Thomas Carper

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I thank the Republican whip for those words and for his work on this. I would just close with this thought: Whenever I talk to people who have been married a long time--like 50, 60, 70 years--I always ask them, what is the secret to being married a long time? I get some very funny answers, and I get some very poignant ones as well. The best answer I have ever heard to that question, what is the secret to being married 50, 60, or 70 years, is the two c's--not ``Cornyn'' and ``Carper'' but ``communicate'' and ``compromise.'' I would add maybe a third to that, and that is ``collaborate.'' We need to demonstrate the ability to communicate and to compromise and to collaborate. And those aren't always the secret to a vibrant marriage, but they are the secret to a vibrant democracy. This is a confidence-building measure. I think we have taken an important step here, working with Democrats and Republicans and working with a Democratic President, and the next step is one we have just talked about, trade adjustment assistance. We need to do that. If we can actually work through these issues this week and produce a bipartisan product that the President is going to sign, we will actually build some trust. And when we turn to the issue of transportation and having a robust, vibrant transportation system and how to fund that, how to pay for that, what to do, this will be helpful. So my applause to Senator Ron Wyden, Senator Murray on our side, Senator Hatch, the leader on the Republican side, and to Senator Cornyn for good work--not done but a very good start today. I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, while the Senator from Texas is still on the floor, let me say, if I could--he mentioned the word ``trust'' a number of times. It is an important word in Congress. One of my favorite sayings is ``Integrity--if you have it, nothing else matters. Integrity--if you don't have it, nothing else matters.'' The same is true for trust. In order to get things done here--there is a lot we need to get done. Everybody realizes that. My takeaway from the election last November was threefold: No. 1, people want us to work together; No. 2, they want us to get stuff done; and No. 3, they want us to get things done that will actually strengthen the economic recovery. One of the ways to strengthen the economic recovery, frankly, is to make sure that those markets overseas will actually allow us to sell into them, whether it is products or goods or services, that we have access to those markets. The other thing is that my colleague from Texas is as big believer, as am I, in the Golden Rule, and that is to treat people the way we want to be treated. And I think most of the people in this country support what we are doing. Most of the Democrats in our country support what their President has proposed, and the Republicans as well. But what we need to do while we move forward with trade promotion authority is we need to keep in mind that not everybody will be helped by this and that there are some people who will to be disadvantaged, and we have an obligation to them to treat them how we would want to be treated if we were in their shoes. There is a sister piece of legislature to go along with trade promotion authority, and I would ask the Republican whip from Texas to give us some assurance or reassurance so we build trust around this issue. When we are contacted by folks from around the country today, tomorrow, or the next day, what are we going to do to provide assistance to those people who may be disadvantaged because of trade promotion authority and the trade deal that is going to be negotiated? Can you give us some assurance there? Is this like the end of the road or are there some more pieces to follow this week?

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, it is with great pleasure that I rise on behalf of the Delaware Delegation to honor the exemplary service of Alan Levin, director of the Delaware Economic Development Office, upon his retirement. Alan became director in January 2009 and continued to serve with distinction in that capacity for 6 years. He assumed that position at a time when tens of thousands of Delawareans were losing their jobs, and the State's top priority was putting them back to work. Throughout this tumultuous time, he has been a tremendous leader and true advocate for the State. Alan has a lifetime of experience when it comes to knowing what it takes to make a business successful. In 1987, he took over Delaware's homegrown pharmacy chain Happy Harry's, the business his father started, and grew it to become an iconic brand with 76 stores throughout the state. Prior to taking over the family business, he worked for United States Senator Bill Roth as his executive assistant and counsel. He is a graduate of Tulane University and Widener University Law School. When Delaware Governor Jack Markell tapped him to head the Delaware Economic Development Office, unemployment in Delaware was soaring. The State's automotive plants were shuttering, and the State's major oil refinery announced plans to idle operations. Alan got straight to work, and over the next 6 years, the Delaware Economic Development Office awarded more than $213 million in job creation grants and loans to corporations through its strategic fund, and courted big firms such as Amazon, Barclays, Capitol One, JP Morgan Chase, Kraft Foods, Purdue and Sallie Mae to expand its current operations or relocate to Delaware. Alan was also instrumental in reopening the shuttered Delaware City Oil Refinery, putting hundreds of people back to work at one of the State's most significant industrial sites. Alan has been lauded as a bold risk-taker whose experience and innovative planning has helped Delaware have the fastest job growth in the Mid-Atlantic over the last 2 years. He can also be credited with helping to level the playing field for minority, women, and veteran business owners, as well as those with disabilities. On behalf of Senator Chris Coons and Congressman John Carney, I wholeheartedly thank Alan Levin for his service to the State of Delaware. His model leadership and dedication has improved the quality of life for countless residents and businesses in our great State. We offer our sincere congratulations on a job well done, and wish him and his wife Ellen, their children Andrew, Daniel and Jason, and their granddaughter Hannah, many happy, healthy and successful years to come.

