Christopher Dodd

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. I thank the leader for his question and for his leadership in helping guide us through this crisis. He is exactly right. I have been saying throughout this process that foreclosure prevention has been one of the key reasons we need to move forward with the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act. The legislation has a number of key provisions dealing with foreclosure prevention: First, it requires that the Secretary of the Treasury ``implement a plan that seeks to maximize assistance for homeowners'' in keeping their homes. This means Congress has rejected an ad hoc approach by the Treasury in favor of a programwide system to keep families in homes. In the case where the Secretary owns whole loans, we expect him to modify those loans to ensure long-term affordability for American families. The legislation outlines that this should be done by a reduction in principal, a reduction in the interest rate, a refinance through the HOPE for Homeowners Program, or any equivalent method that ensures that these hard working Americans are restored to sustainable home ownership. I want to remind my colleagues that millions of Americans were sold loans that the mortgage brokers and lenders knew or should have known the borrowers could never afford. These ``exploding'' adjustable rate mortgages, ARMs, interest-only loans, and payment-option ARMs were designed to entice borrowers with low initial payments. Yet, after a couple of years, the payments would explode, increasing by 20 percent, 30 percent, or more. This is driving delinquency and foreclosure rates to historically high levels and driving home prices down, creating the economic downturn we are now facing. Second, all other Federal agencies that own or control mortgages, including the FDIC, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, FHFA, and the Federal Reserve Board, must also implement plans to maximize assistance to homeowners. The FDIC, under the leadership of Chairman Sheila Bair, has already started down this road with the assets it has taken from IndyMac Bank, and we expect the other agencies to work with the FDIC in developing their own programs. The FHFA, which is the conservator for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, now oversees hundreds of billions of dollars of mortgages and mortgage-backed securities, MBS, which they will now be obligated to aggressively modify as a result of this legislation. Third, one of the serious complications the modern mortgage market has created is the difficulty of doing modifications for loans that have been pooled and securitized into a host of MBS. It is often difficult to get the various investors in the numerous MBS backed by a particular pool of mortgages to all agree to do a modification. This legislation, however, mandates that the Treasury and the other Federal agencies that own or control MBS must aggressively pursue loan modifications with other investors and must consent to all requests from servicers for reasonable modifications. In fact, it is our hope that the Federal Government will gain control of sufficient percentages of these pools that their ongoing pursuit of modifications and reasonableness in their willingness to accept offers that ensure families can keep their homes will tip the balance and lead to more modifications. Finally, this bill includes three new provisions for the HOPE for Homeowners that should expand its reach and allow us to help many more homeowners avoid foreclosure and get into affordable, stable, FHA- insured mortgages. As I have been saying for well over a year, the epicenter of the current financial and economic crisis is the housing crisis and the heart of the housing crisis is the foreclosure crisis. I understand the need to move to stabilize the financial system as a whole--that is why I have devoted countless hours over the past weeks to negotiate this final package. But I would not support this bill, nor ask my colleagues to do so, if I was not convinced that it adds important new tools to address the core problem--rising delinquencies and foreclosures. Obviously, this bill does not include everything I would want but it is an important step forward.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I first thank my colleagues for their generous comments. This has been an incredible 2 weeks. It began exactly 2 weeks ago tomorrow night when the Chairman of the Federal Reserve and the Secretary of the Treasury, in words that were as chilling as any I have heard in 28 years here, describing the condition of our economy. We heard the words ``credit crunch.'' I was educated in high school by Jesuits, and the word ``credit,'' the derivative, comes from the Latin word ``to believe.'' What is more important to me at this moment than any financial loss that Wall Street suffers or other institutions or shareholders, as much as I am concerned about it, but the biggest loss we run the risk of is Americans believing in their country, that sense of confidence and optimism that has been at the base of our success for more than two centuries. I say to my colleagues who are wondering whether at this moment we ought to embrace this plan to move us to the right footing, this is the moment which we must take this opportunity to get back our economy, and simultaneously, more important than anything else we achieve, to restore Americans' confidence, their optimism, and their belief that this country can provide a better day for their children and their grandchildren than the one in which they were raised. Nothing less than that, in my view, is at stake in the vote we will take in a matter of minutes; maybe the most important vote any one of us will ever cast in this body. It will determine the future and the well being of our country. I beseech my colleagues, not as Democrats or as Republicans, but as Americans, and as Members of this remarkable institution, to cast a vote for the future believability in our economy and our country. I urge a ``yes'' vote. Exhibit 1 Department of the Treasury, Washington, DC, October 1, 2008. Hon. Christopher Dodd, Chairman, Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman, I