Johnny Isakson

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I was unavoidably detained during rollcall vote No. 215, an amendment to strike the earmark for the Durham Museum in Omaha, NE, from H.R. 2918, the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act of 2010; rollcall vote No. 216 on a point of order with respect to amendment No. 1365; and rollcall vote No. 217 on passage of H.R. 2918, the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act of 2010. Had I been present I would have voted yea for rollcall vote No. 215; nay for rollcall vote No. 216; and nay for rollcall vote No. 217 and ask that the Record reflect that.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I am delighted to rise with my colleague from Georgia, Senator Chambliss, and pay tribute to my friend, Dr. Bruce Grube. A lot of times we stand on the floor and say ``my friend,'' when it is a passing statement. Well, it is not for me. I met Dr. Grube in 1989, when he was named the 11th president of Georgia Southern University, and I was with him as recently as commencement last year. He is a great leader in education in our State, and he will be missed. But he is both remembered and revered and there are three reasons I would like to talk about his distinguished career. No. 1, he did what is most important for college presidents to do--he raised the endowment of the university. In fact, he doubled the endowment of the university. And because of that, as Senator Chambliss said, he doubled the number of scholarships going out to deserving Georgians to come to Georgia Southern University. That is No. 1. No. 2, as a former chairman of a State board of education and one whose passion is education, I love what Dr. Grube did when he put in the First-Year Experience program at Georgia Southern University, a program designed to make the first-year experience a lasting experience so student retention improved at Georgia Southern and more kids who entered graduated. Since the inception of that program, retention at Georgia Southern University has gone from 66 percent of the freshman class to 81 percent of the freshman class--four out of five returning and getting their degree at Georgia Southern University. No. 3, among everything else that a president of a university does in terms of responsibility, it is so important that they outreach to the community. When you go to Bulloch County in Statesboro, GA, if you are at Snooky's Restaurant for breakfast, Dr. Grube is there. If you are on campus in the middle of the day, interacting with students under the shade of a Georgia pine tree, Dr. Grube is there. If there is a charitable or benefit program in Bulloch County, Dr. Grube is there. He is the face of Georgia Southern University, and he will be missed--but only for a year because after a brief sabbatical he comes back to teach political science at Georgia Southern University. He returns to his roots, established in his doctorate degree at the University of Texas in political science and carried on for years to come as a distinguished professor of political science at Georgia Southern University. I am proud to rise with my colleague, Senator Chambliss, to pay tribute to a great Georgian, a great educator, and my personal friend, Dr. Bruce Grube. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the time be divided between myself and Senator McCain.

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, how much time remains on our side in morning business?

