Mike Crapo

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, today I wish to honor the life and legacy of Joseph ``Perry'' Swisher. A third-generation Idahoan, Perry committed much of his life to service to our State and Idahoans. Perry was born in Bruneau, IA, and educated at Pocatello High School, University of Idaho Southern Branch and Idaho State University. He had an extensive career as a journalist and in elected office. This included his work as the Pocatello News Bureau manager for the Salt Lake Tribune, editor and publisher of the Intermountain, and assistant managing editor for the Lewiston Morning Tribune. In the late 1960s through mid 1970s, Perry owned The Book Arcade in Pocatello. For 7 years, he served as director of special services at Idaho State University and was involved in helping low-income and minority students succeed in college. He also served as a member and president of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission, as Idaho State representative of Bannock County, Idaho State senator for Bannock County, and as a member of the Pocatello City Council. Perry received many awards and honors for his work and served on a number of boards and commissions. His immense experience in many aspects of the communities he lived in and the State contributed to his deep understanding of Idaho and Idahoans. Perry was known for his ability to simplify complex issues and make them understandable. He was sharp and inquisitive and had a propensity for debate and thought-provoking discussions. Perry had a comprehensive knowledge and sense of Idaho history, which he was willing to share if asked. Although his political partisan affiliations were famously known to shift according to the cyclical vagaries of political thought, his own view of the world remained consistent. His view of current events, always stated in the context of Idaho history, was of enormous value to many, including to those in my office. He also had an innate kindness and fabulous sense of humor that made the lessons he delivered particularly enjoyable. I extend my heartfelt condolences to Perry's wife of 64 years, Nicky Swisher, his children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, and many other family members and friends. Perry was truly exceptional. His steadfast determination and efforts in support of and to better our state will always be remembered.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today to support and underscore the points just made by Senator Enzi in support of the U.S. Sugar Program, which, as he indicated, has operated successfully at no cost to the American taxpayers, consumers, or food manufacturers. As you know, the sugar beet industry is very important to my State of Idaho, bringing in approximately $1.1 billion in revenue every year. History has shown that grocers and food manufacturers do not pass their savings from lower ingredient prices along to consumers. For example, from the summer of 2010 until now, producer prices for sugar have dropped nearly 20 percent. In fact, the U.S. Sugar Program remains crucial because other nations are implementing trade-distorting subsidies for their otherwise uncompetitive sugar industries. The world sugar price, as is so often debated in these Halls, suffers from government-backed dumping that protects sugar producers overseas to the detriment of American sugar producers--hence, the need for the U.S. Sugar Program. Consumers in the rest of the world pay, on average, 14 percent more for sugar--in the developed world, 24 percent more--than American consumers pay. In America, sugar is a readily available and affordable product. Critics of U.S. sugar policy make the argument that the program causes disastrous shortages in U.S. sugar supply, which flies in the face of reality. U.S. farmers and producers have proven themselves, time and again, to be the most efficient in the world, but they cannot be left alone to face a trade market undermined by foreign government manipulation. Nothing could be further from the truth, and the latest numbers released by the U.S. Department of Agriculture underline that. The USDA now estimates that there is enough sugar surplus to give every man, woman, and child in this country nearly 12 pounds of sugar on top of what they already consume. This is enough surplus sugar to fill the Capitol Dome 55 times. I strongly encourage my colleagues to oppose any attempts at repealing this program. At risk would be 142,000 American jobs generated by the U.S. sugar-producing industry. Many of these jobs would be lost to subsidized foreign producers who are generally less efficient and less reliable and produce sugar far less safely and responsibly than American sugar producers. I support Idaho's sugar beet growers as well as sugar growers throughout the country. I am committed to ensuring that they have access to the tools they need to produce an affordable and abundant sugar supply. The bottom line is not only is this program not a cost to the U.S. taxpayer, it generates revenue to help us reduce our deficit. These are the kinds of programs we need to protect American producers. I encourage all of my colleagues to oppose the Shaheen amendment.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, my colleague Senator Herb Kohl joins me today in congratulating the 2011 winners of the Alfred P. Sloan Award for Excellence in Workplace Effectiveness and Flexibility, which recognizes companies that have successfully used flexibility to enhance both business results and employee goals. The Sloan Awards are presented by the When Work Works initiative, which is a project of the Families and Work Institute and the Society for Human Resource Management. In 2011, the When Work Works initiative was sponsored by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. We want to draw your attention to the Sloan Awards because these organizations are to be commended for their excellence in providing workplace flexibility practices that benefit both employees and employers. Achieving greater flexibility in the workplace, to maximize productivity while attracting and retaining talented individuals, is one of the key challenges facing organizations in the 21st century. Organizations in the following 25 communities were eligible for recognition through the 2011 Sloan Awards: Arizona, statewide; Aurora, CO; Boise, ID; Charleston, SC; Chicago, IL; Dallas, TX; Dayton, OH; Durham, NC; Georgia, statewide; Houston, TX; Long Beach, CA; Long Island, NY; Louisville, KY; Melbourne-Palm Bay, FL; Michigan, statewide; Milwaukee, WI; Morris County, NJ; New Hampshire, statewide; Oregon, statewide; Providence, RI; Richmond, VA; Rochester, MN; Salt Lake City, UT; Twin Cities and St. Cloud, MN; and Winona, MN. In addition, there are several winners recognized in the at-large category. In these communities, organizations applied for, and winners were selected for, the Sloan Awards through a process that included employees' views as well as employer practices. We would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the 2011 winners of the Alfred P. Sloan Award for Excellence in Workplace Effectiveness and Flexibility. These organizations are to be commended for their excellence in providing workplace flexibility. In Arizona, the winners are Arizona Foundation for Legal Services & Education; Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System, AHCCCS; Autohaus Arizona, Inc.; Children's Dental Village; Custom Accounting & Tax-Cave Creek; Henry & Horne, LLP; Infincom; Keats, Connelly and Associates LLC; Microchip Technology Inc.; Omega Legal Systems, Inc.; Point B; Rio Salado College; Scottsdale Healthcare; Southwest Institute of Healing Arts, SWIHA; Verde Valley Sanctuary; and Wist Office Products. In Aurora, CO, the winners are Arapahoe/Douglas Works! and Aurora Mental Health Center. In Boise, ID, the winners are Alliance Title & Escrow Corp.; American Geotechnics; Givens Pursley LLP; Mountain States Group, Inc.; Red Sky Public Relations; and TitleOne Corporation. In Charleston, SC, the winners are Barling Bay, LLC; Charleston Metro Chamber of Commerce; Community Management Group; McKesson Corporation; and MMP School, Inc. In Chicago, IL, the winners are AzulaySelden Law Group; Bryan Cave, LLP; Frost, Ruttenberg & Rothblatt, P.C.; Manpower; NCH Marketing Services-A Valassis Company; Ocean Tomo, LLC; Ounce of Prevention Fund; Perspectives, Ltd.; Recruit Training Command Great Lakes; Sanchez Daniels & Hoffman LLP; The Habitat Company; True Partners Consulting; Turner Construction Company; and Verizon Wireless. In Dallas, TX, the winners are A. Miller Consulting Services, Inc.; Abernethy Media Professionals; Aguirre Roden Inc.; Dallas Convention & Visitor's Bureau; Delta Dallas; MHBT Inc.; Operation Kindnexx; and The Center for American and International Law. In Dayton, OH, the winners are Azimuth Corporation; Barco, Inc.; Brower Insurance Agency LLC; Cornerstone Research Group; EAGLE Registrations Inc.; Eastway Behavioral Healthcare; Evanhoe & Associates Inc.; Greater Dayton Area Hospital Association; Macaulay-Brown; Premier Community Health; Radiance Technologies Inc.; Sebaly Shillito + Dyer; and Shumsky Enterprises, Inc. In Durham, NC, the winners are American Institute for Certified Public Accountants (AICPA); American Journal Experts, LLC; Durham Convention & Visitor's Bureau; Hill, Chesson & Woody Employee Benefit Services; ICF International; McKinney; Rho, Inc.; Shodor Education Foundation, Inc.; and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-RTP. In Georgia, the winners are Hancock Askew & Co., LLP; Mom Corps; Synergis; and WellStar Health System. In Houston, TX, the winners are Abel Design Group, Ltd.; Binkley & Barfield, Inc.; ContentActive, LLC; Fronterra Integrated Geosciences; Houston Academy of Medicine-Texas Medical Center Library; Klotz Associates Inc.; McDonald's USA LLC; Memorial Hermann Healthcare System; Null-Lairson, P.C.; PKF Texas; Skylla Engineering Ltd.; The Dow Chemical Company; The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston; The VIA Group; University of Phoenix-Houston Campus; Vinson and Elkins; and Xvand Technology