John Ensign

Mr. ENSIGN

Mr. ENSIGN. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. ENSIGN

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 I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. ENSIGN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that at 1:45 today, the Senate stand in recess for 10 minutes.

Mr. ENSIGN. Madam President, I rise to talk about a bipartisan amendment on military voting, a bill I have cosponsored, because counting every vote in our elections is the foundation of our democracy. I thank Senators Schumer, Bennett, Chambliss, and Cornyn for their work on this matter. This is a long overdue measure to address the problems that our uniformed service men and women face in exercising their constitutional right to take part in elections, a right for which they so bravely fight to protect. Military personnel have encountered many problems in recent elections. They have trouble receiving timely information about elections in their home States. They have trouble registering and obtaining absentee ballots. They have trouble preparing ballots. Most of all, they have trouble returning the ballot to local election officials in time for their vote to be counted. It has been a national embarrassment to read news stories of military ballots that have been delayed. Despite the best efforts of those voters, those votes were not counted. Those military voters were disenfranchised from the same democracy they are charged with protecting because of administrative redtape. According to a Pew Charitable Trust study, one-third of States do not provide military voters stationed abroad enough time to vote. Additionally, it found that 25 States and the District of Columbia need to improve military absentee voting to ensure our men and women stationed around the globe can participate in the democratic process. While it concluded that my home State of Nevada gave its voters enough time to vote, there are still steps that could be taken to make the process simpler. Providing half of the country with insufficient time is entirely unacceptable. This study went on to say that by almost every measure, military and overseas voting participation is much lower than the general population. In 2006, voter turnout was approximately 20 percent for military voters as opposed to approximately 40 percent for the general population. These statistics illustrate that those who are fighting to protect our democracy are not being afforded the opportunity to participate in it. Both the Department of Defense and State and local election officials have not done enough to address these problems. The Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act of 2009 would address some of these problems to help military personnel have their votes count. The bill establishes new requirements for the States and for the Department of Defense to make it easier for military and overseas voters to participate in elections. The key requirement is for States to allow sufficient time for these voters who are overseas to receive their ballots, vote, and return them in time to be counted. Other provisions in the bill include having States provide online and fax systems to deliver registration and absentee ballots; making the Department of Defense provide improved ballot delivery and mail service for troops; and having the Department of Defense provide improved Federal voting assistance such as designating and training voter assistance officers and providing registration and absentee ballot information at every installation. While these are challenges, they are not insurmountable, especially when we consider the outcome--providing the men and women in uniform with the opportunity to vote. We, as Americans, owe them that opportunity. My office has been in touch with the office of the Secretary Of State of Nevada to continue to work through these challenges. Implementing these changes will not be simple. My colleagues and I have modified the bill to address some of these concerns and will continue to work with our States and localities going forward. For example, the original version of the bill focused attention on the steps that States must take, even though we know that many States, such as Nevada, have local election officials who carry out important election activities. We never had any intention of reaching into States and rearranging that relationship. That is why the Rules Committee modified the bill to clarify that election responsibilities identified in the bill can, of course, be delegated to the appropriate local election officials. The negotiation process is ongoing because the objective of ensuring that military votes are counted on election day is so critical. I fully expect we will find new issues to work through, but we must keep our eyes on the main goal--improving the system to protect the voting rights of our military personnel. There are few rights we exercise greater than choosing our own elected officials. We cannot call ourselves a democracy if we do not count the votes of our citizens in elections of government officials. The men and women who put their lives on the line for you and me to protect our country are certainly no exception. It is time that we take steps to protect their right to vote. I encourage my colleagues to make sure that this particular amendment is included in the Defense authorization bill. This is critical ahead of the election so States have time to prepare and every person in the military who wishes to exercise their right to vote is allowed to do so and their vote is counted in time for the 2010 elections.

Mr. ENSIGN

Mr. ENSIGN. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess, as under the previous order.

