Tim Johnson

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, today I wish to celebrate and honor the service of Dr. Susan Randall upon her retirement as executive director of South Dakota Voices for Children. Dr. Randall's career began in education. She spent 2 years in Centerville, SD, as a high school English and speech teacher. Susan continued her commitment to young people by going on to work in higher education, teaching sociology. She entered the political realm after a successful bid for Sioux Falls city commissioner, a position she held from 1986 to 1988. After her time at city hall, Dr. Randall worked for Turnabout, a community organization serving South Dakota's underprivileged children and families. She furthered her dedication to the youth of South Dakota by volunteering with South Dakota Voices for Children, using her expertise to help them to secure grants. In 1999, Dr. Randall became the executive director of the organization. Dr. Randall's 13-year tenure as executive director of South Dakota Voices for Children has been marked by many victories. She fought tenaciously to reduce teen smoking, with great success; initiated a campaign in support of Starting Strong, a prekindergarten pilot program for low-income children; and spearheaded an effort to improve conditions for juvenile offenders. Dr. Randall was recognized as a champion for South Dakota youth by the Associated School Boards of South Dakota with their Bell Award, the highest honor that can be conferred on a non-school board member. Throughout her career Dr. Randall has been a tireless advocate for South Dakota's youth. I greatly value her advocacy and expertise and she has frequently met with me and my staff over the years, keeping me apprised of the most pressing issues facing South Dakota's children. Dr. Randall and her husband Mark Sanderson plan to start a business growing herbs and flowers on their 80-acre property in Brookings County under the name Deer Creek Farms. I am pleased to hear that in retirement Susan will fulfill this long-held dream. Dr. Randall has been a determined fighter for the health and well- being of South Dakota's children. I wish Dr. Randall all the best in retirement and the new business venture.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I rise today to honor a true trailblazer, my colleague Senator Barbara Mikulski. Earlier this month, she crossed a major milestone by becoming the longest serving woman in Congress. Before she set her sights on Congress, Senator Mikulski worked as a community activist, social worker, and a member of the Baltimore City Council. In 1977, she was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives from Maryland's Third Congressional District. At that time, she was one of only 21 women serving in Congress. She never let any misguided stereotypes or long odds slow her down. Ten years later, she won her first race for the U.S. Senate and in the process became the first Democratic woman elected to this Chamber from the State of Maryland. She immediately lent her voice to issues like education, health care, and national service. Along the way, she has given a voice not only to families and the middle class but also sent a powerful message to women all across this Nation. If there were ever any doubt, they now know for sure that they deserve a seat at the table in Congress. And her message is being heard. Since Senator Mikulski first was elected to the House of Representatives, the number of women serving in Congress today has increased to 92. I have gotten to know Barbara well, especially through our work on the Senate Appropriations Committee. I know she would rather we focus on her accomplishments regardless of her gender, but Senator Mikulski has blazed an important path. Along the way, she has never forgotten the value of hard work that was instilled in her from an early age. She has also built the kind of working relationships you need to get things done. There is a reason the people of Maryland have sent Barbara Mikulski back to the Congress time and again. She is telling their story and making sure that every voice has a chance to be heard. I want to congratulate her on this milestone. It is an important one for her and her family, and I believe it is symbolic of the gains we have seen our Nation make since she first was elected to Congress more than 35 years ago.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Madam President, I rise today to express my views on the bill that is before us--H.R. 3606--the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act. This bill is a package of measures intended to increase capital formation a goal which I believe Democrats and Republicans share. Banking Committee members on both sides of the aisle, including Senators Schumer, Crapo, Tester, Vitter, Merkley, Toomey, Bennet and Johanns, teamed up to introduce a number of bipartisan legislation on this issue, and I commend them for their hard work. Small businesses are the engine of the American economy. Start-ups and small businesses create a majority of new jobs, and they deserve every opportunity to take an idea and turn it into an exciting, new venture that could lead to the next great American company. Investments are often necessary resources that allow start-ups and small businesses to grow. Unfortunately, the recent trend is that fewer emerging growth companies are entering the U.S. capital markets though IPOs. According to the IPO Task Force, 92 percent of job growth occurred after a company's IPO, so it makes sense to consider ways to facilitate more IPOs in a manner that protects investors. There are also novel ideas to help start-ups raise money over the Internet, reaching out to their friends through social media and inviting them to invest small amounts to help them grow their business. So in considering these new ideas to spur job creation in a balanced and thoughtful way, the Banking Committee held four hearings since last summer. We heard a wide range of views on how best to modernize our securities laws to allow new and growing companies to raise capital, but in a way that does not undermine investor protections so that people will still be willing to invest. At our hearings and through our efforts to explore this subject, members of the Banking Committee heard concerns about provisions in the House bill before us from a number of experts, including the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. One piece of the legislation attempts to encourage more companies to pursue an IPO by creating a so- called ``on-ramp.'' The House bill determines that companies under $1 billion in annual revenue should be exempt from disclosures for up to 5 years. Witnesses at the Banking Committee's hearings raised concerns about whether this threshold is appropriate and accurately reflects those companies that need relief most. The House bill contains a provision to restrict the independence of accounting standard-setting by the Financial Accounting Standards Board. For many years Congress has debated whether we