Kent Conrad

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Madam President, the city of Minot, ND, in my home state, is facing a dire emergency. Minot and other communities on the Souris River in my home State are facing a flood of epic proportion. We have a wall of water heading toward the city. I am told the sirens have just sounded in that town alerting people to evacuate. This is the headline this morning from that town's major newspaper. The headline reads: ``Projection: Devastation. Minot residents evacuate as historic rise in the Souris River approaches.'' This flood is a result of overly wet conditions for an extended period of time, a record snowmelt, combined with record rainfall in the basin above the city. We are now told that perhaps a third of the city will be underwater, and unprecedented rains have filled upstream reservoirs to capacity, leading to a dramatic change in the forecast in 48 hours. On Saturday, we were told we could expect the river level to reach elevation 1,555 feet in the city. On Monday, we were told 1,566 feet-- an 11-foot increase in 48 hours. The result is the defenses that have been built up over an extended period of time, that gave us about 3 feet of freeboard, are absolutely incapable of dealing with a flood of this magnitude and a rise happening this rapidly. This is the headline from yesterday in the Minot Daily News, which kind of summed it all up: `` `It's a sad day.' Crest could be 10 feet higher than June 1.'' It is staggering to understand what is happening here. There are four reservoirs above the city of Minot, all of them filled to capacity. In fact, we have been told the floodgates of the major reservoir in Canada are wide open. They cannot control the flow of water. Whatever comes in is going out because they have lost the ability to meter out the water more slowly. This is what we are seeing happen all over Minot as crews rush in to try and provide secondary defenses, to protect as much of the city's critical infrastructure as possible--schools, water treatment facilities, other critical infrastructure--that is going to be necessary to be able to continue to fight this flood menace. This was the headline in the Bismarck Tribune: ``Crisis to the North. Souris Floods Force 11,000 Residents From Minot.'' It is a town of 40,000. So when you have 11,000 people forced to flee, that has a devastating impact. This is the headline, again, from the Minot Daily News of June 20, on Monday: ``Water Woes Continue. People in danger zones advised to be prepared to evacuate.'' And as I have said, that evacuation is occurring as I speak. The Fargo Forum, which is the biggest newspaper in our State, had this headline: ``11,000 Forced Out. Rising Souris moves up evacuation time. Residents in heart of city work fast to save what they can.'' My own cousin and her family have a home that is in danger. They have moved everything from the basement to the first floor. Now they say they will have 7 feet of water on the first floor of their house. This is happening to people throughout the Minot community. These pictures that ran in the newspapers tell the story in a powerful and clear way. What we have is somebody trying to go into a neighborhood. You can see there is a police vehicle, because they are under mandatory evacuation. This person tried to get over to perhaps rescue a pet or take care of some last-minute business; maybe turn off the gas. And there he is, stuck in the water, as these floodwaters rise, and rise very rapidly. This picture also gives a perspective on what we are confronting. Here is the dike, levee, that has just been raised, and you can see there is maybe 2 or 3 feet of freeboard there. But what is coming is 10 more feet of water, so there is absolutely no way these dikes can possibly hold. There is no way they can protect the city. These dikes are going to overtop, and thousands of residents will be displaced. This picture shows another shot. In this place, they didn't have the dikes covered by plastic. You can see a couple of feet of freeboard there. All these houses are at risk as this wall of water comes our way. This is another shot showing a house, and you can see they have the main dike and they have also built a secondary dike to protect their home. All these efforts will prove to be for naught because of this unprecedented wall of water. In fact, this is five feet higher than in all of recorded history. That is what is happening to this community of Minot, ND--home to 40,000 people, home to one of the major Air Force bases of the United States, home of the Minuteman missiles, and home of the B-52 bombers. Minot, ND, the fourth largest city in my State, is about to experience the greatest devastation in the history of the town--a flood worse than the 1969 flood by many feet, and that flood was a modern-day record to that point, the 1969 flood. This chart shows the evacuation zones. This gives you some sense of how major the relocation of people is out of this city. These are the evacuation zones 1 through 8 that go right on the edge of the river, and you can see all of these people under mandatory evacuation. They are going to have to leave, and they are going to have to leave very quickly. Madam President, I would like to end as I began, by showing the headline this morning in the Minot Daily News. ``Projection: Devastation.'' There is no way around it. There is absolutely no way to respond when the flood forecast changes this rapidly and the water is coming this quickly. The result is these people are going to face high water not for just a day or two. Typically in a flood, the water comes and the water goes. In this circumstance, the water is coming and it is not leaving anytime soon. They have told us as recently as yesterday that we could expect high water until the middle of July. Can you imagine, to have your house under water from late June to the middle of July, the devastation that will result. So this headline, ``Projection: Devastation,'' says it very well. That is what we are faced with in this community. The bottom line is, we are going to need help. And we are certainly getting it. We deeply appreciate the efforts of the Corps of Engineers, FEMA, and all of the other Federal agencies that are helping. The National Guard, certainly hundreds of troops there are doing a fantastic job of patrolling these dikes, of helping people move, of making certain that people get out of harm's way because job number 1 is protecting people's lives. We also have an obligation to do everything we can to protect as much of the property as is humanly possible. We very much appreciate the assistance the Red Cross is giving. I just met with General Kowalski of the U.S. Air Force, a three-star general who has as part of his command the Minot Air Force Base. I called the Secretary of the Air Force yesterday and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force the day before and asked them to be alert to the need for that base to help us because there is so much they can provide in assistance, being out of harm's way. The base is 12 miles north of the town. General Kowalski came to me this morning to deliver the message that the U.S. Air Force is prepared to help in every way possible. We deeply appreciate that commitment and that support. We remember very well in 1997, when we had record floods in Grand Forks, ND--that is home to one of the other major Air Force bases of the United States--the extraordinary support and help they provided to us at that time. The final board I will show is the headline from the Minot Daily News of June 21: ``It's a sad day.'' It is indeed a sad day. But the people of North Dakota are tough, they are resilient, and they are going to come back. I have every confidence that we will rebuild this town. It will be a tough slog, but the people of North Dakota are equal to it, and we deeply appreciate the help we are getting from people all across America. I have seen America at its best in a time of crisis. When people are down, when they are hurt, when they are devastated by natural disaster, the people of the United States rally and help out. That is the ethic of my State. When a farmer gets sick and can't harvest his crop, the neighbors pitch in. When a barn burns down, the neighbors pitch in. That is the best of community spirit. That is the best of America. We are going to be relying on that generosity of spirit in the days ahead. Madam President, I yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I want to thank the Senator from Indiana for his thoughtful presentation. There are parts of it with which I disagree, but the overall theme of what he has said is undeniably true. I believe our country is in deep trouble. At the end of this year, we will have a debt that is 100 percent of the gross domestic product of the United States. We have had two of the leading economists in this country tell us, after a review of 200 years of economic history, that when a country reaches a gross debt of more than 90 percent of its GDP, its future economic prospects are diminished. And that is where we are. So I agree with the Senator from Indiana that this is the time. We must find a way to come together to craft a plan that deals with this debt threat. Five years ago, the ranking Republican on the Budget Committee, Senator Gregg, and I came up with the concept of a commission. That effort led to the commission