Hillary Clinton

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, September 18, 2008, at a time to be determined.

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, September 18, 2008 at 2:30 p.m. to hold a closed hearing.

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Indian Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, September 18, at 9:30 a.m. in room 562 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, to conduct an executive business meeting on Thursday, September 18, 2008, at 10 a.m. in room SH-216 of the Hart Senate Office Building.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Madam President, I did not know I had a time restraint. A new government entity such as the HOLC with focus on attacking the source of the problem can serve a purpose of clearing a lot of those toxic mortgage securities from the market. We know there will not be any semblance of a normal or orderly marketplace until we have found a way to resolve these mortgage securities that are metastasizing in the bottom of our markets. By taking this paper out of the market and quarantining it in this new entity, we will give the market breathing room to recover. We also will be able to set the stage for an orderly sale of these securities and in return allow some of them to recover and regain some of their value. Perhaps as importantly, not only would our financial markets stabilize, but so would our housing markets. This is an extraordinary measure, but it is not without precedent. This is the greatest market upheaval since the Great Depression. We are, indeed, in crisis, and in times of crisis there are opportunities for leadership. Congress can show the American people that leadership by working with the President to embrace this bold proposal to take immediate action to address the abusive and manipulative short-selling practices that are rattling the markets, threatening firms and jobs, and sending shock waves across the broader economy. I commend the SEC for yesterday tightening rules against manipulative short selling. The SEC's rulings are a positive step in curbing the heightened volatility casting uncertainty on domestic markets and financial institutions. However, the Commission did not go far enough. As a Senator from New York, I have a special duty to represent the workers of the financial services industry and to try with all my might to retain New York City as the financial capital of the world. The abuses that have disrupted the markets today will impact the lives of so many far beyond New York. So I think it is necessary for the SEC to take steps similar to the emergency rule it imposed this past July when the Commission ``concluded that there now exists a substantial threat of sudden and excessive fluctuations of securities prices generally and disruption in the functioning of the securities markets that could threaten fair and orderly markets.'' Conditions now pose a greater threat than they did in July. Several of the institutions that the Commission sought to insulate from abuse do not even exist or certainly not in the same form they did 2 months ago. The situation is evolving rapidly, so we need to stay a step ahead, not a step behind. I urge the Commission, as I expressed yesterday in a letter to Chairman Cox, to move toward a temporary moratorium on all the abusive and manipulative short-sale practices associated with ``substantial financial firms,'' such as those the Commission identified in July. A temporary moratorium would allow the marketplace to take a step back, take a deep breath, and it would allow the Commission and other regulators to identify and weed out the sources of these abusive transactions. Moreover, the Commission should give close consideration to the many calls for the immediate restoration of the uptick rule, whose repeal has been linked to the recent market volatility and proliferation of these short-sale transactions. I know there are technical problems in moving toward digitalized trading, but we ought to figure out how to handle that. Third, I am calling on President Bush to convene an economic summit that brings together leaders in the administration and Congress with lenders, consumer advocates, nonprofits, financial institutions, and all the stakeholders. Such a summit, I believe, would restore confidence and demonstrate that the entire country is focused on solving the problem we face. Fourth, I want to propose once again that we aggressively pursue and encourage mortgage modifications. I have introduced such legislation. I believe it is important. Madam President, 10 million homeowners are underwater today, carrying more than $2 trillion in mortgage debt. That is a huge anchor on our markets and our economy. Modification done right is a strategy that serves lenders and borrowers, as well as the broader markets. Fifth, it is clear that for too long, the rapid evolution of the securities and banking industry overwhelmed our regulatory framework, resulting in an entire shadow banking system that operated outside of oversight and without accountability. It is not enough to shift responsibility or move lines on a flow chart. We need a new regulatory framework. We have been living off the one from the Great Depression. Now is the time to create a new framework. Sixth, I proposed the Corporate Executive Compensation Accountability and Transparency Act to impose new transparency rules on executive pay and the accounting techniques that hide compensation and provide shareholders a say in executive compensation packages. Finally, and seventh, I am proposing that we require any financial institutions borrowing money from the Federal Reserve's new lending facilities to open their books and ensure accountability and transparency to identify unsound practices. These banks and other entities have tapped the Fed's new lending windows for over $300 billion in capital. They shifted a lot of that risk onto the backs of our taxpayers. These are unprecedented interventions, and we should make sure these companies are not using taxpayers' dollars to subsidize golden parachutes or risky investments, throwing your good money after bad. If we are bailing you out, we deserve to know exactly your liabilities, and you have to be part of this new regulatory framework. This crisis has not abated. It is time for us to start acting like Americans again. There isn't anything we can't solve once we put our minds to it. For that we need leadership. I know that our leader, Senator Reid, has said the Senate will remain in pro forma session. We are ready to work with the administration, to work with the other stakeholders to change course and end the failed economic policies and failure of regulatory oversight that brought us to this point. There is much more we need to do. Individuals have to take responsibility, we know that, but in this dynamic environment, we must work together to stabilize the market, tackle the root causes that have festered too long, and restore confidence in our economy. We will weather this storm, but let's do it sooner instead of later. Let's try to save as many boats in the water right now instead of cleaning up the wreckage on the banks. I believe we can do that. I thank you, Madam President, for your attention. I hope we will be able to start seeing action very soon. I yield the floor.

Mrs. CLINTON. I ask unanimous consent for an additional 10 minutes.

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, we have seen the financial landscape in our country reshaped overnight. The titans of Wall Street have been rendered insolvent or even bankrupt. These are firms that survived the Great Depression, world wars, the attacks of September 11, but were no match for a mounting credit crisis that was allowed to escalate in the shadows of our financial system. The Federal Government has taken over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Bear Stearns had to be rescued by JPMorgan Chase, after the Federal Government guaranteed J.P. Morgan's investment. While they are in talks to keep part of the company viable, Lehman Brothers has declared the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history. Merrill lynch has been purchased by Bank of America, and the Federal Government has agreed to rescue AIG. This past Monday, we saw the largest drop in the Dow Jones Industrial Average since 9/11. Now even money market funds are affected; for only the second time in our history, one has been valued at less than 100 cents on the dollar. Alan Greenspan called this a ``once in a century event.'' In my State of New York, tens of thousands of hard-working employees have lost their jobs. The livelihoods of tens of thousands more who depend on Wall Street's economy are threatened as well. New York City and New York State, already facing serious economic and fiscal challenges, will now be forced to contend with a battered Wall Street, the lifeblood of our State's economy. The sudden collapse of these firms and the Government takeover of some has shaken our markets and buffeted the economy as a whole. Many are now asking: What is next? I know that New Yorkers and other Americans are deeply concerned and more than a little bewildered. As our markets have grown more complex and interconnected globally, so, too, have the crises that have emerged. We are still sorting out the details. One of the consequences of the secrecy and lack of oversight under the Bush administration is that we do not know what we do not know. But it is important to recognize what we do know about what went wrong so we can assess what needs to be done right now to make it right. What we have seen over the course of the last 8 years is an administration that refused to recognize the threats that lurked in our economy--no matter what lurked just beneath the surface or what problems were facing middle-class families. We know that many CEOs are paying lower tax rates than their receptionists. We know that President Bush and those who carry his mantle seek to lower those taxes even further. Middle-class families have seen their wages decline, even as the cost of living has skyrocketed. This administration has the worst job creation record in 70 years. Millions of families were locked into ballooning and unaffordable adjustable rate loans as this administration stood by denying there was a crisis. Regulations designed to keep pace with the markets have been steadily chipped away by Washington Republicans even as companies experimented to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars in ever-more complex and risky financial instruments. Now, we were reassured that the risk was too diversified and investments too sophisticated to put our economy in jeopardy. Meanwhile, behind closed doors, the cracks were showing as the value of mortgage-based securities slipped day by day. And the President and his supporters in Congress repeatedly chanted--and still chant today--the