Mr. ENSIGN

Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, yesterday Senator Brown and I introduced bipartisan and commonsense legislation as both an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act and as a stand-alone bill. This is not the first time we have worked together on legislation. I would like to recognize and thank the junior Senator from Ohio for the bipartisan manner that both he and his staff have worked on this particular issue. In particular, I would also like to thank the Nevada Office of Veterans Services and the National Association for State Veterans Homes for bringing this matter to our attention. As stated, our legislation is both bipartisan and common sense. Currently, an individual is allowed into a State veterans home if the individual is, No. 1, an eligible veteran as defined by the U.S. Code; No. 2, the spouse of an eligible veteran; or, No. 3, a Gold Star parent. The problem, though, arises in the way that the Veterans Affairs Department defines a Gold Star parent. Under current regulations, an eligible parent is one who has lost all of their children while serving their country. I know it doesn't make sense, but that is the way the definition is. As a consequence, state veterans homes are forced to deny admissions to Gold Star parents if they have any surviving children. Losing a child in war is a stunning and life-altering event for anyone. Senator Brown and I believe that for these families, having one child make the supreme sacrifice in service to our country is sacrifice enough to authorize the surviving parent's elder care in a State veterans home later in life. Our legislation would change that to permit entry into a VA nursing home to any parent who lost a son or daughter in war while fighting to protect our freedoms and our very way of life. As most people are aware, State veterans homes were founded for servicemembers following the American Civil War. They have become institutions that our veterans and their dependents have come to rely on for nearly 150 years. Currently, there are 137 State veterans homes in all 50 States and Puerto Rico that, on a daily basis, provide hospital, rehabilitation, long-term care, Alzheimer's care, and end-of- life care to approximately 30,000 veterans and dependents. I would also like to take this opportunity to recognize the Nevada State Veterans Home in Boulder City, NV, for the great work they do. U.S. News and World Report recently rated this veterans home as a 5- star facility and the top nursing home in my home State of Nevada. I think it is only fair that the parents who have lost a son or a daughter have access to first-class facilities such as this. I thank, once again, the junior Senator from Ohio and ask my other colleagues to support this important legislation. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ENSIGN

Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, as we are confronted with the news this week of the first of what may be many deadly terrorists being transferred to American soil, I am still left to wonder what the administration's plan is for the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. I recently had the privilege of visiting Guantanamo Bay. I traveled down there with Senators Brownback, Barrasso, and Johanns. I would like to start out by saying how proud I am of the job our men and women in uniform who are stationed down there are doing. ADM Dave Thomas and his staff are doing an outstanding job, and their efforts need to be recognized. These are the kinds of individuals who make America great and who keep us safe. This is the type of facility where you do not have a true understanding of how well run it is until you go down there and see it in person for yourself. I would actually encourage our President to go down and see firsthand what Guantanamo Bay is like, what the facility is like, how the prisoners are treated down there, and how well our service men and women in uniform are preforming. As we are all aware, 6 months ago, President Obama set an arbitrary timeline of January 2010 to close Gitmo. It is now mid-June, and it appears he is no closer now than he was back in January of this year in identifying what his plan is. We still have seen little more than political rhetoric and no concrete plan of how to deal with the prisoners currently being housed at Gitmo. My question to the administration is: Why are we rushing to close this world-class facility without first having a plan in place? The administration should work with Congress on a bipartisan basis to first come up with a plan, if a plan is even possible, and then proceed from there. Included in this population are critical figures involved in the 9/11 attacks on the United States and the bombings of a U.S. warship, the USS Cole, and also terrorists captured from the battlefield in Afghanistan. As I stated earlier, one of the most deadly terrorists who was formerly at Gitmo and is directly responsible for the deaths of 224 individuals is now in the United States. On our trip, we were able to see the security measures that have been put in place to keep these evil individuals from escaping or doing harm. These individuals do not view this war we are in as over. A document that was found in an apartment of an al-Qaida operative in Manchester, England, appropriately entitled the ``Manchester Document,'' lays out how terrorists should act if captured. According to the Manchester Document, if an individual is detained, he should ``insist on proving that torture was inflicted on him. . . .'' Whether it was or not, they want to use the press. They want to try to show that torture was used on them. According to this document, they want to ``take advantage of visits from outsiders to communicate with brothers outside the prison and exchange information that may be helpful to them in their work outside the prison. . . .'' They are to ``master the art of hiding messages . . . and provide information about the enemy's strengths and weaknesses, movements of the enemy and its members.'' The terrorists practice this doctrine on a daily basis. In addition, on a regular basis, they abuse our troops down at Guantanamo Bay. It is not the other way around. A spokesman for the Pentagon stated that 14 percent of the over 500 who were released from Guantanamo Bay have returned to some sort of terrorist activity--14 percent. Some people say: Boy, that is a very low recidivism rate. But if we think about it, these are mass murderers and evil individuals. These are people who want to set out to destroy our country, our way of life, and kill as many Americans as they can. Do we want to transfer or release some of these individuals even if only 14 percent of them return? The lives of American troops are at stake. By the way, the people who were released early, the over 500, those are the people we actually thought were safe. The people who are still there are the most dangerous and deadly. One of the people who was transferred detonated a car bomb in Iraq. Another is now a leading al-Qaida operative in Yemen. As I said before, these were supposedly the safe ones. What would happen if those currently at Gitmo returned to the battlefield? This document and the actions of those detained at Guantanamo Bay illustrate what some in this Congress seem to have forgotten. We, as a nation, are still at war. They are trying to kill Americans and destroy our very way of life. The prisoners at Gitmo realize this. Our troops realize this. It is time that we in Washington, DC, wake up and realize it as well. The facilities at Gitmo are state of the art and are some of the most impressive I have ever seen. After touring the facilities down there, I believe it would be next to if not impossible to recreate those facilities in the United States, partially because of the physical location of the facility. Guantanamo Bay is also the appropriate place to conduct military commissions. The privacy and seclusion of the unique courtroom facilities that have already been built there allow classified information to be protected and allow privacy for the 9/11 families who are grieving and have chosen to watch the proceedings down there. Too often, we forget about those individuals, the families of the 9/11/01 victims. Transferring these hardened terrorists to facilities in the United States would make each of the facilities where they are transferred to, and the communities in which they are situated, terrorist targets. Let me repeat that. Transferring these hardened terrorists to facilities in the United States would make each one of the facilities they are transferred to and the communities in which they are situated terrorist targets. Would you like to own a small business, a gas station or a convenience store around one of these prisons that house terrorists? I know I wouldn't. Another observation that struck me while I was down at Guantanamo Bay was the care and treatment of the detainees. Every--every--effort is made to ensure their religious rights are respected. During my visit to the facility, we even paused as part of our tour out of respect for prayer time of the detainees. In addition, there are various programs and resources to provide detainees with instructional training and social recreation. Listen to these statistics. Available to the detainees are over 13,000 books for them to read, 910 magazines, and various newspapers in different languages that are distributed weekly. They have access to a vast collection of DVDs for the detainees. It is almost like they have Netflix down there. They also have satellite television, including Al-Jazeera. Detainees are permitted quarterly phone calls to family members and have received or sent over 22,000 pieces of mail, including privileged attorney-client mail. Finally, we offer literacy classes, second language classes, and art classes for the detainees. These detainees are provided better health care than a lot of Americans are. Does any of this sound like abuse? Does any of it sound like abuse? In his first 6 months, President Obama has had to make some tough decisions. Some of these decisions, such as his Afghan policy, I publicly supported. He needs to realize, though, that on this issue of transferring these hardened terrorists to the United States there is strong bipartisan opposition. If the President were to go down to Gitmo, tour the facilities, and to be completely honest with himself, I believe he would come to the same conclusion I did. In the end, there are no superior alternatives to Guantanamo Bay. The administration must answer this question: How does closing Guantanamo, especially without a plan, make the American people safer? I yield the floor.

Mr. ENSIGN

Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I was unavoidably absent on the afternoon of May 19, 2009. Had I been present, I would have voted yes on rollcall vote 194, in favor of final passage of H.R. 627, the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act of 2009.

