Amy Klobuchar

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I ask to speak as in morning business for 10 minutes.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, first, I wanted to make some comments about the hate crimes bill. I am proud to be a cosponsor of that bill. Actually, this came out of my work as a prosecutor in Minnesota. We had a number of cases that involved crimes that were motivated by hate. Sometimes they were found to be hate crimes under our law; sometimes they were not. The ones I remember most--the little 14-year-old boy shot in the middle of the day by a guy who said he wanted to go out and kill a Black kid on Martin Luther King Day. We had a Hispanic young man who could only speak Spanish, working in a factory, and his boss got mad at him because he didn't speak English and he was speaking Spanish and he took a 2 by 4 and hit him over the head. We had a temple that was desecrated. We had a number of cases, but what I most remember about this was when the hate crimes bill was first introduced in Washington, I had the honor of introducing President Clinton when he announced his support for the hate crimes bill. Before we went into the event, I got to meet the investigators in the Matthew Shepard case, two burly cops from Wyoming. They talked about the fact that until they had investigated that case, they had not dealt with ideas of what this victim's life was like. They did not want to think what his life was like. And then they got to know the family in that case, they got to know the mom, and they got to know the people surrounding Matthew Shepard, and their own lives were changed forever. I hope that by passing this bill, by doing the right thing, we can change the lives of other Matthew Shepards, and other victims of hate crimes.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. That is fine.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for 1 minute?

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside, and I send an amendment to the desk for immediate consideration.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Senator Coleman is an original cosponsor of the original amendment. We made some modifications after speaking with Senator Bond and, of course, he would be included in this one as well. I also thank Senator Murray for the work she did immediately after this disaster, sending a staff member out to observe the bridge and work with us on getting immediate funding.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. It is my understanding that it is emergency funds. We did get some transit money designated early on. The Secretary of Transportation has been very good in working with us. I believe we have received about $55 million of the $250 million. That is why this amendment asks for the remaining $195 million to be appropriated. We will work with the Senator's staff on the details. We want to make sure we cross all the t's and dot our i's. But we cannot continue to let this interstate be a gaping hole in the middle of a metropolitan area, when it is clearly the intent of Congress to fund and authorize the money. We are simply trying to receive the rest of the funding that could be immediately given to us by the Department of Transportation.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I first thank this body for its amazing response when the bridge collapsed in Minneapolis. Senator Coleman and I went there immediately the morning after the bridge collapsed on August 1 and saw firsthand what happened. I came back and reported the bravery of our citizens, the emergency responders immediately diving in, people who were off duty coming to the scene, ordinary citizens running in saving people among shards of steel, among rebar, diving in, risking their own lives. There was a miracle schoolbus there where little kids could have died. But one man, who didn't even know those kids, opened the door and let them out. This is what happened in Minnesota that day. Then we returned to this body and worked with our fellow Senators. Not one Senator objected to the idea that when a Federal bridge falls in the middle of America, we must rebuild it. When a Federal highway overpass falls in the middle of America, we must rebuild it. At that time, when we only had 60 hours to get the authorization for the $250 million that we requested to rebuild that bridge, we were told to wait until the dust settled to figure out the details of the appropriation. That seemed like a good idea. The dust has settled. We have learned in our State and in our community that 13 people died in that tragedy, ordinary people coming home, going to work, people such as Patrick Holmes, who was driving home to his young wife Jennifer and their two children; people such as Sadiya Sahal, a pregnant nursing student, and her 2-year-old daughter Hannah, who were headed to a relative's home when the bridge crumbled beneath them. Many people were injured. Many people died. That is what happened when the dust settled. We now have a gaping hole in a major bridge in the middle of Minneapolis-St. Paul, a major metropolitan area. Any of our Members, or anyone who is listening today, would think about major metropolitan areas in their States, if there was suddenly a gaping hole. The bridge basically buckled into the Mississippi River. It is eight blocks from my home, so I see it every day. It is costing an estimated $400,000 a day in lost business, lost time. There are a number of other bridges, but they are very small. Traffic has built up. The emergency response from the Federal Government has been strong. The response from the State has been strong. Within 12 hours after this tragedy, billboards were up about emergency bus service. People responded in the right way, including the Senate and Congress. But on that day, 60 hours after this happened, a promise was made that we would rebuild that bridge. I appreciated the amendment to build bridges and to help repair bridges across this country. I supported it, as did my colleague, Senator Coleman. But we knew this was not the money that had been allocated to fix our bridge in Minnesota. Oftentimes when these tragedies happen, it does lead to help across the country. When we realized that levees needed to be looked at, when we realized that flood control systems needed to be built after the Grand Forks flood--a lot of things happen that help other people in the country, but we always first help the people where the tragedy occurs. That is what our amendment--Senator Coleman is a cosponsor--is about, to make sure we fund the bridge repair, that we fix the bridge. A bridge in the middle of America just doesn't fall down. We will get to the bottom of what happened. But when it does fall down, we rebuild it. We fix it. I thank the Senate for its consideration.