Susan Collins

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, if I could respond through the Chair to my colleague from Delaware, he is absolutely correct, this is a collaborative partnership with the private sector, and indeed, it has to be. Eighty-five percent of the critical infrastructure is owned by the private sector, so it makes sense to have their involvement. We restructured the bill to require that, and there is another safeguard. Since this is a voluntary system we have now devised, adopting the Kyl- Whitehouse approach, if the private sector decided not to participate, it essentially invalidates the standards that are developed. So why would this interagency council, which has developed the standards based on the recommendations of the private sector, not adopt reasonable standards? They want industry to participate. That is the ultimate safeguard, I say to my colleague from Delaware and my colleague, the chairman from Connecticut, who also may want to add to this.

Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, first let me thank the Senator from Delaware for his graciousness. In light of the fact that there are so many people who are waiting to speak, I will be brief. But I want to talk about the legislation that is before us, the cyber security bill. This bill represents the Senate's best chance this year to pass urgently needed cyber security legislation. Why do I say it is urgent? Virtually every national and homeland security expert, from President Bush's administration including President Obama's administration, has warned us repeatedly that a cyber attack is coming and it is an attack that is going to be aimed at our critical infrastructure. For us to let disagreements over exactly how to counter this threat prevent the passage of this bill would be a tragedy and could lead to a tragedy. This is serious. Yesterday we had a meeting with the FBI, with the Department of Homeland Security, with GEN Keith Alexander, who is the head of cyber command, and the head of the National Security Agency. They were unanimous in warning us that Congress must act and must act now. Every single day nation states, terrorist groups, hacktivists, persistent hackers, transnational criminal gangs, are probing our cyber defenses. Intrusions are rampant. As one expert told me, there are really only two kinds of large companies in this country: those that know they have been hacked and those that do not know they have been hacked. It is so important that we act. I must say we are working very hard to try to accommodate the concerns that have been raised by some of our colleagues and by some in the business community. We, therefore, have altered our bill in a significant way. Another charge I have heard thrown loosely around here is that somehow there has not been enough study; somehow there is not enough process; somehow we need more hearings. Our homeland security committee alone has had 10 hearings on cyber security--10 hearings. The Senate, as a whole, has had 25 hearings and numerous classified briefings. How many more briefings, hearings, and reports do we need? The head of the FBI, Robert Mueller, has told us that in his judgment the threat of a cyber attack will soon exceed the threat of a terrorist attack. Of course, they may be combined. It may be a terrorist group using cyber tools to launch an attack on this country. There is a Web site video that shows an arm of al-Qaida which encourages cyber attacks and talks about how easy it would be to conduct it. Senator Lieberman and I, along with our three principal cosponsors: Senator Feinstein, Senator Rockefeller, and Senator Carper, have made significant changes in our bill to respond to concerns that have been raised. Most notably we have gone from having a mandatory framework to a voluntary approach to enhance the security of our most critical infrastructure. The underlying concept of this approach, which was suggested in a very constructive way by our colleagues Senator Kyl and Senator Whitehouse, is to encourage owners of our most critical infrastructure to enhance their cyber security by providing them with various incentives, the most important of which is liability protections. We have also made changes to improve the privacy protections and the information-sharing title of our bill. The bill establishes a multiagency council, the National Cyber Security Council, to respond to concerns that too much power was being given to the Department of Homeland Security. So now we have an interagency body that includes the Department of Defense, the Department of Justice, represented by the FBI, the Department of Commerce, the intelligence community--undoubtedly it would be the Director of the National Intelligence Office--and appropriate sector- specific Federal agencies, such as FERC, if we are talking about how best to protect our electric grid. The council would work in partnership with the private sector and would conduct risk assessments to identify our Nation's most critical cyber infrastructure. What do we mean by that? We hear that term. What exactly is critical cyber infrastructure? It is that which, if damaged, could result in mass casualties, mass evacuations, catastrophic economic damage to our country or severe harm to our national security. Don't we want to safeguard critical national assets that if damaged would cause numerous deaths, people to flee their homes, their communities, a disaster for our economy, or a severe blow to our national security? I can't believe there is even any discussion about the need for us to have robust systems to protect us against mass casualties, a devastating blow to our economy, and catastrophic consequences. That is a high bar in our bill for defining what is critical cyber infrastructure. It isn't every business in this country. Those who are implying that it is and that this is sweeping are not accurately reading the bill. We would be irresponsible if we did not act when the warnings are so loud and are coming from so many respected sources. We have had the Aspen Institute Group on Cyber Security Issues endorse our bill and urge us to go toward its consideration. That is chaired by President Bush's Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and by a renowned expert on the other side of the aisle, former Congresswoman Jane Harman. It also includes people such as Paul Wolfowitz, not exactly a liberal activist the last time I checked, but certainly one who commands great respect for his knowledge in this area. I am amazed we are letting the clock tick down when we know it is not a matter of if there is going to be a cyber attack on this country, it is a matter of when. Let me very briefly address another issue. Is there some opposition among the business community to this bill? Yes, there is. But there is also a great deal of support from the business community. We have, for example, a letter from the NDIA, which represents 1,750 defense firms. We have letters of endorsement from Sysco, Oracle, the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, the Business Software Alliance, from Semantec, EMC Corporation, the Center for a New American Security, endorsements from individuals in the previous administration such as General Hayden, Mike McConnell, and Asa Hutchinson. There are many supporters for this bill. It is not surprising because they know how important it is that we act.

Ms. COLLINS. In closing, I wish to read a little from General Alexander's letter, which is dated today. In it he says: I am writing to express my strong support for passage of a comprehensive bipartisan cyber security bill by the Senate this week. The cyber threat facing the Nation is real and demands immediate action-- Not action next year, not action next Congress, not action even after the recess we are about to take. As General Alexander says: The time to act is now; we simply cannot afford further delay. Moreover, to be most effective in protecting against this threat to our national security, cyber security legislation should address both information sharing and core critical infrastructure hardening. That is exactly what the bill we have brought before the Senate would do. I urge our colleagues to join us. If they have other ideas, offer amendments, but let's get on with the task before us before we are looking back and saying: Why didn't we act? Why didn't we pay attention to all of those warnings?

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I want to rise very briefly--I know there are a number of Members who are seeking recognition--to thank my friend and colleague from Illinois for his statement today. He has worked very hard on this bill. I know it is an issue he cares deeply about, and I very much appreciate his taking the time to come to the floor and to urge Members to vote for the motion to proceed to the debate on this absolutely vital piece of legislation. I must say I was disappointed to hear some of the comments made on the Senate floor today in opposition to this bill. The fact is both Republican and Democratic officials have, with very few exceptions, endorsed the framework of this bill and urged us to move forward. In fact, they have warned us repeatedly in saying the only question is when a major cyber attack will occur. Not whether it will occur, but when it will occur. We have letter after letter, statement after statement from national and homeland security experts, representing both President Bush's administration and the current administration, urging us to act. Indeed, yesterday the Aspen Institute Homeland Security Group put out a statement, stating the following: The Aspen Homeland Security Group strongly urges the U.S. Senate to vote this week to take up S. 3414, the cyber- security bill, for debate on the Floor. The statement goes on to say: We urge the Senate to adopt a program of voluntary cyber- security standards and strong positive incentives for critical infrastructure operators to implement those standards. The country is already being hurt by foreign cyber-intrusions, and the possibility of a devastating cyber- attack is real. Congress must act now. This letter is signed by officials from the previous administration, such as Charles Allen, Stewart Baker, Michael Leiter, and Michael Chertoff. There are numerous representatives of past administrations and individuals who are renowned for their expertise. How can we ignore their warning that we must act, that it is urgent, and that we must have voluntary standards for critical infrastructure--infrastructure that, if it were attacked, would result in mass casualties, mass evacuations, a severe blow to our economy, or a serious degradation of our national security? That is the definition of the core critical infrastructure we want to cover and to help make more secure through a partnership with the private sector. And it has to be a partnership because 85 percent of critical infrastructure is owned by the private sector. We have worked hard to alter our bill to take suggestions from the private sector, from our colleagues, from the administration, and from experts across the philosophical range to improve our bill. I heard a Member saying this morning that somehow we are going to be hurting the high-tech sector of our society. Well, that is not what Cisco and Oracle think--certainly two of the leading businesses in the high-tech sector. This morning they wrote to us, the chief sponsors of the bill--Chairman Lieberman, Chairman Rockefeller, Chairman Feinstein, myself, and Senator Carper--and I want to read a brief excerpt from their letter. They said: . . . we appreciate your efforts to craft legislation that addresses the important issue of cybersecurity by supporting American industry in its efforts to continue to be the world's leading innovators. The fact is, it is American businesses that are being robbed of billions of dollars every year due to cyber intrusions from foreign governments, from transnational criminals, and from hackers. This is a threat not only to our national security but to our economic prosperity. That is why the letter from Cisco and Oracle goes on to say: We praise your continued recognition of the importance of these objectives through the provisions of S. 3414. They say they support those provisions. Continuing to read from the letter: We also commend your commitment to ensuring that the IT industry maintains the ability to drive innovation and security into technologies and the network. So the idea we heard this morning on the Senate floor that somehow we are going to bring innovation in America to a standstill or hurt this important sector of our economy is not supported by a reading of our bill, and it is certainly contradicted by the letter we received from Cisco and Oracle, leading companies in the high-tech sector. Finally, I would point out they thank us for our outreach, our willingness to engage in an exhaustive process around this issue set, and to consider and to respond to the views of America's technology sector. That is what we have done. That is what we are continuing to do with our colleagues on both sides of the aisle who bring varying views to this issue. But what we cannot do is to fail to act when the warnings are so constant and alarming about the threats to our Nation, to our economy, and to our way of life. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the statement from the Aspen Institute Homeland Security Group as well as the July 26 letter from Cisco and Oracle.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, that is very kind of the Senator from West Virginia. My statement is quite lengthy. So if the Senator from West Virginia, in light of his commitment, would like to precede me, I would be more than happy to have him do so. I would encourage him to go ahead. Then the Senator from Connecticut has graciously said he would allow me to go next. We are all so nice around here.

