Bob Casey

Mr. CASEY

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CASEY. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about our children and, more specifically, children from low-income and working families across the United States who need a good start in life and who need high-quality childcare each and every day while their parents must earn a living. I believe that here in America every child is born with a bright light shining inside them, and it is our job as Senators to do everything we can, everything we can, to keep that light shining ever brightly. A child's potential may be limited or boundless, but whatever it is, every child deserves the opportunity to become the person they were born to be. Here in America, every child deserves high-quality childcare and early education. High-quality childcare gives low-income working families peace of mind while they work. Unfortunately, for the last 7 years, Federal funding for childcare has been essentially frozen. The neglect of Federal funding for childcare during this administration has been unconscionable. What this means is families have been locked out of access to high-quality providers. It means hundreds of thousands of children across the country have been put on waiting lists for childcare because there simply is not enough funding to provide enough slots. Working parents struggle to find childcare that will be healthy, safe, and affordable. They worry every day about finding quality care. For so many families, this is a very personal issue, especially, of course, for mothers. I remember a mother to whom I spoke in Pennsylvania 10 years ago who was worried about being able to afford childcare for her children. She said something I will never forget. She said because of the worry about childcare, she had a knot in her stomach. I think a lot of families closely identify with and understand what she was talking about. These are parents who must work. They must therefore leave their children in care that often does not meet all their needs because it is the only choice they can afford. Here are the facts. The facts show an enormous unmet need in America when it comes to childcare. A couple of points: 365,000 children in America are on waiting lists. In my home State of Pennsylvania, almost 8,000 children are on waiting lists. Across the country, 13.5 million children who are eligible, eligible for Federal childcare assistance, do not get it. That is an abomination. That is an embarrassment. It is a black mark on America. Let me say that number again: 13.5 million children who are eligible for childcare assistance are not getting it. The population of my home State of Pennsylvania is a little less than 12.5 million. So if that group of children who are eligible but not getting the childcare assistance, if that were considered a State, it would be about the fifth largest State in the country. So 13.5 million children who should be getting help are not getting it through our childcare system. Childcare providers working hard every day caring for and educating our children are barely paid above the poverty level, with little or no benefits. The average wage for a childcare worker is $9.05 an hour, which on an annual basis works out to $18,820, barely above the poverty level. Yet we charge them with the responsibility of caring for and nurturing and educating so many of our children. Finally, the last fact: parents must struggle to afford childcare and face impossible choices between losing their jobs or leaving their children in less-than-ideal care. I believe the price for holding down a good-paying job should not be problems with and worries about childcare. Low-income families also spend much higher percentages of their income on childcare, often bringing that family to the breaking point. This is all wrong. Our priorities are literally upside down. That is why I am announcing today a bill I introduced today, the Starting Early, Starting Right Act. The Starting Early, Starting Right Act. I will go through a couple of the provisions. In summary. First of all, my bill on childcare will move hundreds of thousands of children on State waiting lists into high-quality childcare. The bill will meet the needs of underserved children such as English language learners, children with developmental disabilities and other special needs, children living in very poor communities, and children in rural areas, to ensure we reach children most in need of high-quality childcare. Next, our bill will ensure States will visit and monitor childcare providers on an announced as well as unannounced basis every year. Fourth, our bill will require childcare providers who are licensed or registered to participate in 40 hours of training before they work with children as well as 24 hours on an ongoing annual basis. Next we will expand parents' access to high quality childcare opportunities by requiring States to pay childcare providers rates based upon the actual and current cost of care, what advocates know to be the 75th percentile level. Finally, it encourages States to exceed this rate for special populations of children with greater needs. This bill will improve access to high quality care for infants and toddlers by setting aside 30 percent of the bill's funding for this underserved group of children. Finally, this bill will provide greater funding for quality initiatives and encourage more States to adopt quality rating provisions to improve the quality of their programs. Quality rating improvement systems, known by the acronym QRIS, such as the successful program in Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania STARS program, give providers benchmarks as well as resources to continually improve the quality of care. I wanted to share one story before I conclude, a story about the powerful impact of high quality childcare on children and families. This story was shared with our