer serves as the chief executive officer of the GPO, the agency charged with keeping the American people informed about the work of the Federal Government. GPO is one of the world's largest printing plants and digital factories and is one of the biggest print buyers in the world. GPO disseminates the Congressional Record and the Federal Register and a number of other products and services in both print and digital form. The agency has been tasked to build its digital capability into a state of the art operation to improve transparency and citizen access to government documents and reports. We hear all the time about making this system more transparent. Mr. Boarman knows how to do that. Let's give him a confirmed position so we can help bring the public more into what we do here in Congress. Bill Boarman faces the challenges of maintaining the traditional printing skills of an aging workforce while helping a 150-year-old organization adapt to a world in which most documents are ``born digital.'' As Bill has said: Few Federal agencies can count as their heritage the scope of the work GPO has performed, ranging from the first printing of the Emancipation Proclamation to providing digital access to the Government's publications today. The men and women of GPO are responsible for that heritage. It is past time that Bill Boarman--a man with over 40 years of experience in the printing industry--be considered and confirmed as the Nation's 26th Public Printer. I urge my colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle: Let the Senate do what it is legally responsible to do: advise and consent on these nominations. Let us vote so we can confirm this position that was first brought forward over a year and a half ago. With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, authorized under P.L. 105-312 in 1998 and reauthorized by P.L. 107-308 in 2002, the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network helps several million visitors and residents find, enjoy, and learn about the special places and stories of the Chesapeake and its watershed. Today I am introducing legislation to reauthorize this successful program. For visitors and residents, the Gateways are the ``Chesapeake connection.'' The Network members provide an experience of such high quality that their visitors will indeed connect to the Chesapeake emotionally as well as intellectually, and thus to its conservation. The Chesapeake Bay is a national treasure. The Chesapeake ranks as the largest of America's 130 estuaries and one of the Nation's largest and longest fresh water and estuarine systems. The Atlantic Ocean delivers half the bay's 18 trillion gallons of water and the other half flows through over 150 major rivers and streams draining 64,000 square miles within 6 States and the District of Columbia. The Chesapeake watershed is among the most significant cultural, natural and historic assets of our Nation. The Chesapeake is enormous and vastly diverse--how could you possibly experience the whole story in any one place? Better to connect and use the scores of existing public places to collaborate on presenting the many chapters and tales of the bay story. Visitors and residents go to more places for more experiences, all through a coordinated Gateways Network. Beyond simply coordinating the Network, publishing a map and guides, and providing standard exhibits at all Gateways, the National Park Service has helped Gateways with matching grants and expertise for 200 projects with a total value of more than $12 million. This is a great deal for the bay--it helps network members tell the Chesapeake story better and inspires people to care for this National Treasure--and it is a good deal for the Park Service. In this legislation, we cap the Gateways authorization at just $2 million annually. It serves all 150+ Gateways and their 10 million visitors. No other National Park can provide such a dramatic ratio of public dollars spent to number of visitors served. With the National Park Service's expertise and support, Gateways have made significant progress in their mission to tell the bay's stories to their millions of members and visitors, extend access to the bay and its watershed, and develop a conservation awareness and ethic. It is time to reauthorize the Chesapeake Gateways and Watertrails program. It is my hope that the Congress will act quickly to adopt this legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, authorized under P.L. 105-312 in 1998 and reauthorized by P.L. 107-308 in 2002, the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network helps several million visitors and residents find, enjoy, and learn about the special places and stories of the Chesapeake and its watershed. Today I am introducing legislation to reauthorize this successful program. For visitors and residents, the Gateways are the ``Chesapeake connection.'' The Network members provide an experience of such high quality that their visitors will indeed connect to the Chesapeake emotionally as well as intellectually, and thus to its conservation. The Chesapeake Bay is a national treasure. The Chesapeake ranks as the largest of America's 130 estuaries and one of the Nation's largest and longest fresh water and estuarine systems. The Atlantic Ocean delivers half the bay's 18 trillion gallons of water and the other half flows through over 150 major rivers and streams draining 64,000 square miles within 6 States and the District of Columbia. The Chesapeake watershed is among the most significant cultural, natural and historic assets of our Nation. The Chesapeake is enormous and vastly diverse--how could you possibly experience the whole story in any one place? Better to connect and use the scores of existing public places to collaborate on presenting the many chapters and tales of the bay story. Visitors and residents go to more places for more experiences, all through a coordinated Gateways Network. Beyond simply coordinating the Network, publishing a map and guides, and providing standard exhibits at all Gateways, the National Park Service has helped Gateways with matching grants and expertise for 200 projects with a total value of more than $12 million. This is a great deal for the bay--it helps network members tell the Chesapeake story better and inspires people to care for this National Treasure--and it is a good deal for the Park Service. In this legislation, we cap the Gateways authorization at just $2 million annually. It serves all 150+ Gateways and their 10 million visitors. No other National Park can provide such a dramatic ratio of public dollars spent to number of visitors served. With the National Park Service's expertise and support, Gateways have made significant progress in their mission to tell the bay's stories to their millions of members and visitors, extend access to the bay and its watershed, and develop a conservation awareness and ethic. It is time to reauthorize the Chesapeake Gateways and Watertrails program. It is my hope that the Congress will act quickly to adopt this legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on October 19, 2011, at 2:30 p.m., in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building. The Committee will hold a hearing entitled, ``Concussions and the Marketing of Sports Equipment.''