should legislate accounting standards or leave it to the experts. I remain unconvinced that interfering with the independence of FASB would be an appropriate action for Congress to take or would inspire more people to invest in IPOs. It is also unclear that eliminating safeguards to reduce conflicts of interest between stock research analysts and firms selling stock, as the House bill does, will on the whole be beneficial. The absence of such safeguards a decade ago led analysts to write conflicted stock recommendations which too many Americans believed and relied upon to invest, and ultimately lose, their money. Those misleading and fraudulent stock recommendations caused many Americans to pull out of the market and lose confidence in the integrity of the financial system. We must closely monitor this area going forward. Crowdfunding is a concept with potential, but I do not think that the House bill provides appropriate oversight of the online funding platforms to ensure that unsuspecting investors are not ripped off by an online scam. Operators of online funding platforms are not required to register with the SEC. While there is some information these operators are required to share with regulators, it remains unclear if this modest sharing of information will be sufficient for regulators to monitor these new equity-raising platforms in the same way investments on the stock market are monitored. The House bill needlessly limits the involvement of State securities regulators to help the SEC oversee new crowdfunding operations. In response to these concerns on crowdfunding, I was pleased to assist Senators Merkley, Bennet and others in crafting an alternative approach that strikes a better balance between capital formation and investor protection. The Merkley-Bennet amendment requires crowdfunding companies to provide basic disclosures, including a business plan and financial information to potential investors. It also requires companies offering stock online to either register as a broker-dealer with the SEC, or pursue a ``funding portal'' registration. This will provide greater oversight than the House bill. Among other key improvements, the Merkley-Bennet amendment provides for stronger Federal-State oversight coordination, and it allows for properly scaled investment limits as well as an aggregate investment cap across all crowdfunded companies, further protecting investors. For these reasons and more, I urge my colleagues to correct the weak House crowdfunding title and join me in supporting the Merkley-Bennet amendment. Another provision in the underlying House bill modernizes the Regulation A threshold by raising the cap on how much money can be raised in the capital markets without registering with the SEC. The House bill transfers authority away from Congress by requiring the SEC to review and potentially raise the threshold every 2 years. This has the potential to preclude a rigorous public debate about when and why the Regulation A threshold should be raised again. The House bill would also expand the ability of companies to advertise private offerings to accredited investors, referred to as Regulation D. Some have raised concerns that there are not enough protections for our seniors, who could be misled into investing in a company without a full appreciation of the level of risk they are taking on. This will also warrant close attention moving forward to ensure seniors are not taken advantage of. Finally, while I believe the current 500 Shareholder Rule should be updated, it is unclear if the House approach to dramatically raise the threshold to 2,000 shareholders of record is a balanced approach. A more modest increase seems more appropriate to balance investor protection and transparency with capital formation. Throughout this process I have sought to help address needed investor protections in a thoughtful manner while helping to support entrepreneurs, grow small businesses, and put Americans back to work. But I did not write the underlying House bill before us today, and I was pleased to help support my colleagues in drafting the Senate substitute amendment. I believe the Senate substitute addresses each of the concerns I raised. I am disappointed more of my colleagues did not support this alternative that would have increased protections for investors. That said, no piece of legislation is perfect, and this bill contains innovative new solutions that have the potential to boost the economy. Small businesses and startups deserve the opportunity to test these new ideas, but Congress has chosen to act quickly. The House bill received 390 votes in the House, including most House Democrats, and the President and the Majority Leader support it. So despite my misgivings over a number of these provisions, I will support my Leader and the President and vote for this legislation. That said, we must all keep an eye on the effects of these changes as we plow this new ground. As lawmakers, we seek out the appropriate balance in writing laws, doing our best to promote a strong economic recovery while protecting the public from abuse and fraud which would undermine the confidence in our financial system. While I will support this underlying package today, I believe we all have a shared responsibility to ensure that going forward the new changes that we pass today will truly benefit, and not undermine, both start-ups and investors alike.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about an amendment I am cosponsoring with Senator Cantwell as well as Senator Graham and Senator Shelby to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank. This amendment is important to thousands of workers in Senator Cantwell's home State of Washington, and I thank her for offering it with me. This amendment is not just important to the State of Washington; it is important to our national economy. It will create and support more jobs than any other provision in the underlying bill before us today. I believe this is why there was unanimous bipartisan support last year when Senator Shelby and I passed this bill out of the Banking Committee, and it is why we should pass it this week. This legislation would ensure that the bank is able to continue to provide support for U.S. exporters and workers. The amendment extends the authorization of the bank for 4 years and will increase the bank's lending authority to $140 billion by 2015. It also strengthens transparency and accountability at the bank, strengthens restrictions against companies doing business with Iran, and provides for greater oversight of the bank's financing and any risks it may have to taxpayers. The Export-Import Bank is the official export credit agency of the United States. It assists in the financing exports of U.S. goods and services to international markets. Following the financial crisis, the bank experienced a dramatic increase in its activities, as many companies struggled to find financing in the private market. In fiscal year 2010, the bank saw a 70-percent increase in authorizations from 2008. Last year the