office by a childcare provider from southeastern Pennsylvania about a family I will not identify to respect their privacy. One of the children was a 3-year-old boy. I will call him, for purposes of this presentation, Sammy. Sammy started in childcare along with his older sister and younger brother when his mother was evicted from her house following divorce. Sammy's father did not pay child support but, luckily, Sammy's grandmother took them in. They all lived in a tiny two-bedroom apartment. Dropoffs at the childcare center were difficult for this young child. With all the recent changes and trauma in his life, he was scared about his mother leaving. His mother would apologize to the staff, saying she never worked before and the children were not used to childcare. The childcare worker always assured Sammy's mother that it was no problem and that no apologies were necessary. Unfortunately, a few weeks later, Sammy's mom showed up one day in tears. She confided to the childcare worker that she had not been able to find a job and was now so desperate she had to use food stamps. She had gone to the store by bus, getting there through the public transit system. The cashier treated her disrespectfully. Because of that, she was understandably humiliated, and she began to feel hopeless and afraid she would never find a job to support her three children. But at that moment, when that mother was at her greatest need and when the family was in need, the childcare center in southeastern Pennsylvania rallied around this mother and her children. Over the next 2 years the staff of the center encouraged and supported her while she found a job, went back to school, and eventually moved out of her mother's house into an apartment of her own. Her oldest daughter was very successful and attended school with the center through first grade. She was then evaluated for the gifted program when she went to public school and second grade. The youngest son blossomed and made it through family growing pains with little difficulty. Finally, Sammy had some problems, but they were able to get the help needed because of the generosity and commitment of the people who worked in this childcare center. During that time the staff, led by the director, helped raise money for Christmas presents, doctors' bills, and Sammy's mother's application to take her pharmacy assistant's license exam. When this childcare worker left the center, Sammy's mom told her what a profound difference the staff at the center had made in her life and in the lives of her children. Like so many in our country, this group of skilled, caring, and professional early childhood educators made it possible for this family to overcome so many obstacles. The childcare worker told our staff recently: [Sammy] is the kid I think about when people ask me why I do what I do. That is what that childcare worker said about her commitment to the care of children and to that child and his family. This is what quality childcare can mean in the real world to a struggling family. It may be the difference between literally failure and success for countless families. Sometimes it can mean sheer survival. This is one example of childcare providers and families such as Sammy's all across the country. These are quiet victories we never hear much about, but they are literally life changing in impact. Increasing funding for childcare is not only the right thing to do, it is the smart thing, especially for at-risk children and children from low-income families. Research shows that high quality childcare helps low-income children enter school ready to succeed. One study found that children in high quality childcare demonstrated greater mathematical ability and thinking and attention skills and had fewer behavioral problems than any other children in second grade. I won't put the entire report in the Record, but the title of that first study is ``The Children of the Cost, Quality and Outcome Study Go to School.'' This is a June 1999 report by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, University of California at Los Angeles, and Yale University. Several others have mentioned this, but other studies have shown that low- income children who enroll in high quality early care and education programs score higher on reading, vocabulary, math, and cognitive tests, and are less likely to be held back a grade or to be arrested as a youth, and are more likely to attend college than their peers who do not enroll in such programs. Although the peace of mind for parents that comes from knowing their children are well cared for cannot be measured, the impact on stable employment can. Studies show that parents who receive childcare assistance are much more likely to remain in the workforce. The study I refer to that made these findings is a briefing paper by the Economic Policy Institute which is entitled ``Staying Employed After Welfare.'' The subheading is ``Work supports and job quality vital to employment tenure and wage growth.'' Finally, there is no question that starting early and right is truly the right thing to do. The evidence supporting high quality childcare is overwhelming and irrefutable. The evidence tells us we can keep that bright light alive in the heart and soul of every child. We can give them what they need to get a good, solid start in their lives, if only we make that choice to support high quality childcare, if only we make that a priority. I urge my colleagues in the Senate to support this bill, the Starting Early, Starting Right Act. As of now nearly 50 national and State organizations across the country have endorsed this legislation. They know, as so many of us do, that investing in early care for children is the right and the smart thing to do. It is time we put our focus and priorities back where they belong, on our children. In doing so, it will help every child become the person they were born to be.