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. The bill I introduced last week, the End Racial Profiling Act, would build on the Department of Justice's current ``Guidance Regarding the Use of Race by Federal Law Enforcement Agencies'' issued in 2003. This official Department of Justice guidance certainly was a step forward, but it does not have adequate provisions for data collection and enforcement for State and local agencies. The Department of Justice guidance also does not have the force of law. The legislation I introduced would prohibit the use of racial profiling by Federal, State, or local law enforcement agencies. This bill clearly defines racial profiling to include race, ethnicity, national origin, or religion as protected classes. It requires training of law enforcement officers to ensure they understand the law and its prohibitions. It creates procedures for receiving, investigating, and resolving complaints about racial profiling. It would apply equally to Federal, State, and local law enforcement, which creates consistent standards at all levels of government. The vast majority of our law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line every day handle their jobs with professionalism, diligence, and fidelity to the rule of law. However, Congress and the Justice Department can still take steps to prohibit racial profiling and root out its use. I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact this very important legislation. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, last week I introduced legislation in the Senate that would prohibit the use of racial profiling by Federal, State, or local law enforcement agencies. The End Racial Profiling Act, S. 1670, had been introduced in previous Congresses by our former colleague, Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, and I am proud to follow his leadership. I thank my colleagues, Senator Blumenthal, Senator Durbin, Senator Gillibrand, Senator Kerry, Senator Lautenberg, Senator Levin, Senator Menendez, Senator Mikulski, and Senator Stabenow, for joining me as original cosponsors of this legislation. Racial profiling is ineffective. The more resources that are spent investigating individuals solely because of their race or religion, the fewer resources that are being directed at suspects actually demonstrating illegal behavior. In response to a question about the December 2001 bomb attempt by Richard Reid, Former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff stated: The problem is that the profile many people think they have of what a terrorist is doesn't fit the reality . . . and, in fact, one of the things that the enemy does is to deliberately recruit people who are Western in background or in appearance, so that they can slip by people who might be stereotyping. Racial profiling diverts scarce resources from real law enforcement. In my own State of Maryland in the 1990s, the ACLU brought a class action suit against the Maryland State Police for illegally targeting African-American motorists for stops and searches along Maryland's highways. The parties ultimately entered into a Federal court consent decree in 2003 in which they made a joint statement that emphasized in part: The need to treat motorists of all races with respect, dignity, and fairness under law is fundamental to good police work and a just society. The parties agree that racial profiling is unlawful and undermines public safety by alienating communities. Racial profiling demonizes entire communities and perpetuates negative stereotypes based on an individual's race, ethnicity, or religion. I agree with Attorney General Holder's remark to the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee where he stated: In this Nation, security and liberty are--at their best-- partners, not enemies, in ensuring safety and opportunity for all . . . In this Nation, the document that sets forth the supreme law of the land--the Constitution--is meant to empower, not exclude . . . Racial profiling is wrong. It can leave a lasting scar on communities and individuals. And it is, quite simply, bad policing--whatever city, whatever state. Using racial profiling makes it less likely that certain affected communities will voluntary cooperate with law enforcement and community policing efforts. Minorities living and working in these communities may also feel discouraged from traveling freely, and it corrodes the public trust in government. I wish to thank the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights for their endorsement of this legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the endorsement letter of September 14, 2011, from over 50 different organizations be printed in the Record.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. I ask that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I take this time to comment on a vote that took place earlier this week that the people of this Nation are having a hard time understanding--why the Republicans are filibustering legislation that will allow us to consider job growth in America. It is a filibuster, and that happens so frequently in this body that it seems to be standard operating procedure for the Republicans. But in this case I think the American public realizes they have gone too far. We have to create more jobs. We have to create more jobs so our economy can grow. There are millions of Americans who are seeking work and cannot find jobs and they need work in order to support their families. We need more jobs for our economy to grow. We got into a debate in August about what we were going to do about raising the debt ceiling and we were all concerned about the deficits this country has. Yes, we are concerned that our current deficits are not sustainable, but we will not have a budget that is sustainable unless we have more jobs. You can look at all of the programs to reduce government spending or to try to bring in more revenues, but if we do not create more jobs we are not going to be able to get our budget into a semblance of order. The reason for that is simple. The more people out of work, the more reliant they are on government services and the less taxes paid in to pay our bills. So for the sake of those who are seeking employment, for the sake of our economy, for the sake of our budget, we have to create more jobs. We had a vote this week on moving forward on S. 1660, the President's jobs initiative. It was a motion to proceed. It was a motion to bring the bill to the floor so we could get into a debate about the best way to create jobs. Many of us thought we would have amendments that would enhance and improve the President's package. The President's package was a starting point for our debate. But the Republicans said no, we are going to filibuster even the opportunity for us to consider jobs legislation. They wouldn't even allow us to move forward. We had a majority of the Senate. We had enough votes to pass it or at least proceed if it were a simple majority, which is what most democracies believe is the right standard. But, no, we had a filibuster that did not even allow us to consider the jobs bill on the floor of the Senate. I find that most surprising. When you look at the President's proposal, the individual provisions have bipartisan support. This is not a Democratic proposal. Every one of the provisions that the President included in his package had bipartisan support. The Congressional Budget Office said the President's proposal would actually reduce the deficit and would create jobs. It has been validated by the outside experts. Marc Zandi, the chief economist at Moody's--he was also, by the way, the economic adviser to Senator McCain during the 2008 Presidential campaign--said, talking about the President's plan, ``The plan would add 2 percentage points to GDP growth next year, add 1.9 million jobs, and cut the unemployment rate by a full percentage point.'' There are many others. Macroeconomic Advisers said that the President's package would: Boost the level of GDP by 1.3 percent by the end of 2012, and by 0.2 percent by the end of 2013-- In other words, we are moving in the right way; and then went on to say: Raise nonfarm establishment employment by 1.3 million by the end of 2012 and 0.8 million by the end of 2013. . . . The Economic Policy Institute estimates that the President's job bill would create 2.6 million jobs over 2 years and protect an existing 1.6 million jobs. Republicans say we cannot even talk about this on the floor, the majority shouldn't at least be able to bring forward this issue so we can have a full debate in the Senate. The President's proposals included areas in which I think there is strong bipartisan support--to help small businesses. We all know small businesses are the growth engine of America. That is where jobs are created. That is where most innovation will take place. The proposal would help small businesses with new hires on their payroll and expensing of investments so they have an incentive to invest in job growth. That is what was in the President's proposal to help small businesses. In the President's proposal was help for our veterans. We all talk about our warriors, our soldiers, out there every day protecting our values. They have represented America so brilliantly in international combat. Now they are coming home to America. They are coming home and they cannot find work, cannot find a job. The President is saying let's help them. We all talk about doing what we can to help our warriors. This bill did something tangible about it. What did the Republicans do? They filibustered an opportunity to even talk about a bill that could