bank committed to almost $33 billion in support of U.S. exports, a new record. The bank has been self-funding since 2008, returning nearly $2 billion to the Treasury. In fiscal year 2011 alone the bank generated $400 million to offset Federal spending and bring down the budget deficit. It is not often that we discuss government programs that reduce the deficit. So let me repeat that. The Export-Import Bank returned $400 million to American taxpayers last year. We cannot take future success for granted, however. So I am pleased this legislation will implement reforms to help ensure that the bank is working as efficiently and effectively as possible to protect the taxpayers. We must not forget American companies are competing in a truly global marketplace. The Export-Import Bank plays a vital role in ensuring that the global marketplace is also a fair one. When other countries are helping their own companies with export financing, we cannot afford to unilaterally disarm in the face of this global competition. Let me be clear. This is the JOBS bill. The Export-Import Bank charter directs it to use exports to create and maintain jobs at home. Last year the Export-Import Bank supported almost 290,000 American jobs. These are jobs in cities and towns across the Nation, at large companies as well as small businesses. In fact last year, the Export- Import Bank financed more than $6 billion in exports by small businesses, the engine of economic growth. In my home State of South Dakota, Ex-Im has worked with large and small businesses to help export goods all over the world. In the last 5 years alone it has helped support over $20 million worth of export sales. This support has been critical to many companies in my State as they look to expand their customer base. More importantly, Ex-Im financing has helped support good-paying American jobs in South Dakota, something we need to make sure there are more of. I believe while the bank is doing a good job, they can and must do more. I believe this legislation will help the bank reach that goal. This measure was a bipartisan effort in the Senate Banking Committee. I thank Senator Shelby for his support. In addition, I thank Senator Warner, Senator Bennet, and Senator Hagan for their important input into this legislation. The bank's current authorization expires on May 30, 2012--in just 2 months. It is important that we pass this jobs amendment today. I hope my colleagues will support the Cantwell-Johnson-Graham-Shelby amendment to ensure that the bank continues to carry out its mission of supporting American jobs and exports. I would also like to briefly address a filed amendment on which Majority Leader Reid and Senator Udall have spoken, the credit union member business lending amendment. As chairman of the Banking Committee, I held a hearing on this issue last June. My staff and I have told the leader and his staff since then that this is a very controversial matter. From the testimony of the credit union and banking industry witnesses at that hearing, and the ongoing competition over the past month, it is clear there is no consensus. If the Senate chooses to go forward on this issue, I urge the Senate to move forward carefully. Finally, with respect to the underlying House bill, I would like to make a few comments. This is not the bill I would have drafted. Over the last several months, I have worked to enhance the investor protections contained in the capital formation proposals passed by the House in a thoughtful manner while helping to support entrepreneurs, grow small businesses, and put Americans back to work. I will have a separate statement laying out my views in more detail. I am pleased to have assisted my colleagues in crafting the Senate substitute amendment that addresses investor protection concerns. I urge my colleagues to support the Senate substitute. If this body chooses to reject the enhanced investor protections in the Senate substitute, we must remember that all Members of Congress have a duty to keep an eye on the effects of these changes. We are plowing new ground here, and we have a shared responsibility to ensure that, going forward, the new changes we enact into law will truly benefit, and not undermine, both startups and investors alike. I yield the floor.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Madam President, today I wish to recognize George R. Whitaker of Rapid City, SD, who is retiring from Federal service after a career spanning over 29 years. George served in the U.S. Army for nearly 2 years in the early 1960s with overseas tours in Germany and Vietnam as a combat military policeman. He then served over 18 years with the U.S. Air Force with tours in Alaska and Turkey as a law enforcement supervisor and personnel technician. He retired from Active Duty in September 1982. After his military service, George worked with Black Hills Workshop and South Dakota Department of Social Services. He also served as a vocational rehabilitation and addiction counselor with the Fort Meade VA hospital and for the past 7 years has served in various capacities at the Rapid City Vet Center, including readjustment counselor and team leader. I want to commend George Whitaker for his steadfast and tireless service to our Nation, first for his over 20 years of military service in the U.S. Army and U.S. Air Force, and then for his service to veterans with the Department of Veterans Affairs and Vet Center. Countless veterans have benefitted from George's dedication and commitment. Through his own military experiences and combined with his counseling experiences, George has worked directly with veterans and servicemembers through parts of six decades. This timespan has produced many wars, conflicts, and military operations and with it, changes in health services, problems, and issues that affect our military soldiers and veterans. George has been able to share his own experiences and work with returning servicemembers as they deal with the physical and mental health impacts of their military experiences, as well as the impacts on their families and communities. George will now have more time in his retirement to enjoy hunting, fishing, leather crafts, and other pursuits. I commend George for his dedicated service to veterans and wish him and his wife Eddie all the best in his retirement.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Ingianni Acosta, an intern for the Banking Committee, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of today's session.