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about our children and, more specifically, children from low-income and working families across the United States who need a good start in life and who need high-quality childcare each and every day while their parents must earn a living. I believe that here in America every child is born with a bright light shining inside them, and it is our job as Senators to do everything we can, everything we can, to keep that light shining ever brightly. A child's potential may be limited or boundless, but whatever it is, every child deserves the opportunity to become the person they were born to be. Here in America, every child deserves high-quality childcare and early education. High-quality childcare gives low-income working families peace of mind while they work. Unfortunately, for the last 7 years, Federal funding for childcare has been essentially frozen. The neglect of Federal funding for childcare during this administration has been unconscionable. What this means is families have been locked out of access to high-quality providers. It means hundreds of thousands of children across the country have been put on waiting lists for childcare because there simply is not enough funding to provide enough slots. Working parents struggle to find childcare that will be healthy, safe, and affordable. They worry every day about finding quality care. For so many families, this is a very personal issue, especially, of course, for mothers. I remember a mother to whom I spoke in Pennsylvania 10 years ago who was worried about being able to afford childcare for her children. She said something I will never forget. She said because of the worry about childcare, she had a knot in her stomach. I think a lot of families closely identify with and understand what she was talking about. These are parents who must work. They must therefore leave their children in care that often does not meet all their needs because it is the only choice they can afford. Here are the facts. The facts show an enormous unmet need in America when it comes to childcare. A couple of points: 365,000 children in America are on waiting lists. In my home State of Pennsylvania, almost 8,000 children are on waiting lists. Across the country, 13.5 million children who are eligible, eligible for Federal childcare assistance, do not get it. That is an abomination. That is an embarrassment. It is a black mark on America. Let me say that number again: 13.5 million children who are eligible for childcare assistance are not getting it. The population of my home State of Pennsylvania is a little less than 12.5 million. So if that group of children who are eligible but not getting the childcare assistance, if that were considered a State, it would be about the fifth largest State in the country. So 13.5 million children who should be getting help are not getting it through our childcare system. Childcare providers working hard every day caring for and educating our children are barely paid above the poverty level, with little or no benefits. The average wage for a childcare worker is $9.05 an hour, which on an annual basis works out to $18,820, barely above the poverty level. Yet we charge them with the responsibility of caring for and nurturing and educating so many of our children. Finally, the last fact: parents must struggle to afford childcare and face impossible choices between losing their jobs or leaving their children in less-than-ideal care. I believe the price for holding down a good-paying job should not be problems with and worries about childcare. Low-income families also spend much higher percentages of their income on childcare, often bringing that family to the breaking point. This is all wrong. Our priorities are literally upside down. That is why I am announcing today a bill I introduced today, the Starting Early, Starting Right Act. The Starting Early, Starting Right Act. I will go through a couple of the provisions. In summary. First of all, my bill on childcare will move hundreds of thousands of children on State waiting lists into high-quality childcare. The bill will meet the needs of underserved children such as English language learners, children with developmental disabilities and other special needs, children living in very poor communities, and children in rural areas, to ensure we reach children most in need of high-quality childcare. Next, our bill will ensure States will visit and monitor childcare providers on an announced as well as unannounced basis every year. Fourth, our bill will require childcare providers who are licensed or registered to participate in 40 hours of training before they work with children as well as 24 hours on an ongoing annual basis. Next we will expand parents' access to high quality childcare opportunities by requiring States to pay childcare providers rates based upon the actual and current cost of care, what advocates know to be the 75th percentile level. Finally, it encourages States to exceed this rate for special populations of children with greater needs. This bill will improve access to high quality care for infants and toddlers by setting aside 30 percent of the bill's funding for this underserved group of children. Finally, this bill will provide greater funding for quality initiatives and encourage more States to adopt quality rating provisions to improve the quality of their programs. Quality rating improvement systems, known by the acronym QRIS, such as the successful program in Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania STARS program, give providers benchmarks as well as resources to continually improve the quality of care. I wanted to share one story before I conclude, a story about the powerful impact of high quality childcare on children and families. This story was shared with our office by a childcare provider from