am writing regarding the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. It is the intention of the Department of the Treasury that all mortgages or mortgage-related assets purchased in the Troubled Asset Relief Program will be based on or related to properties in the United States. Sincerely, Kevin I. Fromer, Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that with respect to H.R. 1424, in addition to the controlled time specified in the order for consideration of the measure, any other available time until 7 p.m. today be equally divided and controlled between the leaders or their designees, and that when appropriate Members speak in an alternating fashion--Democrat, Republican--that if two Members of any one party speak sequentially, due to availability, then it be in order for two Members of the other party to speak sequentially, if available; that prior to the vote on passage of H.R. 1424, as amended, if amended, the leaders may use whatever leader time they deem appropriate, and that the remaining provisions of the order with respect to this measure be in effect.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 60-vote threshold on the Dorgan-Bingaman amendment No. 5683 be vitiated, unless the yeas and nays are ordered.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, first of all, I wish to thank Senator Richard Lugar and Senator Joseph Biden. Joe Biden is the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee and he and Senator Lugar have worked on this for a long time. We have had five congressional hearings on that committee on the subject matter. I greatly respect my colleagues, Senator Dorgan and Senator Bingaman. However, I would point out to my colleagues that on this particular amendment they offer, the Atomic Energy Act, the Arms Support Control Act, the Hyde amendment, and this bill all have provisions in them that would allow us to respond should India decide to detonate a nuclear weapon. No one anywhere wants to see a further proliferation of nuclear weapons. India and the United States are the two largest democracies in the world. India is in a very tough and fragile neighborhood. It is important we develop and improve that relationship that has been a tense one since 1974. This agreement began with the work of President Clinton and was concluded by President Bush. We think it is an agreement worth supporting, and we urge our colleagues to do so and respectfully reject this amendment.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I have spoken. This is a very worthwhile bill. I commend Senator Lugar and Senator Biden for the tremendous work they have done on this legislation over an extended period of time. I ask for the yeas and nays and urge the adoption of the legislation.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I would like to take a minute and highlight a critically important component of the amendment I am offering today. And that is the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008. The vehicle being used for my amendment, H.R. 1424, is a stand-alone mental health parity bill that the House passed last March before months' long negotiations between the House and Senate on a compromise mental health parity bill. But the actual mental health parity language in my amendment is identical, word-for-word, to the language the Senate passed last week as part of the tax extenders package. The substance of the language is the language that was agreed upon between the Senate and the House last summer. The Senate passed the tax extender package including the mental health parity language in my amendment by a vote of 93 to 2. Last week I spoke at length about the many individuals and organizations who are responsible for championing mental health parity legislation and I won't go through them all again on the floor today. But I will, once again, thank and congratulate Senators Kennedy and Domenici as well as the late Senator Paul Wellstone for their leadership on mental health parity. In the other body, Representatives Patrick Kennedy and Jim Ramstad should be extremely proud of their efforts which have helped get us where we are today. It has taken us more than 10 years, but today we stand at the precipice of hopefully passing one of the most important health care initiatives of the 110th Congress. In fact, if my amendment passes, it will mark the third time the Senate has passed mental health parity legislation in this Congress alone. The first time it passed unanimously and the second time it passed overwhelmingly, as I previously mentioned, by a vote of 93 to 2 We have come too far and worked too hard not to have mental health parity legislation signed into law this year. Today, one in five American families are affected by mental illness. Every American knows a friend, a relative, a neighbor, or a coworker whose life has been touched by mental illness in some way. With this legislation, we are saying that mental illness will no longer take a backseat to physical illness. With this legislation, we are taking an important step toward tearing down the stigma people with mental illness face every day. The Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act will end health insurance discrimination between mental health and substance use disorders and medical and surgical conditions. Upon passage of this bill, health insurers will no longer be permitted to charge higher copays or limit the frequency of treatment for people with mental illness than what they would do for a medical or surgical condition. I join with the more than 250 national organizations representing consumers, family members, advocates, professionals and providers who are urging the Senate and the House to put aside their differences and pass this legislation before the end of the year. I thank my colleagues and urge them to support my amendment.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. I ask unanimous consent that the following fellows, law clerks, and interns on the staff of the Finance Committee be granted the privileges of the floor for the duration of the debate on economic stabilization, tax extenders, and energy: Bridget Mallon, Mary Baker, Sean Thomas, and Kelcy Poulson.