that was in place last year, and it came up with a recommendation to reduce the debt $4 trillion over the next 10 years, and 11 of 18 commissioners supported it. Senator Gregg and I both supported it. We had five Democrats, five Republicans, and one Independent. That is the only bipartisan plan that has emerged from anywhere. But we needed 14 of 18 to agree for it to come to a vote in Congress. There were many parts of that plan I didn't like. I would have gone further than that plan. I proposed to the commission that we have a $6 trillion plan of debt reduction because we could balance the budget in 10 years with that kind of plan. But it was a step in the right direction. It was a big step in the right direction. So I supported it, along with the other 10 commissioners who did. I want to say to the Senator from Indiana that I respect the presentation he just made because, in larger terms, it says what has to be said. We all have to be truth-tellers. However uncomfortable the truth is, we have to be truth-tellers. I believe the truth is that when the revenue is the lowest it has been in 60 years as a share of GDP and spending is the highest it has been in 60 years as a share of GDP, we have to work both sides of the equation. We are going to have to cut spending, and I believe we are going to have to raise revenue. None of it is very popular. If you ask the American people, they will say to you: Well, yes, get the deficit and debt under control, but don't touch Social Security, don't touch Medicare, and don't touch defense. And by the way, just those three are about 80 percent of Federal spending if you add up all the mandatory programs and add up defense. That is about 80 percent of Federal spending. And if you ask the American people, they say: Don't touch any of them. On the revenue side, they say: Don't touch that. Well, do you know what is left? Twenty percent of Federal spending. If you start asking them questions about the elements of that 20 percent, they reject every one except one--foreign aid. They say: Yes, cut foreign aid. A majority supports that. The problem is that is only 1 percent of the budget. Here we are borrowing 40 cents of every dollar we spend, and even if we eliminate all foreign aid, it does not make a material difference. The other thing the American people support by a majority--the only other thing--is taxing the wealthy. Let me just say that I believe the wealthy are going to have to pay somewhat more. But that won't solve our problem because to solve the problem, you would have to have a top rate of 70 to 80 percent on corporations and individuals. What would that do to the competitive position of the United States? So I believe we all are going to have to be truth-tellers, and before we are done, we are going to have to find a way to come together. I was part of that effort on the commission. I was part of that effort in this group of six, which is now a group of five because one of our members left. And there is this other effort under way that is a leadership effort with the White House being involved. At the end of the day, the White House has to be at the table. What Senator Gregg and I had recommended was that the Secretary of the Treasury be the chairman of the commission and the head of OMB be one of the 18 members. That wasn't adopted by the Congress. We got 53 votes in the Senate for our proposal, but 53 votes doesn't pass things around here. You have to have 60. You have to have a supermajority. So here we are. Let me just say again that I thank the Senator for his thoughtful presentation because that is what it is going to take. We are going to have to be brave. We are going to have to show some political courage here to do what is right for our country. So I appreciate the thoughtful remarks of the Senator from Indiana. Let me make a brief review in response to some of what I have heard this morning because I have heard some things with which I strenuously disagree that I believe require a response. We all agree we are on an unsustainable path. We are borrowing 40 cents of every dollar. That cannot be continued. As I indicated earlier, this is a 60-year look at the spending and revenue of the United States. We can see the spending line is the red line; the green line is the revenue line. The spending of the United States as a share of national income is the highest it has been in 60 years. The revenue is the lowest it has been in 60 years. Some of our colleagues say it is just a spending problem. Factually, I reject that. The facts show it is not just a spending problem-- although it is clear we do have a spending problem. When spending is the highest it has been in 60 years, clearly we have a spending problem. But as this chart reveals, revenue is the lowest it has been in 60 years. So, clearly, we have a revenue problem as well. Yesterday we voted on the package that came from the House of Representatives. The package that came from the House Budget Committee was passed by the House of Representatives. Even though that package was defeated overwhelmingly and on a bipartisan basis here yesterday, again this morning we had colleagues come and talk about what a great package it was. I do not believe it was a great package. I think it was a terrible package, and here is why--and now I am quoting former economic adviser to President Reagan, one of President Reagan's economic advisers, Mr. Bartlett. He said, about the House Republican plan, the following: Distributionally, the Ryan plan is a monstrosity. The rich would receive huge tax cuts while the social safety net would be shredded to pay for them. Even as an opening bid to begin budget negotiations with the Democrats, the Ryan plan cannot be taken seriously. It is less of a wish list than a fairytale utterly disconnected from the real world, backed up by make-believe numbers and unreasonable assumptions. Ryan's plan isn't even an act of courage; it's just pandering to the tea party. A real act of courage would have been for him to admit, as all serious budget analysts know, that revenues will have to rise well above 19 percent of GDP to stabilize the debt. This is a former economic adviser to President Reagan commenting on the House Republican plan that we rejected on a bipartisan basis here yesterday. Why does he say it is a monstrosity? He says it because even though revenue is the lowest it has been in 60 years, the first thing the Republican budget from the House did was cut taxes further, an overwhelming tax cut for the wealthiest among us after they already enjoyed very significant tax reductions over the last decade. In fact, the plan that came from the Republican House would have given those who have over $1 million of income a year on average a tax cut of over $192,000. For those who are as fortunate as to earn over $10 million a year, the plan they sent over here would have given them on average a tax cut of $1,450,000. That is a fact. That is just a fact. Does that make any sense at all when the revenue of this country is the lowest it has been in 60 years, that the first thing you do is dig the hole deeper, give another $1 trillion of tax cuts going to the wealthiest among us? It makes no sense. It did not end there because the plan from the House also would permit a scam that is occurring to continue. The scam I am referring to relates to this little building down in the Cayman Islands, Ugland House. This little five-story building down in the Cayman Islands claims to be the home of 18,857 companies. Really, 18,000 companies are doing business out of this little five-story building down in the Cayman Islands? Please. Mr. President, 18,000 companies are not doing business out of this little five-story building down in the Cayman Islands. The only business that is going on is monkey business, and the monkey business that is going on is avoiding the taxes they legitimately owe to the United States. You wonder why big companies making billions of dollars a year can announce they owed no taxes to the United States--none? It is because they are operating out of Ugland House down in the Cayman Islands where there are no taxes, and they show their profits in their companies down in the Cayman Islands. When I was tax commissioner in my State I found a company that reported all of their earnings down in the Cayman Islands. They did business all across the country, but amazingly enough none of those companies showed any profits in the United States. They showed all their profits in the Cayman Islands where, happily, there are no taxes. The Republican budget plan said: That is fine. Keep doing it. That is not fine. It is not fair. We know from our own Permanent Committee on Investigations in the Senate that these offshore tax havens are proliferating. Here is a quote from our Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations: Experts have estimated that the total loss to the Treasury from offshore tax evasion alone approaches $100 billion per year, including $40 to $70 billion from individuals and another $30 billion from corporations engaging in offshore tax evasion. Abusive tax shelters add tens of billions of dollars more. The Republican plan from the House says: No problem. Keep on doing it. In fact, we will go you one more. We will give you more tax cuts for the wealthiest among us. I tell you, that plan cannot stand scrutiny. At the same time it says: You know, because we have