Mr. CARPER

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

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I wish to honor and thank Janet Burrell for her 37 years of talented and dedicated public service upon her retirement from the Senate. Her career in the Senate spans an impressive array of issues and responsibilities--all of which she met with grace, skill, and good cheer. For the last 16 years, Janet has served as the office administrator for the Democratic staff of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Janet started her career in the Senate on the Committee on Finance in 1985 as a staff assistant. She and her colleagues worked around the clock--taking shifts, day and night--to help enact the mammoth and historic Tax Reform Act of 1986. From the Committee on Finance, she moved to the Committee on Environment and Public Works and, finally, to the Committee on Governmental Affairs, which is now the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Over her 30 years of service in the Senate, Janet worked on teams tackling a wide range of legislation, moving from the Tax Reform Act of 1986 to the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security in 2003. She has worked for six Senators over the years, including both Republicans and Democrats, in both the majority and the minority, and even in a Senate evenly split between Democrats and Republicans. Along the way in her Senate career, Janet learned and mastered a broad array of new skills from managing human resources to operating computers to learning the intricacies of how to make a committee run smoothly. She was the office administrator of the now-Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs during the 9/11 terrorist attacks, when anthrax was discovered in the Senate, and even during an earthquake. The challenges were difficult and diverse but Janet rose to every task. Among other things, at the time of the anthrax incident, Janet supervised the young staff who opened the mail. In that capacity, it was among her responsibilities to calm the fears of the staff and their worried parents. She was also responsible for figuring out evacuation drills for scenarios like a biological attack, terrorist attack, or active shooter--risks that few could have envisioned when she started with the committee 16 years ago. Janet also helped shape Senate history. Beginning in 2004, she played an instrumental role in orchestrating the committee's transition from the Governmental Affairs Committee to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Prior to serving in the Senate, Janet worked in the House of Representatives for my former colleague, Ralph H. Regula of Ohio, and she served 7 years in the executive branch at the U.S. Office of Government Ethics and at the U.S. General Services Administration. In every office that she was a part of, Janet acted as a force of calm and generosity at the center of chaotic day-to-day, week-to-week schedules. Her colleagues are quick to share stories of times when Janet went above and beyond the call of duty to make someone's day smoother. In fact, they tell me that her selflessness and kindness was reflected in every task she took on. One of Janet's former staff directors said that Janet, ``always did whatever had to be done to make sure that others felt and understood how much they were appreciated.'' I couldn't agree more. She truly embodies the Golden Rule by always treating others as she would want to be treated. As she gracefully exits her lifelong career in public service, Janet leaves behind a family of colleagues that will miss her and long remember her. As we speak of Janet's most significant accomplishments, I would be remiss if I did not mention Janet's daughter Ashley, the apple of her eye. Ashley got an early start in the Senate--as an infant in the Senate day care center. She went on to be one of the few students at her high school to earn a full international baccalaureate diploma. From there, Ashley earned an advanced degree in counseling and is now fully licensed, helping numerous young adults and families as they cope with life's challenges. Clearly, the apple did not fall far from the tree. Upon her retirement, I thank Janet for the many invaluable contributions she has made to our committee, the Senate, the Federal Government, and our Nation. I congratulate her on a truly remarkable career. On behalf of all of us in the Senate, I want to wish her and her family the very best in all that lies ahead for each of them. Godspeed.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I have come to the floor to discuss the need to strengthen the transportation system of our country, our roads, our highways, our bridges--our transportation system. A long time ago, the question was asked: What is the role of government? If you ask 500 people, you probably will not get 100 different answers, but you will get a lot of different answers. Abraham Lincoln was once asked: What is the role of government? This is what he said: The role of the government is to do for the people what they cannot do for themselves. Let me say that again. The role of government is to do for the people what they cannot do for themselves. Sometimes I go to schools and young students ask me: What do you do? The kids in elementary schools, third, fourth, fifth graders say: What do you do? I tell them I am a United States Senator. They say: What do you do? I tell them I help make the rules for our country. We call them laws. I do that with 99 other Senators, 435 Representatives, the President, and the Vice President. They say: Well, what else do you do? I tell them I help people. I help people. The best way to help somebody is to make sure they have a job--to make sure they have a job. I had the privilege of being Governor of Delaware for 8 years. I am told that in those 8 years, more jobs were created in Delaware than any 8 years in Delaware history. I did not create one of them. We have seen in the last 6-plus years in this country some 12 million jobs created. I did not create one of them. My colleagues did not create those jobs. The President and the Vice President did not create those jobs. What we are responsible for doing here is to create a nurturing environment for job creation, access to capital--to money--for businesses that need to raise money, a world-class workforce, public safety, clean environment, public health, a Tax Code that is fair and reasonable, regulations that embody common sense and reflect common sense. We actually have, believe it or not, on each of our desks on the floor, a book. It is called the ``Senate Manual.'' We do not look at it that often, but if you go to one of the sections about two-thirds of the way through the book, you will find the Constitution. The Constitution lays out who is responsible for what generally in our country, for different responsibilities that do fall on government. There is a section in the Constitution--I am not going to read it, but Senator Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma has oftentimes referred to it--where it talks about the obligation and responsibility of the Federal Government to post roads--post roads. For years, that has been read and interpreted to mean to build some roads, some highways, and some bridges. As time goes by, we have more and more people to build transit systems as well. As it turns out, as we go along in time--after being a country for almost 225 years or so, one of the most important things that we do in creating a nurturing environment for job creation and job preservation is to make sure our country has transportation systems-- roads, highways, bridges, transit systems--that are worthy of this great Nation that we are. As a former Governor--as I like to say, a recovering Governor--but as a former Governor, I have seen the impact roads, highways, bridges, and transit systems have on the economic growth and success in my State, the region in which we live, and across this country. It is how we move people. It is how we move goods. It is the key to an efficient and growing economy. For more than a decade, however, we have faced funding shortfalls for the Federal highway trust fund. This stop-and-go funding and lack of uncertainty has undermined--has undermined--the potential for economic growth in America for years. That has to stop. In fact, since 2008, we had to transfer nearly $65 billion out of the general fund--nearly $65 billion out of the general fund--which is far from running a surplus, to patch holes in the highway trust fund. I like to use the example of the glasses. We have glasses here that the pages are nice enough to fill with water and to bring for us from time to time. I would like for this glass to be the Federal highway trust fund. It is empty. There is another glass here. This is the general fund of the United States. It is empty. We have another glass over here that is full. It is full. When the general fund is empty and the transportation fund, the highway fund are empty, what we do is we go to this glass over here and say: How about some water? How about some money? We borrow money all over the world--all over the world. One of the places we borrow a lot of it is China. When the Chinese lend us money, they do not want to be bothered when we feel they may have been manipulating their currency. They will say to us: We thought you wanted to borrow money, so leave us alone on currency manipulation. They may say: Leave us alone when it comes to taking unfair advantage in terms of trade. When the Chinese are pushing around the Vietnamese in the Philippines in the South China Sea--where I used to fly as a flight officer--they would say: You cannot do that. And the Chinese might respond: Well, we thought you wanted to borrow our money. We find ourselves in a very difficult position to be obligated to a lender that is doing things that we think are inappropriate or wrong. Unfortunately, with the example like the one I have just given you, this actually does happen. We have not had a transportation bill that lasts for more than 2 years for, I think, now 7 years. It used to be commonplace that every 6 years we would pass a fund, a transportation bill, for our country. We call it the highway bill, but it was for roads, highways, and for transit systems--every 6 years, almost like clockwork. The money provided by the Federal Government provides roughly one- half of all the money that is spent in the State highway budget, State highway transportation budget. Half of that money is Federal money appropriated by the Congress and approved by the President. Why we have not had a transportation bill that lasted for more than 2 years, since 2008--we have passed some short-term funding provisions and authorization provisions for transportation that lasts as little as a few days--a few days. This undercuts Governors and undercuts mayors around the country. It prevents them from making long-term investments in critical transportation projects. Let me give a good example. State Route 1 Delaware runs from I-95 to the north, north-south, right past Dover, our State capital, passing Dover Air Force Base, and heads on down to the southern part of our State, where we raise more chickens and soybeans in Sussex County, DE, than any other county in America. It is a county that has more five- star beaches than anywhere else in America. When I had the privilege of being Governor of Delaware, we actually built, modernized, and expanded State Route 1. We replaced about 40 traffic lights with a four- or five- or six-lane limited access highway that cuts not in half but greatly eliminates bottlenecks and expedites the flow of traffic in my State. It took over a decade--maybe a dozen years--from start to finish. Why did it take that long? It is because these projects need some things. You have to take some time to plan the project. You have to take some time to fund the project. You have to take time to contract the project through competitive bids. You have to get the permits for the project. Sometimes there is litigation to work through. It is part of what has to be done to build a major road, highway or bridge in a State. It does not take just a few weeks to do this. It does not take just a few months to do this. It can take years. In the case of State Route 1--in a little State--it took years, roughly a dozen of them. And without the certainty in the future that the Federal funding will be there for a project that is almost impossible to do it well and, frankly, without that kind of certainty, it is really expensive to do these projects. Stop-and-go. ``Stop-and- go'' means stop and pay lot more money for the projects we are trying to build. Yet even though we know our States, our counties, our cities, and our businesses are counting on us in this body to do our jobs, we let them down time and time again. What is worse is that Congress has known about this problem for just about a decade--for almost a decade. It was in 2005 that Congress included provisions in transportation legislation to create not one but two blue ribbon commissions. For what purpose? Will it help us to figure out how to pay for highways, bridges, and transit systems which we are not smart enough to figure this out? Why don't we put together some commissions and let the experts come in and they can help us out? We received the reports and the recommendations. We just never acted on them. In 2008, these two Commissions delivered reports summarizing the advice of countless experts and giving us a roadmap to fixing the problems for good. Among all of their recommendations, one idea was stressed above all the rest: gradually raise transportation user fees and then index them to inflation going forward. Despite understanding the problem and the smartest solutions for nearly a decade, we have only shirked our responsibility to agree on a solution again and again. Rather than take advantage of those blue ribbon ideas, we have continued to kick the can down the road, continued to avoid doing what voters sent us here to do; that is, to make decisions, tough decisions, in the best interests of our country. I stand here today to say it is high time we finally take care of business and do the job the American people sent us here to do. My concern about this issue should come as no surprise to any of my colleagues. For years I have been outspoken about my desire to fully fund a multiyear