Bob Casey

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on April 1, 2014, at 9:30 a.m. to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Caterpillar's Offshore Tax Strategy.''

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 1, 2014, at 2:30 p.m.

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on April 1, 2014, at 10 a.m. in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Judicial Nominations.''

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 on April 1, 2014, at 2:30 p.m. in room SD-430 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Access to Justice: Ensuring Equal Pay with the Paycheck Fairness Act.''

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 April 1, 2014, at 2:15 p.m.

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 April 1, 2014, at 2:30 p.m. in room SR-253 of the Russell Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Reauthorization of the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act.''

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 April 1, 2014, at 2:15 p.m.

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. I would ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CASEY. Thank you very much. I rise tonight to speak about emergency unemployment compensation. We know by the acronyms around here people refer to unemployment insurance as UI. What we are talking about in the real world are literally millions of Americans affected in one way or another because they have been out of work, unemployed for long periods of time. By one estimate the number of Americans who have been out of work for 6 months or longer--and many of these individuals have been out of work for a lot more than 6 months, but when the line is drawn of 6 months or longer, it is more than 4 million Americans. It is a big number. I will talk a little bit more about the Pennsylvania impact and walk through some of those numbers. This legislation that is finally coming together after many weeks is going to be, and I think must be, a bipartisan compromise. That is the only way to move forward. It is an effort to provide an essential lifeline--that is not an overstatement and may be an understatement--an essential lifeline to middle-class families who rely upon the program to stay afloat as they are actively seeking work. I think what is sometimes lost in the discussion is these are folks who are trying to work, trying to find a job again. I would have preferred a much longer extension than the one that is being discussed and worked on. I also would have hoped that people relying upon this type of compensation--emergency unemployment compensation--would not have to see their benefits lapse. Extending this program has always been bipartisan, and we need to make sure we keep it in that vein. While our economy has made substantial improvements, we have a long way to go. Families are still hurting and they need help. Unfortunately, when families read the business page of their local newspaper, some of the numbers look pretty good. But if you are out of work for any period of time, especially 6 months or longer, it doesn't really matter what is on the business page or what the overall assessment is; it is very difficult for that individual or family because they are not working, and because they are not working they are not able to help their family. We know that in addition to being the lifeline for families--an essential connection to any kind of economic security--the other reason it is important to have the emergency unemployment compensation passed is because of the economic boost it provides. Emergency unemployment compensation provides an economic jump start. Just by way of example, in 2012, Mark Zandi, one of our more respected economists on both sides of the aisle, found that for every dollar of emergency unemployment compensation there was a $1.52 economic impact--or new economic activity resulted. That is the old spend a buck, and what do you get for spending the buck? You spend a buck on this, you get a buck fifty-two in return. That is a substantial return on that investment. Recent analysis specifically focusing on the extension of benefits in 2014 has also found a large economic boost. The Economic Policy Institute has estimated that extending unemployment benefits in 2014 would generate $37.8 billion in economic activity. We know that this is an issue--unemployment, emergency unemployment or long-term unemployment--that varies depending on the State, but we know every State has been affected and almost every community has been affected in a very substantial way. Pennsylvania is a big and diverse State with more than 12 million people. In some ways it tends to broadly reflect what is happening in various parts of the country. In Pennsylvania 73,300 people immediately stopped receiving unemployment benefits when the emergency unemployment compensation expired on December 28, 2014. That was kind of the beginning of the current crisis for these families. They have been living through a very difficult economy for years now. They have been out of work for many months, and in some cases more than a year or two, but the current crisis started for them on December 28. I can't even imagine what it is like for them. You are at the end of the holiday season, you are out of work, you have been robbed of your dignity and your ability to contribute to your family's well-being, and on top of all of that--in the middle of the holiday season when it is supposed to be a time of hope and optimism and gift giving and all kinds of family time--you, and perhaps another member of the family, lose your emergency unemployment compensation. That is where it started. Because Congress didn't have a bipartisan consensus until recently, the days and weeks started to add up. So when you go from December 28 to March 1--and we can take another look at the numbers--unfortunately, and not surprisingly, those numbers went up. As of March 1, 105,000 Pennsylvanians lost their benefits. It gets worse than that. If it continues, and there is not some relief provided through May--and this is the period that would be covered by the bill--it is estimated that 158,400 Pennsylvanians and some 2,795,300 Americans who could benefit from this bill will lose their unemployment compensation. It is very simple in terms of the choice we have to make. We need to decide in the very near future--we hope starting this week so we can begin the process of finally getting this done--whether we will help almost 2.8 million Americans and almost 160,000 Pennsylvanians. It is a very simple choice. We are going to take either one path or the other. I hope and pray we take the path that helps those almost 3 million Americans and almost 160,000 Pennsylvanians. Earlier I mentioned the economic impact of passing this kind of legislation. We know that in Pennsylvania, for example, one estimate shows that extending benefits would provide a boost to consumption and economic activity which would save an estimated 15,000 jobs. That is another way to measure the impact of this program. It is my hope that the Senate can swiftly pass this bipartisan legislation to extend emergency unemployment compensation and that the House will take it up and pass it without delay. We can't allow politics to stand in the way of helping families in need. This is a basic and fundamental issue. These families and individuals have waited far too long. I will conclude with just one example. A couple of Sundays ago--maybe 3 weeks ago--I was walking out of church in our neighborhood and a woman came up to me. I didn't know her, but