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I wish to note for the Record that I agree with Senator Levin on the need to address the problem of tax havens, and it is certainly true that the provision of the Bank Secrecy Act that he seeks to amend has been important in dealing with the matters for which it was intended jurisdictions of primary anti-money laundering concern--when it was made part of the PATRIOT Act. However, neither I, as Banking Committee Chairman, nor other members of the Committee, were consulted by Senator Levin as this amendment was being developed, although the Bank Secrecy Act is clearly within the Committee's core jurisdiction. Consequently, Committee staff have not had adequate time to review and assess responsibly the amendment and its possible ramifications, and have had no chance to vet it with appropriate parts of the Treasury Department, including the Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, which administers the Bank Secrecy Act, with the Nation's tax administrators, with the Department of Justice, or with other interested parties. That is normally how changes to the Act are made. Thus it is impossible for us fully to assess the implications of these major changes in the law, or to discern any unintended consequences that may arise from them. Making such significant changes should not be done on the fly, on the floor, without adequate consultation and an appropriate regular order process within the committee of jurisdiction. While I believe we should address the problem of tax havens, and I understand the urgency of finally, after 4 weeks, getting a unanimous consent agreement that allows this bill to move forward, I must also insist that we follow a careful, responsible, deliberative process when making major changes in areas of the law that are squarely within the jurisdiction of the Banking Committee. As we move to conference on the transit bill, a conference on which I will play a significant role, I will make sure that we carefully vet this provision and assess whether this is in fact the best solution to the tax haven problem identified by Senator Levin, whether it works as it is intended to, and if so whether the provision requires any further amendment to make it as effective as possible.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to speak in morning business.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I also ask unanimous consent that following my statement, the Banking Committee's ranking member be recognized, followed by Senator Menendez of New Jersey, and that all time they consume be counted toward the postcloture time.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I am pleased to present the Banking Committee's public transportation bill to the Senate as an amendment to the surface and transportation legislation now before us. The transit bill was reported by our committee unanimously. Maintaining investment in our Nation's transportation infrastructure is a priority of mine and of our committee. I wish to thank our committee's ranking member, Senator Shelby, who has worked for a long time on this bill. Without his support, this bipartisan legislation would not be possible. I also wish to thank our committee chairman, Senator Menendez, and all the other members of the committee who offered their contributions. With this bill, we have the opportunity to preserve public transportation funding for 2 years at current levels and deliver critical investments in the Nation's aging transportation infrastructure. In addition, the bill will institute much needed reforms, such as eliminating earmarks and speeding the construction of public transportation projects. The bill also includes transit safety provisions that have been stalled for 2 years. These are important reforms that many Senators have worked on. Now is the time to move them forward. Finally, our bill increases formula funding for all types of transit: additional urban and rural funds, new money for every State to address the state of good repair needs and more money for tribal transit. Our Nation's transit systems need more than $77 billion to address backlogged repairs. This bill cannot address all those needs, but it can ensure that our transit systems don't fall further behind, and transit funding will support more than 386,000 jobs. Americans make 35 million trips on public transit every weekday. Many of these trips are in our cities, but in places such as South Dakota rural transit service connects seniors with their doctors and helps the workers travel long distances to get to jobs. Everyone benefits from public transportation, and I urge Senators to support this bipartisan bill. I yield the floor for the ranking member of the Banking Committee.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on February 14, 2012, at 9:30 a.m.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on February 14, 2012, at 10 a.m., in room 215 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``The President's Budget for Fiscal Year 2013.''

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on February 14, 2012, at 2:15 p.m.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to meet, during the session of the Senate, in order to conduct a hearing entitled ``Pain in America: Exploring Challenges to Relief'' on February 14, 2012, at 2:30 p.m. in room 430 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, on February 14, 2012, at 2:30 p.m.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I want to recognize Mark Jickling, a dedicated public servant who has served as a financial economist with the Congressional Research Service and is retiring after nearly 33 years of providing expert analyses to the U.S. Congress on economic, finance and securities matters. He is widely respected in the Senate and House of Representatives, as well as among his CRS colleagues, for his broad knowledge and insights into financial and economic matters as well as his professionalism and collegiality. Thanks to his dedicated efforts, Congress has been better informed as it has sought to find legislative solutions to many of the issues facing the United States financial system. Mr. Jickling graduated from the University of California at Berkeley and started work at the Library of Congress part-time with the Collections Management Division. His dedication and intellect led to his becoming an expert in economic matters about which he consistently delivered comprehensive, insightful and helpful analyses. He rose through the ranks to become an economist reaching the level of specialist, the highest level of analyst at CRS. He headed the Banking, Insurance, Securities and Macroeconomic Policy Section in the Government and Finance Division of CRS from 2005 to 2007, in which he oversaw the work of a dozen other analysts and specialists. He is the author or co-author of 100 CRS reports and countless confidential memos. Mr. Jickling has worked on some of the most significant securities and banking issues facing the country. He wrote the first CRS reports on the impacts of the September 11 attacks on the markets and on the Enron scandal. At that time, he also coordinated CRS' internal ``Enron group.'' He assisted senior Congressional staff as they formulated legislative responses to the corporate accountability scandals. From the onset of the recent financial crisis, Mr. Jickling has been instrumental in assisting Congress as we addressed the serious banking and market problems facing the country. He provided expert analysis on a daily basis to the Banking Committee and to others in Congress on housing finance, non-bank financial intermediation, financial derivatives, exotic financial products and markets, and many other issues. His dedication was shown by his working nights and weekends during this period. He significantly contributed to the quality of legislation that ultimately was enacted and cooperated effectively with Members and their staffs to produce the legislation. He was exactly the right person at the right time. Mr. Jickling retires from the CRS having set a standard of superior service and having assisted a generation of CRS analysts in developing their skills. He leaves CRS to spend more time with his family and pursue some of his other interests, including the professional performance of music. His many accomplishments will remain a fitting tribute to his career and character. Mr. Jickling will be greatly missed. I wish him and his family all the best in the future.