Mr. DODD. I ask unanimous consent that Eric Reither, from Senator Ensign's office, be granted the privilege of the floor.

Mr. DODD

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

Mr. DODD. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. DODD. Are we in morning business?

Mr. DODD. I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise to celebrate the life of a man and a friend who passed away this past weekend, an American icon to many Americans--in fact, not only to Americans but to people all over the world--for more than half a century, a remarkable philanthropist in his generosity, a terrific husband, father to six children, a daredevil both on the screen and off. In words that have added poignancy at this moment, Paul Newman once said, ``We are such spendthrifts with our lives. The trick of living is to slip on and off the planet with the least fuss you can muster. I'm not running for sainthood. I just happen to think that in life we need to be a little like the farmer, who puts back into the soil what he takes out.'' The New York Times concluded its obituary of Paul Newman with those words. But I would like them to begin my remarks, because I don't think that will be the last thing people should consider when they remember Paul Newman, but the very first. Where the charitable work of public figures today often seems motivated less by the public interest than by public relations, Paul Newman was a rarity. An enormous celebrity whose commitment to making a difference meant far more to him than any box office, critical notice or award nomination. Believe me. Having known him or 25 years, I can attest to that. A star, with genuine humility, he cared deeply about the people, not only of this country but around the world, and made a significant contribution to their benefit in his own way. We are all, of course, familiar with the Newman's Own brand, which raised nearly a quarter- billion dollars for charitable causes in a quarter century. But that was only part of the story. Paul also founded the Hole In the Wall Gang camps for children with life-threatening diseases that began in Ashford, CT and has since opened three on three different continents. Those camps serve more than 15,000 children annually, with all services provided free of charge to everyone. He also founded the Rowdy Ridge Gang Camp, for families recovering from drug addiction and survivors of spousal abuse. These were no vanity causes to which he simply attached his name and face. Paul was intimately involved in their operations and success. In fact, just this afternoon, I spoke with a friend of mine. I serve on the advisory board of the Hole in the Wall Camp in Ashford, CT, but a good friend of mine is on the board of directors of that camp. He had flown from San Francisco to be back in Connecticut today where people in the Hole in the Wall Gang camp are gathering to remember Paul Newman. They each got up and talked about his intimate involvement with that camp. Believe me, as someone who has been involved on a daily basis, he worked and cared about the maintenance of that facility, as he did the ones on the other two continents I described. Indeed, these examples remind us that every endeavor to which Paul Newman committed himself over his 83 years shared one fundamental quality: They were the product of an enduring appreciation for the special, unique place he was afforded in our society. You could not spend any time with Paul without noticing that he had remarkable life. A wife and family that were not there simply to support him, but to push and prod him, to tease him, to that wonderful kind of vitality we see in vibrant families, a career that afforded him opportunities and experiences many of the characters he played could not have imagined. And Paul Newman knew it. But as much as he recognized the good fortune behind his success, he also understood the obligations that came with it. This was never someone who pretended to be something he was not. He did not rise from poverty or grow up in a broken home. His father was, in fact, a successful entrepreneur himself from the Shaker Heights section of Cleveland, OH. But to watch Paul's Oscar-nominated turn in that remarkable courtroom drama, ``The Verdict,'' is to witness someone whose true kinship was not with those who came from wealth, from power or privilege, but with those who struggled, who earned, who overcame. For all his generosity, kind-heartedness, and compassion, there was another side to this man, one that was utterly driven to succeed, whether it was acting or directing, film or theater, charity or business. I suspect I was not the only friend of Paul's who did not share his passion for racing, which he often did at our State's Lime Rock Park. But compared to Hollywood, Paul found racing's lack of pretension refreshing. The pure love he had for the sport was what made it such a thrill for him--a thrill he pursued into his eighties. He was impossible to pigeonhole. I loved his sense of humor and irony, a devilish spirit which hid--just barely--a contempt for the predictable and lazy you couldn't help but admire. He once commented that the ``single highest honor'' paid to him was learning he was 19th on Nixon's so-called ``enemies list'' assembled by Charles Colson. He named the Hole in the Wall Gang camps after Butch Cassidy's band of outlaws and offered cowboy hats to children who had lost their hair because of chemotherapy. The first vat of Newman's Own salad dressing was stirred with a canoe paddle, to give some idea of his sense of humor. And one of the biographies he wrote for a local production read, ``Paul Newman is probably best known for his spectacularly successful food conglomerate. In addition to giving the profits to charity he also ran Frank Sinatra out of the spaghetti sauce business. On the downside, the spaghetti sauce is outgrossing his films.'' Let it never be said there wasn't a sparkle in those famous blue eyes of Paul's to the end. In a career that required him to fabricate many a character and experience, Paul Newman's rebellious yet playful quality always struck me as completely genuine. It often masked and helped him promote some very serious work. A resident of Westport, CT he made enduring contributions to our State. Some will remember that he insisted on holding the first movie premiere in New Haven history when ``Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid'' made its debut at the Roger Sherman theater. The Presiding Officer is familiar with that community. But for the sprinkle of glitter a star of Paul's magnitude brought to Connecticut, the difference he made to our communities was far more lasting--from helping to preserve open spaces such as the Trout Brook Valley and renovate the Westport Historical Society and its Country Playhouse, to the active role he played in government at the local, State, and Federal levels. Like all Americans at this hour, I will miss him, a great guy and a good friend. As much as I will miss his friendship and his performances on the television screen or at the movie theater, I will miss being reminded every time that we saw him just how good and decent a man he truly was. Our thoughts and prayers are, obviously, with Joanne, his lovely wife, his daughters, and the rest of the Newman family. I wanted to thank them for sharing with us these many years a great guy. Mr. President, I have a wonderful obituary that was written in the New York Times. I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the Record.