transportation bill. Government does have a clear role in ensuring that our country has modern, high-quality roads, highways, bridges, and transit systems. That is why the Framers of our Constitution had the good sense to as much as say so in that Constitution. Unfortunately, it seems to me that our courage and willingness to fulfill this responsibility continues to escape us. Instead, we avoid tough choices and simply do things such as smooth pensions or steal Customs fees. Sometimes we will steal Customs fees that are not due for maybe 6, 7, 8 years into the future, and we steal that future money and use it to pay for a couple of months' worth of road, highway, and bridge construction today. We borrow mine safety funds. We apply other bandaids as well. The standard justification for each of these short-term patches has been that we need just a little more time to work out the details of a long-term plan. Just give us a little more time, and we will work this out. But, as usual, during the 10 months we gave ourselves when we passed the last short-term extension, which, as I recall, was early last August--the 12th time we have done this in 6 years, in case anyone has lost count--we have come no closer to a solution. The Washington Post last summer may have put it best, and here is what they said: ``Congress doesn't need more time, Congress needs more spine.'' Albert Einstein once said that the definition of insanity is doing something over and over again and expecting a different result. Today, I am asking our colleagues to join me and others to help stop this insanity. If we work together, I know we can find a way to invest in the 21st-century transportation system our States, our cities, and our businesses deserve and need in order to compete in a global marketplace. In an effort to do just that, Senator Boxer and I have introduced a measure that would at least get us started, taking a constructive step that would align the expiration of transportation programs with the funding available in the highway trust fund. What we have right now is that at the end of this month, the authorization for spending Federal money for these roads, highways, bridges, and transit projects--the authorizations to spend that money expires, effectively stopping the use of Federal money for these purposes at the end of this month. We can't let that happen. The authorization ends at, we will say right here, the end of May, in about 10 days. Meanwhile, the actual funds in the transportation trust fund, the highway trust fund, are good until the end of July. So the legislation Senator Boxer has joined me in introducing says: At least, if we do nothing else, let's align the end of the authorization--now May 31--to the end of the funding so that we can at least continue the work that is being done in States across the country in the meantime. If we work together, I know we can find a way forward. We have introduced this legislation, and this adjustment will keep the Congress from putting this issue, we hope, on the back burner yet again. We hope this will increase the likelihood that we can finally sit down and come to a long-term solution not this fall, not next year, but this summer. I know there are some who say: Well, let's just push this off until December. We have done that before and we can do that again. I just say to my friends, we have a way of--we are getting to the elections. We are getting into the election cycle for President later this year. Maybe there are some who feel that will be helpful to us in finding a way to come together and funding a transportation project. I would beg to differ. I think if we don't get it done sooner rather than later, if we don't make those tough decisions now, we are not going to make them when the caucuses are gathered in Iowa and the primary voters are starting to get riled up in New Hampshire and South Carolina. That is not going to help us do our jobs. There is a friend of mine who likes to talk about stopgap funding and the need to make a long-term commitment to America's growth and success. He says it is something like what we do now. It is something like taking a road trip--maybe a summer road trip across the country-- stopping to fill up our cars, our trucks, our minivans with gas 1 gallon at a time. Instead of filling up, we stop at a gas station and we get 1 gallon, and then we go down the road and a little while later we stop at another gas station and we buy another gallon. It is wasteful. It wastes time. It wastes money. It is no way to take a trip across the country with your family, and I can assure my colleagues it is no way to build a transportation system for a world-class power-- America. In any event, as I said earlier, I took two or three ideas away from the elections last year. No. 1, Americans want us to work together; No. 2, they want us to get things done; and No. 3, they want us to do everything we can to enhance and strengthen our economic recovery. Finally finding an agreement on a way to pass a fully funded 6-year transportation bill would help us do all three. We would demonstrate that we can work together. We would demonstrate that we can get things done for States and cities and counties across America. No. 3, we really would strengthen our economic recovery. We wouldn't just put 600,000 or 700,000 people to work across America building roads, highways, bridges, and transit systems; we would do a lot more than that. That is important. A lot of jobs need to be filled, and a lot of people would love to have those jobs. As it turns out, the McKinsey Global Institute recently reported that making a major effort to repair and improve our roads, highways, bridges, and transit systems could add about 1.5 percent to our annual GDP growth and create at least 1.8 million jobs. Let me say that again. Making a major effort to repair and improve our roads, highways, bridges, and transit systems could add about 1.5 percent to annual GDP growth. Keep in mind that GDP growth I think in the last quarter was only about 1 percent. This kind of investment could add another 1.5 percent to annual GDP growth and create almost 2 million jobs. By failing to pass a long-term transportation bill, we are sacrificing this potential growth and job creation. It is a little bit like leaving money on a table--in this case, a lot of it on a table. The Federal Government shares the responsibility with State governments to make investments in their aging infrastructure. As I said earlier, the Federal Government--when States spend money on roads, highways, bridges, and transit systems, whether it is in New Hampshire or Delaware, roughly half of that money is coming from the Federal Government. Our States are counting on us to be a partner in funding our transportation systems that the families and businesses we represent count on every day. When a Federal policy fails to plan for the future, we leave these people in the lurch. The highway trust fund has several dedicated revenue streams in the form of various user fees, as we know. These fees haven't been adjusted in over two decades. During that time, the purchasing power of transportation has nearly been cut in half. There have been increases in the price of concrete, asphalt, steel, and labor. The 18.3-cent Federal gas tax that we set up in 1993 is now worth less than a dime. The 24-cent diesel tax is worth less than 15 cents. The Congressional Budget Office put together the chart here on my left that shows the growing difference between the highway trust fund, the money we put out for transportation projects, and the money we take in from user fees. I would say we were doing reasonably good from 1998 to 2014. Every 6 years, we see it go up and then it drops down, and then it goes up and then it drops down. That is a 6-year transportation authorization bill. Look what happened starting this year. I might add that over the last several years, a lot of this money was just transferred out of the general fund, not money we actually raised. Then we borrowed most of that money from around the world. But we get to the year 2015, and look what happens. At the end of the year, every year up through 2025, this will be the shortfall. I think it adds up to about $140 billion by 2020. One does not have to be an accountant to know we have a problem when what we are spending outpaces what we collect more and more each year. We need to find a long-term solution that we can agree on to fix this problem, and we need to do it this summer. We don't need to do it this fall. We don't need to do it next winter. We need to do it this summer. Again, I talked about kicking the can into a Presidential election year. If we don't do it this summer, my fear is we won't do it at all-- at least not a long-term bill. Many of my colleagues have said we must wait until we can enact comprehensive tax reform that creates revenues to solve this problem. As a strong supporter of tax reform, I hope we can find a way to reform our Tax Code, find a way to generate some revenues that can be used to invest in the country's roads, highways, bridges, and transit systems. As I understand, this idea has support from not only President Obama but also from the House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, and that is encouraging. One thing I know for sure is that this idea is a lot better than kicking the can down the road. Let's be honest--we have been talking about tax reform for years. It is one of the most complicated problems Congress is facing. We can't just wait around letting our highways and transit systems that people count on deteriorate while we negotiate the incredibly tough decisions surrounding tax reform efforts. Furthermore, tax reform only offers one-time revenues that won't fix the long-term problem with the highway trust fund. I believe we have to have a viable backup plan in case a bipartisan deal on tax reform continues to elude the Congress. That is why I talked to literally a dozen Members of the House and the Senate from both parties and I asked them to share with me their most thoughtful ideas of what I hope could become an ``all of the above'' transportation funding proposal that we expect to unveil at the beginning of next month. I urge any of my colleagues with serious thoughts on how to shore up the highway trust fund to bring us their ideas and join this effort because I hope to present such a plan, as I said earlier, very soon and to make sure that we don't once again kick this can down the road. There is time to act. It is not next year. It is not around Christmastime. It is this summer. Gas prices this Memorial Day weekend will be lower than any Memorial Day in recent memory and are likely to stay that way for at least a while longer. The prediction is that they are actually going to start dropping again as we move into summer. There is an amazing coalition of stakeholders from all parts of the community--frankly, all parts of our country geographically--and throughout the business sector and our government as well, and they support a long-term transportation bill. They are businesses, labor groups, construction companies, transits, retail businesses, manufacturing businesses, and a lot of American families. Their message to us is the same: It is time to do the right thing. It is time for us to do our jobs. It is time for us to give America the roads, the highways, the bridges, and transit systems that we can be proud of and that will help our Nation to continue to grow and to be great. Mr. President, thank you so much. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, it is with great pleasure that I rise on behalf of the Delaware delegation to honor the service of David G. Bakerian upon his retirement as president, CEO and treasurer of the Delaware Bankers Association. David has dedicated the past 22 years of his life to helping lead the banking industry and keeping it alive and thriving in Delaware for the countless people it employs and serves. As president of the Delaware Bankers Association, David's priority has been to ensure that a significant part of America's banking industry--one of Delaware's top employers--maintained its home in in the First State and continues to thrive while serving customers in the First State and around the world. Tens of thousands of Delawareans rely on the good jobs that our State's financial services provide, jobs that have enhanced the lives of many. Dave is known for being honest, and even if someone didn't always like the answer, they respected him for doing the right thing, not what was easy or expedient. He also is admired for his positive, can-do attitude regardless of the magnitude of the challenges he and the members of the Delaware Bankers Association have faced over the years. Over more than two decades, David has worked with three Governors and testified before and advised 11 separate Delaware General Assemblies on a variety of banking legislative matters, including credit cards, trust administration, interstate banking and branching, foreclosure mediation, and consumer protection. In 2001, David led the Delaware Bankers Association in a cooperative venture with the University of Delaware's Center for Economic Education and Entrepreneurship, the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, and the Consumer Credit Counseling Services of Delaware and Maryland to form Keys to Financial Success, a high school credit course focusing on financial literacy. The program is still offered today in 28 high schools in Delaware with more than 4,200 students participating. In 2004, David was elected to a 1-year chairmanship of the State Association Division of the American Bankers Association. In this role, he became the national spokesperson for the 50 State bankers associations and held a seat on the American Bankers Association board of directors. He is the only Delawarean ever to serve in this national leadership role. His service in that role is a source of pride to our State. While David is passionate about banking, he actually began his career in education and studied to become a college professor. He possesses a remarkable ability to write clearly and communicate effectively. Those skills have helped him go on to such a successful career in banking, in part because of his ability to explain highly complex issues to almost anyone and everyone. His passion for education can be seen in his own academic achievements. After receiving his bachelor's degree from Siena College in New York, he went on to receive a master's degree from the University of West Florida and a postgraduate certificate in higher education administration from the University of Pennsylvania. Prior to his appointment at the Delaware Bankers Association, he served as executive director of the Delaware Chapter of the American Institute of Banking. He began his tenure at Delaware AIB in 1985 and oversaw the educational unit. Through his tireless efforts, David Bakerian has made a positive difference in not only the banking community but the education community and the community writ large. I am delighted to salute David and thank him for his many years of service to Delaware and to congratulate him on a truly remarkable and distinguished career. I know he looks forward to spending more time with his grandchildren in his garden and refining his culinary skills in the kitchen. In closing, on behalf of the people of Delaware, as well as on behalf of Senator Coons and Congressman Carney, I want to wish David and his wife Pam, his son Nick, and his daughters Alex and Catherine, along with his son-in-law Jeff and his grandchildren Adam and Madeline, the very best in all that lies ahead.