Christopher Dodd

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senator Hatch, Senator Reed, Senator Burr, Senator Ensign and Senator Franken in introducing the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Reauthorization Act of 2010, a bill that will benefit some of the most gravely ill patients--those in need of a blood stem cell transplant. The bill we are introducing today reauthorizes the vital work being done for patients as a result of the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005. I first joined Senator Hatch more than seven years ago on legislation to create a national network of cord blood banks and a cord blood registry. Five years ago, when the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee took up cord blood legislation, Senator Hatch and I, working with many of our colleagues on and off the committee, expanded the scope of our legislation to include a reauthorization of the national bone marrow program and updated the cord blood provisions to be consistent with the recommendations made by the Institute of Medicine's report, ``Cord Blood: Establishing a National Hematopoietic Stem Cell Bank Program.'' In the end, that legislation, the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005, passed the senate unanimously. Since then we have learned a lot of about adult stem cell transplantation. There are currently twelve public cord blood banks across the U.S. and cord blood cells account for 22 percent of all transplants as of 2009. Among minorities, transplants using cord blood as the cell source are even higher. As of 2005, survival rates for transplants involving an unrelated donor are almost identical to those of a related donor which represents a near doubling of the survival rates for unrelated donor recipients over the past 15 years. The bill we are introducing today builds on the success of the National Cord Blood Inventory and the national bone marrow transplantation program, making minor improvements to both. Among the most critical changes to the law is the prioritization of the creation of new cord blood collection sites so that we can increase the National Cord Blood Inventory. The 2005 law set a goal of collecting and maintaining 150,000 new units of high-quality cord blood. Unfortunately, the inventory is well below that goal and the transplantation needs of patients. In part, that is because the funding has not kept pace with what was authorized by the 2005 law. While I applaud President Obama for including additional funding for the National Cord Blood Inventory and the national bone marrow transplantation program in his fiscal year 2011 budget, I find it regrettable that President Bush did not provide full funding for these programs in any of his budgets, despite his vocal support for these programs and adult stem cells generally. In my own state of Connecticut, there are more than 128,000 donors participating in the National Marrow Donor Program. There is some very exciting work going on at Yale University and Yale New Haven Hospital involving marrow or cord blood transplantation. In fact, last May, I had the privilege of meeting Ms. Teena Conquest, a bone marrow donor from Middletown, Connecticut, and the recipient of her bone marrow, Rebecca Christy, from Iowa. It was truly inspiring to hear their story and how one woman's generosity saved another woman's life. I am deeply disappointed that there are currently no cord blood collection sites in the state of Connecticut through the National Cord Blood Inventory program. Currently, more than 160 hospitals in the U.S. have an agreement with a public cord blood bank through the National Cord Blood Inventory program to perform collections for banks within the National Marrow Donor Program network. While none of those hospitals are in Connecticut, it is my strong hope that with this reauthorization, we will be prioritizing the establishment of new cord blood collection sites for the public program. I strongly encourage hospitals in Connecticut who meet the criteria to become a cord blood collection site and help increase the inventory of cord blood so that patients in need can find a match. As was the case for Ms. Conquest and Ms. Christy, the therapeutic benefits of bone marrow are tremendous and well established. Bone marrow transplants have been used for nearly half a century to treat patients suffering from diseases such as leukemia, Hodgkin's Disease, sickle cell anemia, and others. The National Marrow Donor Program, NMDP, provides a single point of access, the National Registry, to nearly 8 million volunteer bone marrow donors and 160,000 cord blood units, including more than 28,000 federally funded units in the National Cord Blood Inventory. The NMDP has helped countless patients and families understand their disease and treatment options with educational resources and one-on-one case management support. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me and my colleagues in support of this important legislation. It is my strong hope that we can move quickly to mark up this legislation in September and shortly thereafter pass this bill in the Senate.