mantra that the fundamentals of our economy are strong. The administration waxed philosophic when middle-class families started facing foreclosures at record levels. The administration and its allies derided my proposals over the last 2 years to offer assistance to troubled homeowners seeking refinancing as a ``bailout.'' They dismissed my concerns and the concerns of millions of Americans even as the storm clouds gathered. They said they didn't believe the Government should intervene and provide borrowers an affordable opportunity to avoid foreclosure. Even when I and others warned the Bush administration repeatedly from the start of this crisis, that decisive action was demanded immediately to help families stay in their homes, that that was the best way to stave off a deepening economic crisis, their only responses were predictions for a ``soft landing'' and that the crisis could be contained. As I traveled throughout our country, I could see that no soft landing was forthcoming. Many families, hundreds and even thousands of miles from Wall Street, were having their lives turned upside down by the home mortgage crisis and the ripple effect being felt throughout the economy as a consequence of the broken economic policies of the last 8 years. Unfortunately, the Bush administration waited until this past summer to admit that massive housing relief was necessary. The administration finally supported, in concept, much of what I had proposed--mortgage modifications, freezes for unreasonable mortgage rate increases, and an expanded role for the Federal Housing Administration. But their response was halfhearted, without adequate resources or a commitment to enforcement. So the home mortgage crisis slowly but surely eroded the value of risky debt instruments upon which Wall Street firms were dependent. The house of houses of cards began to fall. My proposals, as well as those of others, were falsely greeted as too much, too soon. Now we are forced to reckon with too little, too late. When giant Wall Street firms revealed their dire straits and turned to this administration for the exact same help as we had sought for middle-class families--discounted loans, loan modifications, and Government-backed lending to weather the storm--Adam Smith was nowhere in sight. Taxpayers have loaned these banks upwards of half a trillion dollars. After years of laissez-faire policies for the middle class, the Bush administration has acted on behalf of Wall Street, with the largest and most significant Federal interventions in the history of our modern financial system. The largest banks in the world could have closed-door meetings with the White House and Federal Reserve and Treasury Department to discuss their bailout options, but millions of homeowners with mortgages worth more than their homes or who are facing default and foreclosure don't have the same opportunity. This administration seems to be, once again, paralyzed. I represent both the workers and the homeowners and the investment firms. I wish we had taken action long before this, for the sake of all of my constituents. But now we must have a concerted, focused effort. I don't believe we can wait until the next President. I am extremely hopeful and optimistic that we will have a President who will work with us to resolve our economic challenges, but I don't think we can wait. However, I do believe we can avoid a deepening crisis. We can take steps right now to address the root causes of what is taking place in our economy to stem the tide of foreclosures, mortgage defaults, and the aggregating consequences in the credit markets, on Wall Street, and throughout the global economy. But we must cast aside the haphazard, halfhearted approach of this administration and bring every stakeholder to the table to seek out and implement the right solutions. We must be as vigilant on behalf of homeowners and middle-class families as we are on behalf of Wall Street firms. We must chart a new course based on the facts at hand, not the ideology at work for 8 long years. We have tried being reactive. It is now time to be decisive. No option should be off the table--certainly not because they don't fit into a narrow ideological prism that this administration has abandoned for some at the first sign of trouble. Ideologues in Washington or in the market who thought that the only danger to the marketplace was the Federal Government are now going hat-in-hand to that same Government seeking help to stay afloat. So to those who suggest that the steps taken thus far are enough, let me be clear: We may need to take even more significant steps to avoid a self-sustaining cycle of depressed home prices and foreclosures, with the consequent effect on the entire marketplace. We have already pumped hundreds of billions of dollars of liquidity into the markets, but we still cannot see the end of this crisis. The biggest problem now is that our entire financial market is anchored by the mortgage securities that are untouchable. We have seen the banks and the financial institutions that had the largest exposure to these instruments among the first to fail. Now we have begun to see some of the mightiest institutions--even those making a profit--fall by the wayside and the market thrown into upheaval, and others the target of predatory short-sellers. The Federal Reserve has used virtually every arrow in its quiver, from rate cuts, opening its lending windows, and, in desperation, has even created some new arrows through its new lending facilities. By some estimates, the Fed has put out more than half a trillion dollars through discounted loans, bailouts, and takeovers to stabilize the market and the economy. While necessary to prevent even deeper disaster, we have seen that the benefits of these actions have had limited effect. This situation reminds me of that old fable where people are standing by the side of a river and they keep seeing babies being rushed down the river in the current. They desperately reach out and try to save as many babies as possible. Day after day, they are reaching out. They get new tools, they build a bridge, they get a ladder, and they are constantly trying to get to those babies, hoping they can save many of them. Finally, someone walks up and says: Who is throwing them in? Go upriver and find out the real problem and stop that. The real problem has always been the way our home mortgage system got totally out of whack, with new kinds of instruments that were sold many times over, with very little regard to the realities of life, human nature, and the inevitable ups and downs in the economy, with the result that until we reach in and fix the home mortgage crisis--and we can bail out everybody from here until kingdom come--we will not get a handle on this economic crisis. Here is what I believe we should do: First, in light of historic bank failures, even with the largest Federal intervention in the history of the mortgage market, we need a government entity, a modern-day homeowners loan corporation, referred to as HOLC, or we need to build on the Resolution Trust Corporation created to help deal with the savings and loan crisis. I personally believe and was among the very first to suggest that a HOLC, a homeowners loan corporation, could be a preferable way of unfreezing and beginning to fix our struggling mortgage market. Some of my colleagues and many other respected economists and Government officials have called for the creation of an entity like the Resolution Trust Corporation which was created after the savings and loan crisis to liquidate in an orderly way the virtually worthless assets that the failed S&Ls held. Yesterday in the Wall Street Journal, Paul Volcker, Eugene Ludwig, and Nicholas Brady made such a proposal. They said a HOLC, RTC--we have to come up with an entity that will assume these debts and burdens and begin to work our way out. Last spring, when I called for a modern version of the HOLC--that is the Depression-era entity that bought up old mortgages and issued more affordable ones in their stead--most people didn't pay much attention. But I think it is important to note that by the time the HOLC closed its books, that agency had turned a small profit and helped over a million people keep their homes. And this was 70 years ago. Our population has grown dramatically. Obviously, if we did it right, we would be able to save a lot of homes, and I think if it is administered correctly, it could be actually a net expenditure or even winner for the Federal Government. With the FHA reforms I long championed and adopted this past summer in our omnibus housing bill, the FHA could be a modern home ownership lending corporation. But we need to look to new ways to revive and, if necessary, create a new market for mortgage securities based on sound accounting, transparent recordkeeping, and responsible lending.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce a resolution that recognizes the importance of connecting foster youth to internship and employment opportunities. I thank Congressmen Cardoza, McDermott, and Fattah for raising this important matter in the House of Representatives, and I am proud to give voice to the issue in the Senate. According to the most recent statistics available, 26,000 youth aged out of foster care in fiscal year 2006. Though many of these youth have characteristics that make them ideal for employment, research shows they have few resources for self-sufficiency and are less likely to be regularly employed than their counterparts in the general population. Because of the instability they experience in foster care, these young adults do not have access to the same kinds of family and community resources that often link young people to jobs and internships. That is why I am introducing a resolution today recognizing how critical it is for foster youth to be connected to internship and employment opportunities as they transition from foster care to life on their own. This resolution expresses the importance of linking these youth to the workforce through internships and encourages employers to increase their hiring of former foster youth. Throughout my career, I have been an advocate for foster youth. As First Lady, I worked towards enacting the Foster Care Independence Act of 1999, legislation that doubled funding for the Federal Independent Living Program and helps youth in foster care earn a high school diploma, participate in vocational training or education, and learn daily living skills. The legislation also extends services to youth up to age 21, which enables more of these young adults to obtain a college education and allows states to provide them with financial assistance as they learn skills to enter the workforce. In the Senate, I have introduced legislation addressing the needs of foster youth. Most recently, I introduced the Focusing Investments and Resources for a Safe Transition (FIRST) Act, legislation that enables states to establish Individual Development Accounts for youth aging out of foster care. Over the years, I have hosted several foster youth interns in my Senate office through programs sponsored by the Orphan Foundation of America and the Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute. I know firsthand that these individuals have extraordinary talent and potential, and have seen many of them go on to graduate school, law school, and the workforce; flourished by the experience. Without meaningful connections to employment, however, many foster youth will experience obstacles to building successful, independent lives. I encourage my colleagues to participate in the various internship programs that bring these young and talented individuals to work in the Congress and it is my hope that my colleagues will join me in expressing the Senate's support for foster youth as these young adults strive toward bright futures.