Mr. DODD. Before my colleague from New Jersey leaves the floor, I wish to commend him for his comments. I had an opportunity--I was not on the floor the whole time but was in the adjoining offices. Of course, with modern technology, we have the opportunity to listen to each other and express our views. I commend him on his. It was a very thorough and important hour to take. We have few opportunities which allow us to have a chance to lay this out as the Senator from New Jersey has just done, going back and examining sort of the autopsy of all of this. We are sort of caught up in the moment and exactly what is happening from moment to moment with the stock market and the bond market, the credit markets across the country and the unemployment numbers. But I think going back and understanding the genesis of this is tremendously valuable. We have some very important and difficult decisions to make in the next few days that are critically important. He has outlined them as well. None of them are perfect. None of us like being here. But we have a challenge in front of us. I think he did an admirable job of explaining this, of where we have come and the idea of how we come back to the decision we make in the next 24 or 48 hours but also what needs to be done after that to make sure we do not find ourselves back here in a matter of weeks or months grappling with even more compound and difficult economic choices. So I did not want to miss the opportunity to come out and thank you.

Mr. DODD. I love that as well. My colleague from Virginia, during moments of stress and strain over the years, when it looks as though all is lost and we could never come back together, he has pulled me aside in one corner or niche of this building, and I can hear him say it over and over again, in the words of Winston Churchill: Never, never, never give in. We are at one of those moments.

Mr. DODD. I thank the Senator for that. The Senator has pointed out, of course, just as the Presiding Officer, his great interest in these matters, and the Senator from New Jersey is, of course, a very worthwhile member of our committee, as is the Presiding Officer. As we look at these questions, and I intend to do that. In fact, I am not going to wait long. Our intention is that on the committee, we will move aggressively--in a matter of days--to examine further as to how we arrived in this situation, No. 1; No. 2, to monitor how the bromide that we have been offered by the Secretary of the Treasury, the solution to all of this, is working; and then thirdly, of course, how do we reconstruct or construct anew the architecture for a 21st-century financial services economy or one that depends upon financial services as much as this one does? Clearly, the architecture of our regulatory system, some rules of which go back to the 19th century--many, of course, were adopted in the wake of the Great Depression back in the 1920s and 1930s--needs to be revisited. The world is a very different place today, much more complicated, global in its complexity, and clearly warrants a fresh look at some new structures. And it is my intention as the committee chairman, along with my colleagues who serve on the committee and others who are involved in these issues, that we begin our work very quickly to address those questions. I see my friend and colleague from Virginia. Of course, the irony or ironies is I was just about to talk about him, and this was not prearranged, him arriving on the floor, and he may have some comments to make as the system here allows us to go back and forth. I really came over to commend Senator Menendez, but I have some comments I want to make about my friend from Virginia, but I do not want to deprive him of the opportunity to be heard.

Mr. DODD. Well, I can tell you, my friend, the majority leader, Senator Reid--I know from having met with him earlier today--is in constant consultation and discussions with the leadership of the Republican minority of this body as well as the Democratic and Republican leadership of the other body, the House of Representatives, to determine when and how we can go forward on the legislation that we crafted both here and there over the last 2 weeks to respond to this economic crisis we are in. I am proud to have been involved, and I am sad to have been involved. Normally, we craft bills and we take pride in the fact that we are solving a problem, and I hope we are in this case. But I am fairly confident we will be able to get to another vote and that the other body will bring up the matter as well. The order of all of this is being discussed as you and I stand in this Chamber. No final conclusions have been reached about that, but I know people are working hard to determine how best to proceed forward. The last thing we need is to have this not work again. We better decide whether we are serious about this. This is a difficult vote--I would not suggest otherwise--but it is an important one. I know that those who cast votes yesterday are having some second thoughts about the condition they placed us in and are trying to find a way to get back on track again. So I am very optimistic we can do that. I know the White House is now engaged much more aggressively than it has been on this issue, which I welcome. I know the leadership of the House is also working on this. I do not want to predict things with any great certainty, but I am quite confident we are working in the right direction and we should end up with a very positive result within the next 24 or 48 hours.