I recognized her from the neighborhood. She asked me about this issue. She said: I'm out of work; when do you think it will pass? She asked me the same question a couple of weeks before that. I said: I think we are getting to the point where there is a consensus. On that particular Sunday--just a couple of weeks ago--she asked me again. When she started to ask the question, she asked it with a seriousness and an earnestness and a kind of worry in her voice that caught my attention. I said something like: I think we are starting to get there, but I can't say for sure when. When I gave that answer, she looked at me and she started to become very emotional and said: I hope you are reaching the point where you can pass something because it is going to be very difficult for me to hang on any longer. This is very tough. I felt at that moment--as an elected official who was given power by the voters to vote and represent them--if not powerless, I was not doing nearly enough for her. I am part of an institution that has not come together yet--in the Senate and in the other body as well. We have not come together to answer her question with full confidence and to say: Yes, we understand. We understand what you are up against to the extent we can--not having lived through this ourselves--and we are going to act this week or tomorrow or the next day. Not having a specific answer for her gave me a sense of not just frustration but a sense of failure. There was a sense of urgency that she brought to my attention, and I believe almost every Member here could probably tell a similar story. We have to act. We have to get this done, and we have to make sure we undertake every effort in the next few days--and I hope we are talking days now--to get this done so we can finally provide a measure of relief which is short term but will have the effect of providing a measure of relief to families who have suffered in ways I can't even imagine. With that, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I would like to commend and salute the work done by Senator Toomey and his staff, working with ours, as well as the leaders he mentioned, beginning with Majority Leader Reid and Chairman Leahy. Like Senator Toomey, I am grateful to have the opportunity to talk about both of these nominees for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania: Edward George Smith, who serves now as a judge, as well as Gerald Austin McHugh, Jr. I have known Gerald Austin McHugh, Jr., a lot longer, and I will speak about him first. I know him as Jerry. If there is one thing I could say about Jerry McHugh, it is he is a lawyer's lawyer. He is the kind of lawyer other lawyers go to for advice, for guidance, and sometimes for education. He has been a great leader in the bar, but also someone who has been a strong advocate for those who need a voice, often serving as a lawyer for those who wouldn't have an advocate absent his involvement in a case. Jerry McHugh is a Philadelphia native. He was educated at St. Joe's University in Philadelphia where he received a degree in theology, graduating summa cum laude with the highest honors. He also graduated from the University of Pennsylvania Law School, and he graduated from Penn law school with honors as well. He began his practice at the law firm of Litvin Blumberg Matusow & Young in the early 1980s. Prior to his career as a lawyer, he served two judges as a law clerk: first, Judge Spaeth, Superior Court of Pennsylvania, the second highest court in the State right next to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. He then served Judge Alfred L. Luongo, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. He then went into practice in the Litvin firm, and later the Raynes McCarty law firm in Philadelphia, PA, starting in 2004. I will highlight a few memberships which I think bear upon his work as a lawyer and the work he will do as a judge. He has been a member of the Pennsylvania Trial Lawyers and a board member of the Legal Aid Network in Philadelphia. He served the bar association in a number of capacities, including Volunteers for the Indigent Program, helping those who may not have a voice. Jerry focused his practice on complex civil litigation, including a variety of matters. I think it is noteworthy that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court three times appointed him to chair the Pennsylvania Interest on Lawyers Trust Accounts Program, a program which is very important so that when the fund is needed to help resolve a case which involves a lawyer, the fund is there. It has to be administered and overseen by folks who have the highest integrity. I know Jerry McHugh as someone who has a wide range of experience as a lawyer, an advocate, an active citizen, someone who would bring to the court a passion for justice and a sense of outrage in the face of injustice. I can't say enough about his experience and his preparation for this very important assignment he would have upon confirmation to be a judge in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. I am grateful for his willingness to serve. In addition, Judge Edward George Smith, as Senator Toomey noted, has a great career and a varied set of experiences, serving now as a judge in the Court of Common Pleas in Northampton County since January of 2002. He was elected to that position and then retained, which is the ultimate validation of someone's services on the bench in the Court of Common Pleas in Pennsylvania. Prior, as Senator Toomey noted, Judge Smith served the United States in the Navy Judge Advocate General's Corps as a captain, from 1984 until the present time. He also served in the DeRaymond & Smith law firm for about 11 years. In that time period he served as solicitor for a number of entities in the region. Edward Smith has also demonstrated his commitment to his community. He is a former president of the Boys and Girls Club of Easton, PA, former president of the Kiwanis Club of Palmer Township, former emergency medical technician in Forks Township. His 27-year military career is substantial. In addition to serving in the Navy and achieving the rank of captain, he served our country in Iraq. Just a few of his commendations are the Bronze Star medal, Meritorious Service medal, and the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation medal. Whether by way of life experience as well as legal experience or whether his experience as a judge, Judge Smith is prepared to be a judge again on a different court--in this case, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. When we make decisions about whom to nominate for either the district court or the appellate court, we always want to consider a range of characteristics, experiences, and qualifications. First and foremost, we look to people who have unquestioned integrity. We look to them as people who have a varied experience, whether in the law as a judge or in other life experiences as well. We also look to people who can do the job--not just by way of their integrity and ability but also those who have the judicial temperament, the approach to litigants, to treat them with fairness and to arrive at a measure of justice. On those qualifications and characteristics, as well as others, both of these nominees possess them in abundance. I am grateful for Senator Toomey's work with us to get this done to have two judges to be confirmed, and we are looking forward to doing that later this week. Mr. President, I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I understand there is a bill at the desk and I ask for its first reading.