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I thank the Senators for working on a bipartisan basis. I thank Senators Murray and Bond for their work on this issue and for passing the appropriation for the funding to fix the I-35W bridge in Minneapolis. The Senate acted incredibly quickly after this tragedy occurred-- August 1. The next day, Senator Coleman and I were there. We saw this tragedy firsthand and the heroic responses of our rescue workers in Minnesota. Ordinary citizens were diving into the water; they didn't know whom they would find and they didn't know the danger. They rescued people. It could have been so much worse. Our citizens came together and now this Senate comes together. I thank them for this. We are losing about $400,000 a day. This was a major thoroughfare in our town and in our Twin Cities area. We are going to rebuild. On the day that we went and saw the shards of steel and the broken bridge that had flopped into the middle of the Mississippi River, I said that bridges in America should not fall down. This bridge did. When bridges in America fall down, we must rebuild. By taking this important action today to fund the rebuilding of the bridge, the Senate has started that process. I thank my colleagues. I thank Senator Coleman for cosponsoring my amendment. We will now move on to rebuilding our bridge and bringing our beautiful Twin Cities area back to where it was. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, the last time I addressed this body was before we adjourned for the August recess, and I had just returned from surveying the enormous damage that occurred when the I-35W bridge collapsed in Minneapolis. It had just collapsed the day before. While I spoke, the dust from this tragedy had yet to settle. Well- trained first responders had arrived at the scene, and they were heroically rescuing survivors from the wreckage. The entire country was mourning for the victims while praying for the ones yet to be found. Everyone was expressing relief that a schoolbus filled with little children had miraculously escaped disaster. Brave divers, despite mental and physical exhaustion, were working around the clock to find loved ones, people such as Patrick Holmes, who was driving home to his young wife Jennifer and their two children, who was on the bridge when that happened; people such as Sadiya Sahal, a pregnant nursing student and her 2-year-old daughter Hannah, who were headed to a relative's house when the bridge crumbled beneath them. The police, the fire department, the emergency personnel, and ordinary citizens all came together. The tragedy of the day was met with enormous generosity from the community. It was also met with generosity from this body. United in bipartisanship, every single Senator agreed that they would help to provide the necessary means to help Minnesota rebuild. It was done in record time--60 hours. Today, as I stand before this body, the dust has finally settled, and the promise was that when the dust settled we would provide the necessary means to help Minnesota rebuild. On August 20, the nearly 3- week recovery effort finally came to an end when the last known victim was found. The loss of Greg Jolstad, or ``Jolly'' as he was known by his family and friends, brings the official death toll to 13. Much of our massive eight-lane interstate highway bridge is now awkwardly draped over the bluffs of the Mississippi River while the remaining tons upon tons of steel and concrete lay buried below the river. As I said that day, a bridge just should not fall down in America. But it did. And although we do not know yet why the I-35W bridge failed, and while we still mourn those who lost their lives, the rebuilding effort has begun. With the initial money that Congress appropriated, Minnesota has increased transit options to serve commuters, set up detours to restore traffic flow, cleared structural debris, and has begun to lay the general framework for rebuilding. As Minnesota continues to clear the path for a new bridge, I know this body, as they promised that evening, stands ready to ensure that the appropriate funding is made available to rebuild it. It is one of the most heavily traveled bridges in the State and vital to our economy. If anyone would imagine the most major bridge in their metropolitan area, the most major highway overpass, suddenly falling into a river, you would understand. It is a bridge that takes people downtown, that brings students to one of the biggest universities in this country, and it brings hard-working Minnesotans to their jobs every day. But most important, it is the bridge that connects countless people with their families and friends. On August 3, this Congress made a promise to the people of Minnesota that we would help rebuild the bridge. Today I come to the floor to ensure that we make good on that promise. I am very happy with and I supported this effort to look at repairs across the country. That is what we just voted on today, and it passed. But I think we should make clear that appropriation did not include the money that Congress promised for the Minnesota bridge. It was used as the key example of why we needed to make repairs across the country, but it did not include the money to repair our bridge. The last time I addressed this body, the day after the bridge collapsed, I said the rebuilding effort is going to be a long process. It is not just going to end tonight. Today I am here to take the next step in that rebuilding process. Our goal is to get this bridge rebuilt and to get our metropolitan area moving again. The Minnesota Department of Transportation concluded that the loss of this critical bridge costs our economy $400,000 per day. This is primarily due to lost travel time for commuters, for commercial truckers, for businesses closed down. This means our economy has already lost well over $8 million since the bridge collapsed. As this fiscal year comes to a close, I am dedicated to getting the funding for our State and the entire Midwest. We need to rebuild this bridge. We would like to rebuild this bridge as soon as possible, as I know this country wants to do and this body pledged to do. That is why we will work on this bill and whatever other bills we need to work on to get this funding for this bridge. I applaud the efforts of my colleagues to get bridge repair for every State across the country, but we are devoted to ensuring that Congress make good on its promise and rebuild this bridge that is the symbol for why we need to make infrastructure repairs across this country.