Mr. DODD. I thank the Senator. This is not a prearranged or prestaged event. It was my intent at this moment to spend a few minutes talking about my friend from Virginia with whom I have just shared, once again, another memorable moment, as he talks about the moment we are in. That is characteristic of my friend from Virginia. One of the reasons he will be missed, with his well-deserved retirement, is that throughout my 28 years here--actually I have known John Warner a bit longer than that, but we have served here together for almost three decades--in every moment I can think of that we have been in a moment not unlike the moment we are in--none quite so grave economically--it has always been the posture and position of John Warner to see this body not as one that is divided by this architectural divide that separates us by party, which must confound and confuse the public as they look at us, wondering if we ever begin to think of ourselves as Americans with a great privilege of serving in this historic institution, that we would come together to find solutions to problems. It has been characteristic of John Warner, from the first moments I have known him, to always see this divide as being sort of a silly barrier; that it probably would be a wise, although probably not a welcome idea, that the seating arrangements ought not to be based on party but maybe some other configuration where you actually have to sit next to someone you may disagree with or of a different party from time to time. That, in itself, may serve as a crucible in which better decisions might be reached. I am going to miss him very much on many different levels. We have only served on a couple of committees together over the years, not by choice but by circumstance. Yet on those occasions, I have enjoyed immensely the work of John Warner. There have been times--and he will remind me often--when we haven't shared a philosophical standpoint in common over the years. But on levels far more significant and far more important to me--and I would hope with other Members as well--my relationship with John Warner is one based on a love of this institution, the importance of it. The hope and the aspirations of a people depend upon it. That, more than anything else, is what I have enjoyed so much about working with John Warner, his reverence for this body. I will use the words of John Stennis, the former chairman of the Armed Services Committee--the position which John Warner now holds--who spoke at a Democratic caucus meeting. He paused when he stood up for several seconds and said nothing at all, and the room quieted, as you might imagine, to a stillness. The first words of John Stennis were: I am a Senate man. I thought, what a remarkable moment, how he began his discourse with us, those of us who were new, by describing himself as a person of this institution. John Warner is a Senate man. He has done many things of great import in his life. But if I were to be asked by people what is a good example of a Senate person--I guess more politically correct today, given the fact that we have a lot of diversity of gender in this institution--John Warner has been a Senate person. He understood the historical value of this institution and the importance it continues to play. While we have had our differences philosophically, we have enjoyed great friendship on a personal level. I cherish in my office a wonderful photograph of John Warner and I sailing together in my Old Friendship sloop off the coast of Connecticut and Rhode Island, enjoying great dinners together, a game of tennis every now and then over the years. So beyond the political discourse and the substantive debates or disagreements, there are relationships here that are far more significant on a human level than that. I was thinking the other day about one of these battles that goes on from time to time. This one was over which State was going to win the contract to build the Seawolf submarine. The Presiding Officer from Rhode Island would have certainly taken the side of the New England point of view. It was a serious discussion about whether it would be in Newport News or in Connecticut and Rhode Island that the contract would be awarded. There was a lot of jockeying back and forth, a serious debate and discussion. It ultimately worked out well for both States and the country as a result. But the final decision came down that Connecticut was going to be awarded that contract. In a moment like that, after weeks and weeks of back and forth, you might expect that the delegation or the Member you have been dealing with on the other side would feel embittered or upset, a variety of emotions that would normally be put on the negative side of the ledger. I don't think I have ever told this to too many of our colleagues. I arrived back in my apartment that night feeling good about the result and the fact that it worked out well. And there on the outside of my door was a package. I opened it and there was a first edition copy of Jack London's ``The Seawolf.'' It was sent to me by my colleague from Virginia, with a congratulatory note on Connecticut and Rhode Island prevailing in this particular contest; that the country would be better if we all worked together to get this new piece of military hardware built. I thought to myself, what an incredible gesture at a moment like this, the sensitivity, the appreciation, seeking out a first edition copy of Jack London's ``The Seawolf,'' the very program we were talking about. That is the kind of person John Warner has been. While there will be great debate and discussion, and he has certainly done a fantastic job working with Carl Levin on the Armed Services Committee and has been a great custodian of guaranteeing and protecting our Nation's security during that tenure, it is those moments of arriving home that night many years ago and picking up that book that I still cherish and have by the way. I will read it to my daughters at an appropriate time in their lives, a great story in and of itself. It is moments like that. I wish you the very best, dear friend.

Mr. DODD. I thank my friend for his distinguished career. There are plenty of references to that in the Record. I thought I would share at least a couple of personal anecdotes.