the lowest revenue in 60 years, and because we are going to give even more tax preferences, more tax credits, more tax schemes to the wealthiest among us, we are not going to be able to keep Medicare. I have heard colleagues say that these Draconian cuts to Medicare that are in the House plan are a way of saving Medicare. You don't save Medicare by destroying it. That is what the House plan does, make no mistake. It ends Medicare as we know it. Why do I say that? Let me just show you what it does. Right now, under traditional Medicare, the individual pays 25 percent of their health care costs. That is how it works today. You pay about 25 percent. A senior citizen eligible for Medicare pays about 25 percent of their costs. Under the House Republican budget plan that they passed and sent to the Senate that we defeated yesterday by a bipartisan vote, they would increase what the individual pays from 25 percent to 68 percent, and they claim they are saving Medicare. It doesn't look to me like they are saving it. It looks to me like they are completely undoing it. When we add it all up, what is most striking is that the House Republican plan, although it gives massive tax cuts to the wealthiest among us, another $1 trillion of tax cuts, even though it shreds Medicare and completely undermines Medicaid, which would mean another 34 million people do not have health care coverage in this country because they completely undo the coverage for health care passed last year so 34 million people are not going to have health care as a result of their plan--even with all of that and the other dramatic cuts--by the way, they cut support for energy programs to reduce our dependence on foreign energy, they cut that 57 percent; they cut education almost 20 percent--even after all that you would think at least they got the debt under control? No. Amazingly enough their plan, according to their own numbers, would add $8 trillion to the debt. Wow. They shred Medicare, they cut education dramatically, they cut almost 60 percent of the funding for energy to reduce our dependence on foreign energy--they cut that 57 percent, and they still add $8 trillion to the debt. That is a good plan? I don't think so. I don't think that is a plan that can stand much scrutiny. We also heard a lot of complaints from the other side that we have not gone to markup on the budget in the Senate. That is true. The reason we have not is because something is going on in this town that is very unusual. There are high-level bipartisan talks going on with the White House on what the budget plan should be to deal with our debt. This is something I have encouraged for years. This year I have repeatedly called for a summit to deal with our debt, to get a plan in place to cut spending, and, yes, to raise revenue--hopefully without raising taxes but by eliminating tax expenditures, tax loopholes, this kind of scam we have just talked about of offshore tax havens and abusive tax shelters. That bipartisan leadership effort that is underway deserves a chance to succeed. If they reach a conclusion, they may need a budget resolution. They may need us to have a markup in the Budget Committee to implement their plan. Some do not want to wait, they do not want a bipartisan agreement. But we simply must have a bipartisan agreement if there is to be any chance for success. The House is controlled by the Republicans. The Senate is controlled by the Democrats. There is a Democrat in the White House. The only possible way that a plan is actually passed into law and implemented is if we work together. I did it for all last year on the President's commission. I have done it for months of this year with three Democrats, three Republicans, spending hundreds of hours trying to come up with a bipartisan plan to implement the recommendations of the committee. So I don't take a back seat to anybody with respect to being serious about trying to get a plan to get our debt under control because it is a fundamental threat to the economic security of the United States. But here is what the Republican leader himself said about the effort that is underway, the bipartisan leadership effort: [T]he discussions that can lead to a result between now and August are the talks being led by Vice President Biden . . . that's a process that could lead to a result, a measurable result. . . . And in that meeting is the only Democrat who can sign a bill into law; in fact, the only American out of 307 million of us who can sign a bill into law. He is in those discussions. That will lead to a result. That is why we have not gone to a budget markup, because we have the patience to wait for the outcome of these bipartisan leadership talks. The top Republicans are represented in the Senate, the top Republicans in the House are represented, as are the Democrats in the Senate and the House, led by the White House. The Republican leader said this as well about the talks: We now have the most important Democrat in America at the table. That's important. He is the only one of the 307 million of us who can actually sign a bill into law. And I think that's a step in the right direction. And the Biden group is the group that can actually reach a decision on a bipartisan basis. And if it reaches a decision, obviously we will be recommending it to our members. That is the point. Why would we go to a partisan budget markup and refuse to wait for the leadership negotiation that is underway to succeed, when we know if they do succeed in all likelihood they will need us to do a budget markup to implement what they decide? I have the patience. I have spent 5 years working, first, with Senator Gregg, the ranking Republican on the Budget Committee, then with all 18 members of the fiscal commission, now with the group of six--three Democrats and three Republicans--trying to put together a plan to implement what the commission recommended to get our debt under control. I have the patience to wait a few more weeks to see if the combined leadership of this country, Republican and Democrat, working with the President of the United States, can come up with a plan to get our debt under control. We should all have that patience. We should all hope they succeed. But we are not going to be sitting and waiting. While we are hoping for a successful outcome, this Senator will continue to work with Republicans and Democrats to come up with a bipartisan plan to meet our debt threat. All of us have that obligation. All of us have that responsibility. I thank the Chair and yield the floor.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, today I am introducing for the second year in a row a Senate resolution to designate June 27 as National Post- Traumatic Stress Disorder Awareness Day. That date was inspired by the birthday of North Dakota National Guard Staff Sergeant Joe Biel. Staff Sergeant Biel served two tours of duty in Iraq as a Trailblazer, part of a unit responsible for route clearance operations. Each day, Joe's mission was to go out with his unit to find and remove Improvised Explosive Devices and other dangers from heavily traveled roads to make it safe for coalition forces and Iraqi civilians to travel. As a result of those experiences, Joe suffered from PTSD and, tragically, took his own life in April 2007. There is absolutely no doubt that Joe Biel is a hero who gave his life for our country. I learned of Joe's story because friends from his platoon, the 4th Platoon, A Company, of the North Dakota National Guard's 164th Combat Engineer Battalion, have organized an annual motorcycle ride across the state of North Dakota in his memory. The Joe Biel Memorial Ride serves as a reunion for the 164th, a memorial for a lost friend, and a beacon to those suffering from PTSD and other mental issues across the region. The key point made to me by the event's organizer, Staff Sergeant Matt Leaf, is that we have to raise awareness of this disease so that the lives of servicemembers, veterans, and other PTSD sufferers can be saved by greater awareness of and treatment for this disorder. For many, the war does not end when the warrior comes home. All too many servicemembers and veterans face PTSD symptoms like anxiety, anger, and depression as they try to adjust to life after war. We cannot sweep these problems under the rug. PTSD is real. The Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs have made significant advances in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of PTSD and its symptoms, but many challenges remain. More must be done to inform and educate veterans, families and communities on the facts about this illness and the resources and treatments available. That is why SSG Leaf and his fellow Trailblazers started the Joe Biel Memorial Bike Ride. That is why I began the effort to create a National PTSD Awareness Day last year. It is why I am introducing this Resolution once again. Actions like this may not seem that important to some, but they are. They garner attention, raise awareness, and help to eliminate the stigma surrounding mental health issues. These efforts are about letting our troops, past and present, know it is okay to come forward and say they need help. It's a sign of strength, not weakness, to seek assistance. It is my hope that this message will be heard. In the words of SSG Leaf, ``maybe if we all take a minute to listen, we can stop one more tragedy from ever happening again.''