Corporation Provider of IsUtility. In Long Beach, CA, the winners are Bryson Financial Group; La Strada; Molina Healthcare (Arco Location); and Molina Healthcare (Hughes Way Location). In Long Island, NY, the winners are Albrecht, Viggiano, Zureck & Company, P.C.; America Institute of Physics; American Heart Association; Brookhaven Science Associates, LLC; Cerini & Associates, LLP; Creative Plan Designs, Ltd.; Jackson Lewis; P.W. Grosser Consulting, Inc.; and YES Community Counseling Center. In Louisville, KY, the winners are Autodemo LLC; Emergint Technologies; Greater Louisville Inc.; Harding Shymanski and Company PSC; KIZAN Technologies LLC; Louis T. Roth & Co.; Lyndon Fire Protection District; McCauley Nicolas, CPAs & Advisors; Mediaura; Prestige Healthcare; Strothman & Company; The Tellennium Group; and Valassis Communication Inc. In Melbourne-Palm Bay, FL, the winners are Courtyard by Marriott Melbourne; Early Learning Coalition of Brevard County, Inc.; Hoyman Dobson; Residence Inn by Marriott; and SunGuard Public Sector. In Michigan, the winners are Altair Engineering; Brown & Brown of Detroit; Educational Data Systems, Inc.; E IT Professionals Corp.; Farbman Group; Frank Haron Weiner; Kapnick Insurance Group; Menlo Innovations LLC; Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Administration; National Multiple Sclerosis Society; Peckham, Inc.; Public Policy Associates Inc.; Visteon Corporation; and Work Skills Corporation. In Milwaukee, WI, the winners are Kforce Inc.; Kolb+Co SC; ManpowerGroup; Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce; MGIC; and Robert W. Baird & Co. In Morris County, NJ, the winners are Piemonte & Liebhauser, LLC and Solix, Inc. In New Hampshire, the winners are Families in Transition and MeetingMatrix International. In Oregon, the winners are FMYI, Inc.; Full Access; gDiapers; Innovative Care Management, Inc.; Isler CPA; Mercy Corps; Metropolitan Family Service; NPC Research; Oregon Environmental Council; Oregon Research Institute; Our House; Portland State University; PREM Group, Inc.; Ride Connection; River Network; Rose City Mortgage; Stoel Rives LLP; and Swift Collective. In Providence, RI, the winner is Rhode Island Housing. In Richmond, VA, the winners are Heritage Wealth Advisors; Vaco Richmond; and VCU Health System. In Rochester, MN, the winners are Cardinal of Minnesota, Ltd.; Custom Alarm/Custom Communications, Inc.; Express Employment Professionals; markit; Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce; Rochester Community and Technical College; Rochester Public Library; Southeast Service Cooperative; United Way of Olmsted County Inc; University of Minnesota Rochester; and Xylo Technologies. In Salt Lake City, UT, the winners are 1 800 CONTACTS; AAA Fair Credit Foundation; Big Brothers Big Sisters of Utah; Cafe Rio Mexican Grill; Christopherson Business Travel; DigiCert; Equitable Life & Casualty Insurance Company; Futura Industries; Intermountain Healthcare; McKinnon-Mulherin, Inc.; Software Technology Group; Thompson Ostler & Olsen; and Vivint, Inc. In Twin Cities and St. Cloud, MN, the winners are Dorsey & Whitney LLP; Health Dimensions Group; LaBreche; Mahoney Ulbrich Christiansen Russ PA; Netgain; Prevent Child Abuse Minnesota; TURCK Inc.; and Western National Mutual Insurance Company. In Winona, MN, the winners are Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Winona; Eastwood Bank; Hiawatha Broadband Communications, Inc.; Home and Community Options; Mediascope, Inc.; Merchants Bank; Sport & Spine Physical Therapy of Winona Inc.; and Winona Work-force Center. The At-large winners are ACS-Madison, WI; Anneken Huey & Moser PLLC; Averett Warmus Durkee Osburn Henning; Bader Martin P.S.; Bottom Line Systems, Inc.; Career Path Services; Cascadia Consulting Group, Inc.; Center for Seabees & Facilities Engineering; Cornell University; cSubs; Decision Toolbox; Fesnak and Associates; Frankfort Regional Medical Center; Gallagher, Flynn & Company, LLP; George Mason University; Humanix; JA Counter & Associates, Inc.; Lexmark International; Miklos Systems, Inc.; MorganFranklin Corporation-McLean, VA; Navy Air Logistics Office; Next Wave Systems LLC; Northeast Editing, Inc.; NPower Northwest; OCLC; OpenEye Scientific Software Inc; PatchPlus Consulting, Inc.; People for Puget Sound; Personnel Detachment Afloat West; Pride, Inc.; Social Dynamics, LLC; Sturgill, Turner, Barker & Moloney, PLLC; Technology Transfer Services; Technomics, Inc.; Training Squadron Ten; U.S. Navy EODTEU TWO; and WithinReach. Organizations with winners in multiple cities are BDO; Bon Secours; Booz Allen Hamilton; Capital One; Clifton Gunderson; Deloitte, Ernst & Young; GoDaddy.com; Intel Corporation; KPMG; Laughlin Constable; McGladrey; Microsoft; PricewaterhouseCoopers; Ryan LLC; Service Express Inc.; and The Novo Group. Again, we congratulate the 2011 winners of the Sloan Award and encourage their community leaders to recognize these best practices.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I appreciate the efforts by our Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, and by the ranking member of our Senate Budget Committee, Jeff Sessions, to give the Senate a chance today to do its job. It has been more than 3 years since the Senate has passed a budget, almost 1,100 days, $4 trillion in increased debt since we last had a budget. Yet it seems as if the current majority are the only ones who do not think passing a budget is part of our job. I have to stop here for a moment and commend the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, Senator Conrad. I know he has fought mightily to get a budget to this floor. But the politics he faces have not allowed him to do so. As of today, for 1,100 days we have not been able to see a budget proposal reach the Senate floor from our committee. I have worked with Senator Conrad long and hard and will continue to do so, trying to get a broad, bipartisan solution brought forward. But today we need to take action on the Senate floor. Everyone else has a budget. The President has offered a budget. The House Republicans have offered a budget. The House Democrats have offered a budget. The Senate Republicans have introduced several budgets, which we will vote on here today. Every American family and every American business has to develop a budget. Previous Congresses, including those that enacted the Congressional Budget Act last year, clearly saw the importance of Congress enacting a budget every year. In fact, it was that congressional budget act that we were able to get in place last year that put into effect the mechanism we are employing today which says if the majority party leadership fails to bring a budget forward by the statutory deadline, then any Senator has the right to call for consideration of any budget on the Senate Calendar. Let's look at the budgets we will be voting on today. First we have the President's budget. At a time when our national debt is more than $15.6 trillion, well more than 100 percent of our gross domestic product, the President's budget seemingly makes no acknowledgment of the dramatic and predictable fiscal crisis we face. Instead of embracing the comprehensive work of his own fiscal commission, the Bowles-Simpson commission on which I served, or any of the other key bipartisan proposals that are available such as the Ryan-Wyden proposal or the Domenici-Rivlin plan or even coming up with a true reform plan of his own, the President's budget regrettably remains within the old discredited framework of trying to tax and spend our way into prosperity. The President's budget would raise taxes by $2 trillion. This is in addition to the $1.2 trillion of tax increases in the health care law which are just beginning to take effect and will continue to roll out over the next few years. Perhaps even more remarkable, the President's budget actually increases spending by $1.2 trillion more than current law. So another $1.2 trillion in new spending, another $2 to $3 trillion in new taxes, no structural entitlement reform, and no discretionary spending reform. Even though it is widely acknowledged that the current paths of our entitlement programs are unsustainable and even though they are on track to soon become insolvent, the President's budget has no comprehensive reforms to our entitlement programs--none. The modest amount of health care savings he does propose would not even be enough to offset the extension of the doc fix or the other increases in the health care spending he proposes. This is a dangerous approach, and it should be noted that this budget failed by a vote of 0 to 414 in the House. Yet we have no other pending proposal from the other side to consider. Today the Senate will also have an opportunity to reject the President's approach to the Federal budget, and I expect it will do so, just as it did last time. Because the Democratic majority here in the Senate has failed to produce their own budget, we will also have the opportunity to vote on some important budget proposals offered by the House Budget Committee chairman and by our own colleagues here in the Senate, Senators Toomey, Paul, and Lee. Each of these proposals would include true comprehensive reforms to our entitlement programs to prevent the impending insolvency and to protect the programs for current and future generations, and would put us on a sustained pathway to balancing our Federal budget. These budgets also call for comprehensive tax reform which takes us out of the old paradigm of Congress debating whether to raise or cut taxes and, instead, these proposals would each in their own way dramatically streamline the Tax Code, reduce the tax rates, and unleash significant economic growth in our economy. A byproduct of this robust economic growth would be an increase in revenues to help us deal with our pending debt crisis. I again commend the chairman, Senator Conrad, for his effort to bring forward a comprehensive plan, a solution--one that originated with Bowles-Simpson on which he and I sat and one which has then been worked on by the so-called Gang of Six for a significant amount of time now to improve and bring