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, first, let me thank the Senator from West Virginia for his comments. He has worked so hard on this issue for many years but, in particular, the past 3 years, as he and the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Feinstein, have worked with Senator Lieberman and me. I rise this evening to urge our colleagues to vote to begin the debate on the Cyber Security Act of 2012. Senator Lieberman and I have introduced this bill along with our colleagues Senator Rockefeller, Senator Feinstein, and Senator Carper. It has been a great pleasure to work with all of them--and work we have--in numerous sessions over literally a period of years, as we have attempted to merge the bills that were reported by the Commerce Committee and the Homeland Security Committee. Of course, it is always a great pleasure to once again work with my dear friend the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, Senator Lieberman, as we bring forth yet another bipartisan bill to the Chamber for its consideration. FBI Director Robert Mueller has warned that the cyber threat will soon equal or surpass the threat from terrorism. He has argued that we should be addressing the cyber threat with the same kind of intensity we have applied to the terrorist threat. This vital legislation would provide the Federal Government and the private sector with the tools needed to help protect our country from the growing cyber threat. It would promote information sharing, improve the security of the Federal Government's own networks, enhance research and development programs and, most important of all, it would help to better secure our Nation's most critical infrastructure from cyber attack. These are the powerplants, the pipelines, the water treatment facilities, the electrical grid, the transportation systems, and the financial networks upon which Americans rely each and every day. The fact is the computerized industrial controls that open and close the valves and switches in our infrastructure are particularly vulnerable to cyber attack. Indeed, the Internet is under constant siege on all fronts by nations such as China, Russia, and Iran, by transnational criminals, by terrorist groups, by activists, and by persistent hackers. That is why our Nation's top national security and homeland security leaders from the current and former administrations have urged us to take legislative action to address this unacceptable risk to both our national security and our economic prosperity. Earlier this year, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta described our bill as ``essential to addressing our Nation's critical infrastructure and network cyber security vulnerabilities, both of which pose serious national and economic security risks to our Nation.'' Just last month, the Secretary reiterated his call for Congress to pass our bill and stress the potential for a cyber attack to cripple our critical infrastructure in a way that would virtually paralyze this country. The Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, has also sounded the alarm. He has described the cyber threat as a ``profound threat to this country, to its future, its economy and its very being.'' The warnings have not been confined to officials in the Obama administration. Former national security officials, including Michael Chertoff, Michael McConnell, Paul Wolfowitz, Michael Hayden have written that the cyber threat ``is imminent and . . . represents one of the most serious challenges to our national security since the onset of the nuclear age sixty years ago.'' They have urged us to protect the ``infrastructure that controls our electricity, water and sewer, nuclear plants, communications backbone, energy pipelines, and financial networks'' with appropriate cyber security standards. Similarly, in a letter to our colleague, Senator John McCain, GEN Keith Alexander, the commander of U.S. Cyber Command and the Director of the National Security Agency, wrote: Given DOD reliance on certain core critical infrastructure to execute its mission, as well as the importance of the Nation's critical infrastructure to our national and economic security overall, legislation is also needed to ensure that infrastructure is sufficiently hardened and resilient. The threats to our infrastructure are not hypothetical; they are already occurring. For example, while many of the details are classified, we know multiple natural gas pipeline companies have been the target of a sophisticated cyber intrusion campaign that has been ongoing since December of last year. The cyber threat to our critical infrastructure is also escalating in its frequency and severity. According to DHS's Industrial Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response Team, last year, almost 200 cyber intrusions were reported by critical infrastructure owners and operators. That is nearly a 400-percent increase from the previous year, and these are only the intrusions that have been reported to the Department of Homeland Security. Many go unreported and, even worse, many owners are not even aware their systems have been compromised. What would a successful cyber attack on our critical infrastructure look like? We have just seen recently what a serious storm that leaves more than 1 million people without power can cause: the loss of life, the blow to economic activity, the hardship for the elderly, the nonworking traffic lights that resulted in accidents. Multiply that impact many times over if there were a sustained cyber attack that deliberately knocked out our electric grid. The threat is not just to our national security but also to our economic edge, to our competitiveness. The rampant cyber theft targeting the United States by countries such as China has led to the ``greatest transfer of wealth in history,'' according to General Alexander. You have heard many of us use his quote. Let me give some specifics of his estimates. He believes American companies have lost about $250 billion a year through intellectual property theft, $114 billion to theft through cyber crime, and another $274 billion in downtime the thefts have caused. In their op-ed earlier this year, former DNI McConnell, former Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff, and former Deputy Secretary of Defense Bill Lynn warned that the cost of cyber espionage and theft ``easily means billions of dollars and millions of jobs.'' The threat of a cyber attack doesn't just go to our national security, critical though that is. It also directly is a threat to America's ability to compete, to our economic edge. In recent years, a growing number of U.S. firms, including sophisticated firms such as Google, Adobe, Lockheed Martin, RSA, Sony, NASDAQ, and many others have been hacked by malicious actors. Earlier this month, the security firm McAfee released a report on a highly sophisticated cyber intrusion dubbed ``Operation High Roller,'' which has attempted to steal more than $78 million in fraudulent financial transfers at at least 60 different financial institutions. Trade associations have been attacked too. The Chamber of Commerce was the victim of a cyber attack for many months, blissfully unaware until informed by the FBI that its membership data was being stolen. The evidence of our cybersecurity vulnerability is overwhelming. It compels us to act. Yesterday 18 experts in national security strongly endorsed the revised legislation we have introduced. The Aspen Homeland Security Group, made up of officials from both Republican and Democratic administrations and chaired by former Secretary Chertoff and former Congresswoman Jane Harman, urged the Senate to adopt a program of voluntary cybersecurity standards and strong positive incentives for critical infrastructure to implement those standards. This group called for action on our bill, saying: The country is already being hurt by foreign cyber intrusions, and the possibility of a devastating cyber attack is real. Congress must act now. Mr. President, you have heard some Members of this body say that somehow this process has been rushed or the bill inadequately considered. Nothing could be further from the truth. Since 2005--7 years ago--our Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee alone has held 10 hearings on cybersecurity. Other Senate committees have also held hearings, for a total of 25 hearings since 2009, not to mention numerous briefings the Presiding Officer and Senator Mikulski of Maryland have helped to convene--classified briefings--for any Member to attend. In 2010, Chairman Lieberman, Senator Carper, and I introduced our cybersecurity bill, which was reported by our committee later that same year. As I indicated, we have been working with Chairman Rockefeller to merge our bill with legislation he has championed, which was reported by the Commerce Committee. We have also worked very closely with Senator Feinstein, an expert on information sharing. The bill we are urging our colleagues to proceed to today is the product of these efforts. It also incorporates substantial changes based on the feedback from the private sector, our colleagues, and the administration. This new bill is a good-faith effort to address the concerns raised by Members on both sides of the aisle by establishing a framework that relies upon the expertise of government and the innovation of the private sector. It improves privacy protections that Americans expect from their government. It also reflects many concepts proposed by Senators Kyl, Whitehouse-- the Presiding Officer--Blunt, Coats, Graham, Mikulski, Blumenthal, and Coons. We have revised our bill in a very substantial way. We have abandoned the approach--which I still believe to be a good idea--of mandatory standards and, instead, have adopted a voluntary approach to standards. This is a significant change from our initial bill, and it was one that was promoted by Senator Kyl's and Senator Whitehouse's group. The new version encourages owners of critical infrastructure to voluntarily adopt the cybersecurity practices in exchange for various incentives for entities complying with these best practices. This was also one of the primary recommendations of the House Republican Cybersecurity Task Force. These incentives include liability protection against punitive damages. I, for one, am open to making that a more robust liability protection. They include the opportunity to receive expedited security clearances, eligibility for prioritized technical assistance from the government, and access to timely cyber threat information held by the government. These major changes from the approach we initially proposed demonstrate our willingness to adopt alternatives recommended in good faith by our colleagues, and we are still open to changes to the bill. Our bill also includes strong information-sharing provisions that promote voluntary information sharing within the private sector and the government, while ensuring that privacy and civil liberties are protected. And again, we incorporated some suggestions from the Democratic side of the aisle to strengthen these provisions. To be sure, more information sharing is essential to improving our understanding of the risks and threats. But let us be clear: More information sharing, while absolutely essential, is not sufficient to ensure our Nation's vital, critical infrastructure is protected. If you survey the vast majority of experts in this field, they will tell you that to pass a bill that only provides for more information sharing does not begin to accomplish the job that must be done to better secure our Nation from this threat. With 85 percent of our Nation's critical infrastructure owned by the private sector, government obviously must work with the private sector. Our bill--both our original bill and our revised bill--has always envisioned a partnership between government and the private sector. We have a very stringent definition of what constitutes covered critical infrastructure. It is infrastructure whose disruption could result in truly catastrophic consequences. What do I mean by that? I am talking about mass casualties or mass evacuations or severe degradation of our national security or a serious blow to our economy. That is the kind of disruption we are talking about. Obviously those who have claimed that every company or every part of our infrastructure is going to be considered as critical infrastructure have not read the definition in our bill. But here is