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Emily Eelman, a detailee on the Budget Committee staff, be granted the privileges of the floor for the duration of today's and tomorrow's sessions.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Madam President, I thank the ranking member. Those hearings would not have been possible without the active working together of my office and his office, and I do think they were an excellent set of hearings talking about the dimensions of the problem we confront and that we are on an unsustainable course, where we are borrowing 40 cents of every $1 we spend. It cannot continue. Madam President, after my brief remarks, I ask unanimous consent that the following Senators be recognized for up to 5 minutes off the Democratic time: Senator Menendez, Senator Lautenberg, Senator Begich, and Senator Whitehouse.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, the budget circumstance we confront as a nation is clear. We are on a completely unsustainable course. The occupant of the chair knows this well as a very valued member of the Budget Committee. We are currently borrowing 40 cents of every dollar we spend. That, obviously, cannot continue. The other side has criticized those of us on our side for not going to a budget markup. The reason we have not is this is not a typical year in which the Republicans put up a budget resolution in the body they control and we put up a budget resolution and we go to conference committee to work out the differences. Something very different is occurring this year. There is a leadership negotiation with the highest leaders of the Republican Party in the House and the Senate, the highest leaders of the Democratic Party in the House and the Senate, meeting with the Vice President of the United States, on a plan to put in place a 10-year effort or perhaps a 5-year plan to deal with the deficits and debt. In fact, the Republican leader has made this observation: [T]he discussions that can lead to a result between now and August are the talks being led by Vice President Biden. . . . That's a process that could lead to a result, a measurable result, in the short term. And in that meeting is the only Democrat who can sign a bill into law; in fact, the only American out of 307 million of us who can sign a bill into law. He is in those discussions. That will lead to a result. It makes no sense for us to go to a budget markup at this moment that would simply be a partisan markup when bipartisan efforts are underway. Last year, for 8 months, I participated in the President's fiscal commission--10 Democrats, 8 Republicans. At the end of that emerged the only bipartisan plan that has come from anywhere so far. Five Democrats supported it; five Republicans supported it; one Independent. Mr. President, 11 of the 18 commissioners voted for that plan to get our deficits and debt under control. We have underway this new effort, a leadership effort, with the President represented at the table. We ought to give that a chance before we pass a budget resolution that may be required to implement any plan they can come up with. The hard reality of what we confront is simply this: This chart shows the spending and revenues of the United States going back to 1950--more than 60 years of the revenue and expenditure history of the United States. The red line is the spending line. The green line is the revenue line. What jumps out at you is that spending as a share of our national income is the highest it has been in 60 years. On the other hand, revenue is the lowest it has been in 60 years as a share of national income. So that is the reason we have record deficits. I hear all the time the other side of the aisle: It is a spending problem. When you have a deficit, that is the result of the difference between revenue and spending. We have a spending problem, yes, indeed-- the highest spending as a share of national income in 60 years. We also have a revenue problem--the lowest revenue we have had as a share of national income in 60 years. So now the House has sent us a plan, the Republican budget plan, and the first thing they do is cut the revenue some more. Revenue is the lowest it has been in 60 years, and the first thing they do to address the deficit is to cut the revenue some more. In fact, they cut, over the next 10 years, more than $4 trillion in revenue. For those who are the wealthiest among us, they give them an additional $1 trillion in tax reductions. By extending the top rate cuts, by extending a $5 million estate tax exemption, by cutting the top rate down to 25 percent from the 35 percent it is today, they are giving massive new tax cuts to the wealthiest among us. Their average revenue during the 10 years of their plan is 18.3 percent. You can see from this chart, the last five times the budget has been balanced, revenues have been around 20 percent: 19.7 percent, 19.9 percent, 19.8 percent, 20.6 percent, and 19.5 percent. The revenue plan they have would have never balanced the budget in the last 30 years. If we look at what has happened on the revenue side of the equation, here is what has happened to the effective tax rate for the 400 wealthiest taxpayers in the United States. Since 1995, when the effective tax rate on the wealthiest 400 was about 30 percent, that effective rate declined to 16.6 percent in 2007. Warren Buffett has said that his executive assistant pays a higher tax rate than he does. Well, how can that be? The reason that happens is because Mr. Buffett has most of his income from dividends and capital gains, taxed at a rate of 15 percent. His executive assistant is probably taxed at a rate somewhere in the 20, 25-percent range. We have a circumstance in which we have the lowest revenue in 60 years, and the House Republicans have sent us a budget that says: Let's cut it some more. Let's cut it another $4 trillion, and let's give $1 trillion of that to the wealthiest among us. If you look at what our friends are proposing, when we have the largest deficits since World War II, they are proposing to give those who earn over $1 million a year a tax cut, on average, in 2013, of almost $200,000. For those earning over $10 million, they would give them, on average, a tax cut of $1,450,000--this at a time when we have record deficits. What sense does this make? It makes no sense. What are they doing to offset these massive new tax cuts for the wealthiest among us? They have decided the answer is to shred the social safety net that has been created in this country over the last 60 years. They have decided to shred Medicare--shred it. They have decided to shred program after program so they can give more tax cuts to those who are the wealthiest among us. Here is what a top former President Reagan adviser said when he looked at the House budget proposal. Remember, this is not a Democrat. This is a top former Reagan economic adviser. This is what he said. His name is Bruce Bartlett. He said in his blog about the proposal from the House Republicans on the budget: Distributionally, the Ryan plan is a monstrosity. The rich would receive huge tax cuts while the social safety net would be shredded to pay for them. Even as an opening bid to begin budget negotiations with the Democrats, the Ryan plan cannot be taken seriously. It is less of a wish list than a fairy tale utterly disconnected from the real world, backed up by make-believe numbers and unreasonable assumptions. Ryan's plan isn't even an act of courage; it's just pandering to the Tea Party. A real act of courage would have been for him to admit, as all serious budget analysts know, that revenues will have to rise well above 19 percent of GDP to stabilize the debt. Let's go back to that chart that makes the point that Mr. Bartlett is making: that the five times the budget has been balanced around here in the last 30 years, the last 40 years--1969, 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001--by the way, those last four all during the Clinton administration--you can see what the revenue has been: nearly 20 percent of GDP in every one of those years. Revenue today is 14.5 percent of GDP. It is no wonder we have a problem with deficits. You combine the high spending we have now with the low revenue, and you have record deficits. Our friends on the other side have decided the first thing you do when you have record deficits and the lowest revenue in 60 years is to go out and give more tax breaks to the wealthiest among us. Here, as shown on this chart, is what they do to health care in the United States. No. 1, end Medicare as we know it. Replace it with a voucher system. They would reopen the prescription drug doughnut hole that means seniors have to pay more of their prescription drug costs. They would block grant Medicaid that ends the countercyclical nature of the program. They would defund health reform, increasing the number of uninsured by 34 million people. Mr. President, 34 million more Americans would not have health