forward, and one which the chairman is prepared to move when the opportunity is available. I have encouraged him to do it now. I believe we ought to have it on the floor today for this debate. But whenever the time becomes available, it is a proposal such as this that we need to be dealing with. We need to develop the bipartisan support that is necessary to pass it. What is it? First of all, as we worked on the Bowles-Simpson commission, we made some basic decisions. We concluded that spending was the major problem--that is where the major part of the solution should be--but that revenue was also critical to the solution and that growing our economy was an important part of anything Congress should do. We first discussed putting together a strong approach to entitlement reform, structural entitlement reform. We put strong spending caps in place and we made clear that our spending patterns in the Federal budget would be brought under control. In addition, recognizing the importance and need for strong growth, we concluded that our Tax Code must be reformed and not on the traditional battleground of whether to raise taxes on one group or lowering taxes on another but in a complete paradigm shift to focus on the reforming of both our corporate and individual tax codes. If you went about trying to create a Tax Code that was more unfair, more complex, more expensive to comply with, and more anticompetitive to our own American business interests, you would be hard pressed to do it different or worse than we have done with our own Tax Code. We concluded that we ought to reform that code to develop a strong, dynamic tax code for America to go forward with. That is why we proposed broadening the base, reducing the rates, and reforming the way we tax in America by simplifying our Tax Code and making America a strong, powerful, and robust economy as it historically has been. Then we put together what is critical for any plan to succeed, and that is an enforcement mechanism. Congress has a perfect record of violating its own budgets. Congress has a record of ignoring the budgets, simply getting 60 votes to waive the Budget Act whenever Congress wants to spend in excess of a budget. Literally in every budget for the last two decades or more, Congress has done so; Republican or Democratic, the Congresses have done so. What we put together in our negotiations was an enforcement plan that would keep Congress within the walls of the budget we adopt. It would have a series of points of order to protect against the declaration of emergencies unjustifiably and would then force even emergency spending, that usually is conducted outside the budget, to be done in the face of a sequestration backed up by 67-vote points of order on the floor of the Senate. This kind of strong enforcement is also critical to what we must do to protect our Nation. We need a comprehensive plan, we need to have entitlement reform, we have to have discretionary spending reform, and we need to have budget enforcement that is solid. We need to strengthen our revenue stream and enforce our Tax Code by lowering taxes. That gives American businesses the opportunity to compete aggressively across the globe. If we do so, we will see a strong revenue component to our reform measures, and we will see strong growth coming out of the fact that we put together effective spending controls. But we have to get there. We have to do it. I appreciate the opportunity to work with Senator Conrad as we try to put this kind of broad, comprehensive reform package together and build bipartisan support for it. But I am very discouraged still that we cannot get a budget proposal onto the floor of the Senate that we can work on. I also appreciate the leadership of Senator McConnell and Senator Sessions, who have given the Senate the opportunity today to debate this issue and have votes, at least, on meaningful proposals that move us down the path I have discussed, and put us onto a pathway for economic prosperity and growth for all. America is at a terrible crisis point. Our national debt is now exceeding over 100 percent of our GDP and threatens our economy. We must take action. We cannot let another year go by without adopting a budget on the floor of the Senate. I yield the floor.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I too rise today to discuss the incredible importance of the Violence Against Women Act. For nearly 18 years, the Violence Against Women Act has been the centerpiece of our Nation's commitment to end domestic violence, dating violence, and sexual violence. Congress authorized the Violence Against Women Act in 2000 and again in 2005 with overwhelming bipartisan support. I am a longtime champion of the prevention of domestic violence because I have seen the impact of this abuse firsthand in Idaho. The act provides critical services to victims of violent crime as well as agencies and organizations that provide important aid to those victims. The Violence Against Women Act has been called by the American Bar Association ``the single most effective federal effort to respond to the epidemic of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking in our country.'' This legislation provides access to legal and social services for survivors. It provides training to law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, attorneys, and advocates to address these crimes in our Nation's communities. It provides intervention for those who have witnessed abuse and are more likely to be involved in this type of violence. It provides shelter and resources for victims who have nowhere else to turn, who are literally victims in their own homes. There is significant evidence that these programs are working. In Idaho, the number of high school students reporting that they have experienced violence by a dating partner has dropped since the Center for Healthy Teen Relationships began its work in 2006. The U.S. Department of Justice reported that the number of women killed by an intimate partner decreased by 35 percent between 1993 and 2008. The legislation is working and our collective efforts across this country to respond to this epidemic are working, but our fight against domestic violence is far from over. Last year in my State 22 people were killed by a domestic partner. Approximately one in three adolescent girls in the United States is a victim of physical, emotional, or verbal abuse from a dating partner. Nearly 1 in 10 high school students Nationwide was hit, slapped, or physically hurt on purpose by their boyfriend or girlfriend. Future tragedies of the kinds we have seen in Idaho and across this country have to be prevented. And while we may not all agree on the specifics of this reauthorization, all of us agree on one very important aspect; that is, we must end domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking in the United States. No bill is ever perfect. As we go through the process of working through this bill on the floor, we will see amendments brought seeking to perfect and improve it. I will support some of those amendments, others will support some of those amendments, and the bill will be addressed, as all bills should be, on the floor of the Senate. But when we are done and the debate is over and the voting on the amendments is concluded, I urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting the reauthorization of this critical program. We must continue the life- changing work this legislation helps us accomplish. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. I yield back our time.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, my colleague Senator Jim Risch joins me today in honoring the life of Steve Appleton. We are deeply saddened by Steve's passing, and we join his wife, Dalynn, their children, family, Micron employees and his many friends in honoring his remarkable life. For more than three decades, our State was a fortunate beneficiary of Steve's determination and hard work. A year after his 1982 graduation from Boise State University, he joined Micron Technology, Inc., and quickly ascended from working on Micron's high-tech assembly line to leading the company as CEO, president and chairman. His talent and energy helped overcome significant challenges and shaped Micron into a multinational world leader in semiconductors. As Kurt Marko, a coworker at Micron, poignantly described him, ``Appleton personified Micron's can-do spirit. He, and it, defied the odds.'' Steve leaves behind a legacy of hard work, focus, integrity and generosity. He was driven to reach remarkable achievements and was generous in sharing the rewards of that hard work to better our State and future generations of Idahoans. For example, he gave his time and financial resources to help Boise State University develop its College of Engineering; raised funds for scholarships, programs, buildings and projects, including the Appleton Tennis Complex; and established the Micron Foundation. Due to his efforts, our State and Nation will be better equipped to compete globally. We were honored to have many opportunities to work with Steve over the years. His pragmatic approach was instrumental in achieving remedies needed to better ensure a level playing field for U.S. semiconductor products and address unfair trading practices. No matter the challenges, Steve faced them with optimism and sensibility. Steve's adventurous spirit was widely known and well documented. His passion for sports and competition contributed to him excelling in tennis, including winning the doubles title at the Big Sky Tennis Championship in 1982. Besides his love of aviation, he also was involved in a number of adventure sports including, off-road car racing, scuba diving, wakeboarding, motocross and more. Steve Appleton's energy and commitment to Idaho will not be forgotten. He has set an extraordinary example of what hard work and initiative in a free enterprise system can achieve. He helped create thousands of jobs and cemented Idaho's standing in the high-tech field. His innovation, drive and forward-thinking approach, as well as his wonderful friendship, will be greatly missed.