help create more jobs. The proposal also provides for infrastructure. Infrastructure is building. It is rebuilding America. Democrats and Republicans agree on that. We have to rebuild our bridges and our roads. The bridges are falling down. Roads are in desperate need of repair. Roads help provide economic growth for our country. It would help us rebuild America, create jobs through those who construct these new roads and bridges and electric grids, et cetera, but then also make America more competitive. It would help those who are unemployed in several ways. First, it would provide not just unemployment benefits, which are important because they help families keep their homes and keep their family together and help our economy because that money is spent, it also reforms the unemployment system, so we train those who are out of work for jobs that are available. In many cases, as the Presiding Officer from Ohio knows, those who have lost their jobs are going to have to find employment in a different area. Well, the unemployment system should be reformed so that they could be trained for those types of jobs. That was in the proposal the Republicans would not even allow us to bring up. They filibustered rather than allow the majority to bring forward a bill to help create jobs. The bill was paid for. As I have indicated before, it didn't increase the deficit. The Congressional Budget Office said it would actually reduce the deficit. I want to make the point I made earlier and underscore this: The motion to proceed was the starting point for the debate--the starting point. I had three amendments I wanted to bring forward--I am going to talk very briefly about those three amendments--that I think would have improved the President's bill. One would allow the Small Business Administration surety bond program--this is a program that gives small construction companies the ability to move forward with construction work. It would increase the surety bond program from $2 million to $5 million. It was an amendment I offered to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Let me tell you about the success of that program. As a result of increasing the surety bonds from $2 million to $5 million, we saw a jump of 36 percent in 1 year, 2010, in construction work for small businesses. That is quite a success story. Guess how much money that cost the taxpayers of this country in direct costs. Zero, no cost to the taxpayer. Well, my amendment would make that extension permanent. And it is bipartisan-- Democrats and Republicans support it. I have another amendment that would expand the infrastructure work to include water projects. Water projects are in desperate need. We have a huge need to deal with the way we treat wastewater and our safe drinking water. My amendment would add $30 billion for infrastructure in our water projects. It would provide $20 billion to the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and $10 billion to the Safe Drinking Water Act. I would like to talk about one more amendment, which is the cool roof bill I filed with Senator Crapo which would change the depreciation schedule for those businesses that put on modern roofs that are energy efficient and would create 40,000 jobs and help our energy policy. This is another amendment I cannot bring forward because the Republicans filibustered the motion to proceed, so we can't bring up the jobs bill. Well, Americans want us to consider jobs legislation. I hope we find a way to do it. I can tell you that I am going to continue the fight to create more jobs for America because that is America's future. Our economy depends upon it, and we need to continue to focus on how we can create more jobs for the American economy. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

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

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize and congratulate the Pennsylvania Avenue African Methodist Episcopal, AME, Zion Church in Baltimore as the congregation celebrates the church's 170th anniversary. Founded on May 31, 1841, Pennsylvania Avenue AME Zion Church has flourished for many decades under the guidance and spiritual leadership of its anointed pastors since it was founded on May 31, 1841. Records from 1904 reveal that Reverend B.J. Bolding and 200 church members purchased Zion's first building at 1125 Pennsylvania Avenue for $16,000. Reverend Bolding served for 27 years until Rev. George Marion Edwards became the pastor in May 1931. Twenty-eight years later, on October 4, 1959, Rev. Clinton Rueben Coleman was chosen as Zion's new spiritual leader and served during the tumultuous years of the civil rights movement. Reverend Coleman was responsible for the renovation of the old Zion Church building and started the course toward planning and building a new church building. On May 12, 1972, he was elected to the AME Zion Church's 12-member Board of Bishops, the denomination's 72nd bishop in succession. In 1972, Rev. Marshall H. Strickland was selected to lead Zion, and the journey continued towards constructing a new church. Three years later, Reverend Strickland led the groundbreaking ceremony at the southwest corner of Pennsylvania Avenue and Dolphin Street. On Sunday, April 10, 1977, after 16 years of vision, perseverance, and hard work, a jubilant congregation marched into the new church building. Eleven years later, on May 15, 1988, the mortgage note for the church was burned. On July 31, 1992, Reverend Strickland was elected the 88th bishop in succession in the AME Zion Church. In September 1992, continuing the legacy of an historic church with great spiritual leaders, the Reverend Dr. Dennis Vernon Proctor was appointed pastor of the Pennsylvania Avenue AME Zion Church. Dr. Proctor's leadership and pastoral abilities, steadfastly applied for over a decade, increased the church's membership to over 1,800 congregants. After 16 years of faithful service to Zion Church, Dr. Proctor was elected the 97th bishop in succession during the Quadrennial Convention in Atlanta, GA, on July 18, 2008. On September 14, 2008, less than 2 months before our Nation elected its first African American President, the Right Reverend Warren M. Brown, presiding prelate of the Mid-Atlantic II Episcopal District, announced the current pastor of the Pennsylvania Avenue AME Zion Church, Rev. Lester Agyei McCorn, to a standing-room-only congregation. Pennsylvania Avenue AME Zion Church, located in Baltimore's Upton community, is committed to providing spiritual leadership and support to help people overcome the political, social, and educational struggles affecting them in the communities that the church serves. It is a Kingdom-focused church, whose legacy continues with a renewed vision to make new disciples, help believers to mature in their faith, and multiply outreach and service ministries. I encourage all Senators to join me in congratulating Pennsylvania Avenue AME Zion Church on its 170th anniversary and its even brighter future.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I am proud to introduce the Water Infrastructure Resiliency and Sustainability Act of 2011 along with my colleagues, Majority Leader Reid and Senator Boxer. This legislation will allow local communities to improve their water infrastructure in the face of changing hydrological conditions. Improving our water infrastructure is a major challenge to my constituents living in Maryland and to all Americans. It is no secret that America's current water infrastructure systems are in poor condition. Our water and wastewater systems have been given a D-, the lowest possible grade. In the United States, close to 250,000 water mains wasting 1.7 trillion gallons of water break each year. Unfortunately, Marylanders have experienced this crisis first hand. In July of this year, a water main break in Cumberland, Maryland, caused close to $300,000 in damage to a local, family-owned business. Last January, a Prince George's County water main break shut down a portion of the Capital Beltway, closed local businesses and schools, and required 400,000 residents to boil their drinking water to ensure its safety. The EPA has estimated that traditional necessary repairs and replacement costs over the next twenty years will cost over $600 billion. We, as a Congress, have stepped up in the past to assist communities in fixing aging water infrastructure systems. The Safe Water Drinking Act Amendments of 1996 established the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. The fund helps public water systems finance infrastructure projects needed to comply with Federal safe drinking water regulations. But we need to do more. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson told Congress that adapting to changing hydrological conditions is a ``significant issue'' that water and waste water systems must address soon. These hydrological changes will likely result in ``too little water in some places, too much water in other places, and degraded water quality'' in other areas across the country. According to a recent study by the National Association of Clean Water Agencies and the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, the costs in dealing with this new recognized problem could approach $1 trillion through 2050. The Water Infrastructure Resiliency and Sustainability Act aims to help local communities meet the challenges of upgrading water infrastructure systems to meet these hydrological changes. The bill directs the EPA to establish a Water Infrastructure Resiliency and Sustainability, WIRS, program. Grants will be awarded to eligible water systems to make the necessary upgrades. Communities across the country will be able to compete for federal matching funds, funds which in turn will help finance projects to help communities overcome these threats. Improving water conservation, adjustments to current infrastructure systems, and funding programs to stabilize communities' existing water supply are all projects WIRS grants will fund. WIRS will never grant more than 50 percent of any project's cost, ensuring cooperation between local communities and the federal government. The EPA will try to award funds that use new and innovative ideas as often as possible. A healthy water infrastructure is as important to America's economy as paved roads and sturdy bridges. Water and wastewater investment has been shown to spur economic growth. The U.S. Conference of Mayors has found that for every dollar invested in water infrastructure, the Gross Domestic Product is increased to more than $6. The Department of Commerce has found that that same dollar yields close to $3 worth of economic output in other industries. Every job created in local water and sewer industries creates close to four jobs elsewhere in the national economy. This legislation would create jobs throughout the economy today, while helping water and wastewater systems make improvements to keep water clean and safe for tomorrow. I believe that by investing in water infrastructure, we can make progress for the American people on both jobs and clean, safe water. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation in the Senate that would prohibit the use of racial profiling by Federal, State, or local law enforcement agencies. The End Racial Profiling Act, ERPA, 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 Senators Blumenthal, Durbin, Gillibrand, Kerry, Lautenberg, Levin, Menendez, Mikulski, and Stabenow for joining me as original co- sponsors of this legislation. Racial profiling is ineffective. The more resources that are spent investigating individuals solely because of their race or religion, the fewer resources are being directed at suspects actually demonstrating illegal behavior. Former DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff stated in response to questions about the December 2001 bomb attempt by Richard Reid that ``the problem is that the profile many people think they have of what a terrorist is doesn't fit the reality . . . and in fact, one of the things the enemy does is to deliberately recruit people who are Western in background or in appearance, so that they can slip by people who might be stereotyping.'' Racial profiling diverts scarce resources from real law enforcement. In my own state of Maryland, in the 1990's, the ACLU brought a class- action lawsuit against the Maryland State Police for illegally targeting African-American motorists for stops and searches along Maryland's highways. The parties ultimately entered into a federal court consent decree in 2003 in which they made a joint statement that emphasized in part ``the need to treat motorists of all races with respect, dignity, and fairness under the law is fundamental to good police work and a just society. The parties agree that racial profiling is unlawful and undermines public safety by alienating communities `` Racial profiling demonizes entire communities and perpetuates negative stereotypes based on an individual's race, ethnicity, or religion. Earlier this year, I spoke out on the Senate floor and in the Senate Judiciary Committee to share my thoughts on the hearings held in the House of Representatives entitled ``The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community's Response'' chaired by Congressman Peter King. This hearing served only to fan flames of fear and division. This spectacle crossed the line and chipped away at the religious freedoms and civil liberties we hold so dearly. Radicalization may be the appropriate subject of a Congressional hearing but not when it is limited to one religion. When that is done, it sends the wrong message to the public and casts a religion with unfounded suspicions. I agree with Attorney General Holder's remarks to the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, where he stated that ``in this nation, security and liberty are--at their best--partners, not enemies, in ensuring safety and opportunity for all . . . I've spoken to Arab- Americans who feel that they have not been afforded the full rights-- or, just as important, the full responsibilities--of their citizenship. They tell me that, too often, it feels like `us versus them.' That is intolerable . . . In this Nation, the document that sets forth the supreme law of the land--the Constitution--is meant to empower, not exclude . . . Racial profiling is wrong. It can leave a lasting scar on communities and individuals. And it is, quite simply, bad policing-- whatever city, whatever state.'' Using racial profiling makes it less likely that certain affected communities will voluntarily cooperate with law enforcement and community policing efforts. Minorities living and working in these communities may also feel discouraged from travelling freely, and it corrodes the public's trust in government. The bill I am introducing today, the End Racial Profiling Act, would build on Department of Justice's current ``Guidance Regarding the Use of Race by Federal Law Enforcement Agencies'' issued in 2003. This official DOJ guidance certainly was a step forward, but it does not have adequate provisions for data collection and enforcement for state and local agencies. The DOJ guidance also does not have the force of law. ERPA would prohibit the use of racial profiling by Federal, State, or local law enforcement agencies. The bill clearly defines racial profiling to include race, ethnicity, national origin, or religion as protected classes. It requires training of law enforcement officers to ensure that they understand the law and its prohibitions. It creates procedures for receiving, investigating, and resolving complaints about racial profiling. It would apply equally to Federal, State, and local law enforcement, which creates consistent standards at all levels of government. The vast majority of our law enforcement officials that put their lives on the line every day handle their jobs with professionalism, diligence, and fidelity to the rule of law. However, Congress and the Justice Department can still take further steps to prohibit racial profiling and root out its use. I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact this legislation.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I am proud to introduce the Water Infrastructure Resiliency and Sustainability Act of 2011 along with my colleagues, Majority Leader Reid and Senator Boxer. This legislation will allow local communities to improve their water infrastructure in the face of changing hydrological conditions. Improving our water infrastructure is a major challenge to my constituents living in Maryland and to all Americans. It is no secret that America's current water infrastructure systems are in poor condition. Our water and wastewater systems have been given a D-, the lowest possible grade. In the United States, close to 250,000 water mains wasting 1.7 trillion gallons of water break each year. Unfortunately, Marylanders have experienced this crisis first hand. In July of this year, a water main break in Cumberland, Maryland, caused close to $300,000 in damage to a local, family-owned business. Last January, a Prince George's County water main break shut down a portion of the Capital Beltway, closed local businesses and schools, and required 400,000 residents to boil their drinking water to ensure its safety. The EPA has estimated that traditional necessary repairs and replacement costs over the next twenty years will cost over $600 billion. We, as a Congress, have stepped up in the past to assist communities in fixing aging water infrastructure systems. The Safe Water Drinking Act Amendments of 1996 established the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. The fund helps public water systems finance infrastructure projects needed to comply with Federal safe drinking water regulations. But we need to do more. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson told Congress that adapting to changing hydrological conditions is a ``significant issue'' that water and waste water systems must address soon. These hydrological changes will likely result in ``too little water in some places, too much water in other places, and degraded water quality'' in other areas across the country. According to a recent study by the National Association of Clean Water Agencies and the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, the costs in dealing with this new recognized problem could approach $1 trillion through 2050. The Water Infrastructure Resiliency and Sustainability Act aims to help local communities meet the challenges of upgrading water infrastructure systems to meet these hydrological changes. The bill directs the EPA to establish a Water Infrastructure Resiliency and Sustainability, WIRS, program. Grants will be awarded to eligible water systems to make the necessary upgrades. Communities across the country will be able to compete for federal matching funds, funds which in turn will help finance projects to help communities overcome these threats. Improving water conservation, adjustments to current infrastructure systems, and funding programs to stabilize communities' existing water supply are all projects WIRS grants will fund. WIRS will never grant more than 50 percent of any project's cost, ensuring cooperation between local communities and the federal government. The EPA will try to award funds that use new and innovative ideas as often as possible. A healthy water infrastructure is as important to America's economy as paved roads and sturdy bridges. Water and wastewater investment has been shown to spur economic growth. The U.S. Conference of Mayors has found that for every dollar invested in water infrastructure, the Gross Domestic Product is increased to more than $6. The Department of Commerce has found that that same dollar yields close to $3 worth of economic output in other industries. Every job created in local water and sewer industries creates close to four jobs elsewhere in the national economy. This legislation would create jobs throughout the economy today, while helping water and wastewater systems make improvements to keep water clean and safe for tomorrow. I believe that by investing in water infrastructure, we can make progress for the American people on both jobs and clean, safe water. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation in the Senate that would prohibit the use of racial profiling by Federal, State, or local law enforcement agencies. The End Racial Profiling Act, ERPA, 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 Senators Blumenthal, Durbin, Gillibrand, Kerry, Lautenberg, Levin, Menendez, Mikulski, and Stabenow for joining me as original co- sponsors of this legislation. Racial profiling is ineffective. The more resources that are spent investigating individuals solely because of their race or religion, the fewer resources are being directed at suspects actually demonstrating illegal behavior. Former DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff stated in response to questions about the December 2001 bomb attempt by Richard Reid that ``the problem is that the profile many people think they have of what a terrorist is doesn't fit the reality . . . and in fact, one of the things the enemy does is to deliberately recruit people who are Western in background or in appearance, so that they can slip by people who might be stereotyping.'' Racial profiling diverts scarce resources from real law enforcement. In my own state of Maryland, in the 1990's, the ACLU brought a class- action lawsuit against the Maryland State Police for illegally targeting African-American motorists for stops and searches along Maryland's highways. The parties ultimately entered into a federal court consent decree in 2003 in which they made a joint statement that emphasized in part ``the need to treat motorists of all races with respect, dignity, and fairness under the law is fundamental to good police work and a just society. The parties agree that racial profiling is unlawful and undermines public safety by alienating communities `` Racial profiling demonizes entire communities and perpetuates negative stereotypes based on an individual's race, ethnicity, or religion. Earlier this year, I spoke out on the Senate floor and in the Senate Judiciary Committee to share my thoughts on the hearings held in the House of Representatives entitled ``The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community's Response'' chaired by Congressman Peter King. This hearing served only to fan flames of fear and division. This spectacle crossed the line and chipped away at the religious freedoms and civil liberties we hold so dearly. Radicalization may be the appropriate subject of a Congressional hearing but not when it is limited to one religion. When that is done, it sends the wrong message to the public and casts a religion with unfounded suspicions. I agree with Attorney General Holder's remarks to the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, where he stated that ``in this nation, security and liberty are--at their best--partners, not enemies, in ensuring safety and opportunity for all . . . I've spoken to Arab- Americans who feel that they have not been afforded the full rights-- or, just as important, the full responsibilities--of their citizenship. They tell me that, too often, it feels like `us versus them.' That is intolerable . . . In this Nation, the document that sets forth the supreme law of the land--the Constitution--is meant to empower, not exclude . . . Racial profiling is wrong. It can leave a lasting scar on communities and individuals. And it is, quite simply, bad policing-- whatever city, whatever state.'' Using racial profiling makes it less likely that certain affected communities will voluntarily cooperate with law enforcement and community policing efforts. Minorities living and working in these communities may also feel discouraged from travelling freely, and it corrodes the public's trust in government. The bill I am introducing today, the End Racial Profiling Act, would build on Department of Justice's current ``Guidance Regarding the Use of Race by Federal Law Enforcement Agencies'' issued in 2003. This official DOJ guidance certainly was a step forward, but it does not have adequate provisions for data collection and enforcement for state and local agencies. The DOJ guidance also does not have the force of law. ERPA would prohibit the use of racial profiling by Federal, State, or local law enforcement agencies. The bill clearly defines racial profiling to include race, ethnicity, national origin, or religion as protected classes. It requires training of law enforcement officers to ensure that they understand the law and its prohibitions. It creates procedures for receiving, investigating, and resolving complaints about racial profiling. It would apply equally to Federal, State, and local law enforcement, which creates consistent standards at all levels of government. The vast majority of our law enforcement officials that put their lives on the line every day handle their jobs with professionalism, diligence, and fidelity to the rule of law. However, Congress and the Justice Department can still take further steps to prohibit racial profiling and root out its use. I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact this legislation.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I wish to congratulate the University of Maryland, UMD, for winning the U.S. Department of Energy's 2011 Solar Decathlon competition. The competition is organized by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, America's premier laboratory for research and development regarding renewable energy and energy efficiency. This biennial event challenges collegiate teams from around the world to design, build, and operate solar-powered houses that are affordable to build and operate, energy-efficient, and aesthetically attractive. Nineteen teams representing the United States, China, New Zealand, Belgium, and Canada competed in this year's event, which was held at the National Mall's West Potomac Park. I am so proud of the collaborative efforts of more than 200 UMD students, faculty, and mentors from diverse disciplines across the campus who participated in making their entry, WaterShed, such a resounding success. Students, faculty, and mentors came from the College of Agriculture & Natural Resources; the School of Architecture, Planning & Preservation; the College of Computer, Mathematical & Natural Sciences; the A. James Clark School of Engineering; the University of Maryland Libraries; the National Center for Smart Growth Research & Education; and the Center for the Use of Sustainable Practices. Over ten academic courses were offered as part of WaterShed's development since the spring 2010 academic semester. WaterShed was inspired by concern for the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem, so the project wasn't just a successful model for energy efficiency; it also implemented practical solutions to preserve our precious water resources and manage stormwater runoff, a particularly damaging form of pollution to the bay. The Chesapeake Bay is Maryland's greatest natural resource. For Marylanders, this national treasure is the cornerstone of our economy and part of the fabric of our communities. Its restoration and protection have been the focal point of my work on environmental issues in the Senate. The University of Maryland's work in publicizing and promoting sustainable housing options like WaterShed for the residents of the Chesapeake Bay region will go a long way toward preserving this treasured resource. I cannot think of a more appropriate effort for the University of Maryland to be engaged in, and I applaud everyone's hard work during the past two years towards this common cause and successful outcome. The success of WaterShed is the pinnacle of a long history of achievement for the University of Maryland in the Solar Decathlon competition. The University of Maryland's initial design for the inaugural Solar Decathlon competition in 2002 became the foundation for subsequent entries. In 2002, Maryland's entry placed fourth. In 2005, Maryland's solar house won the People's Choice and Solar Innovation Awards while placing eighth overall. In 2007, Maryland's LEAFHouse won the People's Choice Award and received a host of other awards from industry and professional associations. The acronym LEAF stands for ``Leading Everyone towards an Abundant Future.'' LEAFHouse placed second in the overall scoring. The UMD team gained valuable knowledge from the 2005 design and LEAFHouse, both of which are still in use for educational purposes. This year, the team took its vision to an even higher level with WaterShed. The forms of the house highlight the path of a water drop. The split butterfly roofline collects storm water into the core of the house for use. WaterShed also features a holistic approach to water conservation, recycling, and