Mr. CASEY. I ask for a second reading and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 323, S. Res. 365.

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee- reported substitute amendment be agreed to, the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 299, S. 611.

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise tonight to talk about Syria and the humanitarian crisis this conflict has created. This week we mark a very grim anniversary: the third anniversary of the beginning of the conflict in Syria. So we are entering our fourth year. There is much to cover and talk about. I will be brief tonight, but it is important that we don't forget what is happening to the Syrian people and especially to the children in Syria. Over the past 3 years the brutal Assad regime has unleashed a campaign of unspeakable violence against its own citizens, with 9.5 million people now needing humanitarian assistance in Syria. Syria's neighbors are overflowing with 2.5 million refugees. This week Amnesty International and Save The Children released reports that underscore the atrocities the Syrian people have suffered and continue to suffer. These reports describe the regime's use of starvation tactics against its own citizens: Syrian children dying from preventable diseases and newborns, newborn babies freezing to death in underequipped hospitals. UNICEF reported this week that Syria is now one of the most dangerous places on Earth to be a child. These unspeakable horrors confirm my worst fear about the conflict: that the most vulnerable and innocent are at the center of President Assad's siege against his own people. I want to share the story of a 10-year-old Syrian boy when he recounted his experience with the conflict, this 10-year-old boy in his account from Save The Children's 2012 report entitled ``Untold Atrocities, The Stories of Syria's Children.'' Here is one of the stories in his own words: When the shells started to fall I ran. I ran so fast. I ran and I cried at the same time. When we were being bombed we had nothing. No food, no water, no toys, nothing. There was noway to buy food--the markets and shops were bombed out. After that we came back home. To make our food last we ate just once a day. My father went without food for days because there wasn't enough. I remember watching him tie his stomach with a rope so he would not feel hungry. One day men with guns broke into our house. They pulled out our food, threw it on the floor, stamped on it, so it would be too dirty to eat. Then we had nothing at all. That is the recollection of a 10-year-old boy in Syria. And you go through the report, the catalog, really, of misery that was compiled by Save the Children from young boys and young girls of all different ages and every one of them has a tale of horror just as he outlined. Some are worse and more graphic than what I read. This most recent report by Save the Children is entitled ``A Devastating Toll,'' and it describes the impact this conflict has had on children in great detail. I commend the report to my colleagues. In an article in the New York Times, in this case by Nicholas Kristof, he said, ``Syria is today the world capital of human suffering.'' Anyone who knows the work done by Nicholas Kristof knows he has seen a lot of places in the world where there is terrible misery and suffering. So for him to say that is a substantial indication of how bad the conditions are in Syria. Of course, when he made that statement it was back in September, many months ago. As bad as it was then, it is even worse now. So today I call on all Senators, both parties, and the international community to support the efforts to bring this terrible chapter in Syrian history to a close. Peace talks could be a way to end the conflict. However, I am disappointed that the talks this past month did not lead to any tangible progress. The Assad regime has refused to negotiate in good faith. Diplomacy is part of the solution, but what we need now is to change the momentum on the ground. Peace talks and diplomacy are fine, but unless something changes on the ground, unless we can take some action or take a series of steps to affect what is happening on the ground, all the talks in the world will be to no avail. The Assad regime and their supporters calculate that they can defeat the opposition and remain in power. The United States should be working with our international partners to tip the balance in favor of the opposition. If we do, not another round of talks will yield the same result: No change. The international community took a good step in ushering in the passage of U.N. Security Resolution 2139 on February 22. With U.S. leadership, Russia and China--which have obstructed other such resolutions--finally joined the international community in demanding an end to attacks on civilians and that the Syrian regime facilitate humanitarian aid to the besieged areas. U.N. Security Council Resolution 2129 also condemned detention of journalists. We do not talk enough about this issue. Both international and Syrian journalists have bravely gone into areas of Syria that many other noncombatants would not dare, and many have paid the ultimate price. So far 60 journalists have reportedly been killed inside Syria. These courageous individuals have given us a window into the devastation inside of Syria. I know myself from reading news reports or columns by journalists in this country how much information we can glean from what is happening inside the country where very few people can go to get information. So we need to focus on that aspect of the problem in the crisis as well. But we shouldn't allow this crisis to continue worsening before our eyes. We need to act. I have been working on a bipartisan basis to put legislation and legislative support behind efforts to bring this conflict to an end. In 2012 I worked with Senator Rubio to introduce S. Res. 370, which called for democratic change in Syria, and S. 3498, the Syrian Humanitarian Support and Democratic Transition Assistance Act of 2012. In 2013 I traveled to Turkey where I met with opposition political and military leaders to