Mr. ISAKSON. Thank you, Madam President.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, for just a minute, I want to talk about health care. I am a member of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. We began yesterday the opening statements on the bill that is pervasive in its coverage around the country as to the future of health care in America. I rise as one not to be a critic but to lay out the challenge this legislation portends for all of us and maybe to raise some points that thoughtfully will be considered before we make a serious mistake on the funding side, the expense side, and the borrowing side. A few weeks ago, in Georgia, at a Rotary speech, I referred to ``a trillion-dollars in debt.'' A gentleman stood up in the Q and A section of that time, and he said: Senator Isakson, I only got a high school education. Can you explain to me what a trillion is? I do not know how many of you have thought about that, but if you had to do it right now, could you explain what it is? I could not. So I decided to go home that night and figure out some easy way to demonstrate how much a trillion is. I thought maybe it would be good to determine how many seconds it takes for a trillion seconds to go by. So I did the math on the calculator. I thought I made a mistake and did it again. I had it checked. It takes 317,097 years, 11 months, and 2 days for a trillion seconds to go by. That is almost incomprehensible, but it does give you some idea of the issues we have to be concerned about in terms of spending and cost and savings. The CBO has scored the parts of the health bill that have actually been drafted--which is about two-thirds of it--at a potential cost of $1 trillion over 10 years. Obviously, we are going to have to pay for that. There have been some discussions in the last few days of suggested pay-fors. But I want to discuss for a minute how we have to be very careful not to use words such as ``a pay-for'' that in fact only move obligations around. For example, President Obama, for whom I have great respect, said to the medical association on Monday that one of the pay-fors, by having public coverage for everybody, would mean there would be no indigent patients; therefore, everybody would be getting paid for their services and that would save us $11 billion a year in DSH payments, which is the disproportionate share of treatments which charity hospitals in New York and Atlanta get through Medicaid because they take a disproportionate number of indigent patients. There is only one flaw in that analysis. Yes, we might not appropriate $11 billion a year for disproportionate share anymore, but we are not doing it because we are raising Medicaid coverage to 150 percent of poverty and providing health insurance through a public plan. So the cost remains the same. It just moves from a cost to pay charity hospitals for disproportionate share to a cost of providing the coverage through Medicaid or through the private plan. The unintended consequence of removing disproportionate share would be taking the economic model through which charity hospitals are financed and turning it upside down. Because in my city of Atlanta, for example, where Grady Hospital exists--and Grady has gone through a reformation; we have created a foundation, and we have done everything we can to save the hospital--it gets a tremendous part of the DSH payment from Medicaid for disproportionate share because it takes a disproportionate number of the indigent patients because private for- profit hospitals will not. But if private for-profit hospitals have indigent patients who now have coverage, and they are closer to the patient than Grady is, the patient will then go to the private hospital, so the DSH payment goes down or evaporates for the public hospital, and so does the funding mechanism upon which their public bonds and their public debt were financed. So we have to be careful about the unintended consequences. Secondly, on Medicaid, I am a product of the Georgia State legislature, and I know the distinguished Acting President pro tempore today is a product of the New York Assembly. We all dealt with Medicaid. Medicaid is a program where the Federal Government pays about two-thirds of it. The States pay about a third of it. And the States run it. When we got into this business of expanding Medicaid under this legislation to 150 percent of poverty--which is a 50-percent increase in eligibility--I thought back to my days in the legislature about how much money that was that my State then was going to have to come up with under the one-third match. In Georgia, in 1968--the first year we had Medicaid--the State's share of Medicaid for the year was $7,791,000. In 2008, the State's share was $2,468,376,258, which would go up by $1 billion if we raised the eligibility to 150 percent. I know the President has said that for 4 years the Federal Government will take over the entire obligation of that increase to 150 percent. But that is only putting off the inevitable for the States, which will be a percent of their budget they cannot afford. Medicaid, in Georgia, in 40 years