southeastern Pennsylvania about a family I will not identify to respect their privacy. One of the children was a 3-year-old boy. I will call him, for purposes of this presentation, Sammy. Sammy started in childcare along with his older sister and younger brother when his mother was evicted from her house following divorce. Sammy's father did not pay child support but, luckily, Sammy's grandmother took them in. They all lived in a tiny two-bedroom apartment. Dropoffs at the childcare center were difficult for this young child. With all the recent changes and trauma in his life, he was scared about his mother leaving. His mother would apologize to the staff, saying she never worked before and the children were not used to childcare. The childcare worker always assured Sammy's mother that it was no problem and that no apologies were necessary. Unfortunately, a few weeks later, Sammy's mom showed up one day in tears. She confided to the childcare worker that she had not been able to find a job and was now so desperate she had to use food stamps. She had gone to the store by bus, getting there through the public transit system. The cashier treated her disrespectfully. Because of that, she was understandably humiliated, and she began to feel hopeless and afraid she would never find a job to support her three children. But at that moment, when that mother was at her greatest need and when the family was in need, the childcare center in southeastern Pennsylvania rallied around this mother and her children. Over the next 2 years the staff of the center encouraged and supported her while she found a job, went back to school, and eventually moved out of her mother's house into an apartment of her own. Her oldest daughter was very successful and attended school with the center through first grade. She was then evaluated for the gifted program when she went to public school and second grade. The youngest son blossomed and made it through family growing pains with little difficulty. Finally, Sammy had some problems, but they were able to get the help needed because of the generosity and commitment of the people who worked in this childcare center. During that time the staff, led by the director, helped raise money for Christmas presents, doctors' bills, and Sammy's mother's application to take her pharmacy assistant's license exam. When this childcare worker left the center, Sammy's mom told her what a profound difference the staff at the center had made in her life and in the lives of her children. Like so many in our country, this group of skilled, caring, and professional early childhood educators made it possible for this family to overcome so many obstacles. The childcare worker told our staff recently: [Sammy] is the kid I think about when people ask me why I do what I do. That is what that childcare worker said about her commitment to the care of children and to that child and his family. This is what quality childcare can mean in the real world to a struggling family. It may be the difference between literally failure and success for countless families. Sometimes it can mean sheer survival. This is one example of childcare providers and families such as Sammy's all across the country. These are quiet victories we never hear much about, but they are literally life changing in impact. Increasing funding for childcare is not only the right thing to do, it is the smart thing, especially for at-risk children and children from low-income families. Research shows that high quality childcare helps low-income children enter school ready to succeed. One study found that children in high quality childcare demonstrated greater mathematical ability and thinking and attention skills and had fewer behavioral problems than any other children in second grade. I won't put the entire report in the Record, but the title of that first study is ``The Children of the Cost, Quality and Outcome Study Go to School.'' This is a June 1999 report by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, University of California at Los Angeles, and Yale University. Several others have mentioned this, but other studies have shown that low- income children who enroll in high quality early care and education programs score higher on reading, vocabulary, math, and cognitive tests, and are less likely to be held back a grade or to be arrested as a youth, and are more likely to attend college than their peers who do not enroll in such programs. Although the peace of mind for parents that comes from knowing their children are well cared for cannot be measured, the impact on stable employment can. Studies show that parents who receive childcare assistance are much more likely to remain in the workforce. The study I refer to that made these findings is a briefing paper by the Economic Policy Institute which is entitled ``Staying Employed After Welfare.'' The subheading is ``Work supports and job quality vital to employment tenure and wage growth.'' Finally, there is no question that starting early and right is truly the right thing to do. The evidence supporting high quality childcare is overwhelming and irrefutable. The evidence tells us we can keep that bright light alive in the heart and soul of every child. We can give them what they need to get a good, solid start in their lives, if only we make that choice to support high quality childcare, if only we make that a priority. I urge my colleagues in the Senate to support this bill, the Starting Early, Starting Right Act. As of now nearly 50 national and State organizations across the country have endorsed this legislation. They know, as so many of us do, that investing in early care for children is the right and the smart thing to do. It is time we put our focus and priorities back where they belong, on our children. In doing so, it will help every child become the person they were born to be.