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senator Hatch, Senator Reed, Senator Burr, Senator Ensign and Senator Franken in introducing the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Reauthorization Act of 2010, a bill that will benefit some of the most gravely ill patients--those in need of a blood stem cell transplant. The bill we are introducing today reauthorizes the vital work being done for patients as a result of the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005. I first joined Senator Hatch more than seven years ago on legislation to create a national network of cord blood banks and a cord blood registry. Five years ago, when the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee took up cord blood legislation, Senator Hatch and I, working with many of our colleagues on and off the committee, expanded the scope of our legislation to include a reauthorization of the national bone marrow program and updated the cord blood provisions to be consistent with the recommendations made by the Institute of Medicine's report, ``Cord Blood: Establishing a National Hematopoietic Stem Cell Bank Program.'' In the end, that legislation, the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005, passed the senate unanimously. Since then we have learned a lot of about adult stem cell transplantation. There are currently twelve public cord blood banks across the U.S. and cord blood cells account for 22 percent of all transplants as of 2009. Among minorities, transplants using cord blood as the cell source are even higher. As of 2005, survival rates for transplants involving an unrelated donor are almost identical to those of a related donor which represents a near doubling of the survival rates for unrelated donor recipients over the past 15 years. The bill we are introducing today builds on the success of the National Cord Blood Inventory and the national bone marrow transplantation program, making minor improvements to both. Among the most critical changes to the law is the prioritization of the creation of new cord blood collection sites so that we can increase the National Cord Blood Inventory. The 2005 law set a goal of collecting and maintaining 150,000 new units of high-quality cord blood. Unfortunately, the inventory is well below that goal and the transplantation needs of patients. In part, that is because the funding has not kept pace with what was authorized by the 2005 law. While I applaud President Obama for including additional funding for the National Cord Blood Inventory and the national bone marrow transplantation program in his fiscal year 2011 budget, I find it regrettable that President Bush did not provide full funding for these programs in any of his budgets, despite his vocal support for these programs and adult stem cells generally. In my own state of Connecticut, there are more than 128,000 donors participating in the National Marrow Donor Program. There is some very exciting work going on at Yale University and Yale New Haven Hospital involving marrow or cord blood transplantation. In fact, last May, I had the privilege of meeting Ms. Teena Conquest, a bone marrow donor from Middletown, Connecticut, and the recipient of her bone marrow, Rebecca Christy, from Iowa. It was truly inspiring to hear their story and how one woman's generosity saved another woman's life. I am deeply disappointed that there are currently no cord blood collection sites in the state of Connecticut through the National Cord Blood Inventory program. Currently, more than 160 hospitals in the U.S. have an agreement with a public cord blood bank through the National Cord Blood Inventory program to perform collections for banks within the National Marrow Donor Program network. While none of those hospitals are in Connecticut, it is my strong hope that with this reauthorization, we will be prioritizing the establishment of new cord blood collection sites for the public program. I strongly encourage hospitals in Connecticut who meet the criteria to become a cord blood collection site and help increase the inventory of cord blood so that patients in need can find a match. As was the case for Ms. Conquest and Ms. Christy, the therapeutic benefits of bone marrow are tremendous and well established. Bone marrow transplants have been used for nearly half a century to treat patients suffering from diseases such as leukemia, Hodgkin's Disease, sickle cell anemia, and others. The National Marrow Donor Program, NMDP, provides a single point of access, the National Registry, to nearly 8 million volunteer bone marrow donors and 160,000 cord blood units, including more than 28,000 federally funded units in the National Cord Blood Inventory. The NMDP has helped countless patients and families understand their disease and treatment options with educational resources and one-on-one case management support. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me and my colleagues in support of this important legislation. It is my strong hope that we can move quickly to mark up this legislation in September and shortly thereafter pass this bill in the Senate.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, as in executive session, I ask unanimous consent that at 9:30 a.m., Tuesday, August 3, immediately after the opening of the Senate, the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 1001, the nomination of Elena Kagan to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, and that during Tuesday's session, the time be divided as follows: Chairman Leahy, first 30 minutes; Senator Sessions, second 30 minutes; with the time from 10:30 to 11 equally divided and controlled between the leaders or their designees; the time from 11 to 12:30 equally divided and controlled, with the majority controlling the first 45 minutes; the time from 2:15 to 8:15 p.m. divided in 1 hour alternating blocks, with the majority controlling the first block, with any additional time beyond 8:15 p.m. continuing to be divided in 1 hour alternating blocks of time.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Banking Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. 1055 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a Boxer amendment, which is at the desk, be agreed to; the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed; the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate and that any statements be printed in the Record.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Banking Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 2097 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and that any statements be printed in the Record.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I understand that H.R. 5901 has been received from the House and is at the desk.

Mr. DODD. I ask for its second reading and object to my own request.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 604 submitted earlier today.