discuss the situation inside of Syria. They asked for aid to help build the capacity of the political opposition as well as support to the military opposition in the form of communications gear, night vision goggles, and bulletproof vests. A year ago Senator Rubio and I proudly introduced S. 617, Syria Democratic Transition Act of 2013. This bill would, among other things, first increase U.S. assistance to victims of the conflict, both inside of Syria and outside of the country; No. 2, support a political transition by authorizing bilateral assistance to build the capacity of the moderate political opposition to prepare for a transition; No. 3, provide nonlethal equipment to vetted elements of the armed opposition; and fourth, expand sanctions against the Central Bank of Syria and designated individuals, especially any foreign entities that continue to do business with the Assad regime. After picking up 10 bipartisan cosponsors to our bill, we worked to ensure that the important aspects of S. 617 was incorporated into another bill, S. 960, the Syria Transition Support Act, which then passed the Foreign Relations Committee in a substantial bipartisan manner last year, last summer. I sent a letter to Secretary Kerry earlier this year urging him to resume nonlethal aid in order to help bolster the opposition before the talks in Switzerland. I was pleased to see that aid resumed not long after I sent the letter. We know Senators Kaine and Rubio are working on many of the principles that I and others have been pushing for the past 3 years, reiterating the need for unfettered international aid for those in need in Syria and the surrounding region, emphasizing the neutrality of medical professionals and aid providers working inside Syria. Their legislation would support civilians who have suffered during this conflict, particularly women and children. I commend Senators Kaine and Rubio for their leadership on this resolution. I intend to support this resolution when it is introduced and I urge all my colleagues to do the same. I believe we can agree on a bipartisan basis that this kind of horrific human suffering is both unconscionable and unacceptable, and we have a national security interest in ending this conflict and countering the influence of Iran and Hezbollah in the region. It is one of the reasons it is in our direct national security interests to make sure we play a substantial role in ending the conflict. Every day the conflict goes on the regime in Iran strengthens to export terrorism and all the trouble the regime imposes upon the region, and secondly, Hezbollah and other extremist elements are empowered the longer the conflict goes. We need to send a clear message from the Senate that we support efforts to bring Assad's tyrannical rule to an end and to respond to this devastating humanitarian crisis which threatens to destabilize the region and scar a generation of young Syrians. When we talk about this, we are talking now about millions of children--by one estimate 5.5 million children--being adversely impacted. Thousands--by one estimate more than 10,000--of those children have already been killed. And the ones who have not been killed have seen the kinds of horrors no human being should ever see, even as adults. It would be very difficult to recover from some of the horror and some of the trauma these children have seen. It will be with them for the rest of their lives. We have an obligation to do everything we can to provide pathways to help them, but also to change the dynamic on the battlefield so those children will never have to see this kind of horror again. Before I wrap up this segment of my remarks, I do want to note that despite the challenge here, the dynamic on the ground that hasn't gone very well, the opposition and the extremist elements within the opposition make it very difficult for us to be helpful even when our government is trying. The humanitarian crisis that I just outlined is substantial, and the refugee issue in the region is substantial. Just imagine this: In Lebanon alone there are almost 1 million refugees in a country that cannot handle that kind of number. In Jordan, the number is just below 600,000. Most people think the number is a lot higher than that in Jordan. Lebanon, as I said, is almost 1 million; Turkey is 600,000-- that number may be low, as well; more than 224,000, by estimates, in Iraq; 134,000 in Egypt. These are the numbers of refugees in just those five countries. Millions of people are being impacted, millions more within the country. If you subtract the refugees who have left the country and subtract the numbers I talked about with regard to children, just the adults within Syria who have been affected are in the millions. Despite all that horror I think it is important for us to point out that our government has helped enormously. The Obama administration deserves a lot of credit, commendation for what they have done already. They get criticized a lot, but we should highlight some of the good things they have done. The humanitarian assistance provided by the administration, paid for by U.S. taxpayers, is substantial and should be noted. It is now more than $1.7 billion. No country comes even close when it comes to the support our taxpayers and our government have provided. About half of that $1.7 billion has been to help within the country. By one USAID estimate, about $878 million is for help within Syria. The balance of that, something on the order of a little more than $850 million, of course, is helping refugees in neighboring countries. So substantial help by the American people should be noted. I think we need to figure out ways to do more. There is probably not a lot of room for more dollars and humanitarian aid, but we should consider that if we can. But there are lots of ways we can help here without directly engaging any of our troops or any of our military might on the ground. There are lots of ways to help and we urge the administration to keep focus on a new and more substantial strategy, which I know they have been working on. They should consult with Congress and work with us as we move forward.