insurance if the plan that is before us would pass. When I say they are ending Medicare as we know it, here is why I say that. Right now, in traditional Medicare, the individual pays about 25 percent of the cost. The rest is paid by Medicare. But look what the House Republican plan would do. It would dramatically increase the health care spending by seniors. Instead of paying 25 percent of the bill, seniors would be expected to pay 68 percent of their health care costs. That is what the Republican plan is about: very generous additional tax breaks to the wealthiest among us. For those earning more than $10 million a year, they would give, on average, a $1,450,000 tax reduction. To make up for it, they would say to seniors: Instead of paying 25 percent of your health care costs under Medicare, you pay 68 percent. What would that mean in dollar terms? Seniors would go from paying $6,150 a year to $12,500 a year. That is the Republican plan that is before us. That is the budget plan we are going to vote on later this evening. Anybody who cannot see that is a shredding of Medicare, that is a shredding of the social safety net, just is not looking very closely. The former Republican Speaker called the House Republican Medicare proposal ``right-wing social engineering.'' Those are not my words. Those are his words. Here is the interview. On ``Meet The Press,'' on May 15, Mr. Gregory, the host, asked this: Do you think that Republicans ought to buck the public opposition and really move forward to completely change Medicare, turn it into a voucher program . . . ? Mr. Gingrich's answer: I don't think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering. I don't think imposing radical change from the right or the left is a very good way for a free society to operate. This budget that is before us is not just radical with respect to what it does to Medicare, what it does to the revenue of the United States. You look at every part of this budget, there are no savings in defense after we have had this massive defense buildup. From 1997 to 2011, you can see spending on defense has gone from $254 billion a year to $688 billion a year. Even the House Budget Committee chairman, Mr. Ryan, who is the architect of this plan, has said: There are a lot of savings you can get in defense. There's a lot of waste over there, for sure. That is what he said about defense spending. Here is what he did about it. He increases it dramatically, from $529 billion--this is just the underlying defense budget; this does not count the war funding--he increases the regular defense budget from $529 billion, in 2011, to $667 billion by 2021. He did not cut one thin dime. After saying there is lots of waste there, lots of places for savings, after the Secretary of Defense himself has said they have to restrain spending, after the Secretary of Defense himself has proposed $178 billion of savings, the budget before us does not save one dime out of defense. Instead, it increases it dramatically from $529 billion to $667 billion, and that does not count war funding. War funding would be on top of it. This budget before us, the Republican budget from the House, also takes some of the fundamentals of making our country strong and cuts them dramatically. Education is No. 1. I was raised by my grandparents. My grandmother was a schoolteacher. She used to say: In our household, No. 1 is education, No. 2 is education, and No. 3 is education. We got the message. Let me read what two of the country's foremost economists have said about the importance of education to the U.S. economy: an educated population is a key source of economic growth. Broad access to education was, by and large, a major factor in the U.S. economic dominance in the 20th century and in the creation of a broad middle class. Indeed, the American dream of upward mobility, both within and across generations, has been tied to access to education. What does the budget that has come over from the Republican house do? It cuts education 15 percent, from $91 billion to $77 billion, from 2011 to 2012. Education, obviously, is not the only important pillar to our economy. Another important pillar is the infrastructure of the country; our roads, bridges, highways, airports. These are the things that support a vibrant and strong U.S. economy. Here is the engineers' report card on America's infrastructure. Aviation, a D; bridges, a C; rail, a C-minus; roads, D-minus; transit, a D; the infrastructure grade point average, a D. What do our colleagues propose in the budget that is before us? They propose cutting it 30 percent. Can you imagine what it is going to be like to try to get around this country if you go out and cut transportation 30 percent? Anybody who has driven on any of the roads across America, certainly the roads in any of the major cities, anybody who has gone through any of the airports, anybody who has gone on a rail system in this country, you think we are going to be better off if we cut the funding 30 percent? That is exactly what the Republican budget that is before us proposes. We also know one of the near-term threats to the economy is what is happening to the price of gasoline. Since December of 2008, gasoline has gone from $1.81 a gallon to $3.85 on May 23--up $2 a gallon. Every economist has said this is hurting the economic recovery in this country. What do our colleagues in the House send us as a budget for energy, things that can be done to reduce our dependance on foreign energy? They cut it 57 percent--57 percent cut in the strategies designed to reduce our dependance on foreign energy--cut it 57 percent. It does not add up. It does not make sense. It is not in the mainstream of thinking. This is a budget that if we poll the constituent elements, the American people, they reject it out of hand. They do not believe Medicare should be shredded. They do not believe that those who are the most fortunate among us ought to be given more tax reductions at this time. With record deficits and a debt growing out of control, the first to be done is not to say to those earning over $1 million a year: You get a $200,000 tax cut; to those earning over $10 million a year: You get a tax reduction of $1,450,000 and then to turn around and slash much of what helps middle-class families in this country, whether it is education or infrastructure or transportation. That is the budget that is before us from our colleagues on the other side of the aisle. We have other budget plans, the Paul budget plan, the Toomey budget plan. I will comment on those later. But I very much hope colleagues are listening, that they pay close attention to this debate, that they have a chance to evaluate what should be the position of this Chamber when we vote later this evening. I believe this is a defining vote for this Chamber. Are we going to approve a budget that is truly radical in its scope and dimension, that fundamentally ends Medicare as we know it, and at the same time gives massive new tax cuts to the wealthiest among us? At a time when we are having the lowest revenue in 60 years, that cutting the revenue of the United States by over $1 trillion to give additional tax reductions to those who have already enjoyed dramatic tax reductions--I pointed out early in my presentation, the effective tax rate on those who are the wealthiest among us has declined dramatically during the recent years. This proposal from the House of Representatives says: We will do even more to reduce the tax load on those who are the wealthiest among us. I do not think it adds up. Let me say to those who think: Well, at least the Ryan budget--the Republican budget--will reduce our deficits and get our debt back on track, we will solve that problem. Let me leave you with one number. The Republican budget from the House of Representatives that we will vote on later today increases the gross debt of the United States by $8 trillion. So anybody who thinks that shredding Medicare and giving these giant tax breaks to the wealthiest among us is going to solve the problem, that it is going to stop the explosion of debt is wrong. In the budget before us, the Republican budget from the House of Representatives, the gross debt of the United States in the next 10 years is increased by $8 trillion. For those who think the debt is already too high, you want to vote for a plan that is going to increase the debt, the gross debt of the United States another $8 trillion? That is the Republican plan from the House of Representatives. That is the budget that is before us. That is the budget we are going to vote on later this evening. I ask unanimous consent that following my remarks, Senator Merkley be recognized for up to 5 minutes and then Senator Sanders be recognized for up to 5 minutes as well.

Mr. CONRAD. I yield the floor.

Mr. CONRAD. I thank the Presiding Officer.

Mr. CONRAD. Madam President, reserving the right to object, I am fine with that if we would have that time added on our side as well.