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, there is obviously a lot of discussion and even frustration on the floor, certainly from our side of the aisle. It appears as though there is not going to be a meeting of the minds on this important legislation. It is deeply disturbing because as we have been speaking today, in my State of New York, a lot of people finished work, started driving home, looked at their gas gauge, and realized they were going to have to stop and fill up either for tonight or for going to work tomorrow. They experienced what people are experiencing across America: the shock of the rising gas prices which in New York are now an average of $4.27 a gallon. That is more than $1 higher than a year ago. Every extra dollar per gallon costs the average family of four an extra $1,500 a year. That is $1,500 that can't be saved for college or retirement. That is $1,500 that can't be used to buy groceries, clothes, or school supplies. That is $1,500 that can't help pay for health care or house payments. That is $1,500 that the people I represent don't have. It not just lying around waiting to be used or spent on some luxury. It really goes to the heart of whether people are going to be able to meet their daily obligations. Statewide in our State, every dollar that gas prices increase costs the New York economy $6 billion in added expenses for our drivers. That is $6 billion that can't be used to grow local economies, to support local businesses or stimulate new jobs. Our farmers are hurting as higher energy costs shrink profit margins, even with higher market prices. Our commuters and our truckers are hurting. Tourism is hurting. I am hearing from New Yorkers every day who depend on tourism at local marinas, for example, where the money has dried up. Meanwhile, we are sending $1.7 billion a day out of our country, more than $600 billion a year. We know where that money is going. It is going to places that are unstable, to governments that use our dollars against us, our allies, and our interests around the world. Clearly, we need a short-term strategy and a long-term strategy. That should be self-evident. In the short term, we have to lower these prices and get relief to the farmers and the truckers, the small businesses, the hard-working families. In the long term, what is required is nothing short of an energy revolution. But there is no way for us to do that energy revolution unless we have the political will to begin acting now. I believe this debate is too important to be sidetracked by slogans or proposals such as opening our coastal waters to drilling. So if the question is, as it should be, what can we do to help lower gas prices right now, drilling is the wrong answer. It will do nothing right now. It is literally a shell game or an ExxonMobil game. It is designed to serve the political interests of vulnerable Republicans and the financial interests of profit-rich oil companies. Average Americans will not see a dime. That is not just my opinion. The Bush administration's own study found that drilling would not have an impact for more than 20 years, and in 20 years, the impact on prices will be insignificant. If the question is, as it should be, what can we do as a nation to end our dependence on foreign oil and begin to harness clean, renewable energy, drilling is the wrong answer again. Even if we drill for oil off our east and west coasts, the most oil we could generate, when the rigs come online in the year 2030, is 200,000 barrels a day. We import 12.4 million barrels a day; 200,000 barrels is barely a drop in that barrel. I heard one of my colleagues, the Senator from Washington, Ms. Cantwell, speaking on the floor earlier today, say that 200,000 barrels a day could be achieved right now by increasing the pressure in the tires of the cars and the trucks we drive. So what are the answers? First, how do we help reduce gas prices right now? That is what my folks are asking me. They want relief now, not next year or in 30 years but now. I believe we can lower gas prices in the very near term by taking smart, practical, sensible steps to address rampant oil speculation. We have all heard recent testimony from financial experts, oil industry executives, the airline industry, consumer advocates--virtually everyone has said that speculation in oil futures is driving up prices beyond what supply and demand justifies. Some experts believe speculation accounts for as much as 50 percent of the current price of oil. Others argue it is less. But many experts still agree it is having a significant impact. I recognize there are companies that use oil and need to use futures markets to hedge against price spikes. All of us in this Chamber believe in free and open markets. But when speculation is allowed to run roughshod over the economy, with little oversight and even less transparency, when backroom deals line the pockets of speculators while sending gas prices soaring, literally taking money out of the pockets of consumers, then we have to do something. We have to ensure that our markets are honest, open, fair, transparent, and accountable. That is why I support granting the Commodity Futures Trading Commission greater authority to regulate trading in these markets. I urge my Republican colleagues to join in this effort. We could pass a bill tomorrow and have it on the President's desk before the recess that would immediately give agency watchdogs new tools to crack down on unfair, unbridled, unregulated speculation. While we are relieving pressures on the markets as a whole, we need to target relief directly to people who are struggling. I am proud to support $2.5 billion in energy relief to low-income families in New York and across America. It is shameful that after all the hand- wringing about gas prices and energy prices, Republicans in the Senate blocked this bill last week. We need to move ahead with this legislation, and I hope we will do so before the August recess. Second--and this question is tougher--how do we break the bonds of the fossil fuel economy? I believe America will and it must embrace this historic challenge because it is a historic opportunity. We can create at least 5 million new jobs, green jobs, we can tackle climate change, and we can end our dependence on foreign oil. Last year, we passed landmark legislation to increase fuel economy standards for the first time in 30 years. That will save millions of barrels of oil a day. It is an important step forward, but what we need is a giant leap. I have proposed a $50 billion strategic energy fund paid for by eliminating tax breaks for the oil companies and making sure they pay their fair share for drilling on public lands. The fund could be used to support the deployment of wind, solar, geothermal, biofuels, and other clean energy technologies available right now. The fund would invest in new ideas and new research to encourage our best and brightest to think outside the box and outside the tanks. But that is just the beginning. Let's create the right tax incentives to promote renewable sources of electricity production. That is something on which Al Gore and T. Boone Pickens agree. If that is not consensus, I don't know what is. Unfortunately, Republican opposition in the Senate prevented the passage of energy tax reform, and the American economy is paying the price. One study found that blocking these kinds of tax incentives will cost 116,000 U.S. jobs and nearly $19 billion in U.S. investment in 1 year alone, while we fall further and further behind in the race to lead the world in clean energy technologies. Let's accelerate the development and deployment of plug-in hybrid vehicles by investing in research and consumer tax credits. Electricity is generated nearly 100 percent from domestic sources, and we have enormous untapped renewable resources we can use to create electricity without contributing to climate change. A recent study showed that a vehicle powered by electricity releases one-third less global warming pollution into the environment than a gas-powered vehicle even if the electricity comes from mostly coal-fired powerplants. This will save the American people money. According to one estimate, to travel as far as you would on $4-a-gallon gas, you only need $1 of electricity, and that is a bargain. We don't need to create a whole new infrastructure the way we would for natural gas or hydrogen. A recent study by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory found that 70 percent of the 220 million cars, light trucks, SUVs, and vans on the road today could be run on power drawn from existing powerplants and grids. This is an important point. Drilling may produce 200,000 barrels of oil each day at most in 2030, but if we used electricity to power our passenger cars by moving toward plug-in vehicles, we would save 6.5 million barrels of oil every single day, fully half of our oil imports. So let's move toward a stronger, smarter, more flexible electricity grid that increasingly relies on wind, solar, and other renewables, while employing smart-grid technology to reduce peak demand and conserve energy. These are solutions that will work. They are solutions that embrace the challenge instead of ignoring it or postponing it, solutions that harness our creativity and talent that have the potential of creating 5 million new, good green-collar jobs. It is the calling of our time. It is, as one of my colleagues and friend on the other side said, the Moon shot. There isn't anything we can't do if we make our mind up to do it. That is who we are. We are Americans. We solve problems. So enough of the fatalism and the defeatism and more of that can-do spirit to tackle this problem. We know President Bush and Vice President Cheney have a different approach. The oil companies say drill, and the President and the Vice President say, how deep? I don't think that is the smartest, most effective answer, and I hope we will be able to work out a way forward between our two sides. I know my colleagues on the other side have a very strong view, as we do, but the American people are depending on us to choose a different course. So let's cut through all of the talk, let's cut to the chase, let's try to cut out the politics, and let's take those bold steps that will relieve pressure now on gas prices at the pump and oil prices in the open market, and let's lead our Nation to embrace the great next American endeavor--a national effort to change the way we produce and use energy. It will serve our economy, it will strengthen our security, and it will bring us together as a Nation. And we sorely need that. I look forward to working with my friends on the other side to come up with solutions that will actually work now. Give us the opportunity to make it clear to the American people we can act, we can see results, and we can move forward together. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Dayna Gibbons, a fellow in my office, be granted the privilege of the floor for the remainder of the debate on the energy legislation.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I am pleased that the Senate today confirmed the nomination of two New Yorkers to the Federal bench. Kiyo Matsumoto had served as a magistrate judge in the Eastern District of New York since 2004. Prior to her appointment, Judge Matsumoto served in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York for more than two decades and held the position of deputy chief of the civil division in that office. Judge Matsumoto has taught as an adjunct law professor at the New York University School of Law as well as worked as a legal research and writing instructor at the Brooklyn Law School. Judge Matsumoto has also served as a member of the Federal Court Committee of the City of New York Bar. Now that she has been confirmed, Judge Matsumoto becomes only the eighth active Asian- Pacific American Senate-confirmed judge on the Federal bench out of approximately 850 judges nationwide. Paul Gardephe was most recently a partner and chair of the Litigation Department at the New York law firm of Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler LLP. Previously, Mr. Gardephe was a special counsel for the U.S. Department of Justice Inspector General's Office. He has also worked for the law department of Time Inc., where he held the positions of vice president, litigation deputy general counsel, and Associate General Counsel. Prior to this work, Mr. Gardephe served in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York for nearly 10 years. For the past 15 years, Mr. Gardephe has taught trial advocacy at New York Law School as an adjunct professor. The careers of both nominees have been marked by a record of achievement and a commitment to public service. I am certain that each of these individuals will be a credit to the Federal judiciary and will continue to exhibit the qualities that have defined their entire careers: devotion to justice and respect for the rule of law. I am proud to have supported each of their nominations, and I commend Senator Schumer and the members of the Judiciary Committee on their diligence in ensuring that our Federal courts are served by men and women of such distinction.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Madam President, I rise today in strong support of S. 2731, the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008. This legislation would provide a substantial increase in our resources to address these devastating diseases on a global scale. It will enable us to increase the number of health professionals, expand treatment, and prevent new infections, thus improving the lives and futures of millions in countries around the world. I am particularly pleased to see the advances that this bill makes in providing information about effective interventions, such as those that can prevent the perinatal transmission of HIV and save the lives of newborns. It also will allow us to implement new strategies to protect women and girls from HIV infection. This bill is an important step in our fight against global AIDS, and I would urge all of my colleagues in the Senate to vote for it. I would like to draw attention to several provisions in this legislation which I believe will help to improve our efforts to combat AIDS around the world. One of these is an increased emphasis on identifying and replicating best practices in service delivery, a science known as operations research. Let me give you an example of how operations research can help to improve our response to global AIDS. In the developing world, about 1 out of every 3 children born to mothers with HIV end up with the virus--a tragic statistic and one we know how to prevent. We have learned from our experience in the United States, where less than 100 cases of perinatal transmission were recorded in 2005, that providing access to critically needed, life-extending drugs can significantly reduce cases of mother-to-child transmission of HIV. With data from operations research, we will be able to understand how we can, in low resource settings, improve testing, education, and treatment options in order to reduce mother-to-child transmission to levels that are comparable to those we see in the United States. And prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV is just one of the areas where the data from operations research can transform our ability to maximize the U.S. investment in global AIDS funding. Earlier this year, I introduced the PEPFAR Accountability and Transparency Act to expand our investment in operations research. I am pleased to note that several of the provisions from that legislation have been incorporated into this bill, which will require the government to incorporate plans to improve program monitoring, evaluation and operations research into its overall strategic plan for AIDS. Doing so will allow us to determine the effectiveness of the interventions we are funding, so that we can replicate those that are working well, and examine ways to improve those that could be better. The bill would also increase the dissemination of research findings, so that information about cost- effective interventions will be available with people working to combat diseases in their own communities, shared through a ``best practices'' report compiled and published annually by our government. I am also pleased to see that this legislation increases our efforts to address the vulnerability of women and girls to HIV infection. According to the United Nations, more than 15 million women were living with HIV at the end of 2007, accounting for slightly less than half of all those living with HIV. But in the places that are hardest hit by epidemic, AIDS has a disproportionate impact upon women. In sub-Saharan Africa, for example, 61 percent of those living with HIV are women. And we are not doing enough to help women protect themselves against infection, particularly young women. Studies completed in 17 countries in 2003 show that more than 75 percent of the young women surveyed could not identify ways to protect themselves against HIV infection. Last year, I joined Representative Barbara Lee in introducing the Protection Against Transmission of HIV for Women and Youth (PATHWAY) Act, which would require the President to develop and implement an HIV prevention strategy that addresses the particular vulnerabilities of women and girls--the links between gender-based violence, lack of educational and economic opportunity, human trafficking and sexual exploitation, and increased risk for HIV infection. I am pleased to see that this legislation contains a strong emphasis on addressing the needs of women and girls. It will require the inclusion of programs to address the needs of women and girls, in the President's 5-year strategy to combat global AIDS, and will provide clear guidance to help integrate gender across prevention, care and treatment programs. With this increased commitment, we will be able to help prevent additional HIV infections among women, and increase access to care and treatment. Doing so will help not only women living with HIV, but the families for whom so many of these women are the primary caregivers. In addition to requiring a strategy to address the needs of women and girls, the PATHWAY Act also repealed requirements that one-third of prevention funding under PEPFAR be spent on abstinence until marriage programs. I believe that we need to repeal this hard spending requirement in order to give countries the flexibility to tailor prevention programs to their local needs. Both the Government Accountability Office and the Institute of Medicine have produced reports demonstrating that such spending requirements impact the ability of in-country programs to carry out effective interventions. The bill we are voting on today removes the abstinence earmark and replaces it with a requirement to submit reports on spending if in- country funding for abstinence and monogamy promotion drop below certain levels. I am hopeful that this compromise will allow countries to tailor their prevention messages to the epidemic that exists, and improve the efficacy of our efforts to halt the spread of HIV, and I will monitor implementation of this provision to ensure that it does not also constrain the ability of grantees to help prevent as many new infections as possible. This bipartisan legislation is an opportunity for us to renew our commitment as a nation to fighting the global scourges of AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. It improves our ability to care for those in need, to help countries torn apart by these epidemics, to combat the dangerous stigma that often still exists around these diseases, and to prevent new infections. Today's vote represents a critical step in our efforts to halt and reverse the burden of these diseases, and I am proud to join my colleagues in supporting this bill.