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 ask unanimous consent to speak as if in morning business.

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, we know it is well past time--and that is an understatement--to take up the reauthorization of this important legislation, the Child Care and Development Block Grant Program, which has not been reauthorized since 1996. It is hard to comprehend that, but that is true. In the nearly two decades since, our understanding of early childhood development and the importance of high-quality childcare in early learning has expanded dramatically. Investing in high-quality early learning opportunities, such as childcare and prekindergarten, sets children on the path to success. I like to say if children learn more now, they will earn more later, and that is why there is a direct nexus with the quality of the childcare we provide. The quality of early learning connects directly with our economic growth. Our gross domestic product--our future economic growth and success as a country--is substantially dependent on the quality of early learning and the quality of childcare. It is good we are focused in a bipartisan way on the childcare aspects of this challenge. We must update the Federal standards that relate to childcare to ensure that the Federal Government is supporting high-quality childcare--not just any quality childcare--for low-income children. The bill we are considering sets a new standard for childcare in America. It makes sure Federal dollars are going to providers who are committed to providing childcare that meets certain criteria, such as health and safety standards. Many of these changes reflect proposals I put forth in previous Congresses to improve the child care and development block grant. The Starting Early Starting Right Act was legislation I introduced. I am encouraged we are able to reach consensus on many of the provisions I supported in the past and that they are represented in this bill. I, and I know many others, would have liked to have gone further to provide more of an investment both by way of dollars and more of an investment by way of quality, but these are significant changes and we should all support them. In terms of the increase in incentives that I would hope we can do at a future date, I described them in this way: incentives for States to invest in quality ratings and improvement systems. We know a lot of acronyms. This is QRIS, Quality Rating and Improvement Systems, which encourages childcare providers to make continuous improvements in the care they provide and the facilities they use often through financial incentives, such as higher reimbursement rates, when a certain quality level is reached. However, I still believe the bill we have in front of us represents a substantial and significant improvement over the current law. We owe our most vulnerable children nothing less. For the first time we are requiring all States to develop a robust health and safety set of standards and to institute a consistent background check for childcare providers. We are requiring States to formally coordinate their early learning programs to improve service coordination and delivery. We are allowing children who qualify for a subsidy to receive 1 year of care before their eligibility is redetermined. This will help promote stability and continuity for the entire family and encourage the child to develop strong relationships with his or her teachers and peers in childcare. Finally, we are increasing the investment in quality from the 4- percent quality set-aside per year--currently required in law--to 10- percent within 5 years, including a separate set-aside for infants and toddlers. Quality is a continuum and continual investment. It is not a one-time purchase. It is something we need to support and sustain. This bill is about investing in our children's future and supporting working parents. I urge all of my colleagues to join us in supporting the CCBDG reauthorization--a nice acronym for a long bill. I mentioned earlier that if children get quality early care and learning, they will learn more now and earn more later when they are in the workforce. There is no question about that. All the studies indicate that. We know that. There is no disagreement about that. We also have to recognize that there are so many families--somewhere in the millions--that have two parents working, and we know the stress and challenge that creates. In addition, we have just come through the worst economic downturn since the 1930s. Climbing out of that hole and having all of the economic pressures on these families, they are often also heavily burdened or even crushed by the cost of childcare. We have an opportunity with this legislation to move forward and make needed changes on issues, such as health and safety standards and making sure we are setting aside more dollars for infants and toddlers. There are a whole range of actions we are taking, but we still have a ways to go to speak directly to the needs that working families have in terms of the cost of childcare and ensuring the kind of quality they have a right to expect. Finally, on a related topic, we need to make sure we are making a national and substantial commitment to early learning. The President has talked about this issue. People from both parties and CEOs tell us about it all the time. We need to get together on these other issues even as we pass this bipartisan legislation. I wish to commend the work of Senator Harkin and Ranking Member Alexander, who are working to get this done, and the good work over several years now done by Senator Mikulski and Senator Burr. We need to get this done and then get to work on some of the childcare and early learning challenges our country faces and families are often burdened with. I yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the period for morning business be extended until 8 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the nomination of Debo Adegbile to serve as Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. As a representative of