Mr. CONRAD. Madam President, just briefly, I wish to address this question of why we on our side have not laid down our budget proposal. Let me repeat, we are in an unusual year. This is not going to be a circumstance in which there is a Republican budget, a Democratic budget, you go to conference committee, and they are resolved because we have a new process underway at the leadership level involving the White House. This is what the Republican leader himself said about that process: [T]he discussions that can lead to a result between now and August are the talks being led by Vice President Biden. . . . That's a process that could lead to a result, a measurable result. . . . And in that meeting is the only Democrat who can sign a bill into law; in fact, the only American out of 307 million of us who can sign a bill into law. He is in those discussions. That will lead to a result. We do not need a Democratic budget and a Republican budget. We need an American budget. We need a budget that is bipartisan because all of us know that is the only budget that can possibly be adopted. The Republicans control the House of Representatives. The Democrats control the Senate. The only possibility for us to make progress is a bipartisan budget. That is why I was deeply involved in the process on the President's fiscal commission--18 of us for 1 year--and it is the only place a bipartisan budget has so far emerged. Madam President, 11 of us supported it--5 Democrats, 5 Republicans, and 1 Independent--11 of us out of the 18 on the Commission. We now have underway a group of five talks--Democrats and Republicans working together. But, most important, we have, at the leadership level, Republican leaders from the House and the Senate, Democratic leaders from the House and the Senate, and the Vice President of the United States. What sense would it possibly make for us to go to markup of a budget before we have seen the results of these leadership talks? That makes no sense. We have a bipartisan discussion underway-- Republican leaders, Democratic leaders, and the White House. We ought to have the courtesy and the patience to see if they can come up with a plan that would then form the basis of the budget.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, today I am pleased to recognize a community in North Dakota that is celebrating its 125th anniversary. From June 24 to 26, the residents of Cogswell, ND, will gather to celebrate their community's founding. Cogswell townsite was founded at the junction of the Soo Line Railroad and the Milwaukee Road Railroad. Some believe it was named for a Soo Line Railroad official, while others say it was named for MAJ Thomas Cogswell, a Revolutionary War hero. Located in Sargent County, the citizens of Cogswell are proud to mention the many reasons their community is so strong. The city offers genuine smalltown living with a post office, bar and grill, repair stores, and construction companies. The people of Cogswell are known for their exceptional work ethic and caring attitude toward others, making it a great place to live and raise a family. In honor of the city's 125th anniversary, community leaders have organized an all-school reunion, school reunion supper, street dances, a parade, 5K run/walk, games, classic car show, quilt show, talent show, and other celebratory events. I ask that my colleagues in the U.S. Senate join me in congratulating Cogswell, ND, and its residents on their first 125 years and in wishing them well in the future. By honoring Cogswell and all other historic small towns of North Dakota, we keep the great pioneering frontier spirit alive for future generations. It is places such as Cogswell that have helped shape this country into what it is today, which is why this fine community is deserving of our recognition. Cogswell has a proud past and a bright future.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I am pleased today to recognize a community in North Dakota that is celebrating its 125th anniversary. On July 29-31, the residents of Lidgerwood will gather to celebrate their community's history and founding. The city of Lidgerwood was established as the Soo Railroad pushed westward in the summer of 1886. George Lidgerwood, for whom the town is named, along with General W. D. Washburn and R. N. Ink, platted the original townsite. Today, Lidgerwood is a vibrant community, with several area attractions. Residents enjoy the town's golf course, swimming pool, recreation park, the American Legion Park, and camping. The people of Lidgerwood also care about preserving the history and heritage of their town, which can be seen in the Lidgerwood Museum and the Bagg Bonanza Farm. The town is also home to the Ann Thielman Performing Arts Center and a wonderful public school. Lidgerwood is known for its sense of community and is an excellent place to raise a family. In honor of the city's 125th anniversary, officials have organized a celebration that includes a softball and golf tournament, a classic car show, an antique tractor show, street dances, games, food vendors and much more. I ask the U.S. Senate to join me in congratulating Lidgerwood, ND, and its residents on their first 125 years and in wishing them well in the future. By honoring Lidgerwood and all other historic small towns of North Dakota, we keep the great pioneering frontier spirit alive for future generations. It is places such as Lidgerwood that have helped shape this country into what it is today, which is why this fine community is deserving of our recognition. Lidgerwood has a proud past and a bright future.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize a community in North Dakota that will be celebrating its 125th anniversary. On July 14-17, the residents of New England will gather to celebrate their community's history and founding. New England was the first townsite in Hettinger County, and was originally named Mayflower. It later became known as New England City. On June 8, 1894, the new post master, Horace W. Smith, shortened the name to simply New England, noting that most early settlers were from Vermont and Massachusetts, two of the New England States. Today, New England is a vibrant, agricultural community in southwestern North Dakota. It is home to, among other things, Dakota West Credit Union, Top Line Auto, Riverside Lodging, Country Style Beauty Salon, Ag Alliance, a grocery store, and a seniors center. The New England Public School sits at the north end of Main Street and provides a high quality education to all of its students. New England is known for its sense of community and is an excellent place to live and raise a family. The citizens of New England have organized numerous activities to celebrate their 125th anniversary. Some of the activities include dances, basketball and volleyball tournaments, an antique tractor pull and show, a parade, an arts and craft show, a bake sale, a car show, games, and a derby. I ask the U.S. Senate to join me in congratulating New England, ND, and its residents on the first 125 years and in wishing them well through the next century. By honoring New England and all the other historic small towns of North Dakota, we keep the great pioneering frontier spirit alive for future generations. It is places such as New England that have helped to shape this country into what it is today, which is why this fine community is deserving of our recognition. New England has a proud past and a bright future.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I am pleased today to recognize a community in North Dakota that is celebrating its 125th anniversary. On July 14-17, the residents of Leeds will gather to celebrate their community's history and founding. In the Spring of 1886, the Great Northern Railroad founded the townsite of Leeds at the junction of the Great Northern Railroad and the Northern Pacific Railroad. It was named for Leeds, Yorkshire, England, an important manufacturing center dating back to 616 A.D. On August 31, 1887, the post office was established with Thomas Howrey as the postmaster. Today, Leeds has much to be proud of. The residents enjoy the outdoors through use of their golf course, parks, baseball diamonds, basketball courts, and a swimming pool. The community also boasts an award-winning school system and the Leeds City Library. The people of Leeds are known for their strong work ethic and caring attitude towards others, making it a great place to live and raise a family. In honor of the city's 125th anniversary, officials have organized a wonderful celebration that includes a family steak fry at the golf course, family games, a basketball and golf tournament, a 5K run, trap shoot, dances, fireworks, and a parade. I ask the U.S. Senate to join me in congratulating Leeds, ND, and its residents on their first 125 years and in wishing them well in the future. By honoring Leeds and all other historic small towns of North Dakota, we keep the great pioneering frontier spirit alive for future generations. It is places such as Leeds that have helped shape this country into what it is today, which is why this fine community is deserving of our recognition. Leeds has a proud past and a bright future.