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Madam President, there are two very important matters that will be coming before the Senate this afternoon. The first is the legislation we are now considering to strengthen our efforts to fight HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. The second is the President's veto of the Medicare legislation. First, with respect to the important work that has been done that we are discussing on this floor, the United States should take a leadership role on behalf of those suffering from HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria around the world. I am very proud that this legislation includes portions of a bill that I introduced, the PEPFAR Accountability and Transparency Act, to monitor and improve the programs we fund so that we know what we are getting for the money we spend; that, in effect, we are looking for ``best practices'' so that we can learn from what works and discontinue what does not work. It is not based on ideology or some kind of personal preference but on evidence, on looking for the best evidence to determine how our dollars can be used more smartly and making each dollar go as far as possible. I am also pleased that this legislation focuses on the needs of women and girls. This has been neglected in the past, and I call on my colleagues to stand against any efforts to undermine the bipartisan consensus to invest more in saving lives and demonstrating the best of American values in the eyes of people around the world. This is one of the ways we can lead with our values and demonstrate clearly that the United States cares about people who are suffering, that we are seeking to find common ground to alleviate that suffering, and that we are willing to stretch out our hands in partnership and friendship. This is an important piece of legislation. I look forward to it passing and being signed into law. Secondly, later today we will consider the legislation which the President vetoed this morning. I find it hard to understand why the President did so. He clearly stood against both the doctors of America and the patients of America on behalf of the insurance companies of America. Personally, I don't understand that kind of calculation. Today, we will be joining colleagues on both sides of the aisle to stand against the cutting of reimbursements for doctors who care for Medicare recipients and standing up for making sure there is access to care for seniors, Americans with disabilities, and the men and women who serve in our military. Couched by lofty goals and cloaked in misleading rhetoric, the President essentially vetoed health care for seniors, for veterans, and for Americans with disabilities. It is a disgrace, but unfortunately it is not a surprise. This is a battle which has been waged ever since President Johnson signed the Medicare legislation into law 33 years ago this month, and long before. I hope today's veto and the narrow margin by which we will override it serves as a wake-up call. By seeking to undermine Medicare, President Bush and his allies continue an unyielding, uncompromising, unrelenting ideological crusade, a long twilight struggle to eviscerate Medicare, Social Security, and the means by which our Government actually solves problems for the people of our country. It really comes down to basic values, and it comes down to our priorities as a nation. Will you stand with our seniors, with our veterans, with our Americans with disabilities? Will you stand with hospitals that are already forced to stretch their budgets to the limit? Will you stand with the doctors who care for Medicare recipients and are already struggling to see more patients in less time every single day? Will you stand with the people of this country who need a champion in the White House? I believe strongly that we have to override this veto. We have to make it clear to the hard-working physicians in America that we are with you, that we will help by investing in preventive medicine such as screening, in health information technology which will limit costs while improving care, in new measures that will lead to improved quality, and by actually seeing what works and what doesn't work. We know that the cuts in reimbursements that the President and his allies are seeking will also affect cuts in reimbursement and care that is accessible to military families. You see, Medicare sets the standards for payments that are used by TRICARE. TRICARE is the program that cares for our veterans, cares for Active Duty, cares for family members. TRICARE uses the Medicare formula for physician payments. I have just finished an incredible experience, crisscrossing our country for the past 17 months, and I was inspired each and every day by the resolve and the resilience of the American people. I learned a lot, and one of the lessons I learned is that Americans are ready, even eager to have a government that actually works again, that solves problems, that produces results. Thirty-three years ago, our Government did that. It wasn't easy and it literally took years, even decades, to achieve, but when Lyndon Johnson signed the Medicare law, he sent a very clear signal to those who worried about whether they would be able to afford to take care of themselves or take care of their parents and their grandparents that health care would be available to them. We have a lot of work to do in the next years to make sure Medicare fulfills its promise. I look forward to working with like-minded allies on both sides of the aisle to make it clear that we will stand behind Medicare. We will need to be modernized. We will have to make some changes so that it works better, so that it emphasizes prevention. But you don't start by penalizing the people who take care of those who are on Medicare today. The doctors and nurses of America do heroic work every single day. Our hospitals stand ready to care for those in need. Let's not make it more difficult to actually deliver the services that will save lives, ameliorate suffering, and extend the quality of life. I am hoping that when this vote is held in a few hours, we will have a resounding repudiation of President Bush's veto and send a message, not only to doctors and nurses and other health care professionals but to the people of our country, that we are better than this and we are going to stand with you to make sure you have the health care you deserve under the program that has meant so much to so many for so long--Medicare. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Madam President, today we are voting on a piece of legislation that has the potential to make a real difference for seniors, Americans with disabilities, physicians, hospitals, and pharmacies. We are voting to ensure that doctors who care for the 44 million people in Medicare and the millions of people who rely on TRICARE, the military health care system, do not see a sudden and dramatic cut in reimbursements. And we are voting to implement a series of reforms to improve our capacity to provide preventive care, to use more health information technology in our medical system, and to measure the quality of care patients receive. We hear a lot of talk about our broken health care system in this Chamber--and on the campaign trail--by Members on both sides of the aisle. However, all too often, there have been some all too willing to lament the crisis until it comes time to address it. But the fact is, all that matters--to seniors, to people with disabilities, to our men and women in uniform--is whether we deliver on the rhetoric. That is our test in this Chamber. And that is our test with this vote. The choice is simple. How will we address the crisis in our health care system, as costs skyrocket, coverage declines, and quality suffers? Do we continue in this race to the bottom--or do we choose a new course? I believe we must take immediate steps to modernize and reform our health care system to control costs, increase coverage, and improve care. The goal--as I have proposed, advocated, and championed my whole adult life--is quality, affordable health care for everyone, no exceptions, no excuses. And we all look forward to the return of our friend, Senator Kennedy, one of America's great health care champions, to help us reach this goal. The solution will not be to cut corners while cutting funding that will drive more and more people and providers out of the health care system. The solution has not been and will never be to stick our heads in the sand to avoid the tough work of dragging our system of care into the 21st century. The solution is tougher--and more complex--but no less real: comprehensive reform to provide coverage for every American that emphasizes prevention, measurable improvements in quality, and a modernized system to dramatically improve efficiency and reduce errors. And we will achieve it by asking everyone to be part of this solution: patients, providers, insurance companies, employers, and, yes, the government. That is why I hope more of my Republican colleagues will join the growing bipartisan majority in the House and Senate to support this legislation and end this Medicare blockade--an obstruction that survived by a single vote--which stands between patients and their physicians, and between this chamber and demonstrable progress in Medicare. Here is why this legislation is so critical. First, unless we act, the 10.6 percent cut in payment to physicians will compromise care for seniors, Americans with disabilities and--though this is largely unknown--men and women who have served in our Nation's military. TRICARE sets its physician reimbursement rates according to Medicare. So a 10.6-percent cut in Medicare is a 10.6-percent cut in TRICARE. The consequences may be catastrophic. A recent survey by the American Medical Association found that 60 percent of physicians would limit new Medicare patients if this cut is allowed. Almost 9 million people who have served in the military would face the prospect of newly limited access to medical care, including more than 180,000 in New York. The answer is not haphazard cuts and temporary formula fixes. The answer is a comprehensive, permanent solution which reflects the costs of doing business for providers--as well as the goals we all share for fixing the incentives in the health care system and controlling costs by improving care--not limiting it. And preventing this cut is only the beginning. I am proud that we have included a number of important reforms I have championed that will help us chart a new course for Medicare and our health care system: We have included a provision to cover new preventive care recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, a proposal for which I have advocated and which I believe should be part of our solution to achieve health care for everyone. Coverage for screenings for osteoporosis, breast cancer, or high blood pressure, for example, will help detect illness at the earliest stages, before becoming life-threatening and more costly. I am proud that we have taken an important step in health information technology, requiring electronic prescribing by 2011. That will reduce errors dramatically. If all hospitals used a computerized order entry system we would reduce adverse drug reactions by an estimated 200,000 each year and save $1 billion annually. Health information technology, which I have proposed and hope to pass through the Senate soon, will allow us to make giant leaps in our health care system to cut errors, improve care, and discover new treatments--while protecting patient privacy and safety and dramatically reducing costs. The bill also extends the Medicare Physician Quality Reporting Initiative and provides for the endorsement of quality measures, as I have long championed. In fact, the first bipartisan health IT legislation I introduced with Senator Bill Frist in 2005 included this idea and it remains in