has gone from 1 percent of our budget to 12 percent of our budget. With this proposal, it would go to 18 percent. We must remember, in the economic stimulus bill, a significant amount of that money was Medicaid money to go to the States to fund what is already an existing shortfall. So I come to the floor to say this: I am for every goal of the preamble of the health care bill that has been introduced in the HELP Committee. I want to make policies more affordable, coverage more pervasive, access easier, and I want to lower costs. But as Acting Chairman Dodd said yesterday in the committee, history will not look favorably on you if you do not do something because it is hard. He is right. But neither will history look favorably upon you if you do something easy when it is hard. This is hard work, and we cannot take the easy way out to pile debt on the people of the United States of America. Hopefully we will thoughtfully consider these ramifications I have discussed and others and move forward with a health proposal we can pay for and that accomplishes its goals rather than an easy answer that puts us in a desperate situation as a country and ultimately takes us to an economic demise in this country. Madam President, I appreciate the time and I yield to my colleague from the great State of Arizona.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, to the Senator from Florida, who left quickly--I am sorry he left--I want to associate myself with the first part of his remarks with regard to the tourism bill. He is a Floridian. Florida is a tourism destination, and it is the No. 1 business in Florida, but you have to go through Georgia to get there. So I have to chime in and say, he is exactly right. Given the economic conditions our country is experiencing right now, tourism is one business we can be a catalyst for that will pay back both in terms of revenues and tax dollars, but, more importantly, in terms of jobs. So I want to associate myself with his support of the tourism bill in that portion of his speech.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, it is a distinct honor and privilege for me to stand on the floor of the Senate to pay tribute to a gentleman I went to college with, a gentleman who has reported on politics and government in Georgia for the better part of the last 35 years, a gentleman who recently announced his retirement at the end of this month from the associate editorial page responsibilities at the Atlanta Journal and Constitution. Mr. Jim Wooten, born and raised in McRae, GA, veteran of Vietnam, 20 years in the Georgia Air National Guard, former President of the Georgia Press Association, lifetime trustee of the Georgia Press Association's educational fund, has made a tremendous contribution to our State and to the public lives of all our people. I rise to pay tribute to him. One of the greatest tributes of all that I can share is what happened on Monday, at lunch this week. I had a luncheon with the Board of Cox Enterprises. The Cox newspapers own the Atlanta Constitution, as they do the Palm Beach Post and the Dayton paper. They own many other businesses. It is a huge privately held company. At that luncheon, unsolicited by me, the name of Jim Wooten came up and, one by one, the leaders of Cox Enterprises talked about the tremendous contributions that Jim Wooten has made to their newspaper. As one who was first elected in 1976 and has been written about many times by Jim Wooten, I wanted to add my tribute to his journalistic talent and the contribution he has made. I am not sure I know of any other writer I have read who has reported on what is going on in politics in our State, who has gotten it right more often--in fact always--than Jim Wooten. Conservative? Yes, he is conservative. But he is pragmatic. When he writes his opinions on the editorial page of the Atlanta Constitution, it makes a difference in the minds and attitudes of Georgia's people. I say job well done to Jim Wooten. I hope his retirement is successful and rewarding in every way he wishes it to be, and I thank him very much for all the contributions he has made to the lives of all Georgians and, in one case, to this Georgian.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. I would like to talk for a minute, if I can, Madam President, about a very important issue. I don't come to the floor all that often, but people will tell you I come to the floor too often to talk about the housing industry. I am going to do it for a little bit tonight because it is critically important to our economy and to our country. A year and a half ago, I introduced a piece of legislation, in January of 2008, creating a housing tax credit of $15,000 for any family who would buy and occupy their home as a principal residence in the United States. I did so because housing had collapsed, foreclosures were beginning to become rampant and are rampant today. Standing inventory proliferated, builders were going out of business, and our economy was in a downward slide. The CBO score on that $15,000 tax credit is $34.2 billion, and I was told last January that was too expensive, we