Mr. DODD. I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related to the resolution be printed in the Record.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I came to the Senate floor to express some comments on a different subject matter, but I would be remiss if I didn't express my gratitude to my friend for those very generous comments about our work on behalf of one out of four Americans who are under the age of 18--our children. As I have said to my friend from Pennsylvania, a relatively new Member of this body, although I will no longer be a Member come next January, after three decades--30 years--in the Senate, I take great comfort in knowing that he and the Senator from Oregon, the Presiding Officer, who is also a member of this committee, have expressed such tremendous interest in this subject matter since the very first days they arrived in the Senate. Like anyone else, I watched a number of people who were leaving as I was coming in three decades ago; people such as Hubert Humphrey, George McGovern, Bob Dole, Fritz Mondale--Vice President but also a Member of this body--and of course Ted Kennedy during our years together here, do tremendous work over the years on behalf of children and working families in our country. So I take a great deal of comfort in knowing that as I walk out of this Chamber there are people such as Jeff Merkley and Bob Casey who are going to continue this effort on behalf of those one in four Americans who don't vote, who don't have lobbyists, who don't make campaign contributions, and who don't have any of the traditional trappings that constituencies have to bring their case before the Congress of the United States. America's children will continue to have champions who are going to insist that children be at the forefront in the debates about resources and how we can provide for their needs. So I thank the Senator immensely for his work on this subject matter and look forward to watching with a great deal of pride as he continues those efforts. Just know that the Senator will have a cheerleader outside who will be doing everything he can to encourage his efforts. So I thank him very much for his comments.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I am deeply concerned because this is a matter that, unlike an awful lot of the subject matters that we bring up and engage in, has bipartisan support in this Chamber; that is, the ability of our first responders to be able to collectively bargain in the workplace. These are our firefighters, our police officers, and our emergency personnel. This is a bill that was championed by Senator Kennedy before he left us--a bill that has been introduced by our good friend and colleague from New Hampshire, Judd Gregg, along with five other the Republican Members of this Chamber, along with many Democrats. In fact, it goes back over a decade, this issue of seeing to it that these, the most celebrated, the most highly endorsed and supported of public employees, would have the right to collectively bargain. This is not something guaranteed in all States. Many States do it, but many do not. So I am terribly disappointed that once again, just days away from the adjournment of this Congress, these individuals who consistently enjoy the outspoken praise of public officials for their work, when it comes down to actually doing something on their behalf we find the Congress missing the opportunity to step up. I hope I am wrong about this. We have a lot of issues to grapple with in the coming days, I know. But my hope is that the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act will be an item we can pass before the adjournment of this Congress. As I mentioned, Mr. President, this is a bipartisan measure that would guarantee our Nation's firefighters, our law enforcement officers, and our emergency medical personnel the right to bargain collectively with their employers. Again, I thank Senator Gregg, who is a champion of this proposal, for his longstanding commitment to this critically important piece of legislation, which was originally championed in the Senate by our good friend, Ted Kennedy. We ask our Nation's first responders to put their lives on the line each and every day in our country. What they do is more than a job. I think most of us appreciate that it is a calling. It is a vocation. Throughout my career in public service, I have had the privilege to meet and work with, as I know most of my colleagues have, countless first responders--police, firefighters, emergency medical personnel. They do exceptional work under the most difficult of circumstances, and the American public appreciates their service more than they do any other people in public life. In particular, I have come to appreciate the unique and multi-faceted challenges faced by firefighters. We have all felt our chests tighten and our pulses quicken with anxiety at the sound of a fire engine screaming through town. We have seen the determination on the faces of the people on those rigs. For them, all the commotion is just another day at the office. When the unthinkable happens--a devastating hurricane, industrial accident, terrorist attack, or three-alarm fire--these brave men and women are the first on the scene, hurtling into danger, to save lives. Just this past year firefighters in my home State of Connecticut have been faced with many serious challenges--and have met them every time. In February, when a massive natural gas explosion at a power plant under construction in Middletown, CT, killed six people and injured more than two dozen others, firefighters from eight surrounding towns rushed to the scene. They remained for hours and days afterwards, searching for victims and working to ensure that all the plant workers were accounted for. When massive flooding hit several parts of my State, local firefighters worked around the clock responding to calls from panicked residents. They dealt with hazardous materials and even helped to pump out flooded basements. They are committed to keeping our communities safe, even when that means putting their own lives at risk for the sake of protecting ours. In the abstract, this can be hard to keep in perspective. But unfortunately, the community of Bridgeport, CT, was recently reminded just what this commitment means. A week ago, two firefighters, Lieutenant Steven Velasquez and Michel `Mitch' Baik, were killed while fighting a fire in a home in that community. Three of their colleagues were also injured. All of these individuals were incredibly brave--they entered a burning building to search for survivors and try to prevent the emergency from spreading. This tragedy highlights just how selfless and courageous these people are each and every day. And it should remind us all that, just as they have made a solemn commitment to us, so too must we affirm our commitment to them. Part of our commitment is to ensure that they never, ever, put their lives at risk on our behalf without the proper equipment and training. I have worked tirelessly over the years to ensure that this commitment is kept. That is why I authored the Firefighter Investment and Response Enhancement--FIRE--Act back