more evidence of why we must act. A study done in 2011 by the computer security firm McAfee and CSIS revealed that approximately 40 percent of the companies surveyed--the critical infrastructure companies--were not regularly patching and updating their software, despite the fact these safeguards are among the most basic and widely known cybersecurity risk mitigation practices. We have even found reports where companies haven't bothered to change the default password that came with the industrial control software. In many cases, the control devices used to operate our Nation's most critical infrastructure are inherently insecure. A Washington Post special report last month noted that security researchers found six out of seven control system devices are ``riddled with hardware and software flaws,'' and that ``some included back doors that enabled hackers to download passwords or sidestep security completely.'' Another front-page story in the Post earlier this month highlighted the fact that as technological advances have allowed everyone from plant managers to hospital nurses to control their systems remotely via the Internet, these vital systems have become even more vulnerable to cyber attacks. To prove the point, the story described how a security researcher was able to easily steal passwords from a provider that connects millions of these systems to the Internet. These examples illustrate that far too many critical infrastructure owners are not taking even the most basic measures to protect their systems, and this is simply dangerous and unacceptable to the security of our country. These basic practices need not be expensive. In most cases, they are not expensive. And I will tell you, they are a lot less costly than the consequences of a breach, not to mention a major cyber attack. A recent report by Verizon, the Secret Service, and other international law enforcement agencies analyzed 855 data breaches and found that 96 were not difficult to pull off and 97 percent of them could have been prevented through fairly simple and inexpensive means. The point is, we must act, and we must act now. We cannot afford to wait for a cyber 9/11 before taking action on this legislation. In all the years I have been working to identify vulnerabilities facing our country in the area of homeland security, I cannot identify another area where I believe the threat is greater and that we have done less. I urge my colleagues to listen to the wisdom of former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and former NSA Chief General Hayden. They wrote the following: We carry the burden of knowing that 9/11 might have been averted with the intelligence that existed at the time. We do not want to be in the same position again when ``cyber 9/11'' hits--it is not a question of ``whether'' this will happen; it is a question of ``when.'' And this time all the dots have been connected. This time we know that attacks are occurring against our Internet systems and cyber systems each and every day. This time the warnings from all across the board are loud and clear. I urge our colleagues to heed these warnings and to support the motion to proceed to the cybersecurity bill.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, today I have filed an amendment to extend for 1 year the individual income tax provisions of the 2001 and 2003 tax relief acts for all Americans, but with a surtax of two percent on those earning $1 million or more, coupled with a ``carve-out'' to protect our nation's small businesses. The Congressional Budget Office has warned us that the ``fiscal cliff'' created by the expiration of current tax rates on December 31, coupled with ill-advised and deep cuts in defense spending that would result from ``sequestration,'' would likely result in a recession in the first half of next year. It makes no sense and should be unacceptable to all of us to allow our country to go over this ``fiscal cliff.'' I have long urged that we begin the debate on comprehensive tax reform aimed at creating a simpler, fairer, pro-growth tax code. I also believe that multimillionaires and billionaires can afford to pay more to help us deal with our unsustainable deficit. My amendment would, therefore, impose a 2 percent surtax on millionaires, with a carve-out to protect small business owners who pay taxes through the individual income tax system. Our Nation's small businesses must not be lumped-in with millionaires and billionaires. The ``carve-out'' I am proposing would shield small businesses owners from tax increases intended to fall on the very wealthy. These small business owner-operators are on the front lines of our economy, and of the communities in which they live. The income that shows up on their tax returns is critical to their ability to create jobs, finance investment, and grow their businesses. Left in their hands, this income will lead to more jobs and buy the tools that help American workers compete. Congress still could tackle tax reform this year but, unfortunately, this is not likely. That is why, in my amendment, I propose extending the current individual tax rates for all Americans through 2013, to give us the time we need to consider and adopt comprehensive reform that results in a simpler, fairer, pro-growth Tax Code. The surtax on the very wealthy, combined with protection for small businesses, will help us begin to deal with the deficit without harming the job creation engine of our economy--small business.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleagues in support of Senate debate and passage of the fiscal year 2013 appropriations bills. I want to begin by commending both Chairman Inouye and Vice-Chair Cochran for their leadership on the Appropriations Committee. In what has been largely a bipartisan process, the Senate Appropriations Committee has approved 9 of the 12 funding bills so far. A lot of hard work on both sides has gone into putting these bills together. As ranking member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation and Housing and Urban Development, Senator Murray and I worked closely together to craft a truly bipartisan fiscal year 2013 appropriations bill. The T-HUD bill strikes a balance between thoughtful investment and fiscal restraint. In fact, this bill honors an allocation that is nearly $14.5 billion below fiscal year 2010 levels, a 22-percent reduction. These deep cuts reflect an even deeper commitment to getting our fiscal house in order. I am proud of the work that went into this bill and the strong bipartisan vote this past April to report it out of committee. Like the T-HUD bill, the Agriculture; Commerce, Justice, and Science; Energy and Water; Military Construction and Veterans Affairs; State and Foreign Operations; and Department of Homeland Security bills have all been reported with overwhelming bipartisan support. In putting together these bills, the Appropriations Committee functioned the way committees are supposed to: we worked together to develop thoughtful and responsible bills that could be recommended for the full Senate for consideration. As such, I was very disappointed to hear the majority leader's recent announcement that not one of the 12 appropriations bills would be brought to the Senate floor until after the election, virtually guaranteeing that we end up with a continuing resolution or catch-all omnibus that the full Senate has not had an opportunity to properly vet. I hope he will reconsider in light of our commitment to work with him to develop a workable and fair process for considering these bills. Given the immense workload that we have before the end of the year-- including enacting appropriations bills and preventing the so-called fiscal cliff, when enormous tax hikes and indiscriminate cuts to defense spending are set to kick in--I am disappointed that we have spent much of July haggling over proposals that never really stood a chance of going anywhere. I understand that the majority leader has said that he doesn't want to bring the bills to the floor because the House is writing its bills to a lower level, but we have a process to deal with disagreements. It is called a conference. The Senate Appropriations Committee has reported several bipartisan bills that are ready for floor consideration. Why not bring them to the floor, allow Senators to offer amendments, and let the Senate work its will on this important constitutional responsibility? As our Nation's economy struggles to recover, it is important that we complete appropriations bills on time and through regular order. It is important for the Senate as an institution that we proceed. It is also important for the American people to see that we can work together in an open and bipartisan manner to establish priorities, make hard decisions, and complete the work that the Constitution requires of us. Last November, I joined Chairman Murray as well as Chairmen Kohl and Mikulski and Ranking Members Blunt and Hutchison to usher the first group of fiscal year 2012 spending bills to final passage, avoiding a long-term continuing resolution for fiscal year 2012. It is my hope that we will build on last year's success and bring the fiscal year 2013 appropriations bill to the floor to be considered through a similarly open and transparent process. These bills make investments that not only create jobs now when they are needed most but also establish the foundations for future growth. Just as important to our economic future, however, is reigning in Federal spending; we must strike the right balance between thoughtful investments and fiscal restraint, thereby setting the stage for future economic growth. Uncertainty only makes matters worse.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, the Height of Land in Maine's Rangeley Lakes Region is a crown jewel among my State's abundant natural treasures. The panorama of lakes and mountains, streams and valleys, offered by this lofty perch in the Western Mountains, is among the most spectacular sights in New England. I rise today to congratulate a remarkable group of local citizens, the Rangeley Lakes Heritage Trust, for their hard work and commitment over more than 2 decades to protect and preserve this extraordinary place and to make it accessible to all. The Height of Land Overlook on the Rangeley Lakes National Scenic Byway, officially dedicated on July 15, 2012, demonstrates the great partnership they have formed with State and Federal Government, conservation organizations, businesses, and neighbors to achieve lasting accomplishments. Since the Rangeley Lakes Heritage Trust was formed in 1991, it has conserved more than 12,800 acres of land, including 45 miles of lake and river frontage, 15 islands, and the commanding 2,443-foot Bald Mountain, so that these features might be accessed and enjoyed by residents and visitors forever. The Height of Land Overlook has converted a narrow and dangerous corridor into a spacious, safe, and welcoming place for inspiration and reflection. To complete this outstanding project, the Rangeley Lakes Heritage Trust brought together a wide range of people and organizations into a common cause. It overcame the boundaries between towns, bridged the divide between government agencies, and worked collaboratively with the private sector. The commitment by the Maine Department of Transportation is especially commendable. In 2009, I was pleased to help secure $2.9 million in U.S. Department of Transportation funding for this important project. It is essential that the Federal Government be a strong member of partnerships to preserve our natural treasures, enhance recreation, promote economic growth, and help protect the environment. The Height of Land Overlook and the conservation walk that will be completed next spring will help make this area a national destination. Sir Edmund Hillary said that, ``People do not decide to become extraordinary. They decide to accomplish extraordinary things.'' Like that famous mountaineer, the citizens who came together to establish the Rangeley Lakes Heritage Trust had a lofty goal. They not only reached the summit, they went far beyond. Their amazing success speaks volumes about the commitment that the people of Maine have to preserve our special places and to share them with all Americans.