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I wish to harken back about 6 months, if I could, to the election of last November. For me there were at least three takeaways from that election. No. 1, the voters of this country want us to work together and across party lines. No. 2, they want us to get things done. Among the things they want us to get done is to find a way to strengthen the economic recovery that has been underway now for several years. Senator Boxer has referred to a couple of things that would be on that to-do list--a robust 6-year transportation bill that rebuilds our roads, highways, bridges, transit systems and will put a lot of people to work and helps to strengthen our economic recovery by making a more efficient and effective transportation network to move products and goods all over this country and outside of this country. We need to strengthen our cyber security. We need to address data breach and all of the attacks that are going on throughout this country to businesses, colleges, and universities--you name it. We need tax reform that actually provides some predictability in the tax system and makes our Tax Code on the business side more competitive with the rest of the world. We also need to acknowledge, as the President has done, that 95 percent of the world's market lies outside of our borders--95 percent. The fastest growing part of that market around the world is Asia. The President has suggested and strongly supported a trade agreement that would involve 12 nations, including about a half dozen here in this hemisphere and the other half over in Asia. All together it encompasses about 40 percent of the world trade market. The President is not suggesting that we just open up our markets so that other countries can sell more of their stuff here. They already do that for the most part. The goal of this trade agreement is to open up these other markets in other countries so we can sell our goods, our products, and our services there. This is a top priority for this administration and this should be a top priority for Democrats and Republicans. This is a priority that should be hammered out and worked on in a way that will be fair to workers and middle-class families. The majority leader has come here today to suggest a path forward. I hope we will not reject it. What he suggested is we allow, through a vote on the cloture, to move to the floor and begin debate on four different pieces of legislation that are part of the transportation agreement. We have seen this movie before. In fact, we have seen it any number of times before because I believe we have given trade promotion authority to every President since World War II except Richard Nixon. The reason why is because it is almost impossible for 535 of us in the Congress to negotiate a trade deal. Whether it is 3 nations or 11 other nations, it is pretty much impossible, and that is why we have trade promotion authority. The majority leader suggested that we move to these four goals and let's begin the debate. We should realize, as Democrats, that we already realized a great victory here. In the past, the Republicans have rejected our efforts almost every time to include trade assistance adjustment, so that when folks are displaced from their jobs, they can actually get help on their health care, job training, and have an opportunity to put their lives back together. This legislation today, the trade promotion authority, actually expresses what our views and our priorities are as a Congress through the trade negotiator and to our negotiating partners overseas, and I think that is in our interest. The other thing that we get out of moving TPA with TAA together is that we get the assurance upfront that we are going to look after workers who are displaced. It is the best trade adjustment assistance we have ever had, at least in terms of the way it treats workers and displaced workers. It even helps those who are maybe not even affected by this agreement but are affected by other calamities in our economy--not just in the manufacturing sector but also in the service sector as well. I suggest this to my colleagues: Let's spend the time between now and 2:30 p.m. trying to figure out how we can establish some confidence, faith, and trust here, so that if we move to this bill, it will not be just to consider trade promotion authority and trade adjustment assistance, we will have an opportunity to consider the other two pieces of legislation as well. There is a lot riding on this. The economic recovery of our country does not rise and fall simply on the passage of this legislation and the conclusion of these negotiations, but it sure would help. It would sure help bolster a stronger economic recovery, just as would the passage of a 6-year transportation bill, just as would cyber security legislation, data breach legislation, and on and on. I will close with this thought about the debate we have had in recent months with respect to the negotiations between the five permanent members of the Security Council, the Germans, and the Iranians in our efforts to make sure the Iranians don't develop a nuclear weapon. We have said again and again--we reworked the old Reagan slogan ``trust but verify,'' except with the Iranians, we have not said ``trust but verify, we have said ``mistrust but verify.'' I would suggest to my colleagues, especially on this side of the aisle, let's take that approach here. Maybe we don't trust the Republicans that they are going to do what they say they are going to do, but we have an opportunity to verify. The verifying comes with a vote later on. We go to the bill; we actually move to the bill, debate the amendments, and so forth. If at the end of the day we are not happy with what has happened, if we feel as though we have been given a raw deal, that workers in this country have been given a raw deal, middle-class families have been given a raw deal, we have a chance to verify and we vote not to move the bill off the floor. We would not provide cloture to end debate. That is where we have our final vote. I hope we keep that in mind. With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, the mission of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, CBP, is broad and diverse. The more than 60,000 men and women of CBP protect our borders at and between our ports of entry. They protect Americans against terrorists and the instruments of terror. They enforce our laws and help boost our economic security and prosperity by facilitating trade and travel. While the roles they play each day may differ, the men and women of CBP share one common goal: to keep our country a safe, secure, and resilient place where the American way of life can thrive. They provide selfless service to our country, and they do so with honor and distinction under an ever-present and evolving threat. Today I wish to pay tribute to the agents and officers who have given the ultimate sacrifice in the service of our Nation. All told, 33 courageous men and women of CBP have died in the line of duty since the agency's inception in 2003. Today we commemorate these brave men and women, celebrate their lives, and offer their families and loved ones our continued support. They have earned the respect and appreciation of a grateful nation. I ask unanimous consent that a list of these agents and officers be printed in the Record.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. I thank my colleague for his graciousness. I told him I would speak for 10 minutes. It is usually about 10 hours, but I only have 10 minutes. Mr. President, I rise today on the Senate floor to recognize the efforts of many of our Nation's public servants. Since 1985, the very first week of May has been dedicated to highlighting the millions of hard-working Americans who serve our Nation as Federal employees, State employees, county and local government employees, and members of the uniformed services, which I have been privileged to be one for some 23 years. This week marks the 30th annual Public Service Recognition Week and serves as an important opportunity for those here in the Senate to show our appreciation for their dedication and service to our community and to our Nation. Throughout my time in public office, including during my time on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which I have been a member of now for about 14 years and which I chaired for the last 2 years, I have had the great pleasure of meeting with any number of dedicated and accomplished public servants. In talking with them, I have been able to learn more about their work, more about their families, learn more about their commitment to public service that they share with all of us. Today, I would like to take a couple minutes to highlight the outstanding service of some of our public servants across our Federal Government. In these cases, their extraordinary service has directly impacted the lives of the Americans they serve. In fact, the two individuals I plan to highlight today are finalists for something called the Samuel J. Heyman Service to America Medals that are awarded by the Partnership for Public Service each year. As you may know, on October 29, 2012--at least we know in Delaware, New Jersey, and New York--Superstorm Sandy made landfall in the United States. Its impact up and down the east coast was, in a word, devastating. In another word, it was heartbreaking. New York, New Jersey, and parts of New England were hit particularly hard. My home State of Delaware was hit hard, too. Widespread flooding caused severe damage to many homes and businesses. Our transportation infrastructure suffered, too. Roads and bridges were damaged or washed out, hurting commerce and transportation and cutting off access to hospitals, schools, and work. What we learned through the difficult recovery that followed is that sound and effective mitigation policies should be thoroughly calculated into any recovery effort. Through mitigation, we can get better results, save money, and save lives. Following Superstorm Sandy, Congress passed an almost $11 billion special transportation appropriations bill. A large portion of that funding--roughly one-third of it, $3.6 billion--was to be used for something called resilience grants dedicated to protecting the infrastructure repaired after Sandy. A fellow named Adam Schildge--Adam Schildge--senior program analyst at the Federal Transit Administration in Washington, DC, was a key player in developing, implementing, and managing a competitive grant program to distribute those $3.6 billion in resilience funds. Those grants, once awarded, supported construction projects that will reduce the cost to taxpayers in cleaning up after future storms. They will also reduce the number of lives and properties lost from powerful natural disasters. As you can imagine, the task assigned to him--here is Adam right here, Adam Schildge--the task assigned to Adam was not an easy one. His mission was critical. His mission, basically, was to identify projects that, if funded, would get better results, save money, and save lives. In order to determine what projects should receive funding, Adam meticulously combed through grant application after grant application to assess the resilience of planned infrastructure projects. When I think of ``resilience,'' I think about how we save money in the future in the event that we have a storm of that nature again. And, believe me, we will. Because of Adam's painstaking attention to detail, eye for innovation, and his dedication to the lives at stake during future storms, Adam was able to grant funding to transportation projects that will serve all Americans for generations to come and to endure the forces of extreme weather. According to Adam, he took the position in public service because it was--these are his words--``the greatest opportunity to impact communities.'' He went on to say: ``I've always known I wanted to work for the public good and I've found a good way now to give back to communities across the country.'' Those are his words. Our Nation's public servants are making a difference across the globe too. As the Presiding Officer may remember, less than a year ago, a deadly epidemic of the Ebola virus gripped Sierra Leone, Liberia, Guinea, and Mali. The severity and scale of the outbreak was an unprecedented challenge to the worldwide public health community. The rapid spread of the outbreak reminded us that deadly and infectious diseases know no borders. It also sent us an important reminder to remember the parable of the Good Samaritan, that we should love our neighbors as ourselves. Jeff, my friend, Senator Sessions over here, knows the Bible pretty well. He recalls in the New Testament where some of the pharisees are trying to trick Jesus. They asked him a question. They said: What is the greatest commandment of all? Jesus responded: It is not just one; there are two. The first is to love the Lord thy God with all our heart, all our soul, all our mind. And then he said: The second great commandment is to love thy neighbor as thyself. The pharisees said: Well, who is our neighbor? He told them the parable of the Good