in 2000. This legislation created the first competitive grant program to assist local fire departments in addressing a wide range of equipment, training, and other fire prevention needs. Senator John Warner, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, was my partner in that effort, making it possible for it to become law. To date this program has provided more than $5.2 billion directly to fire departments. And these grants have not just gone to the largest metropolitan areas. Fire departments in small and medium-sized communities across the country have received funds through the program--including departments in 150 of the 169 towns in my home State of Connecticut. In 2003, we built on the success of the FIRE program by passing the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response Firefighters--SAFER--bill, which I also authored. This program provides funds to ensure that fire departments are adequately staffed. Too many of these rigs go out with only two or three people on them when a minimum of four is required to make sure that they are safe doing their jobs. Since the program began, more than $1.1 billion has helped to put over 75,000 additional firefighters in our Nation's firehouses. I am extremely proud to have been able to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to get these important programs enacted. But our commitment to our public safety community is still not complete. As the Presiding Officer knows, the bipartisan Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act is a critical next step towards fulfilling our commitment to the men and women who keep us safe. As we know, firefighters, police, and emergency medical personnel have a special place in the workforce and in society. They are respected for what they do. But they are also respected for doing it no matter what they face. Once they get the call, they don't get to decide whether to take it or not--they just go. We depend on them every day, and they respond with unquestioned dedication. They are looking out for our well-being. Do we not owe it to them to look out for theirs? In many States these brave men and women are deprived one of the most basic rights that workers in America have--to bargain collectively with their employers. The right to collectively bargain has been proven over time to improve cooperation between employers and employees. This cooperation leads to better, fairer compensation and benefits. It contributes to improved work conditions and safety. And it makes the quality of services better and more efficient for everyone. Quality and efficiency is vitally important in the field of public safety. It can be the difference between an emergency and a tragedy. I know that improving public safety is a goal that I share with every single Member of this body. The Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act is a carefully crafted bill that grants these rights to all first responders, without disrupting their vital role in emergency response. While it requires that all States provide public safety workers with the most basic of collective bargaining rights, it also gives States the flexibility to implement plans that work best for them. These include the right to form and join unions, and to collectively bargain over wages, hours and working conditions--rights that many States, including my State of Connecticut, already provide to these workers. The bill also allows States with right-to-work laws--which prohibit contracts requiring union membership for employment--to continue to enforce those laws. Importantly, the bill explicitly provides for safeguards against the disruption of emergency services. It does this with strong language explicitly prohibiting any strikes, lockouts, or other work stoppages. Of course this legislation is about more than negotiating wages, hours, and benefits. For our Nation's first responders, this cooperation means so much more. It means that the men and women who risk their lives every day keeping us safe can sit down and relate their real life experiences to their employers. It also means that their on-the-ground expertise will be used to help public safety agencies improve services in the community. When tragedies have struck us, from the September 11 attacks to Hurricane Katrina, to the house fire in Bridgeport, CT, just last week, these workers were the first on the scene and the last to leave. We owe them everything, and all they ask in return is the dignity and respect in the workplace that all workers deserve. The legislation before us is important to them; therefore, it should be important to us, regardless of panty and ideology. As I say, this legislation already has strong bipartisan support in this Chamber. All we are looking for is the opportunity to bring it up and vote yes or no. After almost 20 years, with a well-crafted bill that protects against work stoppages and strikes and respects so-called right-to-work States--can we not guarantee this basic right of collective bargaining? I hope before we adjourn that, after 20 years and at a unique opportunity, after all the speeches that have been given in praise and gratitude for the service of these men and women, we can give something back to them. This is the one thing that our first responders--our police, our emergency medical personnel and our firefighters--have asked of us. They appreciate all the wonderful speeches, all the great remarks, all the accolades, all the commendations. But what they would like to have, more than anything else, is for us to recognize their right to collectively bargain. That is something we ought to be able to give these fine men and women who serve our country every single day. I urge my colleagues to give us one chance to vote on this legislation and decide whether we want to say to them how much we appreciate what they do. That is what we are asking for before we adjourn in this Congress. I yield the floor.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 3689, introduced earlier today by Senators Leahy and Sessions.

Mr. DODD. 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 interviewing action or debate, and that any statements be printed in the Record.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Tomorrow we will begin debate on the Kagan nomination. Debate will be controlled in alternating blocks of time.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it adjourn under the previous order.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. on Tuesday, August 3; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate then proceed to executive session to consider the nomination of Elena Kagan to be an Associate Justice of the United States, as provided for under the previous order; and that the Senate recess from 12:30 until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly caucus meetings.