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, today I wish to congratulate the men and women of L.L.Bean as they celebrate their 100th anniversary. This legendary Maine company is one of America's most inspiring family business success stories and one of my State's most cherished institutions. Many L.L.Bean customers know the story of the company's origin. Leon Leonwood Bean was an avid Maine outdoorsman who was tired of cold, wet feet while hunting or fishing. In 1912, he invented the Maine Hunting Shoe, a boot with leather uppers and a thick rubber sole. His fellow outdoorsmen liked the boot and a business was born. The second, less-known part of the story really tells the tale. The rubber bottoms of those shoes separated from the leather tops and 90 of the first 100 pairs were returned. Although it nearly put him out of business, L.L. kept his word and refunded the purchase price. He borrowed more money, corrected the problem and, with undiminished confidence, mailed more brochures. L.L. had learned the value of personally testing his products, of honest advertising based on firm convictions and of keeping the customer satisfied at any cost. Leon Leonwood Bean founded his business on his personal guarantee of ``100 percent satisfaction in every way.'' In all the years since, that promise has been kept. Whether seeking expert advice, making a purchase, or exchanging or returning a product, generations of customers have found L.L.Bean to be a place where that first commitment to customer satisfaction still resonates. Today, L.L.Bean is one of the world's most respected retailers, with sales exceeding $1.5 billion. From the flagship store in Freeport, ME, to dozens of stores and outlets throughout the United States, more than 11 million people visit L.L.Bean stores each year. The company's famous catalogues are sent to 160 countries, and its Internet presence leads the industry. In its first century, the company has grown from a one- room operation selling a single product to a global enterprise providing some 4,900 year-round jobs, and that figure typically doubles during peak holiday season. In addition to its remarkable retail success, L.L.Bean remains true to its origins as a manufacturer. In Brunswick and Lewiston, ME, more than 435 skilled workers craft such iconic products as the Maine Hunting Shoe, the L.L.Bean Boot and the Boat and Tote Bag. Leon Leonwood Bean made 100 pairs of boots in his first production run in 1912. Last year, Maine workers produced more than 400,000 pairs. When the man TIME magazine called ``The Merchant of the Maine Woods'' passed away in 1967, leadership of the company was passed on to his grandson, Leon Gorman. Soon after becoming president, Leon introduced the stakeholder concept, which clearly linked L.L.Bean's success as a business to key stakeholders--customers, employees, shareholders, vendors, communities and the natural environment. In his 30 years as president, Leon Gorman led L.L.Bean from a $4.75 million catalog company to an over-one- billion-dollar multichannel enterprise. Leon firmly established L.L.Bean as a leader in the outdoors industry, offering high-quality equipment and apparel, backed by world-class service and products guaranteed to last. It is fitting that L.L.Bean is celebrating its centennial with special projects that advance the company's guiding principles. These include the Million Moment Mission, in which L.L.Bean will contribute $1 to the National Park Foundation for every outdoor moment shared by customers up to a total of $1 million, and a commitment of an additional $1.5 million at the local and State levels to encourage our young people to discover the outdoors. I am often asked what L.L.Bean means to our State. As one of Maine's largest employers, the company certainly means a great deal to the thousands who work there. L.L.Bean offers careers with opportunities for advancement in a respectful, positive environment. The spin-off benefits to other Maine industries, including product vendors and business suppliers, are enormous. The continued commitment to Maine- made products--wreaths, maple syrup, mustard, furniture, running shoes, slippers, in addition to the company's famous tote bags and boots-- sustains a great many businesses and households throughout our State. Certainly, the sales, revenue, and growth numbers are impressive. Even more impressive is the fact that this family company succeeds in a modern, global economy with the timeless values that foster dedicated employees and loyal customers. It is a pleasure to congratulate the people of L.L.Bean on this centennial and to thank them for their contributions to our Nation and to the great State of Maine.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, today I wish to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the City of Saco, ME, one of the oldest communities in New England and one that exemplifies the determination and resiliency of its people. In 1617, 3 years before the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth, the English explorer Richard Vines established a test winter settlement along a sheltered cove on the coast of Maine. That settlement where the Saco River meets the sea, grew, prospered, and eventually was incorporated in 1762. The name ``Saco'' is derived from the Abenaki word for ``mouth of the tidal stream,'' and the sheltered cove, known today as Biddeford Pool, had been a thriving center of Native American villages and cultivated fields dating back to prehistoric times. Although some 37 English families--fishermen, traders, lumberjacks, and farmers--relocated there within 20 years of Mr. Vine's exploration, growth was stifled by frequent armed conflicts with the French during those early colonial times. The conflicts subsided and in 1716 a young merchant named William Pepperrell purchased 5,000 acres along the Saco River for a lumber operation. The small village began to prosper. In 1752, Sir William Pepperrell, by then a war hero and the first person born in America to be made an English baronet, donated a parcel to be a village common, burial ground, and site for a meetinghouse. Ten years later, the settlers incorporated as the town of Pepperrellborough, in honor of their benefactor. In 1805, the long name was replaced with the much shorter Abenaki word, but the vision and energy of William Pepperrell lived on. First with water power and then with steam, Saco and its sister city across the river, Biddeford, became leading manufacturing centers of the industrial age in North America. At Saco Falls, 17 sawmills supplied Maine's shipbuilders. On Factory Island, Saco Iron Works opened in 1811, followed shortly by foundries, harness makers, and machine shops. With the arrival of the railroad came the great engine of the community's economy--vast, bustling textile mills. That Saco is a city built by the skilled hands of past generations is evident in the fine architecture cherished by the residents of today. Nine properties are listed on the National Register of Historic Places, including the First parish Congregational Church, City Hall, and many homes in the Georgian, Federal, Greek Revival, and Victorian styles. The decline of American manufacturing in the late 20th century presented Saco with one of the greatest challenge in its history. It is a challenge that is being met with the same strength demonstrated by its early settlers. The abandoned mills on Factory Island are undergoing a transformation with residential, educational, and business uses, bringing an economic renessaince to the downtown. Today, Saco is a center for tourism, education, and the arts. Its skilled workers keep the city on the forefront of high-tech manufacturing, including invaluable contributions to our Nation's security in the defense industry. A community that once used waterfalls to power sawmills now uses clean, renewable wind energy to light its beautiful passenger rail station. Mr. President, the yearlong celebration now underway is not merely about the passing of time. It is about human accomplishment. We celebrate the people who for more than 2\1/2\ centuries have pulled together, cared for one another, and built a great community. Thanks to those who came before, Saco, ME, has a wonderful history. Thanks to those here today, it has a bright future.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the service of the women of the American Red Cross Clubmobiles. These brave young Americans served our country with distinction overseas during the Second World War. During the War, the Red Cross was charged by the Armed Forces to provide for the recreational welfare of the troops. Wherever there was a sizable group of American servicemen permanently assigned, the Red Cross established canteens, which provided a bit of respite from training for war and were tremendously popular. But the canteens were fixed sites, and did not reach many of the combat troops garrisoned at small locations across the English countryside. In order to extend a taste of home to the troops, the Red Cross Commissioner for Great Britain, Harvey Gibson, thought up the idea of the ``Clubmobile,'' a mobile kitchen set up in an old London bus. In late 1942, several of these Clubmobiles began operating between dozens of bases around the country, serving coffee and doughnuts to those preparing for D-day. Shortly after the beachhead at Normandy was successfully secured, 80 Clubmobiles and 320 volunteers crossed the English Channel to begin operating their mobile kitchens near the front lines. Each Clubmobile group, consisting of eight two-and-a-half ton trucks named for an American city or State, was attached to an Army Corps and moved with the unit's support elements, often going forward to provide the troops with American music, hot coffee, and doughnuts. Like every soldier, the Clubmobile women were in ``for the duration.'' By War's end, the Clubmobiles were operating across Europe, from southern Italy to northern Germany, and in the Far East from the jungles of Burma to the shores of Tokyo Bay. A visit from a Clubmobile was one of the most significant events for a young G.I. in combat far from home, and the women of the Clubmobiles, young women from every single State, acted as friends and sisters to the troops with whom they interacted. These women were trailblazers, every bit as much as the Navy's Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Service--WAVES--the Women's Army Corps--WACS--and the Women Airforce Service Pilots--WASPS. They were young, independent, and patriotic. They joined for a variety of reasons, some for adventure, some to serve in uniform as close to combat as they were then allowed, and some to honor the sacrifices of their own fathers, brothers, or friends. Every one of them was dedicated to their country, and volunteered for the Clubmobiles rather than an easier or safer job at home. The dangers of War were real. During the War, 52 Red Cross women lost their lives, some of them from the Clubmobiles. Their stories are those of a nation at war. Elizabeth Richardson joined the Red Cross in 1944 after graduating from Milwaukee-Downer College and after a brief career in advertising. She helped pilot the Clubmobile named Kansas City throughout England, Holland and France, listening to soldiers' stories while cracking jokes and sharing her own. Two months after V-E Day, Liz's plane crashed en route to Paris. Liz Richardson, dead at 27, now lies interred at the Normandy American Cemetery. Before she died, she said about her service, ``I wouldn't trade this for anything else.'' Those sentiments are shared by Margaret ``Margo'' Hemingway Harrington of Rye, NH, one of the few surviving Clubmobile women. She said, ``I just got itchy feet, and thought I should be doing something more.'' The women of the Clubmobiles touched the lives of hundreds of thousands of U.S. servicemen. The Red Cross alone purchased enough flour to make 1.5 million doughnuts, most of which were served through the windows of a Clubmobile. To honor their memory, 70 years after they were established, Senator Shaheen and I, joined by 11 of our colleagues, introduced Senate Resolution 471, which commends the exemplary and courageous service of the Clubmobiles, honors those that lost their lives, calls upon historians to not let this important piece of American history be lost, and urges the Red Cross to publically commemorate their stories. Honoring them now is critically important, because only a very few of these women remain. Their stories are every bit as vibrant and important to our victory as those of the men who valiantly fought to defend our freedom. I urge every one of my colleagues to support this Resolution.