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the Uni- Capitol Washington Internship Programme, UCWIP. Our Nation has benefited from the service of outstanding Australian college students who participate in internships throughout the U.S. Congress through this program. The program is providing students with the opportunity to obtain considerable experience through their congressional internships, while also making available other educational experiences throughout their time in the United States. Uni-Capitol Washington Programme interns have helped me serve Idaho constituents, and I am grateful for their efforts and dedication. Chris Colalillo, a UCWIP participant, has joined my staff as an intern this semester. Chris is studying bachelor's of law and arts at the University of Western Australia, where he is double majoring in political science and international relations and ancient history. When he graduates, Chris plans to work in a law firm and eventually go into Federal or State politics. Chris has been great to work with, and he was very quick to learn his role and responsibilities in the office. He is very intelligent, eager, and always puts forward his best work. He has shared with us some of the political and cultural differences between the United States and Australia, and it has been a great learning experience for both Chris and the staff. Chris shared his impressions regarding the program and his internship. He said: The UCWIP has been a unique opportunity to further my knowledge in the legislative process of the United States, enabling me to develop an appreciation for democratic systems of government as well as providing me with practical experience that will facilitate my theoretical studies in Political Science and International Relations. The welcoming nature of the staff within Senator Crapo's office has made this internship an enjoyable experience thus far. Eric Federing, UCWIP's director and founder, has successfully focused his Capitol Hill and Australia experiences to provide this valuable educational exchange opportunity that benefits Australian students and congressional offices. His dedication to advancing this learning experience is remarkable. I have been honored to have worked with the Uni-Capitol Washington Internship Programme for 5 years. The program is shaping young leaders who are helping to deepen understanding between our two nations while providing outstanding constituent support. I commend Chris Colalillo, Eric Federing, and the other Uni-Capitol Washington Internship Programme participants and interns for their achievements and wish them continued success.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, today I wish to honor the life of Roger Kotter, a husband, father, community leader, businessman, and exemplary Idahoan. At the core of Roger Kotter's accomplishments were his dedication to family, strong sense of community, and his ability to connect with his customers. Roger served a mission for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Santiago, Chile, from 1966 to 1968, married his wife of 43 years, Karen, and graduated from Brigham Young University in 1971. After graduating, Roger moved back to Nampa and started working for Stone Lumber in 1972 and became part owner in 1980. Stone Lumber has been a staple of Nampa since 1906, and under the direction of Roger and Monte Schlerf, it has continued in the tradition of providing jobs and exceptional customer service. Roger also devoted decades of service and was involved in various organizations, including Nampa Exchange Club past president--Nampa Boys and Girls Club, Nampa Schools Foundation, Boy Scouts of America, and, through Stone Lumber, worked with Habitat for Humanity. Roger was active in supporting the local Hispanic community acting as a mentor and teaching English. He was also actively involved with his church and served in stake presidencies, bishoprics, and was most recently a counselor in the Boise Idaho Mission presidency. Roger has been recognized for his commendable skills through honors, such as his selection as Idaho Businessman of the Year in 2000. I join Rogers's wife Karen; five children, Kristin, Jason, Brent, Matthew, and Amy; 12 grandchildren; father, James; 6 siblings; other family members; many friends; the Nampa community, and the numerous people he inspired in mourning his loss and expressing gratitude for his contribution. Roger Kotter will be missed, and his legacy of devotion to his family and community will not be forgotten.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize and honor Don Dixon, who is retiring from Senate service. Don has been a trusted advisor and dear friend for many years. Approximately 15 years ago, I was blessed to have Don join my staff as my State director of agriculture. He brought to the position his experience as a farmer and his sincere dedication to solving challenges facing the agricultural community. Throughout his Senate service, Don has covered thousands of miles and spent countless hours meeting with constituents and ensuring that their concerns and interests are properly addressed. It has been said that anytime two farmers meet in Idaho, Don is there. This illustration, while not too far from the truth, emphasizes Don's deep personal commitment to ensuring sound representation of Idaho agriculture. For example, he has assisted with multiple farm bills, gathering input from Idahoans to craft the best policy possible, contributing throughout the drafting and providing information to farmers and ranchers when the laws were enacted. He sacrificed weeks with his family when he stayed in Washington, DC, to assist with the crafting of the 2002 farm bill. I have always been able to count on Don to literally go the extra mile for constituents. Don's dedication and exemplary service led to his appointment to serve as the Idaho State executive director of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Farm Service Agency, FSA. While this appointment, unfortunately, led to Don leaving my staff for the first time in 2007, his work on behalf of the agricultural community during his time at FSA and his return to Senate service were welcomed. I feel blessed to have once again benefited from his on-the-ground knowledge of production and agricultural policy for the past 3 years. His enthusiasm and sincere desire to do all that he can for people are part of what make Don exceptional. His unsurpassed energy, faith, and optimism also set him apart. The humor and get-up-and-go Don brings to any challenge has enabled many accomplishments for Idahoans, and Don is widely respected for his integrity and devotion to achieving results. Although for many, retirement provides time to slow down and relax, knowing Don, he will likely work as hard in his retirement as he does on the job. ``Idle'' is not a word in Don's vocabulary. However, I hope that retirement provides Don with more time to spend with his family whom he loves so much: his wonderful wife Georgia; his children Lucinda, ``Cindy,'' Lorin, Paul, and Tobin; eight grandchildren; and six great-grandchildren. Lucky for me, Don is also one of my neighbors in my hometown of Idaho Falls, so I hope to see him often. We have shared many laughs over the years, and I look forward to sharing many more. Don, you are model public servant, and I feel very fortunate to have benefitted from your wise counsel and hard work for so many years. I wish you the happy retirement you so greatly deserve for your years of dedicated service. Don, thank you for all that you have done on behalf of Idahoans.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, both sides agree that everyone benefits from a marketplace free of fraud and other deceptive and exploitative practices. The disagreement is over the best way to structure our Federal regulatory agencies to accomplish this goal and provide accountability. One of the lessons of the financial crisis is that we need a supervisory program that looks and considers how safety and soundness and consumer protection work together and reinforce better and safer services to banking customers. Far too often, supervision either looked at consumer issues in isolation--promoting access to credit and home ownership--or it looked at safety and soundness in isolation, such as ensuring that customer information was legally accurate but not asking whether it was understandable to bank customers. We should have strengthened the link and coordination between prudential supervision and consumer protections rather than severing it. Instead Congress institutionalized this separation by creating a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and blurred the role and accountability of the prudential regulators and the new Bureau. Mortgage underwriting is a good example of an issue that was found lacking before the financial crisis and has the potential to be subject to an even more bureaucratic regulatory system going forward. I say potential because it is unclear to me where the authority of the Bureau stops and where the authority of the prudential regulators overlaps on several important issues that will likely cause confusion and potentially inconsistent regulatory approaches. Already we are seeing conflicts among regulators with different regulators adopting different consumer protection rules and duplication in examinations. From my perspective, the new Bureau is a massive, expensive government bureaucracy that is immunized against meaningful oversight by either Congress or the President, and dramatically extends the Federal Government's control over the economy. According to analysis from Andrew Pincus, a partner in the law firm Mayer Brown LLP: The Bureau's structure has a number of features that, when taken together, concentrate an amount of unchecked authority in a single individual--the Director--that is unprecedented for a federal agency that regulates private entities and individuals: First, the Bureau will be headed by a single Director with complete, unilateral authority to make all regulatory and enforcement decisions and to hire and fire all personnel, including his or her own deputy. Second, the