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I wish to make note of the fact that a young man who has worked with me for 3 years in this body and who is present on the floor today will be leaving to go to graduate school. I thank Ben Weingrod for his tremendous service to the Senate. Maybe this will be his last opportunity to be a staff member in a floor proceeding. I express my gratitude to him for his service to our country and as a member of our staff over the past 3 years. I thank him very much. Free-Trade Agreements I rise today to talk about the importance of our relationship with Latin America and the role that free trade plays in those relationships. In particular, I wish to emphasize the need for action, in my view, by the Congress to implement free-trade agreements signed with the nations of Colombia and Panama. President Obama described the importance of these agreements in his State of the Union Address earlier this year. I know the President and the U.S. Trade Representative are currently working on the remaining details, and it is my hope that the President will soon submit legislation to the Congress to implement these agreements. While the recession has been a challenge to economies across the globe, it also has given us the opportunity to soberly reevaluate our global relationships and look to build stronger partnerships in places we may have overlooked in the past. The most logical place, in my view, to start that review is Latin America. For too long, American policy has treated Latin America as our backyard, and our policies toward the region have run the spectrum from shortsighted and unsophisticated to arrogant and paternalistic. The narrative of our relationship has been based on the negative, often ignoring and glossing over the important economic, political, and social advances that have been made in the region. The truth is that Latin America is not our backyard at all but part of our common neighborhood. We share far more than a hemisphere with our neighbors in this region. We share a common history, common goals, common opportunities, and a common future. From my time as a Peace Corps volunteer in the Dominican Republic to my current chairmanship of the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee in the Senate, I have had the opportunity to watch this region change dramatically over almost the last half century. Thinking back over the past three decades of my service in the Senate, the progress in many ways has been astounding, and it is time our regional policies reflected these changes. Embracing these free-trade agreements is an important first step to achieve these goals. They will help to cement our regional partnerships and make important strides in shifting the story of the United States and Latin America from conflict to engagement, from division to empowerment. I had the opportunity to visit almost every one of these countries in the region over the last 6 or 7 months and have seen these changes firsthand. In my conversations with numerous leaders and citizens, I have come to see not just problems and conflicts but, rather, remarkable, positive changes and opportunities. Panama, for example, has been a critically important strategic and commercial partner of the United States. The United States, in fact, helped Panama gain its independence, and in 1914, the construction of the Panama Canal, as my colleagues will certainly recall, was completed. Since that time, Panama has developed into an advanced economy based on professional-level services and is currently a destination of $4.4 billion worth of American goods. Despite its small size--3.4 million people, smaller than the population of my State of Connecticut--Panama rates in the top 50 of our trading partners globally. Panama has also made important strides in building democratic institutions. Over the last 20 years, five civilian governments have been elected. With each new election, its commitment to human rights and respect for the rule of law has grown stronger. Challenges, obviously, still remain, particularly in the areas of human trafficking, violence against women, and increasing transparency in the banking and financial sectors. But Panama has made progress--great progress--and I am confident that the Martinelli government is committed to continuing this trend and to implementing solutions. Mr. President, Panama is focused on becoming a financial and economic hub in Latin America. Passing the Panama Free Trade Act would give American businesses access to Panamanian markets. Today, tariffs and barriers remain on all goods and services sold in that country. By eliminating those barriers and tariffs on the overwhelming majority of goods and services, we could increase tremendously the job opportunities not only in my State but others around the country, and it would allow us to take advantage of the economic dynamism occurring in that country. It is estimated upon implementation of a free-trade agreement with Panama, nearly 88 percent of U.S. commercial and industrial exports to Panama would become duty free, and Panama would be required to phase out tariffs on over 60 percent of all U.S. agricultural exports. This would lead to more U.S. exports to Panama and more jobs at home in the United States. This is good news for American workers, for farmers, and for small businesses and consumers alike. Yet strengthening our partnership with Panama is not the only opportunity for increasing our engagement in Latin America. Our pending agreement with Colombia presents, as well, a chance to move forward in our renewed commitment to engagement and empowerment in Latin America. I believe this will have significant positive benefits over time. Colombia has weathered a civil war that has lasted longer than most Colombians have been alive. Fueled by narcotrafficking, this war has claimed the lives of thousands of innocent Colombians, from farmers and shopkeepers to judges, elected officials, candidates, and community leaders, and has left countless more homeless in that country. In fact, there are nearly 3 million internally displaced persons living within the country of Colombia today. Colombia still must improve its human rights protections and strengthen its commitment to the rule of law, but great changes have occurred on the positive side. I understand why, of course, some may question moving forward with this agreement. I firmly agree we must not ignore these very real challenges in Colombia. But I also recognize that tremendous progress has been made in Colombia. I recently spent time there, as I did in the neighboring Andean countries, and the common belief is that great steps have been made in moving in the right direction. Mechanisms are in place today that will strengthen the rule of law, protect human rights, and Colombia recently held, as we all know, its most free and open election in decades. In just 1 weeks' time, Colombia will mark a historic, dramatic transition to power from President Uribe to President-elect Santos. This peaceful democratic transition is an important marker in Colombia's history, and the President-elect has committed himself to strengthening Colombia's judicial system and working to reduce violence against labor leaders and others. The Colombian people have pursued a fresh start, and we must recognize this and be willing to do the same. By passing the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, we have a historic opportunity to do just that. This