Mr. ENSIGN

Mr. ENSIGN. Madam President, I rise to honor the leaders, visionaries, students, faculty, and the parents at West Prep in North Las Vegas, NV. At a time when disappointing and depressing news seems to fill our days, there is a light of promise beaming from a very unlikely place in my State. Just a few short years ago, the writing was on the chalkboard for West Middle School. The school was persistently dangerous and consistently the lowest performing middle school in southern Nevada. Madam President, 100 percent of the students are from low-income households, and 92 percent of them are Hispanic or Black. These children had not just been left behind, their futures were sort of swept under the rug for someone else to deal with at another time. Fortunately, there are educators who will never settle for that. Associate superintendent Dr. Ed Goldman asked if he could take the school over. He hired a young, brash, hungry principal named Dr. Mike Barton and made sure the school had empowerment-level funding. He also gave Dr. Barton tremendous reign over the school. That was in April 2006. Today, West Prep is a study in education innovation. They extended the school day and provided a third semester as summer school. Forty percent of the children have voluntarily signed up for this summer school. Now they have begun a transition to a full K-12 campus. There is afterschool tutoring. The students wear uniforms. There is a newcomer track for students new to the United States. Science and math classes are divided by gender. There is a law enforcement class that collaborates with the FBI and a Men Mentoring Men program, both of which are keeping kids out of the dean's office. Students feel safe now when they go to this school. Most importantly, they are finally learning. I had the opportunity to visit this school and observe the students throughout the school. When an adult walks into the classrooms, all of the children stand, say good morning, sit back down, and continue their lesson. They are taught to respect elders. When I visited that school, I had the opportunity to observe a chemistry class. They were performing a chemistry experiment. I asked one of the students--she was an African-American young lady who had attended the school before Dr. Barton took over: What is the biggest difference between then and now? What was happening now, as opposed to before educators shook things up? She had a very simple reply. She said: Now I get to learn. It seems like such a simple thing, to be able to learn, almost shocking that those kinds of words would come out of her mouth. But these students had been robbed of that opportunity. We are the greatest Nation on earth, and we have not figured out how to make it so all our kids can learn. Give a child an education--an education that teaches and inspires--and there is no limit to their potential. The test results at West Prep are proof. This school has seen phenomenal test score growth. Recently, we learned how phenomenal that growth is. Three years ago, only 17 percent at what was then West Middle School could read or perform math at grade level. Only 17 percent. Today, 97 percent of juniors are proficient in reading, 73 percent are proficient in math, and 64 percent are proficient in science. About 80 percent of the juniors were enrolled at the school 3 years ago when Dr. Barton took over. Isn't that amazing? I am so proud of what Dr. Goldman and Dr. Barton have done, but I am especially proud of the students, the teachers, and the parents at West Prep. Together they have turned the tide. Every day we see at West Prep what quality education can accomplish. There is still work to do, but there is a can-do feeling that has spread throughout the community, and you feel it when you walk onto the campus. See, Dr. Barton was given freedom to lead that school. He isn't tied down by bureaucracy. He spends most of his time in the school, when a lot of the other principals today go to school district meetings, spend time on bureaucracy. The other thing is, he can fire teachers who are not performing. In fact, when he came onboard, he replaced a majority of the teachers. Remember, he is recruiting teachers into one of, what most people would describe in southern Nevada, the least desirable places to live or teach in southern Nevada. But now he has a team in place that he knows will motivate his students and help them reach their potential. This formula is working. In 2006, nobody imagined this school could ever reach the level of success it has in such a short period of time. Instead, the school will graduate its first senior class next year. It is raising the bar every day as it shakes up traditional education. Most importantly, the students of West Prep are learning and reaching their full potential. Congratulations, West Prep. We are all so proud of you and what you have accomplished. Madam President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ENSIGN