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I am pleased today to recognize a community in North Dakota that will be celebrating its 125th anniversary. On June 10-12, the residents of Oakes will gather to celebrate their community's history and founding. Oakes is a vibrant community located in Dickey County. This Northern Pacific Railroad, NPRR, townsite was founded in 1886. The town was named for Thomas Fletcher Oakes, who was the NPRR president from 1888- 1893. Its first mayor, Thomas Frank Marshall, later became a U.S. Representative. Oakes is also the hometown of former NFL player, Phil Hansen. Citizens of Oakes are proud of their community and what it has to offer. They boast that their town is the hub of southeastern North Dakota, with an excellent school system, a well-established clinic, and a new hospital facility. While a strong agricultural community, Oakes also has a booming business sector. Its citizens are honored to call Oakes their home and know that it is a great place to live and raise a family. The residents of Oakes have already begun celebrating their town's anniversary. They gathered for a family night the first day in January to kick off their 125th year. They have also planned numerous activities for the weekend of June 10-12 to continue the celebration, including a walk/run, an all-school reunion, a parade along Main Avenue, and two evenings of live music and street dances. I ask the U.S. Senate to join me in congratulating Oakes, ND, and its residents on their first 125 years and in wishing them well in the future. By honoring Oakes and all other historic small towns of North Dakota, we keep the great pioneering frontier spirit alive for future generations. It is places such as Oakes that have helped shape this country into what it is today, which is why this fine community is deserving of our recognition. Oakes has a proud past and a bright future.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize a community in North Dakota that will be celebrating its 125th anniversary. On July 1-3, the residents of Rugby will gather to celebrate their community's history and founding. Rugby is a vibrant community in North Dakota that was founded in 1886. This Great Northern Railroad station was platted as Rugby Junction, but since its founding has been simply called Rugby, for Rugby, Warwickshire, England. Today, Rugby is home to almost 200 businesses in a variety of fields including craftsmanship, manufacturing, agriculture, retail, food services, and health care. Rugby is also part of the North Dakota Wind Power Project which consists of several wind turbines that produce clean, renewable energy. In addition, Rugby is recognized as the geographic center of North America. In order to preserve the history of the city, Rugby has established museums including the Dale & Martha Hawk Museum and the Prairie Village Museum. Both of these museums are dedicated to the pioneering families and ancestors of the local community. Rugby is also home to a beautiful golf course, the Northern Lights Tower, the historic Pierce County Courthouse, and is near the scenic International Peace Gardens. The citizens of Rugby are proud of all of their accomplishments over the past 125 years and have planned a celebration that will include, among other things, golf tournaments, a softball tournament, a 5K run/ walk, local entertainment, a car show, a parade, and food and craft vendors. I ask the U.S. Senate to join me in congratulating Rugby, ND, and its residents on the first 125 years and in wishing them well through the next century. By honoring Rugby and all the other historic small towns of North Dakota, we keep the great pioneering frontier spirit alive for future generations. It is places such as Rugby that have helped to shape this country into what it is today, which is why this fine community is deserving of our recognition. Rugby has a proud past and a bright future.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, today I am pleased to recognize a community in North Dakota that is celebrating its 125th anniversary. From July 1-4, the residents of Towner, ND, will gather to celebrate their community's founding. Towner, the ``Cattle Capital of North Dakota,'' was founded in 1886. The town was named after Colonel Oscar M. Towner, who was a Confederate veteran of the Civil War and played major roles in the development of Grand Forks and McHenry Counties. Towner established a post office on December 11, 1886. Located in north central North Dakota, Towner is a vibrant community and the county seat of McHenry County. Today, Towner is home to many local businesses, such as Anderson Funeral Home, Farmers Union Elevator, Gunter Honey, Johnson Clinic, McIntee Law Firm, Towner Foods, Ranch House Restaurant, and Western State Bank. In honor of the city's 125th anniversary, community leaders have organized a number of fun activities. There will be live music, a street dance, pancake breakfast, golf tournament, rodeo, fireworks, a classic car show, and a parade. I ask that my colleagues in the U.S. Senate join me in congratulating Towner, ND, and its residents on their first 125 years and in wishing them well in the future. By honoring Towner and all other historic small towns of North Dakota, we keep the great pioneering frontier spirit alive for future generations. It is places such as Towner that have helped shape this country into what it is today, which is why this fine community is deserving of our recognition. Towner has a proud past and a bright future.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, today I am pleased to recognize a community in North Dakota that is celebrating its 125th anniversary. From July 1-4, the residents of Hankinson, ND, will gather to celebrate their community's founding. The town of Hankinson was founded in 1886, and was named after COL Richard Henry Hankinson. At the time, Colonel Hankinson was promoting a townsite called Kelly a few miles to the south, but development shifted to the new site, which had just been reached by both the Great Northern Railroad and the Soo Line Railroad. Both of these railroads were trying to establish control in the area. The post office was established on December 6, 1886, with Colonel Hankinson as the postmaster, and the town was named in his honor. Today, Hankinson is the home of Hankinson Renewable Energy, which is one of the largest ethanol facilities in the United States. The facility began operations in 2009 and produces approximately 110 million gallons of ethanol per year. Great facilities such as this one show the future of energy in the United States, and help ease our dependence on foreign oil. The citizens of Hankinson are proud to mention the many reasons their community is so strong. The city offers genuine small town living with a public library, city park, the ``Caboose'' Museum, and the Jack L. Bopp Memorial Football Field. The Hankinson area is also known for excellent hunting and fishing. In honor of the city's 125th anniversary, community leaders have organized a golf tournament, car and bike show, flea market, children's tractor pull, street dances, a parade, a fireworks display, and other celebratory events. I ask that my colleagues in the U.S. Senate join me in congratulating Hankinson, ND and its residents on their first 125 years and in wishing them well in the future. By honoring Hankinson and all other historic small towns of North Dakota, we keep the great pioneering frontier spirit alive for future generations. It is places such as Hankinson that have helped shape this country into what it is today, which is why this fine community is deserving of our recognition. Hankinson has a proud past and a bright future.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Madam President, today I wish to recognize a community in North Dakota that will be celebrating its 100th anniversary. On July 8-10, the residents of Makoti will gather to celebrate their community's history and founding. The vibrant community of Makoti is a Soo Line Railroad townsite. On July 12, 1911, the village of Makoti was platted, and lots at the townsite were sold. Approximately 200 people attended the sale. The name of the town was coined by the townsite promoter, Edward Kamrud, from maakoti, a Mandan Indian word meaning largest of the earthen lodges. Edward learned of this word from James Holding Eagle, who was building a replica Mandan-type earthen lodge on the grounds of the State capitol in Bismarck. Today, the economy of Makoti is largely based on agriculture. There are also eight businesses within the city, three churches, and the Lewis and Clark Makoti High School. Each fall, the town comes together and celebrates the Makoti Threshing Show, which is the largest threshing exhibition in North Dakota. Other recreational opportunities including a city park, swimming pool, baseball diamonds, and nearby lakes with great fishing and hunting. The citizens of Makoti are proud of all of their accomplishments over the past 100 years and have planned a celebration that will include a golf tournament, 5K walk, arts and craft show, children's activities, a car show, a parade, and fireworks. I ask the U.S. Senate to join me in congratulating Makoti, ND, and its residents on the first 100 years and in wishing them well through the next century. By honoring Makoti and all the other historic small towns of North Dakota, we keep the great pioneering frontier spirit alive for future generations. It is places such as Makoti that have helped to shape this country into what it is today, which is why this fine community is deserving of our recognition. Makoti has a proud past and a bright future.