agreement, with its strong commitment to labor standards, environmental protections, and human rights will help shape Colombia's course to encourage its move toward a more open and democratic system and to build a relationship based on common values and not common enemies. This is an important opportunity that continues on the heels of the nearly 10 years of U.S. support for Colombia, including billions of dollars in aid through Plan Colombia. Allowing this agreement to continue to languish now poses a significant roadblock, in my view, to continued reform in Colombia because it calls into question our Nation's commitment to a sincere and ever more important partnership. We need to act now, in my view, to affirm our commitment to the Colombian people, to show them that we recognize the hard work they have done and to signal that the United States will be a strong partner in their continued improvement. Over the course of my career in the Senate, we have considered a number of trade agreements. I have evaluated each one, as I know my colleagues have, on its merits. Some I have supported strongly, and many others I have opposed just as strongly, including ones for Latin America. A poor free-trade agreement can undermine very important protections for workers, human rights, and the environment. So I opposed the Central American Free Trade Agreement much to my pain and disappointment. But that was a weak agreement which did not deserve the support of this body. These two agreements are different because since May 10 we have strengthened those labor protections, environmental protections, and human rights protections. I believe this agreement is deserving of our support. In the case of these two agreements, they are a commitment to our allies, and a signal to our friends that we value our partnerships and will continue to work with them to promote our shared values of democracy, the rule of law, and economic opportunity. As such, what they represent is much more significant than simply the exchange of goods and services between nations. Trade agreements such as the ones before us represent opportunities to build long-lasting partnerships as well. I believe that is the case with the Panamanian and Colombian agreements before us. With the inclusion of the provisions of the bipartisan May 10 agreement on labor, environmental, and human rights standards, I believe we have addressed some of the most significant concerns about these two trade agreements. I also believe that because these trade deals and agreements have languished for so long, they have turned some opportunities into roadblocks to the success of our bilateral and regional relationships. It simply makes no sense to continue the delay. It is time to pass these two trade agreements in order to help move our economy forward as well. Passage of these agreements is not just a good foreign policy decision; they also make strong economic sense as well. Currently, goods from Colombia and Panama flow north largely unhindered. Yet American businesses and American workers and the jobs, products, and services we provide are subject to significant duties and tariffs when we export goods to the nations of Panama and Colombia. For example, while the vast majority of goods from Colombia enter the United States duty free, American goods exported to Colombia face average duties of 12 percent and, in some cases, as high as 20 percent. This is costing America jobs and American business. If we implement this agreement, we would eliminate many--as I mentioned earlier, almost 90 percent--of these duties and tariffs on these services and products nationwide, and U.S. exports to Colombia would increase, we are told, by a projected $1 billion annually. In 2009, more than $14 billion worth of goods were exported by Connecticut firms to markets all over the world. According to the latest available data from my State--the Department of Economic and Community Development--Connecticut firms exported about $91 million worth of goods to Colombia and roughly $15 million of goods to Panama. Connecticut businesses export a variety of products to these nations, particularly chemical products, manufactured machinery, transportation equipment, computers, electronic products, and paper goods. Under the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, 80 percent of all consumer and industrial goods, which include the categories I just listed, become duty free immediately. In addition, 88 percent would become immediately duty free once the Panama agreement is ratified as well. What can this mean for the future? Well, certainly jobs. The International Trade Administration calculates that nearly one-third of all manufacturing workers in my State depend on exports for their jobs, and more than 4,000 companies engage in exporting some kind of products to these nations. Of those firms, 89 percent were small or medium-sized businesses--precisely the firms that President Obama's Export Initiative targets--that will be well positioned to take advantage of these agreements once they are ratified. This means expanded economic opportunities for workers in our own country and businesses in our various States across the Nation. The Panama and Colombia Free Trade Agreements were established over 2 years ago. They have been the subject of intense scrutiny and public debate. They have benefitted by the input of the Congress, through the historic May 10 agreement, which I described earlier, that saw the inclusion of binding, enforceable, and meaningful labor, public health, and environmental standards. These discussions have allowed the Congress and the American people to critically examine the importance of these trade agreements and our partnerships with these key allies. I urge support of these trade agreements before us not in spite of our current economic situation but because of it. This recession demands bold moves and innovation. It requires us to strengthen our key economic partnerships and to expand into new markets where we can. Now is not the time to close our borders to nations with whom we already have strong ties. History shows that erecting barriers to trade has the potential for deepening the global recession. Conversely, these agreements mean more economic opportunities for American workers and our families. It is time for us to change the way we relate to the world, particularly in Latin America. For too long we have used our differences in this region with our allies as an excuse not to act, as a reason to disengage. These agreements offer us a chance to refresh that paradigm, to make the United States a proactive partner in fostering economic opportunity by bringing us closer together and promoting our shared values. It is time, in my view, for the United States of America to lead a global economic recovery. A small but important step down that road is the passage of the Panamanian and Colombian Free Trade Agreements, and I urge my colleagues, both Democrats and Republicans, to support these agreements. I hope we can do so before we adjourn this session of Congress. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, what is the business before the Senate?