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I think everyone in this Chamber and the country and the world is aware of the tragedy that befell our State a few days ago. This is a bridge that is not just in my backyard, it is actually in my front yard. It is only 8 blocks away. It is one of the most well-traveled bridges in our State. Senator Coleman and I were on the ground and saw the great damage yesterday. When I looked down and saw that miracle bus on the precipice and I thought about the fear in the eyes of those little children as they watched as the concrete and the road basically fell down below them, I couldn't even imagine what they went through. But then I met the heroes, the people who dove in the water over and over again looking for survivors. The death toll would have been so much worse if our community had not come together--the police, fire personnel, emergency personnel, and ordinary citizens--to save the lives of our people. Today we thank our colleagues because it is good news that they stood by us in a bipartisan way to help the people of our State. The vote is good news at the close of a week that has brought so much heartbreak to our State. This was, as I said, the most heavily traveled bridge in our State, and our people and our businesses depend on it. Today in the Senate, as well as in the House of Representatives, the Congress voted to give us the opportunity to access the funds we are going to need to repair this bridge. There was also a focus on transit money, which is so important. The day we got into Minnesota, only 12 hours after this happened, our State had already put on 25 extra buses. They had billboards showing people the routes to go. It was an absolutely extraordinary effort. They were prepared. But I don't think anyone, in any State, can ever be prepared for a tragedy such as this. I thank all my colleagues at the close of a very long week for their words of support. Our thoughts and our prayers are with the victims and with their families. Today, the Congress stood tall and proud and came immediately to their aid. Mr. President, I yield the floor to my colleague from Minnesota.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, following the tragic collapse of the 35W bridge in Minneapolis that took place yesterday, August 1, 2007, I returned to Minnesota this morning to learn all of the facts, and pledge the necessary Federal resources for the victims, the investigation, and the repair. By returning to Minnesota, I was, unfortunately, unable to be in Washington, DC, to vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to concur in the House Amendment S. 1; and the motion to concur with the House Message to S. 1. Had the tragedy in my State not taken me back to Minnesota, I would have voted for the motion to invoke cloture as well as the underlying bill. In short, I would have voted to change the course in Washington. When I arrived in Washington in January, my husband, daughter and I pulled up in our family Saturn, loaded with my husband's college dishes and a shower curtain that I found in the basement from 1980. But we brought a little more than dishes and shower curtains. We brought a commitment for change something the people of our State Democrats, Independents, and Republicans, from Worthington to Moorhead to Duluth to Rochester called for very clearly and loudly in November. We also brought a Minnesota moral compass, grounded in a simple notion of Minnesota fairness: A notion that all people should be on equal footing in the halls of Congress. But they can't be on equal footing when their elected representatives are selling their votes for trips to Scotland or have cash in the freezer. They can't be on equal footing unless this new Congress delivers real, meaningful ethics reform. That's why I came to Washington back in January and why I am delighted to see that the Senate passed a strong, bipartisan ethics reform package today. Instead of maintaining business-as-usual, this ethics legislation will bring meaningful and robust reform in a number of critical areas. Among other things, this legislation will bring about more transparency for lobbyist bundling and political campaign fund activity; greater transparency in earmarking; a strong lobbyist gift ban; meaningful limits on privately funded travel; strong revolving door restrictions; and expanded public disclosure of lobbyist activities. Stated simply, these reforms are needed and they are needed now to restore the American public's faith in the integrity of their government as well as their elected representatives. It is hard to exaggerate the importance of what's at stake. Ethics is woven into the very fabric of how our government does business. And ethics reform goes to the very heart of our democracy, to the public trust and respect that's essential to the health of our constitutional system. Recent scandals have cast a shadow over the legitimacy of the laws and policies that come out of Washington. The American public's receding faith in the integrity of our legislative process means that ethics reform is now central to every public issue that we will consider--whether it's energy policy, or health care reform, tax policy, or even homeland security. The ability of Congress to deal credibly and forthrightly with these other issues depends on reforming our own ethical rules. The long-term challenges that we face in this country are enormous. They include high energy prices and a growing dependence on foreign oil; health care costs that have spiraled out of control; global warming that threatens the future of our environment and our economy; a mounting national debt; and a growing middle class squeeze. I