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Madam President, today, I am pleased to recognize a community in North Dakota that is celebrating its 100th anniversary. From July 8-10, the residents of Selfridge will gather to celebrate their community's founding. The Selfridge Milwaukee Road Railroad Station was established in 1911. Several theories exist on how Selfridge received its name. Some say the name describes the ridge of hills in the area, while others say it was named for a Milwaukee Road Railroad official. Others contend that it was named for Thomas E. Selfridge, a pioneer army aviator killed in service. In 1925, Selfridge boasted 63 business establishments and 51 homes. By 1930, the town's population had more than doubled. In the early 1940s, crops harvested in the countryside around Selfridge brought agricultural success, and during the 1950s the city council established a water and sewer system for the community. Because prairie fires have been a concern for Selfridge since its founding, a voluntary fire department has always been in existence. Selfridge is located in south central North Dakota in Sioux County. It is part of the Standing Rock Indian Reservation. Today the town is home to the Selfridge Fire Hall, Selfridge High School, Selfridge Post Office, Selfridge Farmer's Union Oil Co., and the Branding Iron Bar & Steakhouse. In honor of the city's 100th anniversary, community leaders have organized, among other things, a high school reunion social, street dances, a parade, sporting activities, a performance by Native American dancers, a children's carnival, and a German supper. I ask that my colleagues in the U.S. Senate join me in congratulating Selfridge, ND, and its residents on their first 100 years and in wishing them well in the future. By honoring Selfridge and all other historic small towns of North Dakota, we keep the great pioneering frontier spirit alive for future generations. It is places such as Selfridge that have helped shape this country into what it is today, which is why this fine community is deserving of our recognition. Selfridge has a proud past and a bright future.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Madam President, today I wish to recognize a community in North Dakota that will be celebrating its 100th anniversary. On July 15-17, the residents of Robinson will gather to celebrate their community's history and founding. The vibrant community of Robinson is a Northern Pacific Railroad townsite. It was named after John F. Robinson, president of the First National Bank in Steele. Verne Wells came to Robinson in 1922, and established banking and civic leadership traditions that are now in their third generation. Vernon Liedtke--1912-1957--a world famous circus star, was born here. Today, the economy of Robinson is largely based on agriculture and hunting. There are also local businesses, such as Countryside Auto, Flath Trucking, First Security Bank West, Northern Plains Electric Cooperative, Robinson Senior Center, Carol's Kitchen, Barb's Hair Shack and the Robinson Post Office. The citizens of Robinson are proud of all of their accomplishments over the past 100 years and have planned a celebration that will include, among other things, a class parade, dance, gun raffle, truck and tractor pull, food vendors, street dances, and fireworks. I ask the U.S. Senate to join me in congratulating Robinson, ND, and its residents on the first 100 years and in wishing them well through the next century. By honoring Robinson and all the other historic small towns of North Dakota, we keep the great pioneering frontier spirit alive for future generations. It is places such as Robinson that have helped to shape this country into what it is today, which is why this fine community is deserving of our recognition. Robinson has a proud past and a bright future.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize a community in North Dakota that will be celebrating its 100th anniversary. On June 25-26, the residents of Woodworth will gather to celebrate their community's history and founding. Woodworth is a small but vibrant community in North Dakota. The town was founded in 1911, and takes its name from the Northern Pacific Railroad's traffic manager and vice president at the time, J. G. Woodworth. It is located in Stutsman County and is the last stop on the railroad track that runs along highway 36. The historical site, Camp Grant, is located near Woodworth, and was used in the Sibley Expedition of 1863. Woodworth earned the nickname ``the Cream City'' in its early years, because the sale of cream and eggs was the main source of income for many local farmers. The town is currently home to approximately 70 proud residents. The citizens of Woodworth have organized numerous activities to celebrate their town's centennial. Beginning on Saturday morning, they will participate in a walk/run, with a breakfast, a parade, and art in the park to follow. A truck/tractor pull, street dance, and fireworks will round out the day's events. Woodworth's residents will conclude the centennial festivities with a community worship service on Sunday morning, and enjoy a home-run derby and music in the park on Sunday afternoon. I ask the U.S. Senate to join me in congratulating Woodworth, ND, and its residents on the first 100 years and in wishing them well through the next century. By honoring Woodworth and all the other historic small towns of North Dakota, we keep the great pioneering frontier spirit alive for future generations. It is places such as Woodworth that have helped to shape this country into what it is today, which is why this fine community is deserving of our recognition. Woodworth has a proud past and a bright future.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, today I am pleased to recognize a community in North Dakota that is celebrating its 100th anniversary. From June 17-19, the residents of Tuttle, ND, will gather to celebrate their community's founding. In 1911, the town of Tuttle was founded by an official with the Dakota Land & Town Site Company, Colonel William P. Tuttle. Proud to have a town named in his honor, Colonel Tuttle donated money for the Tuttle Baseball Club's first baseball uniforms. Located near the geographic center of North Dakota, Tuttle and its surrounding area were settled by homestead families of Scandinavian and German Russian heritage. Many of the descendants of these settlers still live and farm in the area today. In addition to farming, there are many community businesses and services in Tuttle such as the Senior Center, Post Office, BJ Auction Service, Buchholz Trucking, Days Gone By Cafe, Tuttle Community Store, Tuttle Farmers Elevator, and Tuttle Tavern. Today, the people of Tuttle enjoy fishing, boating, and hunting near places like Lake Josephine and Cherry Lake. Also popular are traditional culinary specialties like knoephla soup, fleisch kuechle, and kuchen. Tuttle is a hard working community, whose vitality can be attributed to its strong family values and community spirit. In honor of the city's 100th anniversary, community leaders have organized, among other things, a meet and greet fish fry, a centennial 5K/10K Run/Walk, turtle races, a threshing bee and antique tractor show, a parade, and a baseball game in Tuttle Ball Park. I ask that my colleagues in the U.S. Senate join me in congratulating Tuttle, ND, and its residents on their first 100 years and in wishing them well in the future. By honoring Tuttle and all other historic small towns of North Dakota, we keep the great pioneering frontier spirit alive for future generations. It is places such as Tuttle that have helped shape this country into what it is today, which is why this fine community is deserving of our recognition. Tuttle has a proud past and a bright future.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I wish to take a few minutes today to recognize an outstanding North Dakotan. On June 18, 2011, Dori Carlson will become the first female president of the American Optometric Association, AOA. Dori, who has two offices in North Dakota, was honored in 1994 as the North Dakota Young Optometrist of the Year and in 2003 as the Optometrist of the Year. She was also the first female president of the North Dakota Optometric Association. Dori's No. 1 priority is to advocate the importance of having young children undergo vision testing. She tells parents all over the country about ``vision'' problems faced by young children, and that it is easier to address these problems if discovered early. She regularly highlights President Obama's statement regarding the need to review vision of young children: No child should be falling behind at school because he or she can't . . . see the blackboard. This is President Obama, February 4, 2009. As a result of Dori's emphasis on the importance of children's vision, there continues to be an increase in vision testing. This means that fewer children are having vision problems. For all parents, we thank Dori for her dedication and congratulate her on becoming the new AOA president.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. I ask for the yeas and nays.