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize and honor the public service of Mr. Franklin Otis Carroll, who is retiring from the U.S. Forest Service after 45 years of dedicated service to protecting our Nation's natural resources. Frank was born on September 18, 1952, to Franklin and Betty Carroll, in Flagstaff, AZ. Blessed with a gift for expressing his opinion, Frank believed early in life that he was destined to pursue a career in the legal profession. But as he worked to pay for school, he took a job with the National Park Service as a firefighter at southern Arizona's Saguaro National Monument. From then on, he sought to follow in his father's footsteps and care for the lands we all enjoy. He has since served in four National Parks and in Forest Service Regions 2, 3, and 4--travelling from Arizona to Idaho to Minnesota before settling in the Black Hills of South Dakota. Frank earned a degree in history and English at the University of New Mexico and a Masters Degree in Public Administration at Boise State. He and Audrey, his wife of nearly 34 years, raised three girls--Jessica, Lauren and Merri--and are looking forward to spending more time with their seven grandchildren. Over the years, Frank has worked tirelessly to protect our public lands, first working on hand crews, then working his way up the ranks to becoming a top level fire boss. He has been a respected spokesman for forest health and land management practices that keep our lands green as we battle the Mountain Pine Beetle. Proactive in educating the public about our lands, Frank is the first person to pick up the phone to explain what is happening in the forest. During his tenure, Frank has built lifelong friendships with a wide variety of folks that continue to this day. Rick Cables, a former Regional Forester for Region 2 who has known Frank for 35 years, describes Frank as, ``one of the most passionate and dedicated individuals in protecting our public lands that I have ever known. He is a talented communicator whose unique gift for communicating allows him to convey complex forest issues in simple terms so all can understand. When the Black Hills National Forest was looking to establish its new Forest Advisory Board, I could think of no one better to help in the process. I remember telling the supervisor at the time, John Twiss, he's someone that will push you harder to communicate more than you may want.'' Frank's life work has been the protection of public lands and he has done so with an intense love of the places where he lives. It is because of the work of people like Frank Carroll that the forest industry continues to thrive and maintain its crucial role throughout South Dakota. I am proud to recognize and honor Frank's service to the United States Forest Service and am delighted to join with his family and friends in congratulating him on his retirement. I wish Frank and Audrey all the best as they begin a new chapter in their lives.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, today I recognize the public service of a veterans service officer from South Dakota who is retiring after nearly 40 years of dedicated military and public service to veterans and their families. Jerry Lolley has served as Meade County veterans service officer since 1992. Jerry's wife Harriet, known as ``Granny,'' and children Grant and Lara have always supported Jerry while he has provided tireless service to thousands of veterans seeking assistance with benefit claims, medals requests, records searches, payment issues, and health care issues. He has always been a valuable source of needed information for the families of veterans as well. Military service and an understanding of the needs and issues of our military service personnel and veterans is deeply rooted with Jerry. After spending 2 years at South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, he served in the U.S. Air Force from 1968 to 1988 and retired as an E- 7, providing dedicated service as an aircraft mechanic. His father served in General Patton's Army in World War II. But Jerry's service extends also to the numerous issues impacting veterans and their families. He has been a constant advocate for veterans on Federal, State, and local issues of importance. He monitors Federal legislative issues and has shared valuable insight with me and my staff regarding potential impacts of legislation or VA agency decisions. He has always put the veteran first and foremost in his efforts, especially when it comes to improving health care resources, access, and level of care for veterans. He has also provided valuable insight on educational, spousal, dependent, and burial benefits. During the Persian Gulf war, Operation Enduring Freedom, and Operation Iraqi Freedom, Jerry has been diligent in providing returning soldiers with important information about deadlines involving access to health care services, assisting soldiers with applications for various benefits, and providing general information to assist in their return home. My staff and I have always valued Jerry's advocacy for veterans. He is rarely short on opinions on important matters and is quick to offer well-targeted questions toward agency officials to learn the basis for decisions and actions on various issues and even takes great care to request background information to verify or dispel the occasional rumor or misconception that may surface within the veterans community. His steadfast dedication to veterans has made him a great public servant and his service will be greatly missed. I wish Jerry and his family all the best in his retirement, and it is my hope that he can find other options to continue serving veterans in the future. I congratulate him on his military service and his great public service career.