Bureau's Director does not serve at the pleasure of the President. Rather, during his or her five- year term, the Director may be removed only for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office. That standard eliminates the President's power to remove the Director based on a policy disagreement: once nominated and confirmed, the Director cannot be overruled by the President. Third, the Bureau is exempt from the congressional appropriations process. It is funded instead by a transfer of money from the Federal Reserve in an amount determined solely by the Director, subject only to a cap that already exceeds $550 million, will increase 10% for the next fiscal year, and is subject to automatic inflation adjustments thereafter. While I appreciate the willingness of Richard Cordray to serve and answer questions, I can't support the consideration of any nominee to be the Director of the Bureau until the agency is reformed to make it more accountable and transparent. First, we would establish a board of directors to oversee the Bureau. This would allow for the consideration of multiple viewpoints in decisionmaking and would reduce the potential for the politicization of regulations. A board of directors structure is consistent with the organization of the Federal Reserve Board, National Credit Union Administration, FDIC, SEC, CFTC, and Federal Trade Commission. Second, we would subject the Bureau to the congressional appropriations process to ensure that it doesn't engage in wasteful or unnecessary spending. This also gives Congress the ability to ensure that the Bureau is acting in accordance with our legislative intent. The SEC, CFTC, and the Federal Trade Commission have long been subject to the appropriations process for the same reasons. Finally, we would establish a safety and soundness check. This would strengthen the link and coordination between prudential supervision and consumer protections. Given the enormous impact the Bureau will have on the economy, it is important for Congress to revisit its structure and authorities to make it more accountable and transparent.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, my colleague Senator Jim Risch joins me today in recognizing Nancy Bergmann's retirement after 26 years of dedicated and effective service. For the past 18 years, Nancy has represented the Idaho National Laboratory, INL, in promoting economic development, expanding technology business sectors and creating understanding about the nuclear and energy missions at INL. Nancy is a well-known and endearing figure in Idaho's high-technology business community. During her career, she has made a significant impact in helping small businesses, nurturing entrepreneurs, and aiding communities in increasing their technology business base. Previously, she initiated Idaho's Hispanic Youth Symposium while managing INL's diversity program in human resources, which also was recognized by President George H.W. Bush for excellence. With more than 30 years of involvement in serving United Way and community service, Nancy also has been appointed to more than 25 boards and commissions, including the Idaho Rural Partnership, Idaho TechConnect, and many more. Nancy has also been instrumental in organizing regional economic development offices throughout Idaho. In addition to serving on the National United Way Board of America, Nancy has been named INL's Woman of the Year, Idaho's Business Woman of the Year, and 2008 Idaho Business Review Woman of the Year. On November 18, 2011, the Southern Idaho Economic Development Organization honored Nancy for a decade of support by establishing the Nancy Bergmann/INL Math & Science Scholarship, managed by the College of Southern Idaho Foundation. We wish Nancy an enjoyable retirement and a wonderful time with her family, including five granddaughters. We hope that retirement will provide Nancy with more opportunities to enjoy Idaho's magnificent sunsets. Congratulations to Nancy for achieving this milestone, and thank you, Nancy, for your outstanding service to Idaho communities.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, today I wish to honor the life of Idaho State Representative Pat Takasugi. I join his family and friends in mourning the passing of this great Idahoan. Pat's efforts and input on behalf of Idaho agriculture were indispensible. He had the experience and association through his role as the director of the Idaho State Department of Agriculture and a number of agricultural organizations and the on-the-ground knowledge of an innovative farmer that were instrumental in improving agricultural policy. His advocacy for Idaho agriculture advanced its position in domestic and foreign markets, and he leaves behind a legacy of skilled support. We are all better for having known Pat Takasugi. His intelligence, humility and dedication were exemplary. He added the right amount of humor to every situation and approached challenges with optimism. He really liked people, and he took his time to give everyone his full attention. That quality along with his sincerity contributed to the vast number of friends and acquaintances who respect and adore him. Pat led a life of service to our State and Nation. After graduating from the College of Idaho and obtaining post graduate credits from the University of Idaho and Boise State University, Pat joined the U.S. Army through which he served 5 years in Active service and another 5 years in Reserve service. During his military service, Pat was promoted to the rank of captain and qualified for Airborne wings, the Ranger tab and Special Forces green beret. After returning to Wilder, he grew a farm of 32 acres into a more than 1,500-acre-farm and was a partner in Snake River Produce. He also served for 10 years as the director of the Idaho State Department of Agriculture before he was elected in 2008 to represent Idaho's District 10 in the State legislature. His list of accomplishments and associations with a number of Idaho and national organizations, including his service as past president of the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture, is extensive. He advocated for good jobs, a healthy rural economy, business development, lower taxes, less regulation, parental involvement in education, protection of private property and water rights and a lean and accountable government. His principles included belief that ``promoting strong families and renewing an individual sense of responsibility are key to reversing the erosion of our nation's foundation.'' He worked considerately to advance these and other objectives on behalf of Idahoans. I extend my condolences and prayers to Pat's family, friends and loved ones, including his wife Suzanne his three children and his parents Michio and Ayako. Pat was a great friend to many, and he was very proud of his family. He was a talented farmer and public servant. Pat Takasugi's contribution to our State will not be forgotten.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Madam President, The amendment prohibits any funds from being used by the CFTC to promulgate any final rules under Title VII until the agency substantiates that those rules are economically beneficia1, adheres to congressional intent to provide end-users with a clear exemption from margin requirements, and sets clear bounds on the overseas application of the derivatives requirements. While there is not yet bipartisan agreement to go forward with this amendment at this time, there is a bipartisan list of issues that the regulators need to address: Protect end-users from burdensome margin requirements. Margin requirements proposed by regulators currently ignore the clear intent of Congress not to impose margin on end users. Limit the extraterritorial application of title VII per Congressional intent in Sections 722 and 764. In the House of Representatives bipartisan legislation was just introduced that sets clear bounds on overseas application of the derivatives requirements, while allowing regulators to stop systemically dangerous transactions intended to evade U.S. requirements. Encourage greater coordination and harmonization between the SEC, CFTC, and international regulators to seek broad harmonization of cross-border issues. Ensure new rules are subject to robust and quantitative assessment of costs and benefits. The regulators involved in the rulemaking process should understand that Congress is going to closely monitor how they proceed and we expect a change in course. If the regulators ignore congressional intent and fail to adequately harmonize their rules with each other and with their foreign counterparts, then it is my intention to revisit this amendment and push for a vote. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that my amendment be withdrawn.