storm water management. These features include a modular constructed wetland that helps filter and recycle greywater from the shower, washing machine, and dishwasher; a green roof that slows rainwater runoff to the landscape while improving the house's energy efficiency; and a garden, composting system, and edible wall system to illustrate a complete carbon cycle program. So many people are involved in the Solar Decathlon. I would like to acknowledge several of them, including Richard J. King, Solar Decathlon director, and Betsy Black, sponsorship manager, at the U.S. Department of Energy, DOE. Other DOE personnel involved include Marilyn Burgess, John Chu, Sheila Dillard, Kerry Duggan, Nicole Epps, Peter Gage, Cassie Goldstein, David Lee, Howard Marks, Martha Oliver, Erin Pierce, Roland Risser, Phil West, and Janie Wise. At the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Carol Anna, Susan Bond, Bob Butt, Mike Coddington, Rebecca Dohrn, John Enoch, Sara Farrar-Nagy, Michael Gestwick, Amy Glickson, Pamela Gray-Hann, Sheila Hayter, Mary Ann Heaney, Henri Hubenka, Terri Jones, Ron Judkoff, Alicen Kandt, Stephen Lappi, Kamie Minor, Susan Moon, Ruby Nahan, Michael Oakley, Sean Ong, Alexis Powers, Joe Simon, Jeff Soltesz, Blaise Stoltenberg, Byron Stafford, Lee Ann Underwood, Amy Vaughn, Mike Wassmer, and Andrea Watson all lent their support to the Decathlon. Contractors and other contributors include Aquilent, Cecile Warner, Colorado Code Consulting, D&R International, Eberle Construction, Hargrove, Carolynne Harris, Linder & Associates, Navigant, Norton Energy R&D, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Showcall, Stratacomm, and Studio Ammons. Yesterday, a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives said that the United States ``can't compete with China to make solar panels and wind turbines,'' and suggested that the Federal Government shouldn't subsidize green-energy programs. I guess he didn't visit West Potomac Park to see what is going on. The many creative entries in the 2011 Solar Decathlon demonstrate to the wider public the cost effectiveness of houses that combine energy efficient construction and appliances with renewable energy systems that are available today. And even better homes and appliances and systems are just around the corner. Investing in green technologies creates jobs. Diversifying our energy sources creates competition, which will help to stabilize and lower energy prices. Thinking beyond fossil fuels buried in unstable or unreliable countries strengthens our national security. I think the Solar Decathlon represents all that, and much more. At this critical juncture in our nation's history, we face significant economic, energy, and environmental challenges. It is easy to be discouraged or cynical. But for each person who says, ``it can't be done,'' there are scores of people--especially young people--out in our universities and communities, in workplaces and laboratories across America, who reject defeatism and cynicism, who demonstrate the ``can- do'' spirit that made America great and will restore our fortunes. Competitions such as the Solar Decathlon and entries such as the University of Maryland's Watershed provide sparkling evidence of the innovative and practical solutions to the intertwined problems we face. More importantly, they provide hope and inspiration. If we are going to solve our problems, we need to roll up our sleeves and collaborate with each other--just like the UMD team did. Scores of students worked on WaterShed. I am so pleased their hard work paid off and so proud of them. I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge and salute them on this watershed accomplishment. UMD student team leaders included Jay Chmilewski, Major: Civil Engineering, Spring 2012; WaterShed Disciplines: Engineering, Construction; David Daily (Majors: Electrical Engineering & Nanotechnology, Spring 2012), WaterShed Disciplines: Engineering, Construction; Leah Davies (Major: Graduate Architecture Student, Fall 2011), WaterShed Disciplines: Architecture, Living Systems/Landscape, Construction, Communications; Steve Emling (Major: Mechanical Engineering, Spring 2013), WaterShed Disciplines: Engineering, Construction; Isabel Enerson (Major: Environmental Science & Technology, Spring 2013), WaterShed Disciplines: Living Systems/Landscape, Communications; Tamir Ezzat (Major: Graduate Architecture Student, Spring 2013), WaterShed Discipline: Architecture; Michael Feldman (Major: Civil Engineering, Spring 2011), WaterShed Disciplines: Engineering, Construction; David Gavin (Major: Graduate Architecture Student, Spring 2012), WaterShed Disciplines: Architecture, Construction; Jeff Gipson (Major: Graduate Architecture & Real Estate Development Student, Spring 2012), WaterShed Disciplines: Architecture, Communications; Newton Gorrell (Major: Graduate Architecture Student, Spring 2012); WaterShed Disciplines: Architecture, Construction, Communications; Joseph Ijjas (Major: Master of Architecture, Spring 2011), WaterShed Disciplines: Architecture, Construction, Communications; Moshe Katz (Major: Computer Science, Spring 2012), WaterShed Disciplines: Communications, Computer Science; Yehuda Katz (Major: Computer Science, Spring 2012), WaterShed Disciplines: Communications, Engineering, Computer Science; Lynn Khuu (Major: Master of Architecture, Spring 2011), WaterShed Disciplines: Architecture, Communications; Zachary Klipstein (Major: Master of Architecture, Spring 2011), WaterShed Disciplines: Architecture, Construction; Parlin Meyer (Major: Graduate Architecture Student, Spring 2012), WaterShed Disciplines: Architecture, Construction; Jeff Rappaport (Major: Bioengineering, Spring 2013), WaterShed Disciplines: Engineering, Construction; Matt Sickle (Major: Graduate Landscape Architecture Student, Spring 2012), WaterShed Disciplines: Living Systems/Landscape; Evan Smith (Major: Civil and Environmental Engineering, Spring 2012), WaterShed Disciplines: Engineering, Construction; Scott Tjaden (Major: Environmental Science& Technology, Spring 2012), WaterShed Disciplines: Living Systems/Landscape, Construction; Kevin Vandeman (Major: Graduate Architecture & Real Estate Development Student, Spring 2012), WaterShed Disciplines: Architecture, Construction; Nick Weadock (Major: Materials Science & Engineering, Spring 2013), WaterShed Disciplines: Engineering, Construction; Allison Wilson (Major: Master of Architecture, Spring 2011), WaterShed Disciplines: Project Management, Architecture, Communications, Construction; and Veronika Zhiteneva (Major: Environmental Science & Technology, Spring 2013), WaterShed Disciplines: Living Systems/Landscape, Construction, Communications. Student team members include Ali Alaswadi, Benjamin Bates, Amy Chen, Brennan Clark, Linda Clark, Michael Craton, Natalya Dikhanov, Eric Gellman, James Han, Justin Heil, Justin Huang, Erik Kornfeld, John Kucia, Allen Meizlish, Jeffrey Sze, and Andrew Taverner. Extended team members included Ali Alaswadi, Sahin Arikoglu, Alex Atahua, Rishi Banerjee, Justin Bare, Katherine Beisler, Jacob Bialek, Paul Bilger, Christoper Binkley, Ian Black, Andrew Bruno, Victoria Chang, Wen-Hui Chen, Ethan Cowan, Justin Cullen, Diana Daisey, Adam Davies, Aleron Dsilva, Mariam Eshete, Eric Faughnan, Ryan Fitch, Meredith Friedman, Holman Gao, Louis Gbone, Philip Geilman, Phil Geiman, Marisa Gomez, Karen Hillis, Ananya Hiremath, Vanessa Hoffman, Amy Hudson, Phil Jacks, Peter James, Eric Joerdens, Christine Kandigian, Jacob Kunken, Christopher Leung, Arik Lubkin, Christopher Luther, Ryan Maisel, Bracha Mandel, Maria Martello, Zachary Martinez, Abe Massad, Mark Matovich, Shakira Mccall, Kenneth Morgan, Christopher Myers, Zachary Nerenberg, Matthew Newman, Yuchen Nie, Albert Palmer, Daniel Perdomo, Robert Pettit, Chau Pham, Georgina Pinnock, Kaitlin Pless, Olga Pushkareva, James Ramil, Mark Reese, Raheena Rehman, Nicolas Roldos, Boateng Rosemond, Michele Rubenstein, Michael Satoh, Charles Schupler, Juliet Serem, Valerie Smith, Jacob Steinberg, Michael Taylor, Alexander Tonetti, Marcela Trice, Katherine Vocke, Nader Wallerich, Luxi Wang, Amy Weber, Sofia Weller, Christine Wertz, Kiley Wilfong, Christine Wirth, Fawna Xiao, Diane Ye, and Jesse Yurow. The UMD team benefited from a lengthy list of mentors, including Deborah Bauer, a freelance architectural consultant who collaborated with communications team members for various endeavors including tour guide training, residents interviews, and general strategy development; Grant Baxter, Baxter Floors, who worked with the team to craft and install the bathroom woodwork and grate; Charlie Berliner, Berliner Construction, a ``cornerstone'' of the architecture and construction team; Dan Blankfeld, John J. Kirlin, LLC, who provided 30 hours' worth of Occupational Health & Safety Administration (OSHA) training for the core construction team; Joe Bolewski, Whiting Turner, who provided construction and carpentry mentorship to the team; Brian Borak, Booz Allen Hamilton, who provided expertise and assistance to the DC electric team; Erin Carlisle, EYP Architecture & Engineering, who provided Revit training and technical assistance to the drawing and documentation team; John Cartagirone, American Power and Light, a three-time UMD solar decathlon mentor and friend who worked side-by- side with the electrical team to wire the house and install light fixtures; Chris Cobb, Robert Silman and Associates, who worked in partnership with UMD's 2007 Solar Decathlon's LEAFHouse team and returned this year to provide his expertise in the integration of architecture and structural systems; John Coventry, Coventry Lighting, who provided