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, 2 months ago the Senate Banking Committee voted along party lines to send to the full Senate the nomination of Richard Cordray to be the first Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Due to an unprecedented and irresponsible display of political gamesmanship, Mr. Cordray's nomination and strong protections for American consumers are being held hostage. Before any candidate was put forth, Senate Republicans pledged to block the nomination, and their objections have nothing to do with Mr. Cordray's qualifications, his politics, or his character. Republican Senators have actually admitted as much, with a public pledge to block any nominee for the new consumer agency until a list of legislative demands, which would greatly weaken the agency, are met. That those demands were debated and rejected by a bipartisan Congress last year is beside the point. The minority party is distorting the Senate confirmation process, mandated by the Constitution, to rewrite a law against the wishes of the American people. Why do Senate Republicans remain opposed to consumer protection despite national surveys showing 3-in-4 bipartisan voters support the new agency's creation? Whatever the motivation, it appears to outweigh any concerns about protecting families buying homes, students borrowing for college, and service members or older Americans falling prey to financial scams. This vocal minority opposed to strong consumer protection and helped by special interests have drummed up misleading claims to hide behind. They claim the CFPB Director will put the economy at risk--ignoring the effects of the foreclosure crisis, which was itself fueled by irresponsible and predatory lending. They claim the agency lacks accountability--ignoring the fact that it is bound by accountability measures comparable to or exceeding that of other independent financial regulators. And they claim restrictions on abusive financial products will hurt lenders--ignoring the damage those products inflicted on consumers tricked into signing unfair contracts filled with hidden fees and penalties. In reality the CFPB was created as an accountable yet independent regulator in bipartisan negotiations last year. Its mission is to protect consumers--by cracking down on predatory lenders and streamlining disclosures so families can make better informed financial choices. But until it has a confirmed director in place, the CFPB's authority over nonbank financial institutions, like private student lenders and mortgage brokers, will be stifled. Every day Mr. Cordray's confirmation is blocked, vital protections are delayed, millions of Americans--including service members, veterans and older Americans--are left vulnerable, and the Nation's community banks and credit unions remain at a disadvantage to their less-regulated competitors. The question we consider today should not be whether the minority party can hijack this constitutional process and demand as ransom legislative changes that would hamstring the consumer agency. The question should be whether Mr. Cordray is qualified for the job. And I believe that Mr. Cordray is an outstanding candidate. For years Richard Cordray has worked tirelessly as a public servant. As Ohio's Attorney General he aggressively pursued financial crimes by banks and mortgage firms, and won more than $2 billion in settlements for the State. And as Ohio's first solicitor, he argued cases before the Supreme Court to protect consumers and enhance the quality of our financial markets. American families paid a steep price for the financial crisis, battered by layoffs and foreclosures. Yet incredibly, many of the bad actors that contributed to the crisis remain poorly regulated and continue to lobby against tougher regulation. Congress created the CFPB to protect consumers and clean up the marketplace, but it needs a director. Richard Cordray has proven himself capable for the job, and there is no legitimate reason to block his confirmation. I urge my colleagues to reconsider their political game playing and do the right thing. Stop blocking Richard Cordray's nomination and allow him to have an up or down vote. I yield to my colleague from Rhode Island.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I want to discuss the amendment to the pending Defense authorization bill negotiated between my two Banking Committee colleagues, Senators Menendez and Kirk, designed to address the deceptive and fraudulent practices, sanctions evasion, facilitation of proliferation, and other illicit behavior of Iran's Central Bank. Ten days ago, President Obama issued an Executive order designed to further isolate and penalize Iran for its refusal to live up to its international obligations regarding its nuclear program. As he noted, for years the Iranian Government has failed to abide by its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, violated repeated U.N. Security Council resolutions, and ignored its legal commitments to the International Atomic Energy Agency. In the face of this intransigence, the world has spoken with one voice--at the IAEA, at the U.N., and in capitals around the world--making it clear that Iranian actions are a threat to international peace and stability and will only further isolate the Iranian regime. The President targeted, for the first time, Iran's petrochemical sector, prohibiting the provision of goods, services, and technology to this sector and authorizing penalties against any person or entity that engages in such activity. He also designated for sanction a group of individuals and entities for assisting Iran's prohibited nuclear programs, including its enrichment and heavy water programs. And he escalated the financial and economic pressure by using provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act to identify the entire Iranian banking sector-- including Iran's Central Bank--as a threat to governments and financial institutions that do business with Iran. I strongly support enhanced sanctions on Iran, including its Central Bank, and have been working with my ranking member, Senator Shelby, on another sanctions measure to expand and reinforce the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions and Accountability Act, CISADA, enacted last year. That legislation will be marked up soon in our committee. But as in all areas of complex sanctions law, it is important to craft these provisions with an eye to ensuring that they do not have negative unintended consequences for the United States and American consumers in terms of substantially increased oil and gas prices; for our allies, whose cooperation is crucial in further isolating Iran; for central banks around the world. We also want to avoid the result--if this measure is not further refined and then implemented by the White House in close consultation with our allies--that Iran itself could benefit from an oil price premium we in the West would pay if notoriously volatile world oil markets respond negatively and if non-Iranian oil supplies are not sufficient to fill the gap caused by countries that seek their oil elsewhere than from Iran. The amendment seeks to address that concern by providing for a lag time of 6 months for oil markets to prepare and providing for a Presidential certification on oil price and supply availability before the petroleum sanctions would become effective. But that may not be sufficient, given the complexity of oil markets, which