the legislation that I have cosponsored with Chairman Kennedy, Senator Enzi, and Senator Hatch. Linking quality with coverage is essential. Today, we don't know what we don't know. With new data we can find new ways to treat illnesses and new ways to improve the care we provide. We have previously failed by one vote. One vote between improving care or undermining it. One vote that can make the difference between solving problems in our health care system or making matters worse. This is not about politics. This is about the real people whose health and lives will be affected by our votes today. This is about the far reaching consequences of our decision in this Chamber. I have met people across New York and our country who cannot find the medical care--or afford the health care--they need. Mothers who whisper to me in tears, terrified that their children will get sick because they lost their insurance. Nurses who feel like each day is a deluge, as patient loads rise. Doctors forced to see more and more patients--with less and less time to do their jobs and more and more paperwork piling up. Seniors with multiple chronic illnesses who have trouble juggling the recommendations and medications from multiple health care providers. And hospitals like A.O. Fox Memorial Hospital in Oneonta, NY, which stands to lose hundreds of thousands of dollars it cannot afford to lose. Or Bassett Healthcare in Cooperstown, NY, that stands to lose about a million dollars. These are local hospitals struggling to provide care as that care is assaulted on all sides: rising costs, declining reimbursements, more uninsured patients walking through the emergency room doors. It would be a disgrace if these hospitals looked to us for solutions--and found that with these cuts, we were part of the problem. These are the stakes and this is our test. I am grateful to my colleagues who have labored on this legislation and I urge my Republican colleagues to join us. And I will continue to do all I can to be champion for the people across New York and the country who feel like they do not have a voice, who look to us, who are counting on us, who depend upon us. I will always stand with them--and I urge my colleagues to stand with us.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, one of the great challenges before us as a nation is remaining steadfast in our fight against terrorism while preserving our commitment to the rule of law and individual liberty. As a Senator from New York on September 11, I understand the importance of taking any and all necessary steps to protect our Nation from those who would do us harm. I believe strongly that we must modernize our surveillance laws in order to provide intelligence professionals the tools needed to fight terrorism and make our country more secure. However, any surveillance program must contain safeguards to protect the rights of Americans against abuse, and to preserve clear lines of oversight and accountability over this administration. I applaud the efforts of my colleagues who negotiated this legislation, and I respect my colleagues who reached a different conclusion on today's vote. I do so because this is a difficult issue. Nonetheless, I could not vote for the legislation in its current form. The legislation would overhaul the law that governs the administration's surveillance activities. Some of the legislation's provisions place guidelines and restrictions on the operational details of the surveillance activities, others increase judicial and legislative oversight of those activities, and still others relate to immunity for telecommunications companies that participated in the administration's surveillance activities. While this legislation does strengthen oversight of the administration's surveillance activities over previous drafts, in many respects, the oversight in the bill continues to come up short. For instance, while the bill nominally calls for increased oversight by the FISA Court, its ability to serve as a meaningful check on the President's power is debatable. The clearest example of this is the limited power given to the FISA Court to review the government's targeting and minimization procedures. But the legislation has other significant shortcomings. The legislation makes no meaningful change to the immunity provisions. There is little disagreement that the legislation effectively grants retroactive immunity to the telecommunications companies. In my judgment, immunity under these circumstances has the practical effect of shutting down a critical avenue for holding the administration accountable for its conduct. It is precisely why I have supported efforts in the Senate to strip the bill of these provisions, both today and during previous debates on this subject. Unfortunately, these efforts have been unsuccessful. What is more, even as we considered this legislation, the administration refused to allow the overwhelming majority of Senators to examine the warrantless wiretapping program. This made it exceedingly difficult for those Senators who are not on the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees to assess the need for the operational details of the legislation, and whether greater protections are necessary. The same can be said for an assessment of the telecom immunity provisions. On an issue of such tremendous importance to our citizens--and in particular to New Yorkers--all Senators should have been entitled to receive briefings that would have enabled them to make an informed decision about the merits of this legislation. I cannot support this legislation when we know neither the nature of the surveillance activities authorized nor the role played by telecommunications companies granted immunity. Congress must vigorously check and balance the president even in the face of dangerous enemies and at a time of war. That is what sets us apart. And that is what is vital to ensuring that any tool designed to protect us is used--and used within the law--for that purpose and that purpose alone. I believe my responsibility requires that I vote against this compromise, and I will continue to pursue reforms that will improve our ability to collect intelligence in our efforts to combat terror and to oversee that authority in Congress.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, on June 22, our Nation lost a great judge and lawyer, civil rights champion, and public servant. Justice Revius Ortique, the first African-American justice elected to the Louisiana Supreme Court, has died at 84. I met Justice Ortique when we served together in the 1970s on the board of the Legal Services Corporation, and much later in his career, Justice Ortique was appointed by my husband to serve as alternate delegate to the United Nations. Justice Ortique had an illustrious career. In World War II, he served as an officer in the Pacific Theater and after earning his law degree in 1956, set up a legal practice at the vanguard of the civil rights movement. He helped to successfully win equal pay for Black employees in several cases, to integrate State labor unions, and served five terms as president of the Urban League of Greater New Orleans. Justice Ortique not only worked to achieve racial equality but also to achieve racial harmony and served three terms as president of the New Orleans Community Relations Council. He negotiated for the Black community with White civic leaders helping to bring about the peaceful desegregation of lunch counters, bathrooms, and other public facilities in New Orleans before the passage of the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 would guarantee these rights. Justice Ortique was a courtly figure with a mild manner that belied his courage, convictions, and ability to effect change. I am proud to have known him, and my thoughts and prayers are with his wife Miriam, his daughter Rhesa, and all those whose lives were made better because of his leadership.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Madam President, the scientific consensus is clear: strong and swift action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is needed to prevent catastrophic effects of climate change. That is why the debate this week in the Senate about the cap-and-trade bill crafted by Senators Boxer, Lieberman and Warner is so important. This bill makes steep reductions in emissions, encourages the development and deployment of clean energy technology, provides assistance for American families, training for workers that the clean energy industry will demand. I congratulate Chairman Boxer for moving this bill to the floor. It is a first step toward Congress enacting a cap-and-trade bill as part of a broad, comprehensive effort to combat global warming and reduce our dependence on foreign oil, including aggressive steps to improve energy efficiency and deploy renewable energy that will benefit our economy and help create millions of new jobs. I believe that we can and should make this bill even stronger, and I hope that we can do that as we continue to consider the bill. For now, we need to move forward on this important legislation. That is why I would vote for cloture on this legislation if I were able to be present in the Senate for the vote. The time is now to move forward and deal with global warming, and I urge my colleagues to vote for cloture.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, today I introduce the National Innovation Act of 2008, a bill that will strengthen America's leadership in technology and manufacturing innovation, while helping to keep and create more jobs here at home. I would like to recognize my colleague, Senator Collins, for her leadership on this bill, and I thank her and her staff for all their hard work. Our Nation is at a crossroads. Every day we hear of more jobs being sent oveaseas and new technology centers growing halfway across the world. In this increasingly global economy, we need to have the tools and the knowledge to compete and succeed. There is no doubt that technology and innovation will be the foundation of the new economy. And America must be at the forefront of this new, innovation economy. The National Innovation Act is a comprehensive plan to spur the growth of innovative technologies to increase America's productivity gains and economic growth. It builds on the longstanding bipartisan commitment to improve our Nation's competitiveness by strengthening our innovation infrastructure. This new legislation creates a ``National Innovation Council'' to coordinate Federal innovation policy, and to help support efforts at the State and local level to accelerate the adoption of innovation technologies throughout the economy. It will include six existing Federal programs which share this important innovation-based mission. The National Innovation Act also establishes a CLUSTER Information Center and a Cluster Grant Program. The CLIC will collect, develop, and disseminate analysis on industry clusters throughout all 50 States, provide technical assistance guides for regional cluster development, and develop initiatives and programs. Since I took office, I have devoted time and energy into trying to help the economically distressed communities throughout New York State, particularly those in upstate New York that were once economically vibrant but now are facing a declining economy. This legislation will help revitalize communities in upstate New York and across the country who have been hit hard by manufacturing and job loss by establishing regional economic clusters. It will bring innovation to every corner of America. Communities can use cluster grants to build on the strengths of their particular regions by utilizing the skills and knowledge base of local businesses, economic developers, colleges and universities, scientists, nonprofits, and the public sector. In order to secure the future of America's economy we must create new, good-paying jobs here at home. Investing in new technologies and industries will expand our workforce, ensuring America remains competitive in the global economy and putting us on a course toward growth and prosperity for future generations.