mentorship as the architecture team developed the lighting design; Adam Eurich, Robert Silman and Associates, who worked with the team to develop structural design, analysis, details, and drawings; Taz Ezzat, Maryland Custom Builders, Inc., who collaborated with the team on the construction, transport, assembly, and pick/set strategies; George Fritz, Horizon Builders, who hosted visits from the construction team to his demonstration and mock-up facility where he shared best practices for building craft, construction, and vapor management; Julie Gabrielli, Gabrielli Design Studio, who provided input to the communications team on the development of its strategy and concept; Aditya Gaddam; Jennifer Gilmer, Jennifer Gilmer Kitchen and Bath, who worked with the architecture team to design WaterShed's kitchen; Anne Hicks Harney, Ayes Saint Gross, who worked with the drawing and documentation team to finalize the project manual; Maggie Haslam; Ray Hayleck, PMSI Consulting, who provided cost estimating mentorship to the affordability team during the initial phases of estimating; Joan Honeyman, Jordan Honeyman Landscape Architecture, who collaborated with the landscape team on the landscape and plant selection; Ming Hu, HOK, who provided energy modeling assistance to the engineering team; Adam Keith, Whiting Turner, who provided construction and carpentry mentorship to the team; Peter Kelley, American Wind Energy Association, who provided media training to the team and worked with the communications team to develop the target market; Benson Kwong, enVErgie Consulting, who provided mentorship to the engineering cost estimating team during the design development phase; Mike Lawrence, National Museum of Natural History, who worked with the communications team to develop the house tour strategy; Dale Leidich, MTFA Architecture, who provided project management guidance, insight, and advice to the team; John Love, Love's Heating and Air, who consulted with the team on the heating, ventilation, and air-condition, HVAC, design and implementation; Kristen Markham, Simpson Gumpertz & Heger, who consulted with the team on building envelope construction means and methods; Evan Merkel, Greenspring Energy, who worked with the electrical team to design and integrate the photovoltaic (PV) and micro inverter system; John Morris, Perkins Eastman, a veteran of UMD's 2007 LEAFHouse entry and a practicing architect with a background in construction who provided mentorship and assistance to the construction team; Frank Plummer, Tremco, who served as a trusted mentor for the construction team and provided expertise related to construction means and methods for liquid applied membranes for the building envelope and the constructed wetlands; Don Posson, Vanderweil, a long-time teaching partner at UMD who reviewed the engineering and living systems design; Kristin Potterton, Robert Silman and Associates, who worked with the team to develop structural details and drawings; Tyler Sines, who provided mentorship to the engineering team developing the liquid desiccant wall; Niklas Vigener, Simpson Gumpertz & Heger, who consulted with the team on building envelope construction means and methods; Dan Vlacich, Accenture, who provided expertise, assistance, and power tools to the DC electric team; Fred Werth, Kensington Plumbing and Heating, Inc., who provided master plumbing expertise and assisted the team in the design and installation of the solar thermal and HXEST systems and domestic plumbing system; Bill Wiley, the Potomac School, who collaborated with the engineering team to design and build WaterShed's smart house controls system; Jay Williams, marketing and design specialist for the solar home industry, who provided marketing assistance to the communications and marketing teams; Dan Zimmerman, Shapiro & Duncan, a veteran of two previous decathlons who provided experience and advice to the HVAC and solar thermal teams, facilitated donations, and provided the engineering team with his can-do perspective on the value of figuring things out through hands-on experience. Last but not least, I would like to congratulate the UMD faculty and staff, starting with the University's President and Chancellor, Dr. Wallace D. Loh and Dr. William E. Kirwan, respectively. Faculty team members included: Mike Binder, AIA LEED-AP, Lecturer in the School of Architecture, Planning & Preservation; Patricia Kosco Cossard, M.A., M.L.S., Librarian and Lecturer in the School of Architecture, Planning & Preservation; Amy Gardner, AIA LEED-AP, Associate Professor in the School of Architecture, Planning & Preservation and Director of UMD's Center for the Use of Sustainable Practices, Brian Grieb, AIA LEED-AP, Lecturer in the School of Architecture, Planning & Preservation and a Partner with GriD Architects in Annapolis; Dr. Keith Herold, Associate Professor of Bioengineering in the A. James Clark School of Engineering; Madlen Simon, AIA, Associate Professor and Architecture Program Director in the School of Architecture, Planning & Preservation, and a Principal at Simon Design; Dr. David Tilley, Associate Professor of Ecological Engineering in the College of Agriculture & Natural Resources, and President of the International Society for the Advancement of Energy Research; and Brittany Williams, Associate AIA LEED-AP Lecturer in the School of Architecture, Planning & Preservation, Project Designer for MTFA Architecture in Arlington, Virginia, and a 2007 Solar Decathlon team leader. What an outstanding accomplishment! Go Terps!

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I rise to urge my colleagues to support the Currency Exchange Rate Oversight Reform Act, S. 1619, of which I am proud to be an original cosponsor. I wish to thank my colleague and friend, Mr. Brown, the Senator from Ohio, for his leadership in bringing forward this very important legislation. This legislation is about jobs. We all talk about ways we can increase job opportunity in America. Yes, we have to do a better job in our infrastructure and rebuilding America, our roads, our bridges, our schools, our energy infrastructure, our water infrastructure. That is a very important part of job growth in America. We have to help our small businesses. The President is right to focus a program that will help small businesses because that is the job growth energy in America. But another area that is critically important for us on job growth is trade. I represent the State of Maryland. The Port of Baltimore is an economic engine of our State, where we employ many people because of the Port of Baltimore. We want to see products that not only come into America, but we want to see products that leave America for the international marketplace. American manufacturers, producers, and farmers can outcompete their competition anywhere in the world as long as we have a level playing field. If we have a level playing field, we will not only keep jobs in America, we will create new jobs in America because we can outcompete the world. But we can't do it if we give away a huge advantage to other countries. Currency manipulation allows other countries to have unfair competitive advantage over American manufacturers, producers, and farmers. That is what this bill is aimed at: to give us a level playing field, to allow us to be able to compete fairly. I also wish to acknowledge that this legislation is bipartisan. I think it is nonpartisan. This is legislation that makes sense for our country to keep jobs and create jobs. The legislation provides necessary mechanisms to help halt currency manipulation committed by any country. Currency manipulation is an unfair trade practice that reduces the price of imported goods while raising the price of American goods. We are talking about giving a discount to our competitors. How do we expect an American manufacturer to be able to compete with an imported product if they get a discount on the price? That is what happens when they arbitrarily undervalue their currency as a foreign competitor, and that is what is happening to American manufacturers. Trying to end this practice is just common sense and will finally allow us to address our net exports, helping us reduce trade imbalances and, most importantly, create jobs in America. Of course, China is one of the largest abusers of this type of manipulation. Despite a pledge from China in 2001 to adhere to open and fair trade, it continues to violate global trade rules which, in turn, erodes the U.S. manufacturing base and economy. One of these market-distorting practices is China's effort to keep its currency severely undervalued. Unlike other currencies, the Chinese yuan does not fluctuate freely against the dollar but is artificially pegged in order to boost China's exports. Bringing the Chinese yuan to its equilibrium level at 28.5 appreciation is essential to creating much needed jobs in this country as well as a fair and global marketplace. Let me repeat this. Because of what China does on pegging its currency to ours, not allowing it to freely fluctuate, Chinese products, in effect, get a 28.5-percent discount. If a company is manufacturing a product and trying to compete with an imported Chinese product, how can they do that if their competitor gets a 28.5-percent discount? That is what is happening in America today. This legislation would allow those who are being harmed by this unfair trade practice to be able to bring a trade remedy against that unfairly imported product. Inexpensive Chinese imports have caused a great deal of harm to the U.S. manufacturing sector. New studies show that 2.8 million American jobs, including 1.9 million manufacturing jobs, were