couldn't afford to do it. By my last count--Senator Coburn is a better counter than I am--we spent about $5.5 trillion trying to fix an economy that has been in a continual downward slide. Fortunately, in July of last year, with the help of Members on both sides, we did get a tax credit passed, but it was basically an interest-free loan for $7,500, it was means tested to families who were first-time home buyers or had incomes under $150,000. It did no good. Later in the year, I finally convinced this body, and we took off the limitation in terms of the payback and made it a real tax credit and raised it from $7,500 to $8,000 and it has made a difference. First- time home buyers used it and the market stabilized, but we don't have a recession in first-time home buyers. We have a recession in the move-up market. The man who is transferred from Missouri or Georgia who can't sell his house in Missouri, can't come to Georgia, can't take the transfer. The corporation can't afford to buy the house and hold it for him because of the proliferation of inventory that is owned and today in the United States of America one in two sales made every day is a short sale or a foreclosure. That is an unhealthy market, and it is continuing to precipitate a downward spiral in values, loss of equity by the American people, and a protracted, difficult economic time for our country. Tomorrow, joined by a number of Members of this Senate on both sides, I will reintroduce the $15,000 tax credit that is available to any family or individual who buys or occupies any home in the United States of America as their principal residence with no means test for first- time home buyers, no means test or income limitations. Tomorrow it also will be announced in New York the Business Roundtable has adopted this tax credit as its No. 1 suggestion to the U.S. Government as the one thing we can do to turn around the American economy. I am getting to be a pretty old guy. I went through the second recession of my career in 1974. Gerald Ford was President, it was a Democratic Congress. America had a 3-year standing inventory of new houses built and unsold. The economy went into a tailspin. Values started to go down. We were in deep trouble. That Republican President and that Democratic Congress came together and passed a $2,000 tax credit for any family who bought and occupied as its principal residence a new house that was standing and vacant. In 1 year's time, a 3-year inventory was reduced to 1 year; values stabilized, the economy came back, home sales became healthy, and America recovered. That is precisely what will happen this time. I am not so smart that I figured it out, I am lucky enough that I lived through it in 1974, and 30 years later we need to do the right thing for America and the right thing for our economy and put in a time-sensitive, 1-year significant tax credit for anyone who buys and occupies as their residence a single-family home. An independent group estimated, when I introduced this last year, that it would create 700,000 house sales and 684,000 jobs this year. I think it is ironic that house sales today are at half a million. A normal to good year in the United States is 1.2 to 1.5 million sales. If you could get the tax credit and the 700,000 sales that have been estimated it will introduce and add it to the 500,000 sales we have today, it will return our housing market to normalcy. It will stabilize the values of the largest investment of the people of the United States of America. It will recreate equity lines of credit that have dissipated and disappeared in the American family. And over time it will restore our vibrant economy back to the economy we all hope and pray will come. So I ask all of the Members of the Senate to reconsider their positions in the past and consider joining me in the introduction of this legislation tomorrow. We have three Democrats and three Republicans who have come on board. I would like to see all 100 of us because in the end all of our problems will be more easily solved if the problems of the American taxpayers and citizens are solved, and their biggest problems today are an illiquid housing market, a decline in their equity, a decline in their net worth, and a depression in the housing market that we are obligated to correct if we possibly can. I yield the floor.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to address the Chamber as in morning business for up to 10 minutes.