the city of Philadelphia, the Philadelphia police, and the family of slain officer Daniel Faulkner, I feel compelled to voice my concerns about this nomination for the record. In 2009, while Mr. Adegbile was serving as director of litigation for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Legal Defense and Education Fund, that organization took on the defense of Mumia Abu-Jamal. Mr. Abu-Jamal had 27 years earlier been convicted of the first-degree murder of Daniel Faulkner, a Philadelphia police officer. The political theatrics surrounding this case have deprived Officer Faulkner's widow Maureen Faulkner and others of the orderly process of justice they should have received as victims of a heinous crime. I believe strongly that people should have the right to criminal defense no matter what the circumstances. However, I am troubled by the legal defense fund's involvement in Mr. Abu-Jamal's defense at a time when he was ably represented by other counsel. The facts in the murder of Officer Daniel Faulkner while in the line of duty are not in dispute. The events and theatrics that surrounded this trial and that were fueled by the defense team here took an incredible toll on the Faulkner family, the law enforcement community, and the city of Philadelphia. From as early as the pretrial stage, Mr. Abu-Jamal disrupted the court proceedings by demanding representation by a nonattorney, refusing to accept judicial rulings on his motions and reportedly threatening the judge with violence. Since his conviction, Mr. Abu-Jamal and his supporters have engaged in an effort to discredit the judges, the Philadelphia police, Maureen Faulkner, and Officer Faulkner in this case. For many of my constituents, a vote for this nominee would have validated the activities of the supporters of Mr. Abu Jamal. Mr. Adegbile has had a long and accomplished career as a civil rights advocate, including arguing twice before the Supreme Court in defense of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, a landmark piece of civil rights legislation. For years he has been actively working to defend voting rights and recently has been engaged in efforts to restore the protections of the Voting Rights Act for millions of Americans following the Supreme Court's ruling in Shelby County v. Holder. Mr. Adegbile's work on the Voting Rights Act is commendable, and all Americans benefit from his commitment to ensuring equal access to the ballot. I take very seriously my duty to advise and consent, and I have considered Mr. Adegbile's history of public service as well as my concerns about his involvement in the Abu-Jamal case. Pennsylvanians and citizens across the country deserve to have full confidence in their public representatives--both elected and appointed. The Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights is one of the top law enforcement positions in our Nation, and the full faith and confidence of the law enforcement community is an important consideration for a nominee for this position. The vicious murder of Officer Faulkner in the line of duty and the events that followed in the 30 years since his death have left open wounds for Maureen Faulkner and her family as well as the city of Philadelphia. After careful consideration and having met with Mr. Adegbile as well as the Fraternal Order of Police, I decided to vote against this nomination. I note the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I wish to pay tribute to the exceptional life of Tom Gola, a Philadelphia basketball legend, who passed away on January 26, 2014. Mr. Gola was born on January 13, 1933, to Ike and Helen Gola in Philadelphia, PA. His passion for basketball developed early in life and he became a star while playing for La Salle College High School. While there, he led his team to the Philadelphia Catholic League Championship and won the Markward Award as the league's top player. As one of the most celebrated high school athletes at the time, many expected Mr. Gola to attend one of the big basketball schools in the country. Instead, he decided to stay close to home in Pennsylvania to attend La Salle University, where he once again quickly distinguished himself as a star player. In 1952, he led La Salle to a NIT championship, earning the championship's Most Valuable Player Award in the process. Two years later, he led the team to its first and only NCAA championship, alain earning the honor of tournament MVP. Mr. Gola continued his exceptional collegiate basketball career with: a second place finish in the 1955 NCAA tournament; Player of the Year Awards in 1954 and 1955; a place on three consecutive first-team all-American squads, and; achieving the NCAA record of 2,201 career rebounds, a record which stands today. The familiar cheer of ``Go, Gola! Go!'' still echoes in the memories of Philadelphia sports fans of a certain age. Another Philadelphia sports legend, the great Wilt Chamberlain once said: Growing up, you whispered the name of Tom Gola. He was like a saint. Following his extraordinary college career, Mr. Gola entered the NBA in 1955 to join his hometown team, the Philadelphia Warriors. He helped the Warriors win an NBA Championship the following year. He is one of only two players who played on NIT, NCAA and NBA championship teams. A five-time NBA All-Star, Mr. Gola was enshrined into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame in 1976. Following his retirement from the NBA, Mr. Gola focused his considerable talents on hi community. He was elected to the Pennsylvania House of Representatives and later served as the city of Philadelphia's Controller. Mr. Gola also returned to his alma mater as the head coach of the La Salle Explorers for two seasons. Today, the university's multipurpose arena bears his name as a testament to the indelible mark he left on the school. I ask my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to Tom Gola for his remarkable achievements in basketball and his service to Pennsylvania. My thoughts and pray are with his wife Caroline and his son Thomas as they mourn his loss. May he rest in peace.