Mr. CRAPO. Madam President, as the leader has indicated, I will withdraw this amendment at the conclusion of this colloquy, but I want to make sure my colleagues understand what the amendment does. This amendment prohibits any funds from being used by the CFTC to promulgate any final rules under title VII until the agency substantiates that those rules are economically beneficial, adhere to congressional intent, provide end users with a clear exemption from margin requirements, and set clear bounds on the overseas application of derivatives requirements. While there is not yet a bipartisan agreement to go forward with this amendment at this time, there is a bipartisan list of issues that regulators need to address. They need to protect end users from burdensome margin requirements. Margin requirements proposed by regulators currently ignore the clear intent of Congress not to impose them on end users. They need to limit the extraterritorial application of title VII per congressional intent in sections 722 and 764. This is also being addressed in the House of Representatives. They need to encourage greater coordination and harmonization between the SEC, the CFTC, and international regulators to seek broad harmonization of cross-border issues, and they need to ensure that the new rules are subject to robust and quantitative assessment of the costs and benefits. The regulators involved in our rulemaking process should know that Congress is going to closely monitor how they proceed, and we expect a change in course. If we don't get that change in course, then we will need to return to this kind of legislation. I wish to thank Senator Stabenow for working with me. She and many other Senators across the aisle have indicated a willingness to help try to achieve these objectives and to work together to try to make this happen. With that, I yield my time to Senator Stabenow.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. CRAPO. I wish to note that as cosponsors of the amendment, Senators Johanns, Shelby, Toomey, Moran, Vitter, and Kirk are also supportive. The unprecedented scope and pace of agency rulemaking in the United States today is posing incredible uncertainty and threat to our economy. Americans today know that jobs are the No. 1 issue we face, and consistently across the country Americans are also recognizing that the explosion of government regulatory action is one of the huge impediments to our job creation efforts in America. Unfortunately, under the Dodd-Frank Act, we are seeing one of the most significant rulemaking levels of activity in every part of our economy. Many of the proposed rules do not give sufficient consideration to how they will affect Main Street or our economy as a whole, how they will interact with one another or, frankly, how they will impact our global competitiveness. Through this amendment, I focus on the CFTC to send a strong message to all regulators involved in the rulemaking process that we cannot afford regulations that unnecessarily burden our businesses, our economy, and our competitive position in the global marketplace. This amendment does three basic things: It prohibits funds from being used by the CFTC to promulgate any final rules until the agency substantiates that those rules are economically beneficial; secondly, it adheres to congressional intent to provide end users with a clear exemption from margin requirements; and, third, it sets clear bounds on the overseas applications of the derivatives requirements. With regard to the process portion of the amendment, in February, when many members of the banking committee wrote to our financial regulators, we strongly urged them to employ fundamental principles of good regulation in their statutory mandate and not to sacrifice quality and fairness in exchange for speed. We had two main concerns: that the regulators are not allowing adequate time for meaningful public comment on their proposed rules; and that the regulators are not conducting rigorous quantitative analysis of the costs and benefits of their rules and the effects those rules can have on our economy and our competitive position in a global marketplace. On April 15, 2011, the Office of Inspector General for the CFTC issued a report of an investigation entitled ``An Investigation Regarding the Cost Benefit Analyses Performed by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in Connection with Rulemakings Undertaken Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act.'' Unfortunately, the IG report demonstrated that the CFTC is not using rigorous economic analysis to shape its rulemaking. In April, Harvard Law Prof. Hal Scott testified on urgently needed fixes in the Dodd-Frank rulemaking process. We also began hearing from CFTC Commissioners Scott O'Malia and Jill Sommers about problems with the rulemaking process, specifically with economic analysis. In August, CFTC Commissioner Scott O'Malia stated that the current process of enacting rules under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act is inadequate, and excoriated the regulatory body for not putting together a clear rulemaking order and implementation schedule for public comment. Again, in August, CFTC Commissioner Jill Sommers stated: I believe it is a mistake for us to begin the process without a plan to logically sequence our consideration of final rules along with a transparent implementation plan. In July, the SEC's proxy access rule became the first Dodd-Frank rule to be successfully challenged in court for failing to adequately analyze its economic costs and benefits. In the unanimous decision to vacate the rule, U.S. Circuit Court Judge Douglas Ginsburg wrote: The Commission inconsistently and opportunistically framed the costs and benefits of the rule; failed adequately to quantify the certain costs or to explain why those costs could not be quantified; neglected to support its predictive judgments, contradicted itself; and failed to respond to the substantial problems raised by commenters. In this amendment, we require the CFTC to fix its rulemaking process by prohibiting funding for any final CFTC rules until the Commission, jointly with the SEC and other prudential regulators, publishes a schedule outlining the order in which the agencies will consider and implement the final rules. Affected market participants will be able to weigh in and be heard about how rules should be adopted and implemented. Agencies will have to work together to come up with coordinated schedules for proceeding with rulemaking and implementation. The agencies will have to take into consideration economic impacts, international competitiveness, the interaction of their rules one with another, and the implications of inconsistencies in the approaches taken by different regulators. It is more important that the CFTC and other agencies allow for meaningful public comment and economic analysis than it is to rush through these rules and risk undermining the integrity of the process and diminishing the utility of this important market. Secondly, we protect end users from the burdensome margin requirements of the statute. When the Dodd-Frank conference was reopened to deal with the scoring issue, Senators Dodd and Lincoln acknowledged that the language for end users was not perfect, and tried to clarify the intent of the language with a joint letter, stating: The legislation does not authorize the regulators to impose margins on end users, those exempt entities that use swaps to hedge or mitigate commercial risk. However, regulators have interpreted the actual Dodd-Frank legislative language as providing authority to require end users to post margin. This amendment provides certainty for Main Street businesses that played no role in the financial crisis by establishing a clear exemption from excessive margin requirements. End users have emphasized the critical importance of addressing this problem. In its letter, the Coalition for Derivatives End-Users highlighted the stakes of getting this issue right. They said: While the Dodd-Frank Act and implementing regulations do much to increase transparency and reduce systemic risk in the derivatives market, they include provisions that, if implemented as proposed or otherwise expected, would impose unnecessary burdens on end-user companies. While we believe it is important to reduce risk within our financial markets, transactions with end users have not been found to pose systemic risk. Our companies and our economy cannot afford to unnecessarily tie up capital that would otherwise be used to promote growth and create jobs. MillerCoors echoed these sentiments when it said: This amendment protects our ability to efficiently buy malting barley, hops and other ingredients used to brew our beers. FMC and the National Association of Corporate Treasurers noted: This legislation addresses concerns that are of critical importance to end-users--companies using derivatives to reduce business and financial risk and not to speculate. FMC and the other members of the NACT support legislation enabling end-users to continue their cost-effective use of derivatives to manage the commercial risks that they face when they make investments to expand plant and equipment, conduct research and development, build inventories to support higher sales, and to sustain and ultimately grow jobs. The third thing the amendment does is to limit the extraterritorial reach of Dodd-Frank--of the CFTC rulemaking to streamline regulation and protect American competitiveness. Chairman Johnson and Congressman Frank recently sent a letter to the regulators that brought up the concern that the extraterritorial imposition of margin requirements raises questions about the consistency with Congressional intent regarding title VII. They pointed out that Congress generally limited the territorial scope of title VII activities to within the United States. Extraterritorial application of one nation's laws to another nation's markets and firms is especially problematic in a global market such as derivatives, where it is common for counterparties based in different parts of the world to engage in transactions with each other. The historical practice of U.S. regulators is to recognize and defer to foreign regulators when registered entities engaged in activities outside the United States are subject to comparable foreign regulation. Given recent statements and actions by U.S. regulatory agencies, there is concern that proposals could create uncertainty as to how additional regulations could apply across borders and alter regulatory precedent. While there is bipartisan support from Members of Congress to encourage our regulators to work with their international counterparts to seek broad harmonization, there is a growing list of noteworthy and critical items that we are seeing related to the lack of progress on international harmonization. The CFTC and the SEC are taking divergent approaches on some derivatives rules, raising questions about whether we can harmonize even within our own borders, let alone with foreign regulators. Foreign jurisdictions in Europe, not to mention Asia and Latin America, have outright rejected many reforms--such as the section 716 swap pushout provisions. It remains unclear as to what foreign jurisdictions will impose a margin requirement such as proposed by our prudential regulators. Simply put, the rest of the world is not following us in a number of critical areas. Third parties, including market analysts and economists and academics, have also indicated that these rules will negatively impact U.S. competitiveness and growth. Our Fed Chairman Bernanke recently warned that the extraterritorial application of margin rules could create a significant competitive disadvantage for U.S. companies. We can't force Europe or Asia or Latin America to follow, and if our rules are finalized in the United States before other jurisdictions' rules, we risk substantially harming U.S. competitiveness, growth, and financial stability. That is why this amendment sets clear bounds on the overseas applications of the derivatives requirements, while allowing regulators to stop systemically dangerous transactions intended to evade U.S. requirements. In conclusion, there can be no doubt about our resolve to address the root causes of the financial crisis. But equally, there can be no doubt about our resolve to ensure that we do this with great care. Failing to do so will threaten our businesses, our economy, and our competitiveness globally. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment as an important step to ensuring that while working together for the former, we do not neglect the latter. I yield the floor. Amendment No. 879 to Amendment No. 738