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, today I introduce the National Innovation Act of 2008, a bill that will strengthen America's leadership in technology and manufacturing innovation, while helping to keep and create more jobs here at home. I would like to recognize my colleague, Senator Collins, for her leadership on this bill, and I thank her and her staff for all their hard work. Our Nation is at a crossroads. Every day we hear of more jobs being sent oveaseas and new technology centers growing halfway across the world. In this increasingly global economy, we need to have the tools and the knowledge to compete and succeed. There is no doubt that technology and innovation will be the foundation of the new economy. And America must be at the forefront of this new, innovation economy. The National Innovation Act is a comprehensive plan to spur the growth of innovative technologies to increase America's productivity gains and economic growth. It builds on the longstanding bipartisan commitment to improve our Nation's competitiveness by strengthening our innovation infrastructure. This new legislation creates a ``National Innovation Council'' to coordinate Federal innovation policy, and to help support efforts at the State and local level to accelerate the adoption of innovation technologies throughout the economy. It will include six existing Federal programs which share this important innovation-based mission. The National Innovation Act also establishes a CLUSTER Information Center and a Cluster Grant Program. The CLIC will collect, develop, and disseminate analysis on industry clusters throughout all 50 States, provide technical assistance guides for regional cluster development, and develop initiatives and programs. Since I took office, I have devoted time and energy into trying to help the economically distressed communities throughout New York State, particularly those in upstate New York that were once economically vibrant but now are facing a declining economy. This legislation will help revitalize communities in upstate New York and across the country who have been hit hard by manufacturing and job loss by establishing regional economic clusters. It will bring innovation to every corner of America. Communities can use cluster grants to build on the strengths of their particular regions by utilizing the skills and knowledge base of local businesses, economic developers, colleges and universities, scientists, nonprofits, and the public sector. In order to secure the future of America's economy we must create new, good-paying jobs here at home. Investing in new technologies and industries will expand our workforce, ensuring America remains competitive in the global economy and putting us on a course toward growth and prosperity for future generations.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I certainly add my support to the very passionate appeal of my friend from Arkansas on behalf of that wonderful State. I remember very well all the difficult storms and floods that too frequently impact Arkansas. I hope our colleagues will support the request for disaster assistance. I rise to support strongly the GI bill that has been proposed in the Senate. I thank Senator Webb for his hard work on this bipartisan legislation, as well as Senator Lautenberg, Senator Warner, and Senator Hagel--each one a veteran who understands, deeply and personally, the importance of honoring the service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform. I am proud to be a cosponsor of this legislation. It is in the spirit of the original GI bill of rights to provide every American who has served honorably since September 11, 2001, on Active Duty, with real help to go to college, to earn a degree, to end his or her military service with a new beginning in civilian life. After 36 months of Active-Duty service, a veteran's tuition and fees for any in-State public college would be fully covered. We provide a stipend for books and supplies and a housing allowance based on actual housing costs in the area. The benefit would apply fully to members of the National Guard and Reserve who have served on Active Duty, and all Active-Duty servicemembers would be entitled to a portion of the benefit based on the length of their Active-Duty service. This is not a half measure or an empty gesture. This is a full and fair benefit to serve the men and women who serve us, and that is why this is such a key vote. We often hear wonderful rhetoric in this Chamber in support of our troops and our veterans, but the real test is not the speeches we deliver but whether we deliver on the speeches. There are some who oppose this benefit, arguing that our men and women in uniform have not earned it, that it is too generous. I could not disagree more strongly. This is a question of values and priorities. Each one of us will answer that question with our votes today. Let's strengthen our military by improving benefits, not restricting them. There are those opposing this important legislation who have offered a half measure instead, designed to provide the administration with political cover instead of a benefit to our veterans. That is not leadership and it is not right. It is time we match our words with our actions. After all the speeches are done and the cameras are gone, what matters is whether we act to support our troops and our veterans-- before, during, and long after deployment. I have proposed my own GI bill of rights to build on this legislation with opportunities to secure a home mortgage, to start a small business or expand it with an affordable loan. As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, I am proud to support our troops and veterans, improving health care for the National Guard and reservists, providing our servicemembers with the equipment and supplies they need to improve treatment and care at our military and veterans hospitals. The original GI bill was proposed 2\1/2\ years after the attack on Pearl Harbor and, more than a year before the war ended, President Roosevelt signed that bill into law. Eight million veterans participated, improving their skills or education. At the peak in 1947, veterans accounted for nearly half of all college admissions. That is the way we should be honoring the service of those who served us. This is our moment to provide each and every new veteran the opportunity to realize their version of the American dream--the dream they have spent their lives trying to defend. It is time we started acting as Americans again. We are all in this together. Let's send this legislation to the President and let's serve the men and women who served us. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, in honor of AmeriCorps Week, I am pleased to introduce a bill that will help keep our Nation's high school seniors engaged in learning and community service. My legislation will connect high school seniors to service opportunities within their schools or communities while earning money for college. The senior year of high school is a crucial transition time for youth. Despite this fact, many twelfth grade students opt to take less challenging courses, or no classes at all, during their final year of high school, a phenomenon commonly termed ``senioritis.'' I strongly believe we should use this opportunity to provide a service-oriented education for young people across the country. That is why I am sponsoring the Senior Year Community Service Act. This legislation will create a pilot program to enable six local educational agencies to connect high school seniors with service opportunities within their communities or schools. The bill calls on the Corporation of National and Community Service to assist local educational agencies with the implementation of this pilot program. Using grant funds, the local educational agency will establish a partnership with a community based organization to implement this pilot program, provide a service coordinator to assist participating high schools, and provide information to students about this program as early as their junior year. The Senior Year Community Service Act also requires the Department of Education to study the effects of this program on participating seniors. The evaluation will measure student academic achievement on State academic assessments, graduation rates and student rates of college enrollment, persistence and graduation. If the evaluation proves that this program is successful in increasing student achievement, the legislation calls upon the Department of Education to make this program a universal experience for high school seniors. Research has shown that participation in community service activities can lead to increased student achievement. In one study, students involved in community service and service-learning reported higher grades and better school attendance. In another study, civically- engaged high school students tended to make greater academic progress and were more likely to graduate from college. The benefits of community service participation can reach beyond the school walls. The National Service-Learning Clearinghouse notes that in addition to increased academic achievement, service learning contributes to students' increased self-efficacy, enhanced problem- solving skills, and enhanced civic engagement. We have seen colleges and universities take their own approaches to solving the problem of ``senioritis.'' Earlier this year, the New York Times reported that a handful of universities are taking action against slacking high school seniors--ranging from requiring students to meet monthly with the dean of admissions once enrolled, to rescinding admission status completely. Programs that keep seniors engaged in school can prevent college-bound students from squandering their precious opportunities. The Senior Year Community Service Act will prevent many high school students from wasting their senior year and makes community service a common expectation for high school seniors. I hope that my Senate colleagues will join me in supporting this bill that will help our youth stay on track for a bright and successful future.