Mr. CASEY

Mr. CASEY. Madam President, I wish to discuss the ABLE Act, which is a piece of legislation that has been the subject of enormous and substantial bipartisan support both in the Senate and in the House. We know that a lot of families have relied upon and have really benefited from the so-called 529 plans--a section of the IRS Code that allows families to save tax-free for education. What we are trying to do with the ABLE Act is to replicate that opportunity so that families who have a loved one with a disability--it may be one disability or it may be more than one, but every family who has a loved one with a disability should have the opportunity to save just as they might for education in a tax-free manner, in a tax-advantaged way. We have been working on this legislation for a number of years. Senator Richard Burr, the senior Senator from North Carolina, and I have led this effort in the Senate. As I said, it would build upon that 529 model for education. The ABLE Act enjoys the support of 63 Senators, 63 cosponsors. In the House, it is up to 335 Members. That is why we mentioned that over 400 Members of Congress agree. That is why the hashtag #passtheABLEact! is important to highlight. There are few measures which come before the Senate or the House which enjoy that kind of bipartisan support. In the Senate there are no more than 5 bills that enjoy the support of 63 or more Senators. We are pleased about that, but we are not done yet. We still have a long way to go to get this legislation done. So as important as it is to highlight the numbers, it is also important to highlight the people who did the hard work to get us there. I want to commend Members of the House and Senate, but the ones who are worthy of even more substantial commendation would be a lot of individuals, some of whom are here in Washington this week: The National Down Syndrome Society. I was just with folks from the National Down Syndrome Society this morning over on the House side. They allow a Senator to go across to the House side. Our current Presiding Officer knows this, as she served there. Once in a while we get to go over there, and they were kind enough to invite us over there this morning. They have done remarkable work on this legislation and are continuing their advocacy today, even as we speak. We are grateful for their work. Autism Speaks is another great organization that has done enormous work to bring us to where we are today, and the Arc as well. So many Americans know a lot about the Arc, the National Down Syndrome Society, as well as Autism Speaks. So we are grateful for that support, but we still have a ways to go. One of the best ways to ensure this legislation will get over the goal line--I don't want to use too many football analogies here--but if we are getting close, even if we are in the so-called red zone, we are not in the end zone yet. We have a ways to go. But one of the best ways to make sure that happens is to talk about the real people that legislation like this would affect. I mentioned the number of supporters we have, but I didn't mention the full name of the bill: Achieving a Better Life Experience. That is what the acronym ABLE stands for. But I like to think about it in this way as well. I have a constituent, Sara Wolff, who is with us here today. She knows the rules don't allow me to indicate where she is today, but she is very close by, and she is with us today. I am grateful Sara is with us because she is a great example of someone who has a disability but is very able. She has a disability, but on a regular basis--hour after hour, day after day--she finds a way to overcome her disability or to manage it as best she can. She is a remarkable speaker. She gives as many speeches in a week as I give, and I am an elected official. She is well-known in northeastern Pennsylvania where we live. We live in the same county, but I live in Scranton and she lives in Moscow. She works for the O'Malley & Langan Law Offices. She is a law clerk there. But as smart as she is on the law and these issues, probably the most significant part of her whole personality is the dynamism she brings to issues. She is a dynamic person. She does something few of us do well-- even people who work here as elected officials--because she knows how to engage with people. She knows how to deliver a message. She knows how to be candid and