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, I know most Members on the floor remember a song of about 25 years ago called: ``The Night the Lights Went Out in Georgia.'' Well, on Tuesday of this week, a beacon of light in journalism did go out in Georgia, when Bill Shipp, a gifted political writer, announced his retirement after 50 years of reporting in the South. Bill Shipp is a remarkable character. It is said that all of us are replaceable. I am not sure Bill Shipp is replaceable. He began his writing in Georgia as a political columnist for the Atlanta Constitution. Starting in the late 50s, he covered the late Ivan Allen and the late Dr. Martin Luther King and the Governors and the politicians of that era from George Wallace to Lester Maddox, to Jimmy Carter, to Carl Sanders. He wrote about the transition of the old South to the new South. And in Washington, he covered the Civil Rights Act in the middle and late seventies. He was a writer whose perception was keen, whose wit was sharp, and whose pen was even sharper. For 32 of his 50 years I was in elected office in Georgia. I can make a true confession: When he wrote a column, you went to the paper and you read Bill Shipp first. There was a reason for that. If you were going to be the victim of the day, you might as well go out and find out what he was going to say about you. But if you were not the victim of the day, you could relish in seeing some other politician being skewered by that pen. Bill Shipp had a profound effect on journalism in our State. For years he reported for the Atlanta Journal and Constitution, but after a number of years he started his only publication whose title was: ``Bill Shipp's Georgia.'' Never has there been a more appropriate name for a newsletter, because, in many ways, Georgia's politics was Bill Shipp's possession. Bill Shipp wrote about politics in such a way that he changed politics in the South. While I would never accuse Bill of having editorialized in a news article, the tone and tenor of the direction of Bill Shipp's perception of what was right and wrong could help to lead debates to a positive conclusion in an otherwise period of discourse and trouble. I love Bill Shipp for many reasons--one, because he and I have had the pleasure of living in the same county for the last 40 years. The other is, I have learned a lot from him. I always appreciated him. In politics, Bill Shipp is the equivalent of Helen Thomas at a Presidential press conference. When a Georgia politician has a press conference, Bill Shipp is there. When it is time for questions, he always has one. And when it comes time to roll the grenade in the middle of the room, Bill Shipp will do it. He did it to me and to others. Bill Shipp is a gifted friend, a man for whom I wish the best in his retirement. I think, finally, of those days on Ivy Grove and Cherokee Road in Marietta where he and Tom Watson Brown and George Berry would sit at 5 in the afternoon, have a libation, and discuss the next day's column that Bill would write. Bill Shipp is a treasured asset of our State, a man who has contributed greatly to the growth of the new South and the new Georgia, a man whose contributions to journalism are preeminent in our State, and a friend to whom I wish the very best in his retirement. I yield the floor.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I thank the Senator for yielding and also rise in recognition of Lieutenant Colonel Burson and his incredible life story. Lieutenant Colonel Burson volunteered for reserve duty in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom at the age of 70 in order to relieve active-duty doctors so they could carry out other duties. To this end, he searched nationwide for military units in need of a medical doctor and even delayed the celebration of his 50th wedding anniversary for his upcoming deployment with the medical unit of the Indiana National Guard. Lieutenant Colonel Burson was assigned as medical officer for the U.S. Embassy in Iraq from November 2005 to March 2006 and served as one of the doctors overseeing treatment of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. During this time, he was part of the team that successfully convinced Hussein to end his hunger strike. He did this while also performing surgery and treating patients at a nearby trauma/emergency care unit. Lieutenant Colonel Burson was 71 by the time he completed this deployment. At such a point in life, many men and women are well into their retirements. However, after his first deployment to Iraq, Lieutenant Colonel Burson instead renewed his search for a combat arms unit in need of a doctor during the 2007 troop surge in Iraq. He served an additional deployment with an Army Reserve military police battalion from Raleigh, NC, from August 2007 to November 2007 at age 73. Today, as we stand before you on this floor, this extraordinary American will have just returned home after his third combat deployment. At 75 years of age, he has just completed another full tour, this time in Afghanistan. MR. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I thank the Senator for his kind observations regarding Dr. Burson's service. Lieutenant Colonel Burson illustrates the selflessness, commitment to excellence, and courage that exemplifies American character. We applaud the altruistic manner with which he has undertaken and completed each mission. Three combat tours can wear on the best of men, but Lieutenant Colonel Burson has met these challenges head on and succeeded. As long as this great Nation has men like Colonel Burson, who hold true to the values that reveal the best in us, we will remain a world leader.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside and amendment No. 1164, which is at the desk, be pending.