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, on December 21, 2011, the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, finalized the mercury and air toxics standards, MATS, rule for powerplants. These standards, which will be fully in effect in 2016, will require coal-fired powerplants to install pollution controls for mercury and toxic air pollution. When fully implemented, the MATS for powerplants will reduce mercury emissions from powerplants by 90 percent, acid gases by 88 percent, and particulate emissions, including nonmercury toxic metals, by 41 percent. Senator Inhofe's S.J. Res. 37 would disapprove and nullify this rule and, more importantly, make it impossible for the EPA to implement substantially similar rules in the future. The State of Maine, located at the end of our Nation's ``air pollution tailpipe,'' is on the receiving end of pollution emissions from coal-fired powerplants operating in other States. The pollution reductions required under the rule will improve public health and improve the environment in our State. That is why I will vote to uphold the clean air rule that requires coal-fired powerplants to install pollution controls. While legitimate concerns have been raised that additional compliance time and more cost-effective options are needed, I have significant concerns with overturning this rule and permanently barring the EPA from issuing any standards in the future that are substantially similar. I will push the EPA to work with utilities to develop reasonable implementation schedules. Reductions in air pollutants from other States will reduce air pollution in Maine, which has one of the highest asthma rates in the Nation, affecting 1 in 10 adults and over 25,000 children. The EPA estimates that the MATS will prevent 130,000 cases of childhood asthma symptoms. Every State in the country has issued mercury advisories for human fish consumption because of high levels of mercury in our Nation's streams, lakes, and rivers, and half of U.S. manmade mercury comes from coal-fired powerplants. Mercury is one of the most persistent and dangerous pollutants, particularly harmful to children and pregnant women, and it threatens our health and environment today. Under the new rule, 90 percent of this mercury would be removed. I am a longtime supporter of efforts to reduce mercury pollution and have sponsored legislation to establish a nationwide mercury monitoring system to accurately measure mercury levels. The rule also includes standards for 186 other hazardous pollutants, including arsenic, acid gases, and toxic metals. Additionally, the equipment installed to control these pollutants will not only reduce these hazardous air pollutants but also capture fine particles, which are linked to cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. I am a longtime supporter of Clean Air Act protections. This landmark legislation, authored by Maine's own Senator Ed Muskie more than 40 years ago, has helped protect and improve our Nation's air quality and public health for decades. I also support sensible regulatory reforms and have introduced legislation that calls for Federal agencies to analyze the cost and benefits of proposed regulations, including the impact on job creation and consumer prices. This will help cut the tangle of redtape that is holding businesses back from expanding and adding jobs. But when it comes to the air we breathe, I reject the false choice of pitting the environment against the economy because we understand that for much of the State of Maine, the environment is the economy. The people of Maine have always been faithful stewards of our environment because we understand its tremendous value to our way of life. Maine's unique forests, landscapes, waters, and wildlife are an important part of our heritage and have helped shape the economic, environmental, and recreational character of our entire State. Protecting our Nation's air quality will positively benefit the natural beauty of Maine and will improve public health, protecting our children and enriching lives.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize a landmark moment in health care for our veterans. Today is the 25th anniversary of the ribbon cutting ceremony for the Nation's first Veterans' Community Based Outpatient Clinic, CBOC. On June 13, 1987, at the Cary Medical Center in Caribou, ME, Governor John McKernan was joined by Senators George Mitchell and William Cohen, and then- Congresswoman Olympia Snowe to cut the ribbon of the new clinic. As the first community based outpatient clinic of its kind in the United States, the Caribou clinic served as the proving ground upon which the Department of Veterans Affairs, VA, has built a nationwide health care system that delivers much improved access to care for America's rural veterans. Today nearly 3.5 million veterans, approximately 41 percent of those enrolled in the VA health care system, live in rural areas, many of whom receive care at more than 800 community based outpatient clinics. The history of the CBOC in Caribou, however, began long before the ribbon cutting, when seven Aroostook County veterans dedicated themselves to the mission of improving access to critical health care services to the veterans living in their communities. To accomplish this goal, they established the Aroostook County Veterans Medical Facility Research and Development, Inc. The initial members were Percy Thibeault, Meo Bosse, John Rowe, Ray Guerrette, Wesley Adams, Walter Corey, and Leonard Woods, Sr. Over a span of 8 years, they committed themselves to convincing the VA to establish a veterans' health clinic in Caribou. They were joined along the way by other concerned veterans, community members, the Cary Medical Center, and a number of Maine veterans service organizations. Their initiative paid off 8 years later, and today, on the 25th anniversary of their historic accomplishment, they deserve to be recognized. Our veterans in rural areas throughout the United States benefit today from the dedication of this landmark work. CBOCs are a vital part of veteran health services today. These exemplary seven men battled to ensure that health care services were available to every veteran living in rural areas. That battle, despite the VA's best efforts, goes on. Rural areas are still underserved in the types of medical treatment available. In some cases CBOCs don't even have permanent physicians assigned. The Iraq and Afghan wars have created a new generation of combat veterans, many of whom have new medical needs including prosthetic medical treatments, mental health care, and extensive physical therapy needs. I am encouraged by the VA's renewed commitment to rural health care, and the $250 million that VA is allocating for programs for rural communities. But I would urge the VA to do more, and expand one program in particular, the Access Received Closer to Home, ARCH, project. ARCH has been tremendously popular in all five of the communities where the pilot program was established. Given Caribou's history, it is especially fitting that Caribou CBOC was selected as one of the five locations. Our veterans have sacrificed so much for our country. We owe them all that we can to ensure they receive the best care possible. The seven men who fought for the Caribou CBOC knew that, and we honor their dedication to their fellow veterans by carrying on their work.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, Aroostook County in far northern Maine has long been a thriving center of farming and logging. In the early years of the 20th century, it seemed that the only barrier to growth and prosperity was a shortage of modern health care facilities and trained medical professionals. Two local citizens took it upon themselves to remove this barrier. By horse and wagon, Frank White, an attorney, and Charles E. Hussey, a farmer, traveled through the countryside calling on their neighbors and collected $2,500 to establish a center for health care. In the spring of 1912, Presque Isle General Hospital opened with 20 beds, an operating theater with the latest equipment, four physicians, and a training school for nurses. Much has changed during the past 100 years. What began in one three- story converted house as Presque Isle General is known today as the Aroostook Medical Center, TAMC, with facilities in Presque Isle, Mars Hill, and Fort Fairfield, an ambulance service, and outreach services, such as a dialysis center and primary care clinics, throughout the northern part of the largest county east of the Mississippi. It has a medical staff of more than 60 trained professionals and a workforce of more than 1,000, making it the region's largest employer. What has not changed is the spirit of service that is the foundation of this remarkable organization. As one who was born and raised in Aroostook County, I am proud of what has been accomplished there and grateful for the contributions and dedication over the generations that have made this invaluable community resource possible. The commitment that established the region's first public hospital in 1912 was not a one-time event. Less than a decade later, the growing population created the need for a larger hospital. Another, even more successful fund drive led to the opening in 1921 of a facility with more than twice the beds and vastly expanded services. In 1960, a capital campaign of unprecedented size for this area established the A.R. Gould Memorial Hospital that continues to grow and serve Aroostook residents. The namesake of today's hospital is of special significance to my Senate colleagues. Arthur Robinson Gould was a Presque Isle entrepreneur who built a lumber mill, powerplants, and an electric railroad. In 1926, he was elected to the U.S. Senate to fill the term of Senator Bert M. Fernald, who died in office. Senator Gould is best remembered for the courageous stand he took against the Ku Klux Klan at a time when that hateful group was gaining prominence in American politics. Despite the esteem in which he was held, Senator Gould chose not to run for reelection in 1930, saying, ``I want to get back to my railroad and the pine forests of Maine.'' That simple statement describes the affection the people of Aroostook County have for their home and helps to explain how they could join together to create, sustain, and grow a modern health care organization. By proclamation of the Governor of Maine and the city of Presque Isle, June 9, 2012, is the official day of celebration for this great centennial. I am honored to commemorate the occasion by congratulating the men and women of the Aroostook Medical Center and the people of Aroostook County for 100 years of accomplishment, and I wish them the best in the years to come.