I am told by the Energy Department tend to pull such dates forward, anticipating oil price supply shortfalls--and oil price increases--and building them into oil traders' assumptions well before sanctions actually take effect. I have heard a number of concerns about this amendment in its current form from senior officials at the Treasury Department charged with implementing it. First, Treasury officials have indicated that they have concerns about how this amendment could affect our close allies, including foreign central banks of those governments that have worked with us in recent years to sanction Iran and that hold large reserves in the United States but who have thus far decided they cannot, because of their current dependence on Iranian oil, completely and relatively quickly withdraw from purchasing its oil. We must avoid having these central banks begin to pull their reserves from the United States out of fear that enforcement of this amendment might limit their access to the U.S. financial system. That is why the signals sent by the Treasury Secretary and the President about implementing this provision are so important. The administration also has concerns regarding effective implementation of this amendment, especially its requirement that the President prohibit accounts outright instead of, as elsewhere in U.S. law, allowing discretion to impose strict conditions on accounts--on trade finance limits, on the nature or size of transactions, on preapproval of transactions and about the timelines it presents, the confusing and seemingly conflicting interaction of some of its provisions, its lack of an exception for countries that are closely cooperating with the United States on sanctions enforcement, and others. I ask consent to print in the Record following my statement a copy of a letter from Secretary Geithner indicating his strong opposition to the amendment.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I rise today to acknowledge November as National Adoption Month and National Adoption Day on Nov. 19, 2011. With over 107,000 children waiting to be adopted from the U.S. foster care system, I think it is crucial to celebrate the parents, social workers, judges, lawyers, teachers, doctors, nurses, police officers, and other dedicated advocates who help children find safe, permanent and loving homes. It seems quite appropriate that as we prepare to celebrate Thanksgiving, we also celebrate the ways in which families grow through adoption. My own family has been personally touched by adoption, and I can't express enough the positive impact that adoption can have on children and families. Together, National Adoption Month and National Adoption Day aim to raise awareness of the 408,000 children living in the nation's foster care system and encourage individuals to consider opening their homes and hearts through adoption. Each year more than 20,000 children age out of the foster care system without finding a permanent family to call their own. The majority of these children struggle to meet the demands of adult life on their own. Only 50 percent earn a high school diploma, barely 3 percent go on to obtain a college degree, and one out of four will experience homelessness at some point in their lives. While we generally recognize adult independence at age 18, children rarely stop needing the stability, support and guidance that families provide. The benefits of being adopted into a loving home extend well into adulthood. Each year I recognize one South Dakota family as Angels in Adoption in order to highlight the many ways in which exemplary individuals and families across the State have made a positive impact in the lives of children through adoption. I recently had the opportunity to honor Nora and Randy Boesem of Newell, SD, as Angels in Adoption. Nora and Randy have adopted nine children, all of whom are affected by Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders and face a range of physical and mental birth defects that occur as a result of alcohol use during pregnancy. In addition to their adopted children, the Boesems have opened their home to nearly 70 children in foster care over the last 10 years. As a founding member of the bipartisan Congressional Coalition on Adoption, which sponsors Angels in Adoption, I am committed to assisting children in the United States to find stable, loving and permanent homes. Additionally, I support the goals of National Adoption Day, which encourage others to adopt children from foster care, build stronger ties between local adoption agencies, courts and adoption advocacy organizations, and learn more about children waiting to be adopted and the families looking to grow through adoption. I was proud to support the Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 and the recent passage of the Child and Family Services Improvement and Innovation Act, which made some of the most important improvements to the foster care and adoption system we have seen in the last 10 years. I am also proud that Members of the Senate continue to support ways to make adoption easier and more affordable. Since the cost of adoption can be very high, we ought to do what we can to minimize this initial burden for the exceptional people who provide caring homes for children. Adoption proceedings and legal fees for some domestic adoptions can cost more than $40,000. If we ask individuals to care for and adopt children, we must provide some relief from the financial burdens associated with that care. The adoption tax credit is an effective way to help lessen the financial burden families face when adopting a child and I support making the adoption tax credit permanent. The commitment of adoptive parents in South Dakota and throughout our country to provide children with safe, permanent, and loving homes will, of course, have a positive impact on their lives. As we celebrate National Adoption Month and National Adoption Day on November 19, 2011, I call on my colleagues to continue finding ways to support the children, parents, and other important players involved in the child welfare system and to work to ensure all children have stable, permanent and loving families.