Samaritan. That is where we come up with that. But in the spirit of the Good Samaritan--and the story goes back a couple of thousand years--thousands of public servants were dispatched to battle Ebola at its epicenter, on the ground in Africa. A woman named Mia Beers--there she is. Mia Beers was one of those courageous public servants. As the Director of the Humanitarian Policy and Global Engagement Division at the U.S. Agency for International Development, Mia led the U.S. Ebola Disaster Assistance Response Team into the epicenter of the epidemic in Monrovia, Liberia. On the ground, Mia synchronized the efforts of thousands of public health and emergency response workers across five different Federal agencies. Under her leadership, the response team offered training support and contact tracing to better protect health workers in close contact with this deadly disease. She also worked closely with the State Department to strategize response efforts in real time, including ways to inform vulnerable populations about the disease as quickly and efficiently as possible. According to Mia's colleagues, her robust leadership and coordination helped to steer the worldwide response out of the crisis mode and to stem the tide of the deadly global outbreak. According to Mia, it was all because of--these are her words--``the dedication and passion and knowledge'' of the people who she worked with. Not long ago I was with Department of Homeland Security Deputy Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, meeting with some Department of Homeland Security employees at a roundtable. The roundtable was focused on employees and improving the employee morale. During that meeting, he reiterated the profound impact that each employee has on his or her agency and the mission. All told--Ali Mayorkas told the story of an employee at NASA headquarters who was working late one night into the morning hours. The employee finally gathered himself to leave, and he came across a custodian mopping the floors. He asked the employee: What do you do? The custodian who was mopping the floors replied: I am putting a man on the moon. Think about that. I am putting a man on the moon. Every day that custodian went to work thinking he was part of an important mission. The same is true for employees across the Federal Government in its various agencies. These dedicated and hardworking public servants are just two among the hundreds of thousands who are making a difference in the lives of their fellow Americans every day. I want to encourage us all to visit a Web site that is called the Partnership for Public Service to learn more stories about some outstanding public servants and public employees. Today and every day, I want to thank these employees--we ought to thank these employees--for their service, their humble service, their selfless service to our Nation. I hope they all know how important their work is--everything you do in this work across our country and around the world and that you know what brings joy to you. Let me close with this, if I could. I say through the Presiding Officer to my friend Senator Sessions: I was reading earlier this week in the newsclips that come to me from my staff--I was reading the results of an interview, I think, from interviews with maybe 1,500 very senior-level Federal employees. They were basically being asked: How do you like your job? A lot of them, frankly, reported they did not have the sense of satisfaction that they really had hoped for and expected they would have. They were asked: If something could change that would make you feel better about the work you do and people's appreciation of the work you do, what would help the most? The first question they asked them was this: How about more pay? How about more of this or more of that? Believe it or not, what most of them said they would like to have more of was just to be thanked. For somebody to say: The work that you do is important. We are grateful as a nation that you do this. That is something all of us can do. I had a conversation here on the floor, I say to Senator Sessions, with Jim Inhofe, our colleague from Oklahoma. He talked about the TSA employees. When he flies home, back to Oklahoma, and flies out of here, either through Reagan--probably Reagan and on to Dallas and to Tulsa. He has gotten to know the TSA employees there. I think he makes a habit of thanking them for the work they do for all of us. I try to do the same sort of thing when I travel around the country. I bump into Coast Guard folks or other people, especially those who are associated with the Department of Homeland Security. It is an easy thing to do, just say thank you for the work they do on behalf of all of us--especially if we tell them who we are. They will appreciate it, and it will make a difference in their lives, and maybe even a difference in their performance going forward. Thank you so much. God bless.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a statement in support of Division M of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, the Expatriate Health Coverage Clarification Act be printed in the Record.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Ohio for his kind words, and to him and our colleague, Senator McCaskill from Missouri, for their persistence and leadership on an important issue. I oftentimes describe myself on this floor as a recovering Governor and one who focuses on how to create a more nurturing environment for job creation and job preservation. There are a lot of attributes-- access to capital, infrastructure--which Senator Inhofe leads us on every day. Another one is a reasonable tax burden. Another is commonsense regulation. My dad always used to say: Use some common sense. And I think, with the legislation we moved out of committee, and hopefully through this Senate Chamber, that will show a lot of common sense and provide a more nurturing environment. So I thank Senator Inhofe. Public Service Recognition Week Tribute To Elizabeth ``Beth'' Leski and Carol Richel Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the efforts of the men and women who serve their neighbors every day as Federal, State, county, and municipal workers. In 1985, the Public Service Roundtable, with support from Congress, started the very first Public Service Recognition Week to honor the hard work of public employees on our behalf and the sacrifices they often make in doing so. Since then, the first week of May has been officially designated by Congress as Public Service Recognition Week. This week is the 30th anniversary, and I think a perfect opportunity for each of us to show our appreciation to the millions of public servants in our communities and across the country. Over the past several months, I have been coming to the Senate floor, as my colleagues know, to highlight the important work being done by public employees at the Department of Homeland Security, in particular. Over 200,000 men and women work at the Department of Homeland Security. While their jobs are diverse, they share one common mission; that is, to keep our country a safe, secure, and resilient place where the American way of life can thrive. Whether they are patrolling our borders, responding to natural disasters or bolstering our defenses in cyber space, these public servants touch the lives of Americans every day. Today, I rise to recognize two more outstanding public servants at DHS, this time from the Transportation Security Administration, which we call TSA. As we may recall, TSA was established after the devastating September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks with the mission to better protect our Nation's transportation systems. Today, TSA employs some 47,000 transportation security officers at over 440 airports nationwide. Each year, those officers screen about 660 million travelers and nearly 1.5 billion bags. TSA is also the lead agency in securing our surface transportation networks, including our roads, bridges, tunnels, railroads, and maritime ports. For anyone who has ever taken a flight, chances are they have seen the men and women of TSA in action. If they haven't seen them, they certainly enjoyed the benefit of the important work they often do behind the scenes to keep us safe. I would like to take a moment today to recognize one of those TSA employees who is keeping our skies safer. Her name is Elizabeth ``Beth'' Leski. Beth is one of those TSA employees who are usually out of sight but whose work, nonetheless, is vital. She is a Secure Flight Program analyst in the TSA Office of Intelligence and Analysis. Originally from Michigan, she has lived in Severn, MD, for the last two decades with her husband David. After graduating with a B.S. in aviation management, Beth worked in the airline industry for 21 years before joining the Secure Flight Program. Over the past 4 years, Beth has worked at TSA as a customer service agent, customer service supervisor, and now as a program analyst at the Secure Flight Operations Center. Here she is in a picture, between Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson and Deputy Secretary Mayorkas. As I said, over the past 4 years, Beth has worked in different roles at the Secure Flight Operations Center. Secure Flight is a program that enhances aviation security by running the names of passengers against the government's watch list of known or suspected terrorists. In other words, Beth helps to keep bad people off of planes by ensuring that those who receive boarding passes are not on our government's list of individuals prohibited from flying. According to her colleagues, Beth works tirelessly to synchronize all the moving parts at her operations center. They say that Beth always goes above and beyond the call of duty. She strives to make life easier for fellow analysts, developing checklists, spreadsheets, and calendar invitations to keep individuals accountable and organized. Her colleague James Billups says that Beth ``inspires everyone around her, and truly brings the best out of people.'' I can see why. In addition to her positive energy in the workplace, she has been widely recognized at TSA and the Department for always lending a helping hand at employee morale events. She is also known for welcoming new recruits to the national capital region with a unique ``Welcome Aboard'' package. It is actions such as these that show that Beth has truly embodied TSA's core value of team spirit. In 2014, Beth received the Secretary's Award for her steadfast and outstanding assistance to the entire team in the Secure Flight Operations Center. When she is not securing our skies, Beth likes to run and travel the world--pursuits she and I actually share in common. We have another very important thing in common--the U.S. Navy. Beth is a retired yeoman chief petty officer with 21 years of service with the U.S. Navy Reserve. I retired as a captain and spent a couple of years in an airplane with the Navy around the world, and my dad was a chief in the Navy, as well. But on behalf of the Senate--and, really, on behalf of all Americans--Beth, I just want to thank you. We thank you for your exemplary service to our country. I wish to take a couple more minutes to recognize the service and sacrifice of another TSA employee. Her name is Carol Richel. As we can see, even though TSA is often the target of criticism and frustration, their mission at the end of the day is to save lives--our lives. Carol reminded us of this mission just a couple of months ago when a man wielding a machete attacked her and her colleagues at the Louis Armstrong Airport in New Orleans. A native of St. Ignace, MI, Carol has worked as a TSA officer at the New Orleans airport since October 2003 and has been a TSA supervisory officer since October 2005. She is known by her colleagues to step up on a moment's notice. This latest incident was no exception. As many of us may remember from the news stories, in March, a deranged man began to attack a number of TSA agents at a security checkpoint at the New Orleans airport. The man sprayed insect repellent in the face of an officer, pulled a machete from the waistband of his pants, and began swinging the weapon in the direction of other TSA officers. Watching from her post, Carol yelled at the passengers in the area to run. But her warning also attracted the attention of the attacker, and at the moment, he started to run toward Carol. As the man got closer to her, Lieutenant Heather Sylve of the Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office began firing at him. Lieutenant Sylve shot the assailant three times, wounding and incapacitating him on site. He later died as a result of those wounds. Unfortunately, one of those shots also hit Carol in the arm. Injured but undeterred, she reported to her post the very next day, ready to work--not the next week, not the next month, the next day. When asked about her work, by the St. Ignace News, she said: I enjoy my job, and I feel that what we do is a necessary thing. . . . This is an example of why it's necessary. According to her colleagues, Carol is known for her hard work, her dedication to TSA's mission, and her sincere interest in the well-being of the entire team. Our colleague from Oklahoma will enjoy this. When she is not at work, Carol enjoys caring for her animals and dedicating herself to Bible studies. Carol's bravery and commitment to her colleagues and the public she serves truly exemplify TSA's core values of integrity, innovation, and team spirit. To Beth and Carol, let me say this. Every day you go to work, we want you to know that you help to ensure the safety of your fellow Americans and the security of our transportation system, which serves us all. We are grateful for that. Thank you both for your tireless dedication and your invaluable service to our Nation and its people. And to all of the public servants across this country and beyond our borders who give us 110 percent every day, let me close by saying that I want you to know that what you do every day is important to me and to all of my colleagues with whom I am privileged to serve here in this body. We hope your work and your service fills your life with meaning and with happiness. On behalf of the people that we serve together, thank you for what you do. May God continue to bless each of you and this country we love. I yield the floor, and thank my colleague from Oklahoma for his kindness.