lost or displaced over the past decade due to the growing U.S. trade deficit with China, fueled, in part, by currency manipulation. So we have documented millions of jobs that we have lost and that have been lost because we have allowed, without challenge, China to give discounts to its manufacturers bringing products into America. Again, if it is a level playing field, American manufacturers and producers can compete. But they can't compete with such an unfair trading practice. Many U.S. industries have been hard hit by unfair trade practices and currency manipulation, impeding their ability to compete here and abroad. The Alliance for American Manufacturing says that addressing this currency manipulation would lead to the creation of up to 2.25 million American jobs, an increase in the U.S. gross domestic product of $285.7 billion, a 1.9-percent--or $190 billion--reduction in our annual trade deficit; finally, an annual deficit of $71 billion, or between $600 to $800 billion over the next 10 years, if sustained. No wonder this is bipartisan. No wonder this is nonpartisan. Here, by just standing up for American manufacturers and allowing them to be on a level playing field, we can not only increase jobs in America, we can not only reduce the trade imbalance, we can also reduce the budget imbalance. All that can be done if we can establish a level playing field to give our manufacturers, producers, and farmers the opportunity to challenge this unfair practice. That is what this legislation does. With figures such as this, this bill is seemingly a noncost, bipartisan, long-term jobs measure. This would not only spur economic growth but economic stability that would ensure a better and more secure future for U.S. manufacturers, workers, and communities. This is to keep jobs here in America but also give us the opportunity to create more jobs, helping our economy grow. Simply put, this legislation will allow U.S. manufacturers the ability to use existing countervailing duty laws to obtain relief from injury caused by imported goods which benefit from currency manipulation as export subsidies while also providing the U.S. Treasury a new framework by which to identify misaligned currency. In September 2010, the House adopted a similar measure with overwhelming bipartisan support. Passage here in the Senate will lead to real consequences for countries that abuse currency manipulation, and empower the United States to create a more level economic playing field. We can get this done. This is something that can get done. The House has already passed it. We have bipartisan support in the Senate. We have the votes to pass it. I urge my colleagues, let us get this done. Don't try to put other amendments on it. All they are going to do is make it difficult for us to achieve something great for our economy and great for American production. Let's get this matter up for a vote and not try to do all these unrelated amendments. I applaud my colleague Senator Brown from Ohio. He is on the floor. I mentioned earlier I thank him for his leadership for not only bringing this bill together but keeping the bipartisan group together so we can show we can get this done. Now we need the Members of the Senate to say it is time for us to vote on this bill. Let's get it done. Let's send it to the President for the President to sign it. Let's do something that will not only create jobs but help us deal with our trade imbalance and deal with our budget imbalance. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I wish to honor the memory of Ambassador Stephan Minikes, and send my condolences to his wife Dede and their family. Born in Berlin, Germany, and immigrating to the United States as a young boy, Stephan exemplified the American spirit through a life of hard work and public service. I worked closely with Stephan while he served as the U.S. Ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe from 2001 until 2005. During that period, he made significant advances in Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia on a wide range of security-related concerns, including counterterrorism, arms control, human rights, democratization, and economic development. Prior to his appointment, Ambassador Minikes practiced law for more than 30 years in Washington, DC and New York. He worked in public law and policy strategy, while more recently he represented clients in national defense, energy, transportation, and international trade. A well known member of the Washington political, legal and diplomatic communities, Ambassador Minikes combined knowledge of business and government from the perspectives of the White House, the U.S. Congress and Federal agencies, as well as of the roles of U.S. embassies and foreign embassies in Washington, DC. Ambassador Minikes was a 1961 graduate of Cornell University and a 1964 graduate of Yale Law School. He was a member of the bars of the District of Columbia, the State of New York, the U.S. Supreme Court and various other Federal courts, including the U.S. Court of Military Appeals, and a member of the American Bar Association, the District of Columbia Bar Association, the Federal Bar Association, the American Society of International Law and the Association of the Bar of the city of New York. Along with these bar association memberships and his impressive educational background, Stephan was a wonderful public servant throughout his lifetime. He lectured to students around the world on issues ranging from foreign policy to national defense, traveled to more than 100 countries representing the U.S. Government and private interests, served as the director of the Washington Opera at the Kennedy Center, was a member of the Executive Committee of the Yale Law School and a member of the board of directors of the American Council on Germany. Ambassador Minikes was devoted not only to his country, the promotion of human rights and the improvement of global policies, but to his family. Colleagues, please join me in honoring and remembering of Ambassador Stephan Minikes, a true leader and patriot.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I am proud to introduce the Justice Thurgood Marshall's Elementary School Study Act. The elementary school that Justice Marshall attended, known as PS 103, located in my hometown of Baltimore, is a place of national significance because it marks the site where one of our Nation's greatest legal minds began his education. Thurgood Marshall is well known as one of the most significant historical figures of the American civil rights movement. By the time he was 32, he was appointed the chief legal counsel for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, NAACP. He served at the NAACP a total of 25 years and was a key strategist to end racial segregation throughout the United States. Perhaps the greatest illustration of this effort was his victory before the Supreme Court overturning the Plessy doctrine of `separate but equal' and ending school segregation with the landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, KS in 1954. Not only did this case open up educational opportunity and sparked the civil rights movement in this nation, it also established Thurgood Marshall, still a young attorney from Baltimore, as one of the greatest legal minds in all the land. This case was just one of the 29 cases he won before the U.S. Supreme Court. Fittingly, Marshall was the first African American confirmed to the Supreme Court. He was nominated by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1967 and served 24 years, until 1991. On the high court, Marshall continued his fight for the Constitutional protection of individual human rights. But Thurgood Marshall was not always a legal giant. He was once a young boy growing up in West Baltimore. He received the first 6 years of his public education at PS 103. An apocryphal story goes that a young Thurgood Marshall studied the U.S. Constitution in the basement of the building while serving detention. Regardless of whether or not this is true, the building powerfully tells the story of racial segregation in America, PS 103 was a ``blacks only'' school when Justice Marshall was a student there, and the rise of one of the country's paramount thinkers and pioneers in the civil rights movement. The building is located at 1315 Division Street in the Upton Neighborhood of Old West Baltimore. The building is part of the Old West Baltimore National Register Historic District, and is listed as a contributing historic resource for the neighborhood. The Old West Baltimore historic district is one of the largest predominately African American historic districts in the country, and its significance is centered on the African American experience in the area. In Baltimore, we are fortunate to have the National Park Service operate two historical sites, Fort McHenry and the Hampton Mansion. Adding PS 103 is a unique opportunity for the National Park Service to work in Baltimore's inner-city and to expand its ability to engage people around African American history. Needless to say, Thurgood Marshall's legacy is one that should be preserved. He was one of our country's greatest legal minds and a prominent historical figure of one chapter of our country's great history--the civil rights movement. This bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study of PS 103 to evaluate the suitability and feasibility of establishing the building as a unit of the National Park Service. Preserving the building that was Justice Marshall's elementary school will give Americans insight into Justice Marshall's childhood. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.