Mr. ISAKSON. I know the Senator from Iowa wishes to speak, but first I ask unanimous consent that Senator Dodd, Senator Lieberman, and Senator Chambliss be added to the amendment.

Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, this amendment is very simple. You heard me many times come to the floor to talk about the housing tax credit. The tax credit we finally amended to repeal the payback provision of $8,000 for first-time home buyers has brought an improvement in home sales of 40 percent at the entry level. This amendment merely removes the means test of a maximum income of $150,000 for a couple and $75,000 for an individual, and it removes the means test that they have to be a first-time home buyer, which means any home buyer buying a home for their principal residence would receive an $8,000 tax credit and there would be no limitation to their income to disqualify them. I have always fought on this floor for a maximum tax credit of $15,000, and I know how difficult that has been. But in the evidence of what has happened with the current $8,000 with the means test, by removing it I am confident we will have a significant improvement in the housing market in America, which in turn will cause a significant improvement in the economy of the United States of America, as happened in 1968, 1974, 1981, 1982 and 1990 to 1991. Housing took America into a recession, and it was only when it recovered that America began to come out. This improvement in that amendment, with this amendment, will be better for the people of the United States of America and better for our economy. I encourage my colleagues at an appropriate time to cast a favorable vote. I yield the floor.

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

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I wish to honor and commemorate in the Record of the Senate ADM John Henry Towers, pioneer naval aviator, on the 90th anniversary of the first crossing of the Atlantic Ocean in an airplane on May 8, 2009. Admiral Towers was born and raised in Rome, GA, and graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy with the class of 1906. As one of the earliest of all naval aviators, he participated in the development of new aviation technology and the application of air power as a part of the surface fleet. By the time World War II was over, Admiral Towers was the senior surviving aviator of the Navy. In every chapter of the early development of naval aviation, John Towers made his mark. He organized the Navy's entry into aviation in 1911. Admiral Towers worked very closely with Glenn Curtiss in designing the first naval aircraft and due to his efforts became known to his peers as the ``Crown Prince of Aviation.'' Towers held aviation records for endurance, altitude, and speed. He survived a fall out of an airplane in 1913 by hanging onto the aircraft strut as it crashed into the Severn River from 1,300 feet. Unfortunately, his pilot-in-training, ENS, William Billingsly, was killed and became the first naval aviation fatality. As a result, Towers mandated seat belts and harnesses in all naval aircraft after the crash. He also took the Assistant Secretary of the Navy Franklin Delano Roosevelt, future President of the United States, for his first airplane ride, which secured a special friendship that lasted their whole careers. Admiral Towers was the first to use naval aircraft in combat in the Mexican War in 1914. Then, in 1919, he conceived, organized, and commanded the first flight of three Navy NC-flying boats to fly across the Atlantic Ocean, fulfilling his early vision to be the first flight across the Atlantic Ocean. The flights began at Rockaway Beach, NY, on May 8, 1919, and one of the planes made it to Plymouth, England, on May 31, 1919. It was Towers' vision that inspired others and changed the world forever. The flight actually lasted 52 hours 31 minutes, for a distance of 3,936 nautical miles. Towers and his group became international celebrities. During their Atlantic crossing, the Nation was on pins and needles reading about the happenings each day, particularly when they received the news that Towers' float boat NC-3 went down and was lost at sea for 5 days. After he sailed the seaplane 200 miles to the Azores, his became a household name around the world. The significance of this epic flight affected the psyche of the American public because until that time, we were largely protected from invasion by having two oceans on either side of us. When the airplane made that first Atlantic crossing, Americans became aware that we were not immune from future wars on our soil. In addition, Britain, France, and Germany were more advanced in aviation than the United States. When the United States beat them across the Atlantic, we were immediately thrust into a ``super power'' status. The U.S. Navy beat the world in crossing the Atlantic. Admiral Towers' career was a stubborn, determined battle to gain acceptance for aviation from a Navy that was dominated by battleship admirals. He was the first to integrate women into the U.S. Navy and U.S. Marines by creating the W.A.V.E.S. in 1942. The W.A.V.E.S. eventually grew to 12,000 women officers and 75,000 enlisted women. He was also the first to obtain four stars in any branch of service in the State of Georgia and was awarded the Distinguished Service Medal. Apollo 17 honored the admiral and his contribution to aviation by naming a crater on the Moon in his name. In addition, he was honored by Time magazine and placed on the front cover for his efforts during World War II. Towers began in naval aviation at its inception in 1911 and remained dedicated to the field through his retirement in 1947. He is a member of five Aviation Halls of Fame. It is a privilege to pay tribute to the remarkable life of ADM John Henry Towers.

Mr. ISAKSON

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

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that amendment No. 1084, the Gillibrand amendment, be made pending.

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I call up the second-degree amendment I have at the desk.