Mr. CARPER

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

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, sometimes when I travel, people ask me what I do, and I tell them I am a retired Navy captain. And then they say: Well, what do you do now? And I tell them I am a recovering Governor. Then they say: Well, now that you are recovering, what do you do? I tell them I am a servant. Once, one guy said to me on an airplane: What do you mean you are a servant? I said: I serve the people of Delaware. He said: Are you like a butler? And I said: No, not really, but I do serve. But I still think like a retired recovering Governor. I am proud to be able to serve here. I loved being in the Navy. But at heart, I still think and act a good deal like a retired Governor. Those others who serve here in this body who have served as the chief executive of their State sometimes feel the same way about how they approach their job. I love doing that. I feel really lucky to have that choice. I feel very lucky to be here to serve Delaware, the First State, in this capacity. One of the key takeaways from my time as the chief executive of my State was that when we had to negotiate deals, whether with our neighboring States or with the Federal Government or actually with folks who were thinking of starting a business in Delaware or growing a business in Delaware, we had to do so with one unified voice in order to be effective. Now, we were trying to bring AstraZeneca, one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world, and convince them to put their North American headquarters in Delaware. We didn't have the whole legislature to negotiate that deal. My cabinet and I were involved in that negotiation, and we got a signoff from the legislature, at least indirectly. We just couldn't have competing messages coming from all the various elected officials, State senators, State representatives, and so forth. The reason is that this would have undermined in some cases very sensitive negotiations and hindered our ability to work through some already tough issues. While I would consult with Delaware's other State and local officials, as appropriate--and I valued their insight and their opinions, even when I didn't necessarily agree with all of them any more than they agreed with me--at the end of the day, as chief executive of our State, I had to be the final decisionmaker in a lot of cases in negotiating or advocating on behalf of Delaware. Now, as a U.S. Senator, I take really a very similar approach to negotiating on many issues, including matters of foreign policy. I support the idea that when the United States conducts diplomacy with foreign governments, the United States should speak to that government with a unified voice. Our system is set up so that we do not have 535 Members of Congress serving as negotiators and diplomats--and for good reason. That is the case with trade deals--the kind of deal we are trying to negotiate today with 11 other countries that come from this hemisphere all the way over to Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, Japan, and Vietnam. But if we fail to speak with a unified voice in most of those negotiations, including the one I just mentioned, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, then forging international agreements with other countries is going to be really tough and in some cases just about impossible. When it comes to the negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program--the negotiations that involve not just Iran, not just us, but the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and Germany as well--I have been a strong proponent of giving the President and his negotiating team the flexibility they need to achieve the best deal for our Nation. I know many of our colleagues have strong views on the need for Congress to play a direct role in the negotiations and to make sure their voices are heard in this process. I understand that position, and I respect that position as well. There are also some in the Senate who believe that the best deal with Iran is, frankly, no deal at all, and they are trying to maximize their ability to kill the nuclear deal with Iran before it is ever finalized. Another key lesson I learned as Governor--and I am constantly reminded of it in the Senate--is that forging compromise is no easy task. Bridging the divide of competing interests is never easy, especially on issues as important as negotiations over nuclear weapons and Iran. But that is what my colleagues--our colleagues--in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee recently did. Specifically, Senators Corker of Tennessee and Cardin of Maryland, one a Republican and one a Democrat, worked to forge a compromise that identifies an appropriate role for Congress in these nuclear talks. This compromise will enable the President to maintain his prerogative as our Nation's Chief Executive and Commander in Chief to negotiate on behalf of the United States, while also ensuring that Congress is able to weigh in on the final product of those negotiations should they come to fruition. In my mind, that is a reasonable compromise that we should all support regardless of our opinion on the prospect of the President reaching an acceptable deal with Iran. Let me explain why. First of all, Senator Corker and Senator Cardin's compromise satisfies one of my key goals of not undermining our negotiating team before any final deal can be reached with the Iranians. Second, for those who insist that Congress be given a chance to weigh in on a final nuclear deal with Iran, this bill that we are debating today and will probably debate a little more next week will empower Members of Congress to cast a vote for or against any final deal before it is implemented. Finally, for those Members who think that no deal is the best deal, this bill gives those Members the opportunity to make their case to our respective colleagues at an appropriate time. Now, Senators Corker and Cardin should be commended for their tireless work to strike a compromise that should satisfy many of our colleagues--not all, but many. I know they worked with the White House to craft a bill that does not cut the legs out from underneath our negotiators as they work to finalize a deal with Iran, and I want to thank them for preserving the administration's ability to negotiate and the Congress's ability to weigh in on the final deal. As we cast our votes on amendments and final passage of this bill, I would encourage us to consider the delicate nature of the compromise that Senators Corker and Cardin have struck. Too often in Washington we focus on what divides us rather than what unites us. That is unfortunate and sometimes counterproductive for our country--not just on this issue but on a host of important policy matters. Compromise should not be a rare occurrence in our Nation's Capital. Rather, it should be one of our guiding principles. We should seize this opportunity, colleagues, to advance a compromise that meets the needs of many of our colleagues, the President, and our Nation. I urge our colleagues to join me in supporting Senator Corker and Senator Cardin's legislation. Some of my colleagues have heard me say before, whenever I meet people who have been married for a long time, I love to ask those who have been married 50, 60, 70 years: What is the secret for being married 50, 60 or 70 years? I get a lot of different answers, as you might imagine. Some of them are very funny, and some are quite poignant. Some of my favorites include a couple married over 50 years. I asked them not long ago: What is the secret to being married 50 years? The wife said of her husband: He could be right or he could be happy, but he cannot be both. More recently, with a couple who has been married over 60 years, I asked the husband and wife: What is the secret to being married over 60 years? And each of them gave a different answer. The wife said patience, and her husband of 60 years said a good sense of humor. That is pretty good advice as well. I have asked this question hundreds of times over the years, but the best advice I have ever heard in asking that question is years ago from the answers of a couple who had been married 65 years or so. I said: What is the secret of being married 65 years? They both said almost at the same time: The two C's. The two C's. I had never heard that one before. I said: What are the two C's? One of them said: Communicate. That is good. The other one said: Compromise. Those are two pretty good C's. Since then, I have invoked their words any number of times, including on this floor and here in Washington, DC, and in my own State of Delaware. Over the years, I have added a third C to it. The third C is collaborate--collaborate. If you think about it, those two C's or those three C's--communicate, compromise, and collaborate--are not just the secret for a vibrant and long marriage between two people; they are also the secret to a vibrant democracy. As one of the Members of this body, I wish to again express my thanks to Senators Corker and Cardin for communicating, for compromising, and for collaborating in a way that could bring about a better future for my kids, your kids, our grandchildren, and hopefully for the people of Iran and hopefully for the people of Israel and a lot of other nations that have a real interest in this issue--as we say in Delaware, a dog in this fight. As I close, I thank you for this opportunity to speak today. I hope when we vote next week we will reward the efforts of those Senators with the two C's--Cardin and Corker--and further embrace the three C's--communicating, compromising, and collaborating--embrace their efforts with an ``aye'' vote. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. If I can add just one thing, Mr. President, 5 years ago, 6 years ago, our Federal budget deficit hit $1.4 trillion. It has come down since, bit by bit. Now it is down by about two-thirds. But it is still a lot--like $400 billion or so. That is a lot of money. I think the key to further reducing deficits is threefold: No. 1, tax reform that broadens the base and lowers the corporate rates so we are competitive with the rest of the world but also generates some revenues for deficit reduction. No. 2, entitlement reform that saves money and saves programs for our children and grandchildren and doesn't savage old people or poor people. No. 3, look at everything we do in the Federal Government and say: How do we get a better result with less money? This is one of those things we need to look at and put under a microscope. Again, are all for-profit schools bad? No, they are not all bad. Some do a very good job. But we have millions of jobs out here in this country waiting to be filled. We have a lot of people who would like to have a job and don't have the skills. We are spending a ton of money through the GI bill and tuition assistance, and we need to better ensure that the folks--particularly who are veterans--are getting their money's worth and that we are getting our money's worth and that we are getting the workforce we need to fill up those millions of jobs.