Mr. DODD. That is right. We hope it works. At the time that happened, I kept thinking of the person who once described a camel as being a horse that was designed by Congress in the sense of building two parts of this boat and welding them together. It was a perfect congressional result of a matter. Nonetheless, I cherish those comments. I wish you the very best. Thank you for your service to our country. Chuck Hagel I wanted to mention as well a couple of other colleagues who are also retiring. If I could, one is my great friend from Nebraska, Chuck Hagel, with whom I have served on both the Banking and the Foreign Relations Committees for the past 12 years, truly a wonderful person. We have worked together on a number of issues. He got his first job at 9 years of age when he began to help his family economically. He was 16 when his dad died and took over raising his family along with his mother. I believe most of my colleagues are aware that he was a true hero of the Vietnam war. He saved his brother who, in fact, was serving with him in that conflict. He has done a remarkable job in his public service years as well. We serve on the Foreign Relations Committee together and the Banking Committee. Whether the issue has been Iraq, Serbia, or Croatia, Cuba, regardless of who comes before our committee, no one asks tougher questions or gets straighter answers than Chuck Hagel. On Cuba, for instance--again, an explosive issue politically--Chuck and I offered a resolution to end the embargo in Cuba because we agreed that the current policy toward the island has failed the Cuban people and the American people alike and because we refused to let America wait on the sidelines while the future of one of our closest neighbors is determined by others. It is that kind of courage that he brings to the debate, kind of blows through it all and says: What is the right thing for our country and, in this case, the people of Cuba? On the Banking Committee, Chuck and I worked for months to reinvent the infrastructure of our Nation with the creation of a national infrastructure bank, 2\1/2\ years developing that bill. In fact, it was Chuck who convinced me we ought to announce the outcome of our work one day in August last year. I argued with him a bit. I said: No one will pay any attention to announcing an infrastructure bill in August. Who wants to hear about infrastructure in August. Chuck said: No, let's have that press conference and let people know what we are doing. We met in the gallery at 10 a.m. I think we had two reporters who showed up. I said: I think I was right, Chuck. No one cares about infrastructure. By 5 o'clock that afternoon, Chuck Hagel and I were on every TV screen in America because, regrettably, of the great tragedy in Minneapolis that occurred that afternoon. The bridge collapsed. Of course, infrastructure was the subject matter for the next weeks to come. So, once again, Chuck Hagel understood the timing of an issue in bringing it up and how important it was for our Nation. Little did we know that tragedy would fall on interstate 35-W over the Mississippi River. There again was Chuck Hagel, standing with a colleague of a different background, putting aside ideology and politics to work together to find new and innovative ways to address the Nation's most urgent priorities. That is Chuck Hagel, a remarkable person and a very good Senator over the years. Patriotic, never partisan, tough but fair, always engaged, sometimes even confrontational, but never, ever belligerent, a strong Member. This institution will miss Chuck's ability to transcend politics and serve the American people. As such, the people of Nebraska deserve our thanks for sending Chuck Hagel to serve with us over these past 12 years. I will miss him. We all wish him the very best. He served our Nation very well during his service. Pete Domenici The last Member I want to talk about is Pete Domenici with whom I have had the privilege of working on so many issues over the years. In fact, only a few weeks ago I was honored to be asked to come and speak on behalf of Pete Domenici in Las Cruces at New Mexico State University where the Center for Public Policy is named for Pete Domenici. It was quite a gathering at which I was the keynote speaker, where Pete was being recognized for his contribution to the State and our country. Jim Baker, former Secretary of State, spoke at the conference as well over that weekend. It was quite a gathering of people from that State to express their appreciation for Pete's 36 years of serving the people of his home State. Again, a legislative record that is clear and almost without peer in many ways. Because of Pete Domenici our country will soon recognize that mental illness is as serious as any physical illness. He, Ted Kennedy and Paul Wellstone were so pivotal in making us all aware of how important this issue is. Without Pete's leadership, I don't think this would have happened. Without Pete going to his colleagues and saying: Let me tell you about my family--he had the courage to talk about his own family and what they have been through--it has made a difference. Today millions of people will benefit as a result of Pete's leadership on an issue that is going to make a difference in their lives. Because of Pete's leadership, candidates for President in both parties now acknowledge that we have to be serious about doing something about global warming; again, serious about reducing our emissions, ending our dependence on oil. Again, John Warner and Pete Domenici are classic examples of people who step out of what you might normally associate them with on an issue and get involved and make a difference, almost overnight, because they said this is worthy of our attention and certainly serious, so serious that it demands action. Thanks to Pete's relentless vigilance, I am confident that safe and secure nuclear energy, which I happen to be a supporter of as well, will play a large role in helping us address one of our largest problems in the years ahead. Because of Pete, last year over 5 million children in 51 counties studied what character means in the classroom. Pete and I are the authors of that idea. It started out as a small idea in his State and my State, to insist that part of the day, on the athletic fields, in classes--not just for some 15 minutes--students embrace one of the six pillars of great character and make it a part of the seamless garment of a classroom. Today, as I say, in 51 counties, as well as in virtually almost every State, Character Counts is there, to help children learn early on the importance of what honesty and integrity mean, among the other pillars of good character. Yet when we talk about Pete and what he has accomplished for our communities and our country, we would be doing a great disservice if we were to sum up his legacy as some series of issues. My affection for these Members I am talking about transcends the substantive issues which they have championed over the years. It goes deeper than that. Pete's contribution to the Senate will be measured in a volume of bills he introduced with a number of votes he took; some 13,000, by the way, for which I think there are only 8 or 10 Senators who have a similar record. But who Pete Domenici is, is much more than that. Long before he was a Senator, Pete was a wonderful father and husband. He grew up in a remarkable