Mr. CASEY

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

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I know we are ready to wrap up for the week. First, I want to make a couple points about a news item in today's paper. I was looking at the Washington Post this morning, page A4. There is a story about the President seeking $770 million more in world food aid. At first glance, that sounds like very good news, and it is, to a certain extent. But, unfortunately, it is good news about the future in terms of a commitment for 2009, but it doesn't do nearly enough to meet the crisis that has enveloped large parts of the world with regard to the food insecurity we are seeing all over the world. Here is the point. I and others have asked the President to increase, for this year, our food aid from the $350 million he has proposed earlier by adding another $200 million to that. In the short run, we wanted to go from $350 million to $550 million. This $770 million is great, but it is in 2009. When you think about when the food would hit the ground, so to speak, the difference is that if the President's policy stays in place for the near term, what you are going to have is food hitting the ground, totaling $350 million, in the next couple of months, when we could be adding a lot more to that. The demand really requires that we add $200 million. Even if we add the number the President put on the table, which is $770 million, that food won't hit the ground, at the earliest, until November 2008, maybe December, or maybe not even until January 2009. We are at a point now where we have news story after news story about instability across the world--governments that are not just at risk of collapse because of the food insecurity, and we have seen all the reports about rioting--but this becomes not just a humanitarian crisis, not only a government instability problem, but it really becomes fertile ground, unfortunately, for terrorism. So food insecurity is becoming a national and international security problem. We know from our history--world history especially--that in places such as Afghanistan, where there is instability, terrorism flourished. We know the stories in the last couple of years, since before 2001, about the rise of the Taliban and the rise of terrorist elements all over the world. So I hope the President, as much as he has heralded his announcement for 2009 of $770 million, I hope he will reconsider for the short term so we can add another $200 million in food aid--not a lot of money in the scheme of the aid the United States generously provides to the rest of the world--add another $200 million in the near term so food can hit the ground in these countries maybe at the end of this month or in June or July instead of waiting until November, December, or even January of next year. Not just the hunger pangs and the trauma that this causes to real people across the world but the security implication here is very grave. I hope the President will bring the same urgency to this funding as he does to his call for more war funding, frankly. I think we need a sense of urgency because of the humanitarian, moral question here but also because of the security implications. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CASEY