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

Mr. CARPER. I would just ask the Senator, if he could take closer to 15, that would be great.

Mr. CARPER. Madam President, I see the Senator from Pennsylvania, my old friend Mr. Toomey, standing up like he wants to offer something. There are a couple of us who want to have a colloquy for a few minutes, Senator Durbin, Senator Blumenthal and myself, on an issue involving veterans and veterans' financial assistance for school. I do not want to get in the way of Senator Toomey if he has something he wants to offer, just as long as it does not take forever. May I ask a question through the Presiding Officer? What do you think he has to offer and for how long?

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

Mr. CARPER. I thank the Senator from Illinois for yielding. Madam President, I don't know about your family, but my dad and his brother served in World War II. They were both combat veterans, one in the Navy and one in the Army. On my mom's side of the family, two of her brothers ended up serving in the Navy. One was killed in a kamikaze attack on an aircraft carrier out in the Pacific. He never had a chance to participate in the GI bill, but my dad did. Later, in the Korean war, my uncle Ed, who married my mom's sister, had a chance to participate in the GI bill. It was a great benefit. It is one of the things--when we look back in time, we know this is one of the wonderful things that happened in our country. It helped lift us up and prepare a workforce to make us a preeminent nation in the second half of the 20th century. But as it turned out, as the benefits were offered and taken advantage of by veterans, scam artists emerged on the heels of World War II. The same thing happened again after the Korean war. It seems as if every time we have renewed and extended the GI bill for a new generation of veterans, the same thing has happened. I served on Active Duty from 1968 to 1973 in the Vietnam war--as a naval flight officer--served 5 years on Active and another 18 years beyond that as a P-3 aircraft mission commander, a retired Navy captain. I had a chance to get a master's degree near the end of the Vietnam war, and I moved from California to Delaware and got an MBA on the GI bill. I think we got $250 a month. The GI bill today--men and women who have served 3 years of Active Duty, including some time in Iraq or Afghanistan, get tuition free to pretty much any college or university--public--in their State. They get tuition assistance. They not only get tuition, they get book fees, and if they need tutoring, they get that free. They also get about a $1,500-a-month housing allowance. Vietnam veterans got 250 bucks a month. This is a lucrative GI benefit. And if the GI doesn't use it today, their spouse can use it. If their spouse doesn't use it, it is transferrable to their dependent children. It is a great benefit. Not surprisingly, just as scam artists emerged at the end of World War II, at the end of the Korean war, and at other times, they have emerged again this time as well. Some of them are private colleges; some of them are not. Some of the private colleges actually do a good job, but too many of them do not. They are in this for money. They see a rich benefit, and one of their goals is to try to make sure they cash in. In some cases, it is at the expense of the veteran and the taxpayers. Congress put in place in I want to say 1992 a rule that said we want to combat this by injecting some market forces. So since the beginning of 1992, no university, college, whatever, could get more than 85 percent of their revenues from the Federal Government--no more than 85 percent from the Federal Government. We changed that in 1998 and said that no college or university--private, for profit, whatever--could get more than 90 percent of their revenues from the Federal Government. They had to raise 10 percent from other sources, such as people who paid their own money or who got private loans or whatever to go to college. Somewhere along the line, though, we changed the rules to say that 90 percent did not include the GI bill, that 90 percent did not include something called tuition assistance for people on Active Duty. So 90 percent today is not a full picture. It is student loans and it is Pell grants. It is not the GI bill. It is not tuition assistance from people on Active Duty. So if we put it all together, we find out that today there are over 100 colleges and universities--again, almost all private--that are getting way more than 90 percent of their revenue from the Federal Government. I don't think that is a good thing. It is not a healthy thing. What was meant to be an approach that provided some market correction doesn't work anymore. For years, Senator Durbin and I have introduced legislation designed to restore the integrity of the original 85-15 rule or the 90-10 rule, which says, look, if you are a college or university, if you are a for-profit, private, public, the 90 percent should be included all in. It is college loans, it is student loans, it is Pell grants, it is the GI bill, it is tuition assistance--the whole deal. If you are a college or university, you can get up to 90 percent of your revenues from those sources but not 100 percent--as too many of them are doing today. We have talked about Corinthian, which has gone down. Corinthian has cost taxpayers probably billions of dollars. A lot of men and women who risked their lives and served our country in sometimes very dangerous situations have now gotten out of the military and they have literally been put at risk again. They have been put in a position where they have squandered their GI bill benefits. We ask sometimes why there is bad morale in some cases, low morale, why some Veterans take their own lives. Well, sometimes it is because they get sucked into these scams. Sometimes that is what happens. We can fix this. It is the right thing to do for our veterans. It is the right thing to do for our taxpayers. I know Senator Blumenthal is here. He is also a distinguished veteran and the father of a distinguished veteran, and I am happy to yield to him. (Mr. GARDNER assumed the Chair.)

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Madam President, today I wish to express my gratitude to the chairman for his work with his conference to clear the path to this discussion today of the nomination of Russ Deyo and to bring his name forward for hopefully confirmation this afternoon. When I first met Russ Deyo, I asked him: How do you pronounce your name? He said: ``Dio'' as in Rio. I said: I think you mispronounce your own name. He said: No, no. It is ``Dio'' as in Rio. So I try to do that, but he has been called a lot of things. Some of the things he ought to be called are talented and dedicated, and we should call ourselves lucky that a guy or gal with his credentials from the private sector is willing to come and go to work for the people of America and to serve all of us. The Department of Homeland Security is a Department that, as we know, does enormously important work to protect us. People all over this Nation--in the air, on the ground, on the borders, in our cities, and all over our countryside--have my gratitude and I know the gratitude of all of us. Every organization of any consequence needs good management, and the idea of bringing in Russ Deyo is--this is a fellow who will offer real strength to the management team at the Department of Homeland Security. We need him. We are glad he is ready to go into the lineup, and I hope we will put him in there later this afternoon. The position for which he has been nominated, the Under Secretary of Management, is the third highest position in the Department of Homeland Security. While this vote is long overdue, he has been approved by our committee now not once, I think, but twice. Unfortunately, we failed in the Senate to act on his nomination before the end of the last Congress, so we had to start over again. I am just glad he is willing to serve in this role. As of this week, more than a year will have passed since the last Senate-confirmed Under Secretary for Management--a fellow named Rafael Borras, a very good leader--stepped down from this post. I again thank Chairman Johnson for his efforts and our joint efforts to move this nomination forward. Everything I have learned about Russ Deyo over the past several months has led me to conclude that he is an exceptional candidate to be the next Under Secretary for Management at DHS. Chairman Johnson has already walked through his impressive career. Russ Deyo is also no stranger to public service. We tend to emphasize his very significant responsibilities at Johnson & Johnson and as a partner in a major law firm, but he has also worked with law enforcement organizations. He was an assistant U.S. attorney in New Jersey for 8 years--something we don't always note--including a period as chief of the public corruption unit. His perspective from the private and public sectors is going to be a great asset to Secretary Jeh Johnson and to Alejandro Mayorkas, the Deputy Secretary at the Department, as they work together to get the Department operating in a more unified and cohesive manner, in creating one DHS. If confirmed, Mr. Deyo is going to face plenty of challenges. For example, the Government Accountability Office continues to remind us that the overall management of the Department remains on GAO's high- risk list of government operations that need urgent attention. Of course, if confirmed, Mr. Deyo will inherit the challenge of improving morale across the Department. I believe Mr. Deyo has the leadership, the experience, and the skills necessary to tackle these and other challenges at the Department and that he really will make a difference. I would just say in closing that all of the organizations I have ever been a part of or observed, whether they happen to be a school or a university, a sports team, a military unit, a business, a church, the House or the Senate--here or at the local level--the most important element in the success of those organizations is almost always leadership. What we have endeavored to do over the last year, or actually a little more than a year, is to take the Department of Homeland Security--which was largely bereft at the senior levels of Senate-confirmed leadership--and with the addition of Russ Deyo in this No. 3 position to be in charge of the management shop at DHS, they will have a full slate. They will have a full slate for not the C team or the D team or the B team but I think in many respects the A team. We expect them to rise to the challenge--there are plenty of challenges they face today--and Russ will help make that possible. I wish to say to Russ Deyo, if he is listening: Thanks for your willingness to hang in there with us until we could get to confirmation. To the Deyo family: We appreciate very much your willingness to share your spouse and in this case your dad with the people of this Nation. We need him. We will put him to good work, and after a while we will send him back to you safe and sound. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARPER

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

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I do not know if I am going to be able to have time to get into this. For the last several months this year, I have been taking time 1 day a month to talk a bit about an employee in the Department of Homeland Security. Of all the Departments in the Federal Government--the largest Department--it has the lowest morale. We have been working hard with them to do something about that. We are doing small things that nonetheless is to remind everybody that folks in the Department of Homeland Security, in some cases, risk their lives, invest their lives in trying to make sure we have a life and a good life and a safe life. They are worthy of our praise. What I am going to do tonight--unless I get run off the floor because of other business--I want to talk about one of them. As the Presiding Officer knows, the Department was recently the center of a budget battle on Capitol Hill. For weeks, it was unclear if the Department was going to face a shutdown, another short-term continuing resolution or receive the full-year funding they needed. Fortunately, Congress did its job and sent a clean funding bill for the rest of the fiscal year to the President's desk. The employees are grateful for that and certainly I am as well. While the Department's employees and leadership can now return to their focus on keeping America safe from threats our country faces, we should not ignore the harm the latest debate inflicted on the already low morale of employees at the Department. More than 200,000 men and women work for the Department of Homeland Security, really just to do one mission; that is, to create a safe, secure, and resilient place where the American way of life can thrive. Many of those employees, again as I said earlier, put their lives on the line every single day. Whether these employees are securing our borders, securing our skies, responding to natural disasters or bolstering our defenses in the cyber world, few other Federal agencies and employees touch the lives of so many Americans on a daily basis more than do the employees of the Department of Homeland Security. There is no question that they deserve to be treated better than the way Congress has been treating them lately. That is one of the reasons why over the past few months I have been coming to the floor to recognize the work of at least a few of the many exemplary Department of Homeland Security employees. In February, I spoke about Ramiro Garza, Jr., a Border Patrol agent at U.S. Customs and Border Protection. I had the opportunity to meet Mr. Garza early in February in McAllen, TX, while on a visit to the Mexican border in South Texas with Senators Ron Johnson and Ben Sasse. In the past summer, Mr. Garza played an instrumental role in quickly setting up an emergency operations center and processing facility, which he now runs, to help Customs and Border Protection better manage unaccompanied minors and families apprehended along the southern border. Today, I rise to speak about another dedicated and outstanding employee of the Department of Homeland Security. His name is Matthew O'Neill. Matthew is employed as a special agent within the U.S. Secret Service. Over the past several months, there have been incidents, including some as recently as this month, that have again raised serious questions about the Agency and its ability to fulfill its responsibilities. The Agency's leadership is still addressing these incidents and taking steps to implement reforms to improve the Agency from the inside out. So while it is important for us to usher in a new chapter for the U.S. Secret Service, it is important also that we shine some light on some brave men and women at the Agency who continue to serve our country and carry out their missions with distinction. Special Agent Matthew O'Neill is one of the many hard-working public servants whose day-to-day work deserves special recognition. We live in a world that has become increasingly digitized. Nearly all Americans, including Members of this Chamber and me, are spending more and more of our time online, whether it is to do our banking, our shopping, communicating with loved ones or simply getting our work done on a day-to-day basis. Americans' ability to go online in a safe and secure environment is at the core of Special Agent O'Neill's work. You see, agents in the U.S. Secret Service are not only responsible for protecting the President, the First Family, and other dignitaries as well, some agents, such as Special Agent O'Neill, do their work in cyber space-- not outer space but cyber space. And there in that cyber space are criminals who are elusive, and the threats they pose to us are sophisticated and many. Put simply, Agent O'Neill's job is to target cyber criminals taking aim at the American consumer, businesses, and our national community online. Financial crime has evolved dramatically in the nearly 20 years since Special Agent O'Neill began his career with the Secret Service. Not that long ago, criminals would go to a bank, perhaps maybe a jewelry store or a convenience store, to steal money and maybe some other valuables. Today, they don't even need to go outside to steal items of great value from businesses, from the Federal Government or from the rest of us consumers and regular citizens. Criminals just need access to the Internet. These data breaches are disruptive to our economy. They cause worry and confusion for millions of American consumers and for businesses. But thanks to his dedication and expertise, Special Agent O'Neill has helped the Federal Government to try to stay ahead of the curve and keep our most sensitive information and our property secure. Special Agent O'Neill is originally from Dumfries, VA. He graduated from James Madison University in Harrisonburg, VA--that makes him a Duke--before joining his career with the Secret Service in 1998 in the New Haven, CT, office. From 2003 to 2007, he served in the Vice Presidential and Special Services Division in Washington, DC. However, it is while serving in his current role, one primarily performed in cyber space, that Special Agent O'Neill has become one of the top cyber warriors defending our security online. In this position, he has helped to lead a number of complex transnational cyber crime investigations. These investigations have focused on crimes ranging from hacks into check-out lanes at brick-and-mortar stores to the online sale of stolen, personally identifiable information, such as Social Security numbers. In one investigation, Special Agent O'Neill identified Web site portals that sold the personal information of approximately 30 million Americans to other cyber criminals, potentially putting victims at risk for identity theft or credit card fraud or worse. To uncover the criminals running and participating in this scheme, Special Agent O'Neill sought and executed over a dozen Federal search warrants, made numerous undercover purchases, and painstakingly examined nearly 40,000 emails. As a result of an extensive investigation, Special Agent O'Neill was able to trace the source of the stolen data to an individual in South Vietnam. In 2013, the culprit was arrested for his crimes. Since the investigation, Special Agent O'Neill has been able to identify and arrest over 20 other criminals who worked in conjunction with the culprit by illicitly purchasing the stolen data. In addition to breaking up that complex network, Special Agent O'Neill's work has also thwarted attacks involving everyday transactions, saving businesses and saving consumers from financial harm. For example, he played a critical role in identifying, tracking, and identifying three Romanian nationals who were planning to hack into the computer system of a major fast food franchise with more than 25,000 restaurants in the United States. Time and again, Special Agent O'Neill's supervisors and colleagues have noted his commitment and dedication to duty, including his willingness to work at all hours of the day and night to track criminals who use the Internet with malicious intent. In 2012, he was recognized as the Investigator of the Year by the International Association of Financial Crimes Investigators. In 2013, he was honored by the Secret Service as its Special Agent of the Year for his efforts, and in 2014, he received the Department of Homeland Security Secretary's Meritorious Service Award. But Special Agent O'Neill's service doesn't end with his work at the Department of Homeland Security. When he is not combatting cyber crime, he is serving his neighbors and community by volunteering for a local charity that provides financial assistance to families dealing with cancer. The charity also provides scholarship money for the continuing education of oncology nurses. I thank Special Agent O'Neill's family for sharing him with his community and his Nation. We are a safer country because of him. In closing, the actions taken by Special Agent Matthew O'Neill attest to this critically important work done by thousands of individuals across the Department of Homeland Security every single day. These men and women are courageous, dedicated, and exemplary Federal employees who selflessly serve our country year in and year out. Like Special Agent Matthew O'Neill, these unsung heroes and heroines walk among us every day, protecting us from the unknown or from the unexpected. And more often than not, the good work they do goes unnoticed--but not today. Special Agent O'Neill, thank you. Thank you for your dedication to this country. Thank you for your tireless service to all of us. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. In closing, let me just note that I am encouraged to hear that Senate Majority Leader McConnell now seems to be moving toward allowing a vote on a clean bill. I hope this change of course is the beginning of the end of this crisis for the Department of Homeland Security and for our country. Whatever we do, it is critical that we consider and pass a clean Department of Homeland Security funding bill first. At this point, every hour that goes by without one creates more uncertainty and more waste. After we do that, let's roll up our sleeves and let's get back to work on a thoughtful, 21st century immigration reform policy for our country, a policy that is fair, a policy that will significantly reduce our Nation's budget deficit, and a policy that will strengthen the economic recovery now underway. I want to thank my friend from Iowa for the kindness in allowing me to proceed for an extra few minutes. I yield the floor.