Mr. CRAPO. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment, and I call up my amendment No. 814.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, today I recognize Bechtel BWX Technologies Idaho LLC's, BBWI, legacy at the Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project, AMWTP. Under the leadership of Jeff Mousseau, appointed manager of the project in November 2007, and with the commitment and dedication of the skilled workforce, the AMWTP has flourished. Jeff Mousseau led the Bechtel team efficiently and safely to exceed benchmarks. AMWTP went from being 3 years behind to more than 3 years ahead of scheduled requirements to move waste out of Idaho. No other site in the U.S. Department of Energy, DOE, Complex has enabled the permanent disposal of as much radioactive waste at the DOE Waste Isolation Pilot Plant more safely and compliantly than AMWTP. The company's dedicated employees have achieved a record of removing the waste safely. BBWI employees have worked more than 12.4 million hours and 2,839 days without a lost-time injury. In 2010 and 2008, the company earned national safety awards that included an Occupational Excellence Award, Perfect Record Award, Safety Leadership Award and Million Hours Worked Award. In 2007, the company earned the first-ever Integrated Safety Management Systems verification following assumption of the AMWTP contract. The company's safety achievements have also been recognized through the 2005 DOE Electrical Safety Challenge; 2008 Bechtel Safety Achievement Award in recognition of achieving more than five million job hours without a lost-time injury; 2008 Secretary of Energy's Appreciation Award for Electrical Safety; and 2009 Voluntary Protection Program verification. BBWI has also been an active and involved corporate partner to Idaho. Through its community contributions, the company has supported civic, arts, cultural and education organizations and initiatives that have strengthened the fabric of many communities and improved the quality of life for many Idahoans. BBWI has been supportive of Idaho small businesses; more than 80 percent of its contracts for materials and services are awarded to small businesses. In 2009, DOE recognized BBWI with its Small Business Achievement Award and, in 2006, with DOE's Mentor Protege award for the company's relationship with North Wind. It is a privilege to acknowledge a job well done. The significant achievements of BBWI's workforce and Jeff Mousseau's leadership have resulted in the project being ahead of schedule and under budget with a recognized safety record. Thank you for your remarkable service.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the life of a distinguished Idahoan, J. Robb Brady. I join his family and friends in mourning his passing and paying tribute to his legacy. Robb Brady is well known for his work as a journalist and publisher of the Idaho Falls Post Register, my hometown newspaper. Starting at the Post Register in 1941, he advanced in his field and served as publisher for more than 10 years. Throughout his career, he was a respected and knowledgeable voice. He earned a reputation as being a professional and principled journalist who was devoted to his wife of 69 years, Rose, his family, work and community. His talent and dedication have been noted by many who worked with him. He was also known for being humble, committed and compassionate. In addition to his exemplary hard work, Robb Brady demonstrated a commitment to the community and maintaining Idaho's natural resources. He supported local charitable efforts, including his purchase and donation of the Idaho Fall's Haven shelter. As an outdoorsman, who backpacked and camped with his family, Robb Brady had an appreciation for our natural resources, and he worked to conserve them. With Robb Brady's passing, we have lost a kind and valued member of our community, but his example will not be forgotten. He has left an indelible mark in the lives of the many people who knew him, worked with him and learned from him. I extend my condolences and prayers to his family, friends and loved ones. Robb Brady's legacy will endure as a significant contribution to Idaho's strength and history.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, my colleague Senator Jim Risch joins me today in recognizing Bonneville County's 100-year anniversary. Established on February 7, 1911, by the Idaho Legislature, Bonneville County was formed out of Bingham County in eastern Idaho, along the Wyoming border. Bonneville County was named for CPT Benjamin Bonneville, an officer in the U.S. Army who was an explorer and fur trapper in the area in the 1830s. Home to more than 100,000 Idahoans in an area of nearly 2,000 square miles, the county has diverse geography and industry. It is Idaho's fourth largest county and includes the six incorporated cities of Idaho Falls, Ucon, Iona, Ammon, Swan Valley, and Irwin. Outside of these cities, the county has many beautiful natural features, including the Snake River, Palisades Reservoir, Caribou National Forest, Grays Lake National Wildlife Refuge, and Targhee National Forest. Family farmers produce an abundance of agricultural products, including grain, livestock, fruits and vegetables, floriculture, and poultry, throughout the county. Bonneville County also leads the Nation in energy research and development through the Idaho National Laboratory, the Center for Advanced Energy Studies, and the AREVA Eagle Rock Enrichment Facility. Bonneville County residents have much to celebrate with 100 years of accomplishments. The work of the Bonneville County Heritage Association and volunteers to organize events observing this milestone, including the centennial Gala Celebration in November, is commendable. Many people have worked hard to make this celebration possible. I was blessed to grow up and together with my wife raise our children in Bonneville County, where we experienced firsthand the exceptionalism of the people and the communities of the county. Senator Risch and I are proud to recognize this landmark anniversary. We congratulate Bonneville County residents for this centennial, and we wish its communities many more years of success.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, over the last several months, this body has been focused on issues pertaining to our economy, such as the ailing jobs market and our debt and deficits. That is as it should be. However, while these important issues have commanded most of our attention here in the United States Senate, that is not to say that other matters and conflicts have suddenly taken a back seat to them. Even as we vigorously debate our economic future, home-state and regional issues continue to command our attention. It is one of those regional issues that brings me to the floor today. Two months ago, a three judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit handed down a final decision that could have far reaching negative impacts on public and private forests, and the communities that rely on them, throughout the United States. In the case of Northwest Environmental Defense Center v. Brown, the Court ruled that logging road runoff when managed with a system of ditches and culverts and deposited into rivers and streams qualifies under the Clean Water Act as point source pollution. This means that storm water when mixed with dirt and rocks will now be subject to some of the most stringent environmental protection laws in the United States. America's Federal forests are already heavily litigated, but with one fell swoop, this decision threw out over 35 years of precedent, opening the door for even more litigation on Federal forest lands, and subjecting private and state forest lands to the same specter. There was a time when forest jobs supported millions of Americans and their communities. But a lot has changed since then. Endless litigation, cheap imports, disease and a general shift in Federal forest management policy have drastically changed the landscape for forest jobs and the families and communities that rely on them. Working on the forests used to make up a considerable amount of the tax base in many rural communities, particularly in my State of Idaho. However, that has shrunk dramatically in recent decades. Forest communities that were once prosperous now find themselves in a state of perpetual economic jeopardy, with young people searching for employment elsewhere and tax bases that can barely cover the cost of basic public services. This has become so dire that in 2000, Congress had to pass legislation to provide funding to rural communities with Federal public lands to make up for lost revenues from timber harvests on those lands. Given all of this, I am disappointed that another impediment is being added to the economic survival of our forest communities. This decision will impact both public and private forests. In the case of Federal