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act, which will help speed safe and effective drugs and medical devices to the patients who need them. This bipartisan, consensus bill was developed through a long and collaborative process involving the FDA, stakeholders, and Senators from both sides of the aisle. I commend the chair and ranking member of the HELP Committee for their tremendous leadership and hard work on this very important bill. The legislation we are considering today reauthorizes existing user fee programs for prescription drugs and medical devices and creates new user fee programs for generic drugs and biosimilar biological products. In addition, the bill reauthorizes programs that have helped make medicines safer for children, upgrades the FDA's tools to police the global supply chain, increases incentives for the development of new antibiotics, and expedites the development and review of certain drugs for the treatment of serious or life-threatening diseases and conditions. I particularly want to commend my colleagues for including provisions based on legislation I sponsored with Senator Klobuchar to address the shortages of drugs that are causing significant disruptions in care and putting patients at risk. I continue to hear from doctors, emergency medical personnel, and other medical professionals in Maine who are extremely concerned about this issue. Many of the drugs in short supply are vital, used in hospitals and cancer centers for anesthesia, chemotherapy, and treatment of infections. There are also continuing shortages of drugs used in emergency rooms and intensive-care units. These shortages are causing serious problems around the country, including forcing some medical centers to ration drugs or postpone elective surgeries. Oncologists have told me of situations where they were forced to change a patient's chemotherapy regime midcourse because they suddenly encountered a shortage of a particular drug. Moreover, for some drugs, there are no effective substitutes. This crisis is widespread, with more than 80 percent of hospitals reporting that they have had to delay treatment due to shortages. That is why I joined my colleague from Minnesota in sponsoring the Preserving Access to Life Saving Medications Act to give the FDA tools to better manage, and hopefully prevent, shortages of life-saving medications, including requiring manufacturers to provide an ``early warning'' when a drug will not be available. Providing early warning when a drug will not be available will help both doctors and patients. It builds on the successful model of the FDA's Drug Shortage Program which encourages manufacturers to report potential or existing shortages so that problems can be addressed or other manufacturers can ramp up production. Through this voluntary approach, the FDA was able to avert almost 200 shortages last year. The legislation we are considering today will give the FDA the information and tools it needs to help address and prevent drug shortages. It will also promote innovation, improve safety, and increase access to the drugs and devices that are critical to our health. Again, I commend Senators Harkin and Enzi for their leadership and encourage all of my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, on April 23, 2012, Dr. Theodora J. Kalikow gave her last lecture as president of the University of Maine Farmington and received a standing ovation from an overflow audience at the campus's largest auditorium. In that same spirit, I rise today to express my gratitude to a great leader and good friend for 18 years of outstanding service to the people of Maine. There are many ways to describe what Theo as she is known to colleagues, students, and friends has meant to our State. One is to note that in 1998, her fourth year as president, the University of Maine Farmington was named to U.S. News and World Report's best college list for the first time. This year, UMF celebrated 15 consecutive years of receiving that hard-earned and well-deserved recognition. Another way is to consider the deep affection alumni and people throughout Maine have for this remarkable institution. As just one example, in 2007 UMF opened its new Education Center that integrates technology with teaching and learning. This major expansion was made possible only through the generosity of countless individuals, businesses, and organizations. Over the years, this kind of overwhelming support has enabled this small school of just 2,000 students to keep pace with the top colleges and universities in the country. Responding to the needs of an ever-changing society is one of the richest traditions a college can have. The traditions Dr. Kalikow has upheld began a century and a half ago when the people of rural Franklin County joined together to establish Maine's first public institution of higher education. When the first class of 31 students matriculated at the new Farmington Normal School in 1864, they did so in a setting that was described by a University of Maine historian as ``rough, crude, and plenty humble.'' Under Dr. Kalikow's leadership, UMF has upheld another noble tradition that of contributing to the entire region by adding to its cultural life, teaching in local classrooms, coaching youth athletics, and helping youngsters learn everything from swimming to foreign languages. From the Health and Fitness Center to the Mantor Library, the doors of UMF are open to the community. In her last lecture, Dr. Kalikow drew a strong connection between the America we know today as a place of unsurpassed equality, freedom, and opportunity and the ``rough, crude, and plenty humble'' foundation of public higher education laid in Farmington, ME, and other frontier communities across the Nation so many generations ago. These ordinary citizens knew that education was a necessary condition of creating a successful society, she said, and we today are the beneficiaries of their investment. Mr. President, Dr. Theo Kalikow has increased that investment through an ongoing commitment to teaching and learning. On behalf of the people of Maine, I thank Dr. Kalikow for her contributions to our State and wish her all the best in the years to come.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, today I wish to offer my congratulations to John T. Cyr and Sons, Inc., on its 100th anniversary. This outstanding Maine company demonstrates why family businesses are so important to our Nation's economy and to communities in every State. The determination and vision that led to a century of success define America's entrepreneurial spirit. Sometime around 1903, John Thomas Cyr moved his family from Caribou, ME--my hometown--to Old Town, near Bangor, where he found work in a lumber mill. Nine years later, in 1912, at the age of 51, John T. Cyr struck out on his own. Joined by his son, Joseph, they started a livery stable and delivery business. What began with horses, buggies, and wagons is today a thriving enterprise of 22 luxury motor coaches, 200 school buses, and nearly 250 employees. A company that got its start hauling lumber for a local canoe factory now serves 17 school districts across Maine with an exemplary safety record. They offer tours throughout the United States and Canada from New York City at Christmas to Washington, D.C., in cherry blossom season. As a native of Aroostook County, I know how valuable their daily intercity service is to the towns and cities of northern Maine. Handed down and nurtured through the generations, this is a true family business, owned and operated by the founder's grandson, Joe Cyr, joined by his brother, Pete, son Mike, and daughter Becky. Their remarkable story of growth, of meeting challenges, and of delivering value was expertly told in a recent article in Maine Trails magazine. I would like to complement that account with my personal observations. Before coming to the Senate, I worked at Husson University in Bangor, where I had the pleasure of getting to know Joe Cyr, Class of 1962, and his wonderful wife, Sue, Class of 1965. Joe has been a longtime member of the Husson Board of Trustees, and Sue been a volunteer supporter of uncommon energy. Joe and Sue's generosity to Husson includes significant gifts to athletic programs, a new home for the university president, the annual fund, and most recently, the new Cyr Alumni Center. The countless ways they serve--from the Boys Scouts and the Y to St. Joseph Hospital--touch people of all ages. People throughout Maine are fortunate to have such a family as the Cyrs, but I am especially lucky--my summer camp on Cold Stream Pond is just down the road from theirs. As much as I cherish our time together, having dinner, playing cards, and enjoying the beautiful Maine summer evenings, I cherish even more being in the presence of those who give so much to others and who see the act of giving as the greatest reward. I am delighted to extend my congratulations to the Cyr family in their business's centennial year and to thank them for their contributions to the State of Maine. I ask that the Maine Trails article be printed in the Record. The article follows. [From the Maine Trails, Feb./Mar. 2012] Driving Through History (By Kathryn Buxton) From horse drawn wagons to modern coaches and school buses, Cyr Bus Line travels through history into an elite club of 100-year-old Maine businesses It's midday at Cyr Bus Line, and about a dozen drivers in black company jackets are gathered, waiting for the next wave of activity to begin. That's when the company's fleet of school buses head out to pick up students for the trip home from Old Town's high school, middle school and three elementary schools. A fresh layer of snow covers the ground outside, and everyone is alert and ready to get to work. Outside, a coach bus pulls in to the lot, returning from its daily run to Aroostook County. The bus will be washed down and ready for its 6 p.m. departure from downtown Bangor. It is a scene that has played out countless times over the past 100 years since John T. Cyr and his son Joseph founded the company on South Water Street in 1912. Previous to that, John had been working for the Jordan Lumber Company in Old Town. Joseph had been working for the Old Town Woolen Mill. They applied for a trucking license and were approved by the Old Town city council on May 21, 1912. John and Joseph had two horses and the company's frst jobs were hauling lumber for Old Town Canoe. The Cyrs also operated a livery stable at the family homestead on French Island (also known as Treat- Webster Island), and for many years, the Cyr stable was the go-to place if you needed a horse and buggy to visit friends or family. The company's wagons and carriages also delivered mail and served as hearses, transporting local citizens to their fnal resting place. Fathers and Sons John T. Cyr & Sons, Inc./Cyr Bus Line celebrates its 100th anniversary this year, putting it in an elite group of Maine companies that have been in business for a century or more. Old Town Canoe, located nearby in Old Town is one. Another is the famous outdoor retailer L.L. Bean, which as Mike Cyr is quick to point out, is also celebrating its 100th anniversary this year. ``Cyr Bus is a fxture here,'' said Mike Cyr, one of a fourth generation of Cyrs to work in the family business. ``A lot of people figured we had already been here for 100 years.'' For the Cyrs, a century of company history is inextricably meshed with the family history. Through the years many family members have left their mark on the business. Four of John's five sons--Joseph, Albert, Arthur and Harvey--all worked for the company in its infancy (Clibby, a ffth son who worked in the woolen mill, eventually became an Old Town firefighter). Albert, 19 and a weaver at the Old Town Woolen Mill in 1912, was a silent partner for many years, coming on board full- time as the business continued to grow through the 1920s. Arthur and Harvey, young children when their father and brothers founded the company, grew up in the business and eventually joined their brother Albert in running the company in the 1930s and 40s after their father and brother died unexpectedly in 1934. Harvey bought out his brothers in 1951. Today, the company is run by Harvey's son, Joe Cyr. His brother, Pete, works in the company's body shop. Joe's son, Mike, oversees the company's coach division and manages information technology--everything from the company's two-way radio system to its computer hardware and software. Daughter Becky Whitmore is the bookkeeper. Helping them these days, is general manager Rick Soules, who the Cyrs hired not quite two years ago. Bringing Rick in was a necessity as the company has grown and diversified, and as Joe, now 71, has begun to scale back the time he spends at the office. Working with family has always been one of the great joys of the business, according to family patriarch and company president, Joe Cyr, with the business officially for nearly 50 years. Joe drove trucks for H.E. Sargent and worked as a surveyor for James W. Sewall during the summers before coming to work at Cyr with his dad. His memories of working alongside family go even further back--to being with his dad in the office when he was six or seven, driving a company truck when he was 11 and washing buses as a kid. At 15, he was driving buses for the family concern. He also found time to get his degree from Old Town High School and a year of study at University of Maine at Farmington and another year and a half at Husson College. He left school and joined the company full-time in 1962 when a cousin who had been the company bookkeeper died. For a while, Joe was not only the bookkeeper, he served as the company mechanic, secretary and payroll clerk. In just a few years, Joe was running the company, and after his father Harvey died in 1967, he bought the business from his mother for $25,000. Looking back, Joe said he has never regretted the decision to spend his professional life at the helm of the family firm and he always has considered himself honored to work alongside his father, son, daughter, brother and cousins. ``Frankly, I feel pretty darn lucky,'' said Cyr talking from his winter home in Daytona Beach Shores, Florida where there is a small community of Old Town snowbirds. Joe started