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

Mr. ENSIGN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mr. ENSIGN

Mr. ENSIGN. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. ENSIGN. I rise to talk about the Ensign-Boxer-Pryor-Snowe amendment. The four of us have worked on this amendment. It is a second-degree amendment, but it is a friendly second-degree amendment to the Boxer amendment. I commend all four offices and our staffs that did superwork over the last several days to come up with the language. It is not compromising language; it is strengthening language. This is great bipartisan work to increase the oversight of this program known as the Public-Private Investment Program or as some call it, PPIP. The special inspector general of TARP has stated that PPIP is ``inherently vulnerable to fraud, waste, and abuse.'' Our amendment would go a long way to protect taxpayers from such fraud, waste, and abuse. Most of my colleagues would agree Congress gave far too long of a leash to the Treasury when it created TARP. I know few people who believe the program has been completely successful so far. The PPIP would represent the most ambitious and complex undertaking yet for TARP and by far the riskiest use of TARP funds to date. Let's not make the same mistakes with PPIP that we have made with the rest of the TARP fund so far. Our amendment would establish key oversight, transparency, and conflict-of-interest safeguards before the program begins, not after. Our amendment will impose strict conflict of interest rules to prevent PPIP fund managers from inappropriately using the program to benefit themselves or their clients. It will require these rules be in place before any Government funds can be used in the new program. The amendment requires rigorous investor screening procedures and robust ethics policies for the Public-Private Investment Program funds. It will require Treasury to issue regulations governing how the program and the Federal Reserve's TALF Program can interact to avoid excessive and dangerous over-leveraging. Lastly, our amendment calls for significant and improved oversight and transparency of PPIP. The amendment also preserves the language from the underlying Boxer-Snowe amendment that provides the special inspector general of TARP with an additional $15 million to conduct audits and investigations of this new program. The American people are demanding more accountability and transparency from their Government. President Obama campaigned over and over on change and promised to lead the most open administration ever. Let's send a message to the country that we are backing up that rhetoric with action. Let's shine sunlight on the TARP's newest program from its inception, not once mistakes have been made. Let's put the safeguards in place from the start of PPIP to protect against fraud and waste rather than waiting until after abuses occur. I urge my colleagues to vote in support of the Ensign-Pryor-Boxer- Snowe amendment. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. ENSIGN. I yield the floor.

Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I call up the Ensign second-degree amendment, No. 1043, at the desk.

Mr. ENSIGN

Mr. ENSIGN. For the Chamber's edification, I have an amendment filed as a first-degree and I also have a second-degree. I was going to call up the second-degree amendment.

Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside and I call up amendment No. 1004, which is the first-degree amendment.

Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, taxpayers and politicians alike have been too long in the dark about how the Treasury has been implementing this so-called TARP program--or as most people in the country know it, the bank bailout program. The President has proposed and Treasury Secretary Geithner has proposed a new toxic asset plan that could put hundreds of billions of dollars of the taxpayers' money at risk, so we need to do this right. The special inspector general for TARP has stated that this new toxic asset buy-back program--called the Public-Private Investment Program-- is ``inherently vulnerable to fraud, waste, and abuse.'' The special IG's report outlined a number of good recommendations that are necessary to protect the taxpayers and to ensure the integrity of this new program. My amendment would simply require that the Treasury Department implement the recommendations from this special inspector general before allocating money under this new program known as the Public- Private Investment Program. These requirements include, very simply, No. 1, imposing strict conflict of interest rules to prevent PPIP fund managers from inappropriately using the program to benefit themselves or their clients. Common sense. Makes sense. No. 2, mandate complete transparency of this program, including public disclosure of all transactions and the current valuation of all assets. And No. 3, requiring that the fund managers who manage this program have stringent investor screening procedures, at least as rigorous as typical know- your-customer procedures found at commercial banks or retail brokerage firms to ensure investors are legitimate. Let's put these safeguards in place. These are common sense. We are all talking about a bill in front of us that eliminates fraud and abuse. Well, there is no bigger program that we have right now than the TARP program. We need to eliminate fraud and abuse. And when the special inspector general has said this new program is ripe with fraud and abuse, we ought to protect the taxpayers. I urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment so that the Treasury Department fulfills President Obama's promise of bringing in transparency and open government. That is what he promised upon coming in. This particular amendment will help ensure that the American people have transparency and that their interests are protected, especially their dollars are protected with this new program that literally could run into the hundreds of billions of dollars. With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment. Hopefully, we won't get blocked on having a vote on this amendment.

Mr. ENSIGN. Reserving the right to object, will the Senator repeat the unanimous consent request?

Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, can I modify the request that I be recognized to call up an amendment, not to have action on it, call up an amendment, spend 5 minutes on it following the Senator from New York to get my amendment pending?

Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside, I call for regular order with regard to the Boxer amendment, and that I be allowed to call up a second-degree amendment, No. 1003.

Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I call for regular order on the Boxer amendment.

Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, do I have the floor?

Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I call up as my second-degree amendment No. 1003.