forests, we have millions upon millions of acres that are in need of active management and restoration. Our Federal forests have suffered from under management, disease, wild fires and other factors, and to address these problems, the U.S. Forest Service needs to be able to get to work on much needed fuels reduction, thinning and other forest health projects. But litigation has made that very difficult, and this decision is only going to make it worse. Then, there are private forests. The people who own, manage and work on these private forests need roads to have access to them. But, this judicially-mandated permit requirement will inevitably lead to increased costs for businesses that are already operating on the margins. Furthermore, this decision will impose the Federal Government into the management of private lands as these permits, even if issued by a State agency, will be subject to Environmental Protection Agency oversight under the Federal Clean Water Act, as well as citizen suits that are intended to further reduce timber harvests. We need to do something about this unfortunate and unwise decision out of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. As such, I am introducing legislation along with my friends Senator Wyden, Senator Risch and Senator Begich to overturn it. This legislation is entitled the Silviculture Regulatory Consistency Act of 2011. Our forests and the communities that they have long supported are already in considerable jeopardy, and we need to do everything in our power to help these rural communities. Passing this legislation is only one step in that process, but it is a very necessary one. I hope that the Senate can pass this bipartisan legislation as soon as possible.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, over the last several months, this body has been focused on issues pertaining to our economy, such as the ailing jobs market and our debt and deficits. That is as it should be. However, while these important issues have commanded most of our attention here in the United States Senate, that is not to say that other matters and conflicts have suddenly taken a back seat to them. Even as we vigorously debate our economic future, home-state and regional issues continue to command our attention. It is one of those regional issues that brings me to the floor today. Two months ago, a three judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit handed down a final decision that could have far reaching negative impacts on public and private forests, and the communities that rely on them, throughout the United States. In the case of Northwest Environmental Defense Center v. Brown, the Court ruled that logging road runoff when managed with a system of ditches and culverts and deposited into rivers and streams qualifies under the Clean Water Act as point source pollution. This means that storm water when mixed with dirt and rocks will now be subject to some of the most stringent environmental protection laws in the United States. America's Federal forests are already heavily litigated, but with one fell swoop, this decision threw out over 35 years of precedent, opening the door for even more litigation on Federal forest lands, and subjecting private and state forest lands to the same specter. There was a time when forest jobs supported millions of Americans and their communities. But a lot has changed since then. Endless litigation, cheap imports, disease and a general shift in Federal forest management policy have drastically changed the landscape for forest jobs and the families and communities that rely on them. Working on the forests used to make up a considerable amount of the tax base in many rural communities, particularly in my State of Idaho. However, that has shrunk dramatically in recent decades. Forest communities that were once prosperous now find themselves in a state of perpetual economic jeopardy, with young people searching for employment elsewhere and tax bases that can barely cover the cost of basic public services. This has become so dire that in 2000, Congress had to pass legislation to provide funding to rural communities with Federal public lands to make up for lost revenues from timber harvests on those lands. Given all of this, I am disappointed that another impediment is being added to the economic survival of our forest communities. This decision will impact both public and private forests. In the case of Federal forests, we have millions upon millions of acres that are in need of active management and restoration. Our Federal forests have suffered from under management, disease, wild fires and other factors, and to address these problems, the U.S. Forest Service needs to be able to get to work on much needed fuels reduction, thinning and other forest health projects. But litigation has made that very difficult, and this decision is only going to make it worse. Then, there are private forests. The people who own, manage and work on these private forests need roads to have access to them. But, this judicially-mandated permit requirement will inevitably lead to increased costs for businesses that are already operating on the margins. Furthermore, this decision will impose the Federal Government into the management of private lands as these permits, even if issued by a State agency, will be subject to Environmental Protection Agency oversight under the Federal Clean Water Act, as well as citizen suits that are intended to further reduce timber harvests. We need to do something about this unfortunate and unwise decision out of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. As such, I am introducing legislation along with my friends Senator Wyden, Senator Risch and Senator Begich to overturn it. This legislation is entitled the Silviculture Regulatory Consistency Act of 2011. Our forests and the communities that they have long supported are already in considerable jeopardy, and we need to do everything in our power to help these rural communities. Passing this legislation is only one step in that process, but it is a very necessary one. I hope that the Senate can pass this bipartisan legislation as soon as possible.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President today I wish to honor the life of Paul Zatica, a husband, father, community leader, businessman and exemplary Idahoan. At the core of Paul Zatica's accomplishments were his dedication to family, strong sense of community and his ability to connect with his customers. After serving in the U.S. Navy from 1946 to 1948, graduating from Boise Jr. College and the University of Denver and marrying his wife of nearly 63 years, Erma Jean, Paul Zatica opened Paul's market in Homedale, ID, in December of 1955. He grew the business into eight stores throughout southwestern Idaho. Paul's Market has been credited with providing jobs and scholarships to numerous students. Paul also devoted decades of service on the Homedale City Council, the Homedale School Board and Owyhee County Rodeo Board and helped form the Homedale Development Company. Paul has been recognized for his commendable skills through honors, such as his selection as Idaho Retailer of the Year in 1988 and grand marshal for the 2006 Owyhee County Fair and Rodeo Parade. I join Paul's wife; four children, Stan, Paulette, Bryan and Steve; eight grandchildren; three great-grandchildren; other family members; many friends; the Homedale community; and the numerous people he inspired in mourning his loss and expressing gratitude for his contribution. Paul Zatica will be missed, and his legacy of devotion to his family and community will not be forgotten.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today to honor one of my longtime staff members, who has decided for the second time to leave my employ. Dorothy Boger's service as part of my staff started on the first day I became a Member of Congress; she was the veteran staffer, the only one with any Hill experience, on my first day in office in 1993. While her job title was scheduler, she did so much more. She came to my office with several years of experience working for her home State Congressman, the Honorable Clyde C. Holloway of Louisiana, and the training that she received there served me very well over the next 18 years. On that first day, my office was one of the few that had staplers, copy paper, and wastepaper baskets--all because Dorothy already knew what to expect coming into a brand-new office. During my 6 years in the U.S. House of Representatives, Dorothy oversaw my office operation and my schedule; she kept us running, paid attention to the details and made sure that everyone from Idaho got a dose of Southern charm. We often say that she is from southern Idaho, way southern Idaho. When I was elected to the Senate in 1998, Dorothy came with me to start up another office on the other side of the Hill. But, by that time, her family priorities had shifted and after a few months, she realized that she needed to be home with her young son and soon after she had another on the way. It was hard to say good-bye the first time, and it was terrific when an opportunity presented itself that was perfect to bring her back to the office. She has contributed in the second go-round in the communications field, and it is difficult to recognize that she means it this time when she says she is retiring. Dorothy's priorities have always been very clear. She and her husband Bill have a young family, and she has been able to arrange her schedule to be with them as much as possible. But this year has been very trying for her as she has faced the loss of her beloved mother and eldest sister. She says that it has brought those priorities into even sharper focus, and I cannot argue with her desire to spend time at home, have the opportunity to visit family who live far away and enjoy more freedom to accomplish all that makes her most happy. We will miss her deeply, and for far more reasons than the delicious double chocolate Ghirardelli brownies that she frequently brings to the office to share. Her positive spirit and support have left an indelible mark, and I wish her all the best.