heading south in the winter 10 years ago, but he still maintains close contact with Mike, Rick Soules--Cyr's general manager--and others via phone and e-mail several times a day. And he reels off facts about the business in quickfire fashion. How many vehicles in the company fleet? ``250.'' How many coaches? ``22.'' How many square feet at the company's headquarters? ``We've got about 20,000 under cover there,'' said Cye, stopping only to calculate the many expansions they have made at the 10-acre site since 1980. milestones and challenges The company has lived through good times and bad. There was 1934 when the family's two male patriarchs died--John in May and Joseph in August. There were also two devastating fires at the company's headquarters on French Island. The first was in the early 1950s and the company garage and its full fleet of eight buses were destroyed. The second fire hit in 1970, destroying the company garage, an apartment over the garage and one bus. In both cases, the family and employees came together to get buses back on the road quickly. There were good times, as well. Nineteen hundred and twenty-two was an important landmark. That was when John and Joseph Cyr helped usher in the era of the automobile. They bought the company's first motorcars--Studebakers--to transport Old Town children to school. Four years later, after housing the company fleet at several different locations in Old Town, Cyr consolidated its operations at a single location on French Island. The area was growing, and by the early 1930s, cars were no longer large enough to transport all the students traveling to Old Town schools from Stillwater and Gillman Falls. So the city asked Cyr to buy a bus. Cyr also had a taxi service, begun soon after the company's founding, as well as freight hauling and storage services. By the late 1930s, brothers Albert, Arthur and Harvey were also operating a regular bus service connecting Old Town, Great Works, Milford and Bradley, with special runs to locations including Trenton and Green Lake. By the mid 1940s, the company's regular motor coach routes had expanded to include Old Town, Eddington, North Brewer and Bangor. The company also operated a limousine service, and during the war transported German prisoners of war for the U.S. Government to detention camps in the rural reaches of the state. In the late 1950s and early 60s, Harvey, now head of the company, expanded its stake in the school bus business. By 1962, Joe had joined his father, Harvey, in the business full-time, and John T. Cyr & Sons boasted a fleet of 12 buses, several cars and two dump trucks at its headquarters on French Island. In 1976, Joe purchased the fleet of Pinecrest Bus Service, the company that had been providing school bus service to the city of Brewer (two years later, Cyr bought Pinecrest's lot and garage). Then, Cyr bid for the contract to serve the Bangor school system in 1978. They won the business. The ramifcations were enormous for the small family-run firm. It required purchasing more than two dozen new school buses at a cost of about $17,000 each. It was one of the few times since Joe had taken the helm they had to borrow money, but it was, Mike recalled, a calculated risk his dad felt he had to take. ``He figured if he didn't do it, one of the big guys would come in and take the business,'' said Mike. That year, there was a 60-cent-per-gallon run up in fuel costs which caused several anxious hours for the Cyrs. At the time, fuel for buses was purchased by the bus company. Now, it is common for school systems to purchase their own fuel, and Joe Cyr said that adds more stability to contracts. Still, it all worked out well. ``I still hate to borrow money, though,'' admitted Joe recently. Perhaps the biggest milestone came when the city was in the midst of a two-decade effort to redevelop French Island that had, over the years, become increasingly overcrowded. As a result, Cyr moved its headquarters across the river to its current location at 153 Gilman Falls Avenue in Old Town in 1980. Long-time local residents can still remember the day in late October when the company's fleet of buses made their way across the bridge from the island to Cyr's new home on Gilman Falls Avenue. Over the years, the Cyrs have also been active in the community. The business has been a long-time member of the MBTA where Joe has served as a board member. Joe was for several years president of the Bangor Chamber of Commerce during the 1980s and has sat on several boards, including St. Joseph's Hospital and Merrill Merchant Bank. The family was a major contributor to the Cyr Family Field House at the Old Town-Orono YMCA completed in 2001. close at hand In 1984, Cyr took over the Aroostook County route, operated by Bangor & Aroostook Railroad (B & A) since 1957 when the railroad had ceased service to The County. The same day B & A shuttered its service, Cyr bought the firm's coach bus and hired its driver. Passengers didn't miss a day of service. Today Cyr continues to run the daily transportation lifeline to the county, connecting Bangor, Caribou, Fort Kent, Houlton, Howland, Limestone, Oakfield, Orono, Madawaska, Mars Hill, Medway, Presque Isle, Sherman and Van Buren. (The service, considered an essential transportation link, receives an operating subsidy from MaineDOT.) A Cyr bus departs Bangor every afternoon and makes the return trip from Presque Isle every morning. In 1990, the company purchased North-star Tours and began offering charter tours throughout the country and to Canada as Cyr Northstar Tours. In 2003, Cyr purchased Maine Line Tours & Charters, a South Portland-based division of Peter Pan Bus Lines. The move made John T. Cyr Maine's largest charter operation, and in 2004, the company was honored as Metro magazine's tour operator of the year. Nonetheless, the long hours and splitting energies between operations in Old Town and Southern Maine took its toll. The Cyrs sold the South Portland charter operation in 2007. ``It was profitable,'' remembered Mike of the decision to sell. ``But we just weren't comfortable being in two places at one time.'' Today the company operations have become increasingly complex, with three divisions and increasing federal regulations regarding hours of service for the company's long-distance drivers and expanded environmental requirements on buses. At the same time, this year, the Cyrs estimate, their buses will log more than 3 million miles. Mike describes the Cyr philosophy as one that has grown from his dad's unique combination of conservative fiscal approach, a hands-on understanding of the business and a willingness to step up when someone presents a challenge. Much of their business--in both the school bus and tour charter divisions-- comes to them through word-of-mouth. ``My dad hardly ever says `no,' '' said Mike. ``Someone asks us to do something, and we fgure out how to get it done.'' ``We could have grown a lot more,'' said Joe. ``Instead we take what comes and do the best job we can. We're not trying to be the biggest.''

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce The Clean Cookstoves Support Act, which addresses a serious global environmental and public health issue. I am pleased to be joined in this effort by my friend and colleague, Senator Durbin. Nearly half the world's population cooks food over open fires or inefficient, polluting, and unsafe cookstoves, using firewood, dung, or coal as fuel. Smoke from these traditional cookstoves and open fires is associated with a number of chronic and acute diseases, with women and young children affected disproportionately. The World Health Organization estimates cookstove smoke to be one of the top five threats to public health in poor, developing countries. This smoke may account for nearly two million deaths annually in the developing world, which is more than the deaths from malaria, tuberculosis, or HIV. Traditional cookstoves also create serious environmental impacts. The amount of biomass cooking fuel required each year can reach up to two tons per family, and local environmental degradation can result where demand for fuel outstrips the natural regrowth of resources. Recent studies show that emissions of black carbon, or common soot, from biomass cookstoves significantly contribute to climate change, second only to carbon dioxide in impact. These stoves should be replaced with modern alternatives to reverse these alarming health and environmental trends. Fortunately, modern stoves, designed to burn fuel efficiently, can eliminate up to 90 percent of the black carbon produced during cooking and home heating. This would be relatively inexpensive and could be done quickly it is what scientists call the ``low-hanging fruit'' of environmental fixes. Through the leadership of Secretary of State Hilary Clinton and the United Nations Foundation, the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves was formed in 2010. Recognizing the severity of the global health and environmental issues, this public-private partnership aims to save lives, improve livelihoods, empower women, and combat pollution by creating a thriving global market for clean and efficient household cooking solutions. The Alliance partners are working to help overcome the market barriers that currently impede the production, deployment, and use of clean cookstoves in the developing world. To assist in this important endeavor, several Federal agencies the Departments of State, Energy, and Health and Human Services, including NIH and CDC, the United States Agency for International Development, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation have committed to contribute to the Alliance in three key areas. First: support for research and development to improve design, lower costs, and develop global industry standards and testing protocols for cookstoves. Second: diplomatic engagement to encourage a commercial market for clean stoves and promote several strategies, including reducing trade barriers, promoting consumer awareness, and improving access to financing. Third: the launch of international development projects to distribute the clean stoves to targeted areas, including refugee camps, disaster relief efforts, and long-term aid programs, as well as projects aimed at women and girls. These contributions will assist the Alliance in reaching its goal of spurring the adoption of clean cookstoves in 100 million households by 2020. Our legislation reinforces the commitment these U.S. agencies have made to the Alliance and requires the Secretary of State in consultation with the relevant Federal agencies, and in coordination with relevant international nongovernmental organizations and private and governmental entities to work to advance the goals of the Alliance. In addition, our bill formally authorizes the agency's funding commitments to ensure that these crucial pledges toward preventing unnecessary illness and reducing pollution around the globe are met. By supporting the work of the Alliance to replace primitive stoves with modern versions that emit far less soot, this legislation would directly benefit some of the world's poorest people and reduce harmful pollution that affects us all. This measure addresses an important global pollutant and alleviates a serious public health and environmental concern affecting developing nations. I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting The Clean Cookstoves Support Act.