direct but to do it in a way that is engaging and warm and friendly. So once in a while I will take instruction from Sara Wolff. But even more than that, I take inspiration from her. Sara is someone who is very able and talented and committed, but she is among the many Americans--Pennsylvanians in my case--asking us to pass this legislation so that if a family such as hers wants to begin to save to help pay for a whole range of services for an individual with a disability, they can do so in a tax-advantaged environment in order to save over time, and do it in a manner that doesn't put them at a disadvantage from a tax standpoint down the road. So Sara is a great example of why the ABLE Act should pass, and she is doing more than her share to make sure that it does pass. So I am grateful to Sara Wolff for doing that, and I am especially grateful to people like Sara, who like a lot of us at some point in our lives have to overcome a tragedy. Sara lost her mother Connie not too long ago to a sudden and rapid illness. But she has been able to deal with that tragedy and still help us day in and day out to get the ABLE Act passed. I will highlight one more story and then I will conclude. Angie Cain is a 28-year-old who lives in Indianapolis, IN, and like Sara Wolff she lives with Down syndrome. Angie has five different jobs and works 5 days a week. She works paid positions at Kohl's on Mondays and at the YMCA on Fridays. On Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays she volunteers for several organizations, including a hospital, a Down syndrome office in Indiana, and the Alzheimer's unit of an assisted living facility. Unfortunately, like so many Americans with disabilities, Angie is unable to save enough to cover her future needs--the same problem I just highlighted--if we don't change the law with the ABLE Act. Under current law, she must have less than $2,000 in assets in order to be eligible for Supplemental Security Income. That doesn't make a lot of sense, and that is one of the reasons we have to change the law. Angie is, therefore, forced to limit the amount of money she earns and work multiple paid and volunteer positions in order to benefit from the steady benefits that SSI provides. Angie would like to live independently and, at the same time, she knows that she has limitations in that regard because without adequate savings and income, because of the current state of the law, she is forced to live with her family. She would like to be independent. That is something we all yearn for at some point in our lives. Angie's family is worried about her living and financial situation, especially down the line, years from now, when her family may not be with her any longer. Stories such as Angie Cain's story, the story of Sara Wolff, and individuals across the country like Sara and Angie are the reason we have to pass the ABLE Act. They don't need a lot of help. They need just a tool, one tool in their toolbox, to be able to reach down and have the opportunity to have their families save in a way that will help them down the road. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 19 percent of Americans live with one or more disabilities, 12 percent live with severe disabilities, and many of them are unsure about their ability to cover their basic expenses in the future because they are unable to build adequate savings. We talk a lot about how folks should save. We encourage people to save for college. We encourage families to do that, and we encourage people to save for all kinds of things. Just the principle itself--to save and to conserve--is a good one to espouse and to advocate. But we have to give, in this instance, families an opportunity to save for a loved one with a disability or, in some cases, more than one disability. So whether it is Sara Wolff or Angie or others, we have to give them an opportunity to do that and give their families that opportunity. When you see that number of Members of Congress--400--coming together, I believe it is not simply a question of whether this will pass but only a question of when the ABLE Act will pass. I hope that will take place in the next couple of months and that we can get every single Member of the Senate and House to join us. This is one major thing we could do this year to show the American people we get it when it comes to one challenge that a lot of families face.