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

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, briefly, I have high regard for Senator Gillibrand and the intent of the amendment. I also understand the practical application of what could happen. I know in my home State of Georgia, in one school system in Gwinnett County, there are 178 different languages spoken. The application of this amendment would cause, for example, in Gwinnett County, 178 different credit reports in 178 different languages to meet the intent of the law. I respect and understand the difficulty that fluency can make in someone's ability to read and do their financial affairs. However, before we were to require of all the credit reporting agencies that they publish all credit reports and make them available in every language that could be spoken in the United States, we should conduct a study through GAO to ensure that we understand the relationship between fluency and financial affairs on the part of an individual and we understand exactly what the consequences of this amendment would be. This gives us 1 year to study and make a final decision based on facts rather than forcing an automatic imposition of credit reports being published in a variety of different languages, which could be well in excess of 100. I, respectfully, appreciate the consideration of the Senate. I yield back the remainder of my time and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, today I honor in the Record of the Senate LTC Margaret A. Johnson of the Georgia Army National Guard on the occasion of her retirement after 22 years of service. Lieutenant Colonel Johnson, who is from Macon, GA, graduated from Wesleyan College in 1969 with a bachelor's degree in English, and in 1976 received a master's degree in English from the University of South Florida. In 1980 she graduated from Mercer University's Walter F. George School of Law with a juris doctor degree. Lieutenant Colonel Johnson took her impressive resume to the Georgia National Guard and was commissioned as first lieutenant into the Judge Advocate General Corps. During her 22 years of service, Lieutenant Colonel Johnson was given many challenging assignments throughout the United States, and rose to the challenge on each and every occasion. When her country asked her to serve in support of Operation Enduring Freedom, she answered the call and has spent the last 2 years on active duty. Lieutenant Colonel Johnson culminated her career as the deputy staff judge advocate for the Office for the Administrative Review of the Detention of Enemy Combatants, Arlington, VA, where she rose to the challenge once again and performed her job duties excellently. She provided much-needed leadership for a legal department that had to quickly respond to ever changing standards established by Congress and the Federal courts. In testament to her service, Lieutenant Colonel Johnson was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Army Reserve Components Achievement Medal, the Armed Forces Reserve Medal, the Global War on Terrorism Medal and the Georgia Meritorious Service Medal. I honor LTC Margaret A. Johnson on the occasion of her retirement, and I extend to her my sincere gratitude for her dedication to the defense of our nation. I know that Lieutenant Colonel Johnson's children, Mary Catherine Johnson and Margaret Amy Allen, are so proud of their mother for her long and distinguished career, and I would also like to express my gratitude to them as well.

Mr. ISAKSON

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I thank the Budget chairman for a lot of things. One is his openmindedness. But I particularly thank him for the closing he presented because it relates directly to the subject I would like to discuss, but I would like to yield to the chairman to ask him two questions to make sure I am accurate about the conference report. First, it is my understanding that there is a $634 billion account set up for health care; is that correct?