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, in honor of AmeriCorps Week, I am pleased to introduce a bill that will help keep our Nation's high school seniors engaged in learning and community service. My legislation will connect high school seniors to service opportunities within their schools or communities while earning money for college. The senior year of high school is a crucial transition time for youth. Despite this fact, many twelfth grade students opt to take less challenging courses, or no classes at all, during their final year of high school, a phenomenon commonly termed ``senioritis.'' I strongly believe we should use this opportunity to provide a service-oriented education for young people across the country. That is why I am sponsoring the Senior Year Community Service Act. This legislation will create a pilot program to enable six local educational agencies to connect high school seniors with service opportunities within their communities or schools. The bill calls on the Corporation of National and Community Service to assist local educational agencies with the implementation of this pilot program. Using grant funds, the local educational agency will establish a partnership with a community based organization to implement this pilot program, provide a service coordinator to assist participating high schools, and provide information to students about this program as early as their junior year. The Senior Year Community Service Act also requires the Department of Education to study the effects of this program on participating seniors. The evaluation will measure student academic achievement on State academic assessments, graduation rates and student rates of college enrollment, persistence and graduation. If the evaluation proves that this program is successful in increasing student achievement, the legislation calls upon the Department of Education to make this program a universal experience for high school seniors. Research has shown that participation in community service activities can lead to increased student achievement. In one study, students involved in community service and service-learning reported higher grades and better school attendance. In another study, civically- engaged high school students tended to make greater academic progress and were more likely to graduate from college. The benefits of community service participation can reach beyond the school walls. The National Service-Learning Clearinghouse notes that in addition to increased academic achievement, service learning contributes to students' increased self-efficacy, enhanced problem- solving skills, and enhanced civic engagement. We have seen colleges and universities take their own approaches to solving the problem of ``senioritis.'' Earlier this year, the New York Times reported that a handful of universities are taking action against slacking high school seniors--ranging from requiring students to meet monthly with the dean of admissions once enrolled, to rescinding admission status completely. Programs that keep seniors engaged in school can prevent college-bound students from squandering their precious opportunities. The Senior Year Community Service Act will prevent many high school students from wasting their senior year and makes community service a common expectation for high school seniors. I hope that my Senate colleagues will join me in supporting this bill that will help our youth stay on track for a bright and successful future.

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, in honor of AmeriCorps Week, I am pleased to introduce legislation that will place more of our Nation's low- and middle-income high school students on the road to higher education. My legislation will address the disparity that exists in college persistence between lower-income, high-achieving students and their more affluent peers. According to the National Educational Longitudinal Survey, NELS, more than 1.5 million high school students with annual household incomes of less than $85,000 do not earn college degrees despite having ranked in the top half of their high school classes. Further, a recent report from the Jack Kent Cooke Foundation found that 59 percent of lower- income high-achieving students graduated from college compared to 77 percent of their higher income peers. America cannot remain competitive in the global economy if we continue to squander our college talent every year. That is why I am sponsoring the Coaching Our Adolescents for College Heights Act, or the COACH Act. The COACH Act creates a pilot AmeriCorps program to recruit, train, and place recent college graduates, or coaches, in high schools to help prepare low- and middle-income, high-performing high school students for success in college. Under this program, coaches will be responsible for working with school staff to build a strong college-going culture within their high schools. Coaches will be paired with a cohort of low- and middle-income, high-achieving students to ensure student enrollment and success in college-prep coursework and to connect participating students with summer internships, community service activities, and other opportunities that will enrich each student's academic experience. Coaches will also help students and their parents in understanding the college application, admissions, and financial aid processes as well as work with students to select and enroll in the institutions of higher education that best meet each student's educational and social needs. The role of coaches will not end once students are enrolled in college, as coaches will be required to monitor their students' academic performance and social adjustment through the end of each student's first year of college. In this way, coaches will ensure that students are connected to the support services they need to persist in and ultimately graduate from college. A recent study by the Consortium on Chicago School Research found that only 41 percent of students who aspired to go to college took the steps necessary in their senior year to apply to and enroll in a four- year college, despite being well-qualified for even the most selective colleges and universities. It is among these students that the Nation suffers the greatest loss in proven talent. Unfortunately, our high schools are struggling to provide these students with necessary guidance. In 2002, the National Center of Education Statistics found that the average ratio of high school students to full-time guidance counselors was 315 to 1. Furthermore, only 10 percent of public schools have advisors whose sole responsibility is college counseling. The COACH Act not only addresses the need to prepare our high-achieving, low- and middle-income students for college, but it also engages eager AmeriCorps members as a necessary resource for completing this task. I hope my colleagues will join me in this effort to help these students succeed in higher education and compete in the global economy.

Mrs. CLINTON

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, in honor of AmeriCorps Week, I am pleased to introduce legislation that will place more of our Nation's low- and middle-income high school students on the road to higher education. My legislation will address the disparity that exists in college persistence between lower-income, high-achieving students and their more affluent peers. According to the National Educational Longitudinal Survey, NELS, more than 1.5 million high school students with annual household incomes of less than $85,000 do not earn college degrees despite having ranked in the top half of their high school classes. Further, a recent report from the Jack Kent Cooke Foundation found that 59 percent of lower- income high-achieving students graduated from college compared to 77 percent of their higher income peers. America cannot remain competitive in the global economy if we continue to squander our college talent every year. That is why I am sponsoring the Coaching Our Adolescents for College Heights Act, or the COACH Act. The COACH Act creates a pilot AmeriCorps program to recruit, train, and place recent college graduates, or coaches, in high schools to help prepare low- and middle-income, high-performing high school students for success in college. Under this program, coaches will be responsible for working with school staff to build a strong college-going culture within their high schools. Coaches will be paired with a cohort of low- and middle-income, high-achieving students to ensure student enrollment and success in college-prep coursework and to connect participating students with summer internships, community service activities, and other opportunities that will enrich each student's academic experience. Coaches will also help students and their parents in understanding the college application, admissions, and financial aid processes as well as work with students to select and enroll in the institutions of higher education that best meet each student's educational and social needs. The role of coaches will not end once students are enrolled in college, as coaches will be required to monitor their students' academic performance and social adjustment through the end of each student's first year of college. In this way, coaches will ensure that students are connected to the support services they need to persist in and ultimately graduate from college. A recent study by the Consortium on Chicago School Research found that only 41 percent of students who aspired to go to college took the steps necessary in their senior year to apply to and enroll in a four- year college, despite being well-qualified for even the most selective colleges and universities. It is among these students that the Nation suffers the greatest loss in proven talent. Unfortunately, our high schools are struggling to provide these students with necessary guidance. In 2002, the National Center of Education Statistics found that the average ratio of high school students to full-time guidance counselors was 315 to 1. Furthermore, only 10 percent of public schools have advisors whose sole responsibility is college counseling. The COACH Act not only addresses the need to prepare our high-achieving, low- and middle-income students for college, but it also engages eager AmeriCorps members as a necessary resource for completing this task. I hope my colleagues will join me in this effort to help these students succeed in higher education and compete in the global economy.