family, an immigrant family to our country--the classic American story. Many of our fellow colleagues can tell similar tales of how they arrived in this great Nation of ours and the contributions they have made. Long before he dreamt of becoming chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, Pete was a boy counting pennies at his father's grocery business in New Mexico. So often all we hear about politicians is negativity--and it breeds cynicism, too much, frankly. But in my experience, the most effective legislators have remarkable strength and an inner confidence. That is Pete Domenici in so many ways. You only need to know his wife Nancy, whom Jackie and I have gotten to know--they are neighbors of ours on Capitol Hill. We have had wonderful dinners together on Sunday nights, with Pete doing some of the cooking, and Nancy, I suspect, doing most of it, but Pete taking credit for most of it, as we would gather and have wonderful family gatherings, as they would embrace and cherish the new arrivals of my family, my two daughters. So we are losing not just a colleague but a neighbor and a friend and a person I care deeply about. Together, these two people, Nancy and Pete, have raised eight wonderful children. As one of six myself, their house reminds me so much of growing up in my own house--kids, very independent thinkers, all challenging their parents on every imaginable subject matter, and then going out the door and parroting their parents' positions on every issue--the parents never to appreciate the fact that their words were actually carrying the day. It can be messy in those households, but it is never boring, and certainly never so in the Domenici household as well. That is why there is one legislative accomplishment that best captures Pete Domenici, and that is the Character Counts bill that we started together in 1994. Character Counts was founded on a simple notion: that core ethical values are not just important to us as individuals, they form the foundation of a democratic society as well. Values like trustworthiness and respect, responsibility and fairness, caring and citizenship are at the core of who Pete is as a human being. Despite the fact that it was Pete's own family, heritage, and faith that taught him character's importance--his mother and father, the nuns in his Catholic school--he recognized something that too often gets lost today: that in a society that celebrates our differences--our heritage, our personal interests as individuals--character is the one thing that transcends them, whether they be cultural, religious, economic, or social. Somewhere along the way we lost that as a country. We forgot how important character is to the strength of our families, our communities, our institutions, and who we are as individuals. Quite frankly, when Pete retires at the end of this year, in a matter of days now, I am worried we will be losing a piece of that from the institution in which he and I serve--the value that he has brought on this subject matter and so many others. So let me say thanks to Pete for his warmth and friendship, and I wish him and Nancy the very best in the years to come. He is a remarkable individual and one who will make a difference in whatever he decides to do with the remainder of his life. I thank him for all of his contributions, and I look forward to seeing him and Nancy as often as we can in the years to come. Wayne Allard Mr. President, I, again, want to say a kind word or two about Wayne Allard as well, who is retiring. We serve on the Banking Committee together. He has a wonderful family history dating back decades in Colorado. Some of the earliest arrivals from the East were the Allard family in northern Colorado. That family has made wonderful contributions. Wayne has been a wonderful member of the Banking Committee. We have not spent a lot of time on many issues together, but I can tell you, on issues such as regulatory reform and working together to see we had a good housing bill last summer, Wayne Allard was a very constructive and positive member, and he can be very proud of his contribution to this body. Certainly, as to the landmark Transportation bill we sent to the President just a few years ago, Wayne Allard was as much responsible for that as any Member of this body, coming from a State where you normally would not think of transportation issues, certainly not mass transit issues as being pivotal. But Wayne Allard played a very important role in all of that. So to Wayne Allard, his wife Joan, and their family, I wish them the very best as well in their retirement years. Again, Mr. President, to my friend, John Warner, a special thanks, my dear friend. Now, when they say there is a white-haired Senator roaming around the floor, they will not have to guess whether it is the guy from Virginia or the guy from Connecticut, unless someone else arrives here with a full head of white hair. So to the white-haired caucus, again to John Warner, I thank you, dear friend.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, today Senator Domenici and I introduced a resolution designating the third week of October as ``National Character Counts Week.'' Senator Domenici and I have worked together for many years on the issue of character education and hope that by designating a special week to this cause, we may highlight the importance of character building activities in schools not only this week but all year long. In 1994, Senator Domenici and I first established the Partnerships in Character Education Pilot Project and have worked regularly since then to commemorate National Character Counts Week. Character Counts was founded on a simple notion: Our core ethical values aren't just important to us as individuals--they form the very foundation of democratic society. We know that we in order to face our challenges as communities and as a Nation, we need our children to be both well- educated and trained--and that begins with instilling character in our children. Trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, fairness, caring, and citizenship--these are the six pillars of character. Character education provides students a context within which to learn those values and integrate them into our daily lives. Indeed, if we view education simply as the imparting of knowledge to our children, then we not only miss an opportunity, but as also jeopardize our future. Children want direction-- to be taught right from wrong. Young people yearn for consistent adult involvement, and when they get it, we know they are less inclined to use illegal drugs, to vandalize, or commit suicide. The American public wants character education in our schools, too. Studies show that approximately 90 percent of Americans support schools teaching character education. Character education programs work. Currently, there are character education programs across all 50 States in rural, urban and suburban areas at every grade level. Schools across the country that have adopted strong character education programs report better student performance, fewer discipline problems, and increased student involvement within the community. Support for character education crosses party lines. Indeed, there is no stronger advocate for character education than my good friend, Senator Pete Domenici. I have had the distinct pleasure of working with him to ensure that all our children not only acquire strong math and science skills, but also the skills they need to develop into good and decent human beings. Senator Domenici has worked tirelessly on behalf of our Nation's children, and as he winds down his career in the Senate, I would like to take a moment to thank him for his good work and friendship. He will be sorely missed in the halls of this building, and we all wish his wife, Nancy, and him the very best. This renewed focus on character sends a wonderful message to Americans and will help reinvigorate our efforts to get communities and schools involved. With this resolution, it is my hope that even more communities will make character education a part of every child's life. I hope that my colleagues will support this important effort.