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may proceed as in morning business.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, today I honor the life and career of George J. Ritter, who passed away on July 18, 2010, at the age of 90. George was a remarkable public servant and a person of great principle and energy. His commitment to helping the less fortunate and for advancing social progress through the law made a lasting impact on the city of Hartford and the lives of many working families. He grew up in New Jersey, raised by the children of German immigrants who were the very embodiment of the American dream. His grandfather had been sent to this country--alone--as little more than a child and began working full time to build a new life at the age of 12. His parents both began working when they were very young as well. Their lives and the values they espoused had a deep impact on George, and it should come as no surprise that he would become a stalwart advocate for advancing the economic opportunities of all Americans, particularly for working families and minorities. This clearly defined sense of social justice and the value of equal opportunities no doubt contributed to George's lifelong captivation with the law and the Constitution. He even hitchhiked as a teenager all the way to Washington, DC--just to observe the U.S. Supreme Court firsthand. In our Nation, the will of citizens is the strongest force for social change. But building the coalitions necessary to make change happen is a difficult task and requires a common vision and commitment, and lots of energy. George certainly had energy, and got to work building coalitions to push for change at a young age. As a student at Rutgers University, he worked to organize the nonfraternity members of the student body into a cohesive voting block--which in turn, elected him to serve as the first nonfraternity student body president in the school's nearly 200 year history. After college, his passion for the law took him to Yale Law School, in my home State of Connecticut. His legal education was interrupted by his distinguished service to the United States in the Pacific during World War II. Upon finishing his degree, he became active in the U.S. labor movement. He and his wife and partner in social activism, Patricia, had the opportunity to travel the United States and Europe studying unions and the labor movements that were beginning to gain steam and become a force in politics and society all across the globe. As a young labor attorney he worked to organize some of Connecticut's first municipal unions, and also served as an attorney for Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. At the ripe old age of 36 he became Hartford Corporation counsel, which launched a career in public service that continued until 1980. He served on the Hartford City Council from 1959 until 1968, and in 1969 was elected to represent Hartford in the Connecticut General Assembly. During his time on the council and in the general assembly, George worked to highlight and pursue progressive solutions to issues that were not yet part of mainstream concerns; from civil rights, to elder and juvenile justice, to government accountability, and of course, working to provide equal opportunities for all. He was truly a pioneer when it came to raising concerns about and finding solutions to address the issue of civil rights and equal opportunities. In fact, in the early 1960s--prior to the passage of the Civil Rights Act--he and Patricia started the Connecticut Housing Investment Fund to help finance minority home-ownership and integrated housing. This organization became a model for subsequent national programs to support affordable housing. Throughout his career he fought tirelessly for the rights of workers, and the advancement of housing, employment, and other opportunities for minorities--including by recruiting and managing the campaigns of the first minority candidates for the Hartford City Council and Board of Education. He was also the first man ever appointed to Connecticut's Permanent Commission on the Status of Women, an honor that always gave him a smile, and spoke volumes of his commitment to equal opportunities for all Americans. Even outside of public life, George continued to work to help others. After retiring from the general assembly in 1980, he cofounded the Independent Energy Corporation. One of the projects of Independent Energy helped to streamline the electricity usage of the largest business in the Caribbean region. The electricity savings from that one business helped to lower the foreign exchange bill of the entire nation of Jamaica--a truly notable achievement. By any measure, the life of George Ritter was an utter success. In business, in public life, and as the loving father of five children, George led a life of principle and purpose. His work benefitted his community and helped to expand opportunities for the less fortunate. Even though he has passed, George's spirit of public service lives on. His sons Thomas and John have both served in the State legislature, and his grandson Matt is a member of the Hartford City Council and is running to fill the general assembly seat George once held. I am confident they will continue to build on George's legacy, and am proud to call them my constituents. I wish them the best of luck, and hope that they will continue to pass George's values and character on for generations to come.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Madam President, I rise today to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The enactment of this important legislation was a significant milestone in our national journey to perfect our Union, uphold our founding values, and reaffirm our commitment to ensuring that the rights enshrined in our Constitution are truly available to all of our citizens. I was honored to have been able to support this bill in 1990, and am proud to be here today to talk about what its enactment means to millions of our fellow Americans, as well as to celebrate the contributions of those whose tireless work, and undying support, made passage of this bill a reality. Thanks to this landmark law, our country has made progress in eliminating the historical stigma previously associated with mental and physical disabilities. It is also a critical step toward guaranteeing basic civil rights for an entire population who, for much of our Nation's history, have faced incredible unfairness and isolation. For decades, we have fought for the civil rights of people with disabilities, combating the antiquated mindsets of segregation, discrimination, and ignorance. Our Nation has come from a time when the exclusion of people with disabilities was the norm. We have come from a time when doctors told parents that their children with disabilities were better left isolated in institutions. We have come from a time when individuals with disabilities were not considered contributing members of society. Those times have thankfully changed. The passage of the ADA in 1990 provided the first step toward that change our country so desperately needed, and 20 years later, many of these individuals are thriving in ways that a few short years ago, would have