Mr. ISAKSON. I thank my distinguished chairman. I wish to make my remarks not to the Senate. I commend the chairman and the Senate for adopting the amendment as we did on the floor 3 weeks ago. I wish to direct my remarks to the President of the United States, to Dr. Summers, to Dr. Christina Romer, the head of the Council of Economic Advisers to the President, to Secretary Geithner, and my friend, Rahm Emanuel. I wish to make a case for what the Senate did, which is deleted from this budget resolution, and I wish to start it looking back 15 months ago. Fifteen months ago, when we came in, in January of last year, we were beginning to see foreclosures, beginning to see the housing market decline, and I introduced at that time, along with other Members of the Senate, a housing tax credit for the purchase of foreclosed and vacant houses. It was scored at a cost of $11.4 billion. The Finance Committee rejected that amendment in the Senate, saying it cost too much. Ninety days later, the Senate passed a $150 billion economic stimulus bill recommended by President Bush that gave every American $300, or up to $1,200 per family, to stimulate the economy--and the economy spiraled down. In July of last year, we dealt with a housing bill that created HOPE for Homeowners and an FHA program expansion. I tried to amend that with a housing tax credit and, to the credit of the House and Senate, the conferees ended up creating a $7,500 interest-free loan for first-time home buyers. It did not work, but it was a sincere effort to try. Then we came back this year and Senator Lieberman, myself, and others reintroduced the $15,000 tax credit for any family who buys and occupies their home, any single-family residence in America, for at least 3 years. The tax credit of $15,000 is a substantial incentive. It is tied directly to exactly what happened in this country in 1975, when America offered a $2,000 tax credit for anyone to buy any one of the 3 years' worth of standing vacant inventory that was on the market in the United States. We passed it at that time and exited that recession within 12 months, restimulating the housing market which had led us into that particular recession. It is housing that led us into this recession and it is housing that is causing precisely what the chairman referred to and that is the deflation that is going on in the United States of America. One in five homes today is underwater, meaning they owe more on their home than it is worth. The equity lines of credit have been wiped out. Families' basic major estate and their net worth has been wiped out and the housing market continues to be a collection of short sales and foreclosures. The current tax credit we have, which is now $8,000 to a family as long as their income doesn't exceed $150,000 and as long as it is their first home purchase, is a fair effort to start, but our problem is not with first-time home buyers. Our problem is with move-ups, with transferees, people who have been playing by the rules, making their payments. If they are transferred, they are afraid to take the transfer because they are afraid they can't sell their house, and they are afraid there is no buyer incentive to help get them there. I urge the President, Dr. Summers, Secretary Geithner, Dr. Romer, and Rahm Emanuel to consider this: That $15,000 tax credit, if it were passed today in America for 12 months, would cost, as scored by CBO, $34.2 billion. How much is $34.2 billion? It is 5.4 percent of the President's set-aside of $634 billion for health care. It is one one-hundredth of 1 percent of the $3.5 trillion budget--one one-hundredth of 1 percent of the amount of the budget. Don't you think we could provide an incentive that is that inexpensive to motivate a housing market to return, to begin to reflate values back and put equity in the pockets of the American people and return our economy? Experts have estimated--and I am not saying I am an expert, this is experts who have estimated--that if that tax credit had passed last year it would have created 700,000 home sales and 587,000 jobs. Mr. President, 587,000 jobs is the number of jobs we have been losing a month. We need to find a way to create that kind of number. More important, let me give you the intriguing fact about the 700,00 house sales. Current home sales in America are at 500,000. An average year in this decade in this country was 1.2 million, a good year was 1.5 million. If you add that estimated 700,000 produced by the credit to the existing 500,000, you would return the United States to a balanced housing market. You would begin to appreciate the value of those houses back to where they were. You would restore equity lines of credit for the men and women of the United States of America. You will employ people in the construction industry. My last point is very important. This housing recession and the difficulties in it now are in the developed lots that are standing, developed and unsold, and the A, D, and C loans that have been made by the major banks funded around the country to fund those developments. Those loans are beginning to come due. They are threatening the integrity of the U.S. banking system, and there is only one thing that will solve that and that is for those lots to begin to be absorbed. The only way to do that is to get house buyers back in the market with an incentive to come back in and buy. If the tax credit passed, we do not have that much of a vacant inventory available in the country. It would immediately stimulate the employment of construction workers to go into homebuilding. My thanks to the Senate for its wisdom in adopting the $15,000 credit. I express my deep disappointment in the conference committee dropping it, and I encourage our President and the leadership of our country to give a second thought to what this credit could do. It seems to me one one-hundredth of 1 percent of the budget is worth a gamble to create almost 600,000 jobs and 700,000 home sales, restore equity lines of credit to America's families and, most important of all, reenergize the great engine that is the American economy. The greatest stimulus in the world is not a gift of money, it is an incentive to invest and for American families to return their confidence in this great economy we have in this great country. I urge the leadership of the country to consider that. I, again, thank the chairman of the Budget Committee and every Member of the Senate for their unanimous support of it, and I yield the floor in sincere hopes that when this speech goes to the White House they will read it, they will check the numbers, and they will ask the question: Is one one-hundredth of 1 percent of this budget worth the chance to restore the economy of America? I yield the floor.