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce The Clean Cookstoves Support Act, which addresses a serious global environmental and public health issue. I am pleased to be joined in this effort by my friend and colleague, Senator Durbin. Nearly half the world's population cooks food over open fires or inefficient, polluting, and unsafe cookstoves, using firewood, dung, or coal as fuel. Smoke from these traditional cookstoves and open fires is associated with a number of chronic and acute diseases, with women and young children affected disproportionately. The World Health Organization estimates cookstove smoke to be one of the top five threats to public health in poor, developing countries. This smoke may account for nearly two million deaths annually in the developing world, which is more than the deaths from malaria, tuberculosis, or HIV. Traditional cookstoves also create serious environmental impacts. The amount of biomass cooking fuel required each year can reach up to two tons per family, and local environmental degradation can result where demand for fuel outstrips the natural regrowth of resources. Recent studies show that emissions of black carbon, or common soot, from biomass cookstoves significantly contribute to climate change, second only to carbon dioxide in impact. These stoves should be replaced with modern alternatives to reverse these alarming health and environmental trends. Fortunately, modern stoves, designed to burn fuel efficiently, can eliminate up to 90 percent of the black carbon produced during cooking and home heating. This would be relatively inexpensive and could be done quickly it is what scientists call the ``low-hanging fruit'' of environmental fixes. Through the leadership of Secretary of State Hilary Clinton and the United Nations Foundation, the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves was formed in 2010. Recognizing the severity of the global health and environmental issues, this public-private partnership aims to save lives, improve livelihoods, empower women, and combat pollution by creating a thriving global market for clean and efficient household cooking solutions. The Alliance partners are working to help overcome the market barriers that currently impede the production, deployment, and use of clean cookstoves in the developing world. To assist in this important endeavor, several Federal agencies the Departments of State, Energy, and Health and Human Services, including NIH and CDC, the United States Agency for International Development, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation have committed to contribute to the Alliance in three key areas. First: support for research and development to improve design, lower costs, and develop global industry standards and testing protocols for cookstoves. Second: diplomatic engagement to encourage a commercial market for clean stoves and promote several strategies, including reducing trade barriers, promoting consumer awareness, and improving access to financing. Third: the launch of international development projects to distribute the clean stoves to targeted areas, including refugee camps, disaster relief efforts, and long-term aid programs, as well as projects aimed at women and girls. These contributions will assist the Alliance in reaching its goal of spurring the adoption of clean cookstoves in 100 million households by 2020. Our legislation reinforces the commitment these U.S. agencies have made to the Alliance and requires the Secretary of State in consultation with the relevant Federal agencies, and in coordination with relevant international nongovernmental organizations and private and governmental entities to work to advance the goals of the Alliance. In addition, our bill formally authorizes the agency's funding commitments to ensure that these crucial pledges toward preventing unnecessary illness and reducing pollution around the globe are met. By supporting the work of the Alliance to replace primitive stoves with modern versions that emit far less soot, this legislation would directly benefit some of the world's poorest people and reduce harmful pollution that affects us all. This measure addresses an important global pollutant and alleviates a serious public health and environmental concern affecting developing nations. I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting The Clean Cookstoves Support Act.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, today I wish to offer my congratulations to John T. Cyr and Sons, Inc., on its 100th anniversary. This outstanding Maine company demonstrates why family businesses are so important to our Nation's economy and to communities in every State. The determination and vision that led to a century of success define America's entrepreneurial spirit. Sometime around 1903, John Thomas Cyr moved his family from Caribou, ME--my hometown--to Old Town, near Bangor, where he found work in a lumber mill. Nine years later, in 1912, at the age of 51, John T. Cyr struck out on his own. Joined by his son, Joseph, they started a livery stable and delivery business. What began with horses, buggies, and wagons is today a thriving enterprise of 22 luxury motor coaches, 200 schoolbuses, and nearly 250 employees. A company that got its start hauling lumber for a local canoe factory now serves 17 school districts across Maine with an exemplary safety record. They offer tours throughout the United States and Canada--from New York City at Christmas to Washington, DC, in cherry blossom season. As a native of Aroostook County, I know how valuable their daily intercity service is to the towns and cities of northern Maine. Handed down and nurtured through the generations, this is a true family business, owned and operated by the founder's grandson, Joe Cyr, joined by his brother, Pete, son Mike, and daughter Becky. Their remarkable story of growth, of meeting challenges, and of delivering value was expertly told in a recent article in Maine Trails magazine. I would like to complement that account with my personal observations. Before coming to the Senate, I worked at Husson University in Bangor, where I had the pleasure of getting to know Joe Cyr, class of 1962, and his wonderful wife Sue, class of 1965. Joe has been a longtime member of the Husson Board of Trustees, and Sue has been a volunteer supporter of uncommon energy. Joe and Sue's generosity to Husson includes significant gifts to athletic programs, a new home for the university president, the annual fund, and most recently, the new Cyr Alumni Center. The countless ways they serve--from the Boys Scouts and the Y to St. Joseph Hospital--touch people of all ages. People throughout Maine are fortunate to have such a family as the Cyrs, but I am especially lucky--my summer camp on Cold Stream Pond is just down the road from theirs. As much as I cherish our time together, having dinner, playing cards, and enjoying the beautiful Maine summer evenings, I cherish even more being in the presence of those who give so much to others and who see the act of giving as the greatest reward. I am delighted to extend my congratulations to the Cyr family in their business's centennial year and to thank them for their contributions to the State of Maine.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, this is an important victory for the U.S. Postal Service and the American economy. The Postal Service is the linchpin of a $1.1 trillion mailing and mail-related industry that employs nearly 8.7 million Americans in fields as diverse as mail, printing, catalog companies and paper manufacturing. Those industries and the jobs they sustain are in jeopardy. The Postal Service lost $13.6 billion over the past two years and has seen a 26 percent drop in first class mail since 2006. But today we have begun to right the ship. There is still much work to be done, including working with our colleagues in the House to present the President with a bill he can sign. Nevertheless, I appreciate the solid bipartisan support that this bill received. It's gratifying that so many of my colleagues understand that the Postal Service should not choose the destructive path of cutting service and raising prices. This vote sends the message that we can't allow the Postal Service to drive customers away to other communication options. Once they leave the mail system, they won't be coming back, and the Postal Service will be sucked further into a death spiral. As we move toward a conference with the House, we must continue to resist ill-conceived policy changes. We must avoid short term ``fixes'' that undermine service and thus jeopardize the long-term sustainability of this American institution. Today's vote is also a win for bipartisanship. Americans are rightly frustrated about what many feel is a dysfunctional Congress. With enormous problems facing our country and Congress having little to show by way of accomplishments, the process we've just completed on this bill demonstrates that it is sometimes possible for Congress to do more and bicker less. Today we see what can happen when Republicans and Democrats work together; when Senators from big states and small find common ground. We can achieve important policy for those who sent us here. I want to thank Senator McConnell for working with us so well to preserve an amendment process that fostered healthy debate and allowed our colleagues to get votes on their priorities. Of course, I must also thank Majority Leader Reid for pushing hard to resolve differences in order to create a successful process once the bill was brought to the floor. I know that we would not have had the support that we had for final passage of this bill without the Leaders working together to ensure an amendment process that was fair and reasonable. As always, Chairman Lieberman's commitment to bipartisanship is unmatched, and it's making him extremely busy and productive in his last year in the Senate. This marks the third bill we have shepherded through to Senate passage in this Congress. I hope to work with him successfully on at least one more bill--cybersecurity. Senator Scott Brown has already built an impressive record as a key voice for both postal reform and the STOCK Act. I appreciate his partnership on both of these important measures. He has become an independent leader for common sense and I thank him. I appreciate Senator Carper's leadership on this bill. We have been working together on postal issues for many years, and I am grateful for his expertise and dedication. My bipartisan cosponsors and I consulted extensively with postal customers, both business and residential, postal workers, and local communities deeply committed to preserving their postal facilities. We could not have gotten this bill passed through the Senate without their important contributions, cooperation, creativity and support. This bill would not have been possible without the hard work and dedication of our staff, and I'd like to recognize some of them personally. Katy French, John Kane, Katie Adams, and Cassie D'Souza on my staff, have been working for four months as if this bill were coming to the floor the next day. My Committee staff director, Nick Rossi, press secretary, E.R. Anderson, and other members of our team have ably supported them. Justin Stevens on Senator Scott Brown's staff has been an incredible partner as well. Their colleagues across the aisle were models of hard work and collegiality, and I want to thank them, especially the Chairman's staff, Mike Alexander, Beth Grossman, Kenya Wiley, and Larry Novey, and John Kilvington of Senator Carper's staff. I know it's been hard work, but the staff have the highest level of professionalism, collegiality, patience with each other and the process and it's made the challenge of bringing this bill to the floor a rewarding one. Finally, I can't thank enough the long-suffering floor staff, who have been incredibly patient, helpful and have gone out of their way to serve many competing agendas with grace. Thank you especially to David Schiappa with Senator McConnell's staff and his team in the Republican cloakroom, and Gary Myrick and his team, with the Majority Leader. Our work isn't done. Today is just the first step on a long road ahead. We must move a bill to the President's desk. The House has a bill that awaits floor consideration. We will come together for a conference process. More compromises will have to be made along the way. But we can't forget the urgency of our task--saving the Postal Service for the next generation of Americans.

Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I believe the odds of our getting the 60 votes for final passage are increased if I make my statement later, rather than delivering it right now. I will deliver my statement after the vote, but I do wish to thank Senator Lieberman, Senator Scott Brown, Senator Carper, all the staffs who have worked so hard. Today, assuming we get those 60 votes, we have proven the Senate can tackle an enormous problem in a bipartisan way and make real progress on an issue that matters to our economy and to the American people. Thank you, Madam President.

Ms. COLLINS. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, I urge support of Senator DeMint's amendment. It protects the first amendment rights of postal workers by requiring that unions obtain prior approval from workers before spending their dues on political purposes. I think this is probably the one and only amendment where I will diverge with my chairman, but I do urge support of Senator DeMint's amendment.