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

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise tonight to talk about the war in Iraq, from two different vantage points. One, the first vantage point, is from the perspective of those who have served--some of our fighting men and women who happen to be in the Reserves. I also wish to talk about a victim of this war and some thoughts I have in my heart today about the war and about this particular victim and what it tells about our country. First of all, with regard to a particular problem and then some legislation I introduced to correct it. We have a policy right now, which I would regard as unfair, that if it is fully implemented would hurt numerous Army Reserve members and consequently our national security. Last year, the Army implemented a new policy whereby Reserve members who were called to Active Duty for a period of time exceeding 180 days, will be given an option--an option of a permanent change in station assignment or a waiver request to receive a significantly reduced per diem rate for the locality to which they are temporarily assigned. This could tremendously disadvantage those who happen to be serving in the Army Reserves. While on its face it might seem harmless because it gets fairly technical, its unintended ramifications could be very costly. Reserve Members from across Pennsylvania and across the country have described this policy as a hardship that could potentially cause future problems for retention and enlistment rates. For instance, under this new policy, an Army reservist living in Philadelphia who is deployed for a temporary mobilization, as short as 9 or 12 months, for example--and this is an increasingly common occurrence because of the strain the war in Iraq has placed on our military, but this particular example means that person could face the financial necessity of selling his or her home if he or she is unable to afford to maintain both their primary residence and their temporary housing on a reduced per diem rate. In other words, they are not being helped in that interim period of, say, 9 to 12 months. This is not only a story about Pennsylvania, but it is a story that could be replicated, unfortunately, across the country. I introduced legislation yesterday entitled ``The Reserve Residence Protection Act of 2008,'' which would correct this fundamentally unfair policy. The legislation would provide a basic allowance for housing to cover the costs of maintaining the primary residence of National Guard or Reserve members when they are mobilized outside their local area. In addition, it would pay a lower second basic allowance at their mission location, if onbase housing is not provided. In January, when we passed the fiscal year 2007 National Defense Authorization Act, we passed a provision providing for the second basic housing allowance to protect the residence of Reserve members without dependents, but we left out--it is hard to believe this but we did--this body left out members with dependents. So if you had dependents and you are in this dilemma, you were left out. This legislation corrects this very important oversight. Our Nation today is relying more than ever on National Guard and Reserve troops to fulfill our missions around the world and especially to carry on the work these men and women are doing in Iraq. Without these citizen soldiers placing their lives on the line to contribute to our national security, we could not carry out all our vital missions. National Guard and Reserve members know the sacrifices they need to make whether they enlist, but no Reserve members should be forced to choose--as they are now, if this policy is implemented without the bill passing--no Reserve member should be forced to choose selling his or her primary residence in order to fulfill a temporary mobilization order or deciding not to reenlist due to this unnecessary burden. In addition to being unfair in the first instance, it acts as a disincentive to those who might want to give even more service to their country. When citizen soldiers enlist, they sign agreements to train and deploy when they are called up. That is the commitment they make to us and to our national security. However, I do not believe, and no one in this Chamber believes, that this is a one-way street or a one-way deal. The Nation, at the end of this bargain, promises to acknowledge their unique role as citizen soldiers and to aid in the transition between Active and Reserve Duty. I am proud to have introduced the Reserve Residence Protection Act of 2008 because it will ensure that America is keeping its promise, keeping our promise to those who serve in our National Guard and Reserve, and we are keeping our promise to their families as well. In conclusion tonight, I wish to talk about the war for a few moments, from the perspective of one victim, but I think this one victim tells a very dear and sad story. Today's Washington Post had a picture on the front above the headline. The headline read: ``U.S. Role Deepens in Sadr City.'' The subheadline reads, ``Fierce Battle Against Shiite Militiamen Echoes First Years Of War.'' I would say this in the context of where we are today. Tomorrow is the fifth anniversary of President Bush declaring, ``Mission Accomplished.'' That is one thing we are thinking about today and tomorrow--all the time that has passed, all the trauma to our country and to the people of Iraq since then. But also we note, in yesterday's press, in the month of April, as of April 29, yesterday, 44 Americans died in Iraq, the highest number since September of 2007. So why do I say that in the context of this story? The story, which is an ominous sign for what is happening in Sadr City with regard to our troops--and we have seen the loss of life this week. But above that story is this horrific picture. I know you may not be able to see it from a distance, but many have seen it today. I will read the caption before I show the picture. The caption reads: ``Ali Hussein is pulled from the rubble of his home after a U.S. airstrike in Baghdad's Sadr City. The 2-year-old died at a hospital.'' The picture depicts two men, one holding this 2-year-old child above his head. The 2-year-old, this child, would look like any child in America with the kind of sandals you can connect with Velcro. He has shorts on and a shirt. Unfortunately, I know you cannot see it from here, unfortunately for this child, who later died, apparently when this picture was taken he is still alive, he looks at that moment, in fact, dead. His eyes are closed, his mouth is open. You can see the soot or the dust from an explosion covering his body. So at that moment he had not died, but he died a short time after. And what does this mean? Well, it means a lot of things. It means this war grinds on, and that the lives of our soldiers, the effect on their families, and we see other victims--we do not see pictures like this very often of children dying in Iraq. This is not the fault of any one person or any side of the aisle here. It is something we have got to be more cognizant of, especially in the context of this raging debate we are having in America about our economy. And it is so important that we have a debate about our economy. It is so important that we focus on those who have lost their jobs, focus on those who have been devastated by the loss of their homes, focus on the increasingly difficult challenge that people have paying to fill their gas tank; all of the horrific and traumatic economic circumstances we face. But as that debate is taking place, we are still at war. We still have soldiers coming home who, as Lincoln said, in his second inaugural when he spoke of ``him who has borne the battle and his widow and his orphan.'' So many soldiers are coming home either maimed or coming home dead for their final rest. And even victims in Iraq, young victims such as this young boy, 2 years old. He lost his life in an airstrike. So whether it is a 2-year-old in Sadr City who happened to be Iraqi or whether it is a 2-year-old boy or girl here in America who lost their mother or their father in Iraq serving our country, we have to remind ourselves that this anniversary challenges all of us to do all we can to bring this conflict to an end. No one has a corner on the market of truth. No one knows the only way to do this. But we have to continue to worry about it and think about this war and its victims, and we have to figure out a way to get our troops out of this civil war. As we do that, unfortunately, these pictures of the victims, whether they are nameless and faceless, or whether they are, in fact, identified, as this poor child was identified, must be reminders to all of us that we have a lot of unfinished business in the Senate and in Washington when it comes to the policy that has led to the loss of life we have seen here in America. In my home State of Pennsylvania, like the Presiding Officer's, Ohio, we are up to 184 deaths and more than 1,200 wounded, in many cases grievously, permanently, irreparably wounded. So this picture reminds us that we have a lot of work to do when it comes to the policy as it relates to the war in Iraq. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 29, 2008, at 10 a.m., in room 215 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to hear testimony on ``Oversight of Trade Functions: Customs and Other Trade Agencies.''