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to Major General Raymond W. Carpenter and his faithful service to our country. After 44 years of service to our Nation and the State of South Dakota, General Carpenter will soon retire from the United States Army. Gen. Carpenter began his military service in 1967 when he enlisted in the South Dakota Army National Guard. General Carpenter later joined the United States Navy and put his photographic memory to work learning the Vietnamese language in preparation for his assignment at the Naval Support Activity in Danang, South Vietnam. Upon completion of his Naval service, he returned to the South Dakota Army National Guard where he was commissioned in 1974. He has commanded at all levels, from Lieutenant to Colonel. General Carpenter is an engineer by formal training, tirelessly devising, planning and building. He was a founding member of the Director of the Army National Guard's Engineer Advisory Team and went on to be the chairman until May 2006. Engineering and organizational skills aside, General Carpenter is most passionate about soldiers: the Nation's sons and daughters who are in his care. I have seen this firsthand and have also witnessed his dedication to our Nation's veterans as he assisted me in awarding Korean War medals to veterans in South Dakota. For the past 2\1/2\ years, Gen. Carpenter has ably served as the Acting Director, Army National Guard. In this capacity, he has led more than 350,000 National Guard soldiers from the 54 states, territories and the District of Columbia. As Chairman of the Military Construction and VA Appropriations Subcommittee, I have worked with Gen. Carpenter to fund important National Guard construction projects, and I was proud to have him testify before my subcommittee. He has represented our home State well and has been a tireless advocate for the members of the Army National Guard. He is truly a soldier's soldier. On occasion, when Big Army concocted some sort of short-sighted plan, there was Gen. Carpenter ``standing like a stone wall'' to look out for the interest of his soldiers and his country. For his efforts, General Carpenter has received numerous awards and decorations at every phase of his stellar career, including Legions of Merits, Meritorious Service Medals, the Vietnam Service Medal, Army Commendation Medals, Army Achievement Medals, Army Reserve Components Achievement Medals, and the National Defense Service Medals, among many others. Today I join my fellow Americans and stand with proud South Dakotans in congratulating Gen. Carpenter on an impressive military career. In 2011 our Nation is most assuredly safer, stronger, and more secure because of this dedicated soldier, gifted engineer, and superb leader. I am grateful for Gen. Carpenter's service to our country, and to his wife, Mary, for her tireless support of her husband and his mission. After years of dedicated service, I wish Major General Carpenter a relaxing retirement, filled with many joyful hours on his Harley.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, this amendment would essentially force the wind-down of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac prematurely without any structure to take their place. The Banking Committee has heard from witnesses, including Dwight Jaffee and Mark Zandi, that taking over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were the only options the government would have to avoid a complete market collapse. This amendment could plunge us back into the panic of 2008, when credit was unavailable and the economy was on the verge of collapse. Mortgages would not be finalized, home sales could not go through, and the home owners would be unable to refinance. The Vitter amendment would eliminate any stability we have achieved in the housing market. The Vitter amendment is an irresponsible response to the housing crisis, and I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a letter from the National Association of Realtors, and a letter from the Mortgage Bankers Association.

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota

Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, today I rise to reiterate and again offer my full support of the United States Department of Agriculture Grain Inspection, Packers, and Stockyards Administration's, GIPSA, authority to continue promulgating its proposed rule concerning livestock competition. There have been some comments made with concern about both the substance of GIPSA's proposed rule as well as the authority of the Department to continue its rulemaking process. I would like to respond to some of those concerns and to discuss the critical importance of the protections afforded under the proposed rule. The 2008 Farm Bill, more formally known as the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, was enacted by overwhelming majorities in both the House of Representatives and the Senate with amendments to the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921 as well as directions to USDA to conduct rulemaking with respect to additional issues relating to implementation and enforcement. As a result of this rulemaking authority, as well as given the authorities permitted explicitly in the Packers and Stockyards Act, GIPSA in 2010 issued a proposed rule that would provide a variety of new protections for livestock producers. Among these protections would be to further define practices that are unfair, unjustly discriminatory or deceptive, establish new protections for producers required to provide expensive capital upgrades to their growing facilities, prohibit packers from purchasing, acquiring or receiving livestock from other packers, and bar them from communicating prices to competitors, as well as including arbitration provisions that give contract growers opportunities to participate in meaningful arbitration. The Department has not yet published a final rule. In August 2010, I joined with Senator Harkin in leading a bipartisan letter with 19 of our Senate colleagues to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack that reiterated our belief that GIPSA has the authority to promulgate such rules as is consistent with its responsibilities under the Packers and Stockyards Act and that the rules should and will allow for continued marketing opportunities including pricing premiums and contracting. I am fully supportive of the proposed rule as I have consistently supported efforts to strengthen our anti-trust and competition laws. Independent farmers and ranchers must have an opportunity to leverage a decent price for their products. Market consolidation has done a severe disservice to our producers, and it is critically important that we maintain market access and price discovery options for independent farmers and ranchers. I am also fully supportive of GIPSA's authority to continue the rulemaking process as directed in the 2008 farm bill. The proposed rule takes an important first step toward finally enabling livestock producers to get a fair shake in the marketplace. Opponents of the rule were able to include a provision in the House- passed version of the Fiscal Year 2012 Agriculture Appropriations bill which prohibits GIPSA from spending funds to finalize the proposed rule. A letter written by 190 organizations from across the country, including the South Dakota Farmers Union, the South Dakota Livestock Auctions Markets Association, and the South Dakota Stockgrowers Association, was recently sent to Congress outlining the important protections provided for in the proposed rule and urging Congress to allow the rulemaking process to continue. I ask unanimous consent that the letter be printed in the Record. Fortunately, the Senate version does not contain this provision. As the appropriations process continues, I will work to defend GIPSA's ability to continue the rulemaking process, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.