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, today Senator Ensign and I have introduced a resolution designating October 16, 2008, Lights On Afterschool Day. Lights on Afterschool brings students, parents, educators, lawmakers, and community and business leaders together to celebrate afterschool programs. This year, more than 1 million Americans are expected to attend about 7,500 events designed to raise awareness and support for these much needed programs. In America today, 1 in 4 youth, more than 14 million children, go home alone after the school day ends. This includes more than 40,000 kindergartners and almost 4 million middle school students in grades six to eight. On the other hand, only 6.5 million children, or approximately 11 percent of school-aged children, participate in afterschool programs. An additional 15 million would participate if a quality program were available in their community. Lights On Afterschool, a national celebration of afterschool programs, is celebrated every October in communities nationwide to call attention to the importance of afterschool programs for America's children, families, and communities. Lights On Afterschool was launched in October 2000 with celebrations in more than 1,200 communities nationwide. The event has grown from 1,200 celebrations in 2001 to more than 7,500 today. This October, 1 million Americans will celebrate Lights On Afterschool! Quality afterschool programs should be available to children in all communities. These programs support working families and prevent kids from being both victims and perpetrators of violent crime. They also help parents in balancing work and home life. Quality afterschool programs help to engage students in their communities, and when students are engaged, they are more successful in their educational endeavors. In our work on the Senate Afterschool Caucus, Senator Ensign and I have been working for more than 4 years to impress upon our colleagues the importance of afterschool programming. It is our hope that they will join us on October 16 to celebrate the importance of afterschool programs in their communities back home.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, today we are acting on House-passed legislation which contains a 1-year extension of the Defense Production Act, DPA, which I hope will be swiftly approved by the Senate. While I am delighted that this extension legislation was passed by the House Tuesday night, it is crucial to remember that many of this law's authorities, last renewed in 2003, expire on September 30. We have just a few legislative days to get this done. As the United Sates continues to fight two wars and respond to various natural disasters, it is important that we not allow key provisions to expire--provisions allowing our Government agencies to ensure that American industry meets varying demands of national emergencies. Such measures involve mandates to keep industry producing critical resources for our military and first responders in times of crisis, and initiatives for maintaining crucial investments in strategic technologies. During the Korean war, what was then the Senate Banking & Currency Committee--the precursor to today's Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs--authored the Defense Production Act to ensure the availability of key industrial resources for the Department of Defense, DOD. Over time, the Defense Production Act has been amended to include energy supply, emergency preparedness, and critical infrastructure protections, thereby allowing civilian agencies to respond rapidly to crises such as natural disasters and terrorist attacks. In the last several months, the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs received two reports mandated by law from the Government Accountability Office and Department of Homeland Security. These reports highlighted major shortfalls in the administration's application of DPA authorities. Furthermore, I have been informed that in 2004, FEMA and other Federal agencies conducted their own internal review of DPA authorities and made several recommendations to the White House's Homeland Security Council. The White House chose not to act on those recommendations, and Congress has still not been fully briefed on these findings. In a perfect world, we would fully analyze and incorporate appropriate findings of pertinent reviews. Unfortunately, due to time constraints of the current legislative session, including our work on measures to address the crisis in our financial system, it is clear that a complete assessment now of their conclusions would be impossible. But we should not simply reauthorize this act for another 5 years. The recommendations gathered in these valuable reports should be reviewed, considered for legislation in a workable bill, and enacted into law in the near future; not 5 years from now. Simply put, granting a 1-year extension would provide our agencies with the authorities they need in the short term, but will also maintain the expectation that in 2009 the Banking Committee and the U.S. Senate will conduct a thoughtful review of these recommendations in hearings, mark-up, and floor consideration. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Senate, as well as in a new administration, to see to it that the DPA is modernized to address the challenges of the 21st century. In the meantime, I thank my colleagues for working with me to approve this 2009 reauthorization.

Mr. DODD

Mr. DODD. First, I thank my colleague from Florida. Let me say I am rising to speak on a matter other than the matter the Senator is addressing, but I wish to commend him for his thoughts and ideas on the situation. We have had extensive hearings, of course, yesterday, 5 hours with the Secretary of the Treasury and the chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank and chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the head of this new agency with our GSEs. The House is going to have a hearing today. What is quite clear is the plan, as submitted by the Secretary of the Treasury, I think, generally--I say this politely--but across the spectrum, has been sort of rejected, a three-page bill asking for $700 billion. I pointed out to someone yesterday a few years ago you could get a $100,000 no-doc subprime loan and the paperwork was four pages long. This is sort of a no-doc request here--not to try to be humorous about a situation such as this. But nonetheless we have a lot of work to do to try to put together a plan, but I hope we can do something because the situation is grave and it is serious and we have to respond.