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 29, 2008, at 2:30 p.m. to hold a nomination hearing.

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 29, 2008 at 10 a.m. in room 406 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled ``Oversight on EPA Toxic Chemical Policies.''

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 29, 2008, at 10:30 a.m., in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities of the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 29, 2008, at 4 p.m., in closed session to mark up the emerging threats and capabilities programs and provisions contained in the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2009.

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on April 29, 2008, at 2:30 p.m., to hold a closed mark-up.

Mr. CASEY. 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 a hearing entitled ``Living on the Street: Finding Solutions to Protect Runaway and Homeless Youth'' on Tuesday, April 29, 2008, at 10 a.m., in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to meet, during the session of the Senate, to conduct a hearing entitled ``When a Worker is Killed: Do OSHA Penalties Enhance Workplace Safety?'' on Tuesday, April 29, 2008. The hearing will commence at 10 a.m. in room 430 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs' Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 29, 2008, at 9:30 a.m. to conduct a hearing entitled, ``The Impact of Implementation: A Review of the REAL ID Act and the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative.''

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Seapower of the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 29. 2008, at 2:30 p.m., in closed session to mark up the Seapower Programs and Provisions contained in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009.

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support of the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 29, 2008, at 3 p.m., in closed session to mark up the Readiness and Management Support Programs and provisions contained in the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2009.

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Personnel of the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the Session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 29, 2008, at 9:30 a.m., in closed session to mark up the personnel programs and provisions contained in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal year 2009.

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now stand in recess until 2:15 p.m.

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read three times and passed; the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate; and any statements related to the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 2929, introduced earlier today by Senator Kennedy.

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations: Calendar Nos. 516, 519 through 524, 526 through 536, 542 through 564, and all nominations on the Secretary's desk in the Foreign Service, Air Force, Army, Coast Guard, Marine Corps, and Navy; that the nominations be confirmed en bloc; the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table en bloc; that no further motions be in order; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action; and that the Senate resume legislative session; that any statements relating to any of these nominations be printed in the Record.

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Kansas.