been unthinkable. More and more, individuals with disabilities are able to integrate into communities across America. Thanks to the ADA, they are finding employment, buying their first home, and enjoying our public parks, transportation, and other civic facilities far more successfully than ever before. Just as I was a proud supporter of the ADA then, I was a proud supporter of the resolution which the Senate passed last week, introduced by my colleagues Senators Harkin and Hatch, commemorating the 20th anniversary of that historic achievement. I would like to thank Senator Harkin in particular for his leadership on the passage of the ADA. I would also like to thank my former Connecticut colleague, Lowell Weicker, who, as a Senator in 1988, was the original sponsor of the legislation that went on to become the Americans with Disabilities Act, and is still a national leader in advocating for individuals with disabilities. Without their tireless efforts and support, it would not have been possible to pass this legislation those 20 years ago. Equal protection under the law is not a privilege in the United States of America--rather, it is a fundamental right due every citizen, regardless of race, gender, national origin, religion, sex, age, or disability. It is unacceptable to deny any individual his or her right to those protections because of a disability. Our country has an obligation to its citizens to ensure that their fundamental rights are protected, and, if those rights are violated, that the appropriate recourse is available. In 2008, the overall percentage of people with a disability in my home State of Connecticut was 10.4 percent; approximately 350,000 residents. That is 350,000 reasons why 20 years later, I am proud of-- and somewhat awed by--the impact this bill has made. And that is just in my home State. Across the entire country, more than 50 million people have been aided by the passage of this historic legislation. The resolution that we passed in this body last week honors and commemorates the 20th anniversary of the ADA. We passed it 100-0. This strong, bipartisan statement underscores the far reaching importance of this landmark law. I am proud to not only have been able to vote for its passage those 20 years ago, but also to have been an original cosponsor along with several of my colleagues still present in this body, including Chairman Harkin. As we take this opportunity to commemorate the tremendous advances the disability community has made, we must not forget the steadfast support of the wide network of groups and individuals who have made it their mission to help every single American, despite his or her disability, reach his or her fullest potential, and which made this extraordinary achievement possible. I have worked closely with these groups throughout my tenure in the Senate to ensure they have gotten the support they need from the Federal Government, especially the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities. I thank them for their support and assistance, and truly value the working relationships I have established over my entire career. In my capacity as a senior member of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, I have spent my career fighting alongside my colleagues to improve the lives of people with disabilities. Some of the most important pieces of legislation I have introduced or supported throughout my career have been to further that goal. From the Disability Savings Act, a bill I introduced in 2008 which would encourage individuals with disabilities and their families to start disability savings accounts for their unique disability- related needs, to the Best Buddies Empowerment for People with Intellectual Disabilities Act, a bill I introduced earlier this Congress with Senator Hatch which promotes the expansion of that acclaimed program. I am hopeful we can pass this important legislation this year. I am also pleased that the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act makes further progress toward meeting the needs of the disabled community. That legislation incorporates an important idea known as the CLASS Act, which creates a voluntary disability insurance program designed to pay for nonmedical and support services so that persons with disabilities are able to live independently. Getting this program started was a remarkable achievement, and something many of my colleagues and I had worked for many years to accomplish. Of course, none of the important advances we have made, legislatively or otherwise, would have been possible without the tireless work of one of the great advocates for equal opportunities for individuals with disabilities that the Senate has ever seen--my dear friend, the late Senator Ted Kennedy. For Teddy, the issue of fairness and empowerment for individuals with disabilities was always in the forefront of his mind and legislative agenda. Along with his late sister Eunice Kennedy Shriver, his commitment to this issue, which touches so many of our fellow citizens, is a legacy that we must seek to preserve and to continue. On this, the 26th day of July 2010, I urge my colleagues and fellow citizens to celebrate the freedom and opportunities provided by the Americans with Disabilities Act, and recognize the strides we have made to raise the employment and graduation rates, increase self- sufficiency, and very simply, lift the self-esteem of those who for too long were denied these opportunities. As we strive to perfect our Union, we must remember that we are a just society. We are a society that has enshrined the notion of equality, both in rights and opportunity, for all in our very founding documents. We must continue to reaffirm the promise made in those documents to each citizen, no matter their race, creed, or circumstance. The passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act is one example of how we have worked to keep those promises. It represents a successful step toward fulfilling our Nation's goals of equality of opportunity, independent living, economic self-sufficiency, and full participation for Americans with disabilities. It has been a tremendous honor to have been able to support this law, and as I look back on the good it has done, 20 years later, I am confident that future generations will continue to build on its success as a cornerstone to ensuring that all Americans have equal access to the American dream.

Mr. DODD

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

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Madam President, I am about to propose a unanimous-consent request that has been agreed to by the respective leaders. I ask unanimous consent that the postcloture time be considered expired at 2 p.m., with the time until then equally divided and controlled between Senators Dodd and Shelby or their designees; that during this period, if and when a budget point of order is raised against the conference report, then an applicable waiver of the point of order be considered made; that at 2 p.m., the Senate proceed to vote on the motion to waive the applicable budget point of order; that if the waiver is successful, without further intervening action or debate, the Senate vote on adoption of the conference report.