believe that there are solutions to these challenges. We can achieve energy independence by investing smart and having some guts to take on the oil companies. We can get this country back on the right fiscal track, and move forward to more affordable health care. We can deliver much-needed and long overdue relief to the middle class. These are the things that the people of Minnesota sent me to Washington to fight for. The people of Minnesota also sent me here because they have not yet seen the bold change of direction that we need to make these solutions happen. Instead, they have seen a Washington where the rules are tilted against them and where the interests of well-connected lobbyists come at the expense of the interests of the middle class. When our energy policy is drafted in secret meetings with the oil companies, we all end up paying more at the pump because they've failed to invest in renewable energy. When our health care legislation is written by the drug companies, we all pay more because they've banned negotiation on prices. The people of this country know corruption when they see it and they saw last November who was benefiting and who was getting hurt. Business as usual doesn't only generate bad policy and wasteful spending. It also erodes public trust in the integrity of our government institutions, our elected leaders, and the law-making process itself. We the American people know what we want from Washington. It is this: a government that's focused on doing what's best for our nation, and on securing a better and more prosperous future for the people. This reform legislation gets us there. By passing this legislation, we will make a positive difference in how Congress performs its duties--and these reforms will send a strong, clear message to the American people that we are here for them and focused solely on representing their interests. And that's the way it should be.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I thank my colleague, Senator Coleman, for those fine words and for his description of the history of the Mississippi River, which is such an important part, as he noted, of our State's history. But for me it is personal. I live only 8 blocks from where this bridge buckled under. This is a place where every day I drive with my husband and our 12-year-old daughter. As I looked down at that bridge, when I stood on the side and saw that schoolbus barely hanging to the side of that fallen concrete, I thought of those drivers, I thought of those other moms with their kids in the backseat--that on an August day, maybe they were going to a Twins game or maybe they were driving home from work--and never did they expect that a massive eight-lane interstate highway bridge would suddenly buckle to the ground. That is what we saw when we went there this morning. But the other thing I saw that I come back to tell the Nation is there are little miracles every day--the miracle of that schoolbus, where kids from a very poor neighborhood in Minneapolis were sitting and somehow saved, and acts of heroism. People saw on the news the woman diver who went in and back in and back in, without any safety equipment on, among the concrete and the shards looking for survivors. This was a disaster that no one expected, but it was something our city and our State had planned for. We learned the lessons from 9/11, and we had many practices for these kinds of disasters. I was the former prosecutor for this area. I remember meeting with the sheriff and the police chief and we planned these drills and we went through them. You could see the results today. You could see the lives that were saved. When we got in today and drove on this highway, there were actually billboards--actual billboards--already up telling people how to get around the scene. There were actually 24 buses added to the transit service, already, at 6 a.m. in the morning and advertised in the newspaper so people could get to work. This is going to be a model as we go forward for how to handle national disasters. The Mississippi River starts in Minnesota. In fact, you can walk across it by Lake Itasca, as Senator Coleman noted. But then you go down and it gets bigger and bigger and pretty soon it ends in New Orleans. When I think about what happened today, I think of a much bigger and more massive disaster with Katrina and how that was handled and how people in Washington responded. In some ways, I always think of those people stranded on those roofs. I think the mirror of those people was a reflection of leadership and a lack of leadership. We are not going to let that happen in Minnesota. We know this is not the massive disaster of Katrina. But it is a huge mess, and it involved a loss of life. So we are coming together, bipartisan, with our colleagues on the other side of the aisle. Senator Reid is fully behind this. Senator Durbin, Senator Schumer, Senator Murray--they all talked to me already this morning, and they pledged their support. So what we have proposed, working with Senator Coleman--we are working together on this--and working with the Republican leadership, is we get a bill passed tonight to at least authorize a lifting of the cap so we can move forward for emergency disaster relief. But I think this is also a reminder, as we go forward, that we have to invest in our Nation's infrastructure. We do not know what the cause of this disaster was. One thing I learned as a prosecutor is, you do not come to conclusions unless you know the cause. But this is a reminder that we need to invest in our long-term infrastructure, and we need to have those emergency funds in place, because a bridge such as this in the middle of America should not fall into a river on an August day. We need to get to the bottom of this and we will rebuild this bridge and we will rebuild this country. Our prayers are with the families, our thoughts are with the rescue workers. We thank them for working throughout the night. We thank our hospital personnel and our firefighters and our police officers and the ordinary citizens who were walking by--it is right in the middle of the University of Minnesota campus--and dove into that river to help. This was the true spirit of Minnesota, and the world watched last night. Thank you, and I thank my colleagues for their support and all the help they have given us as we move forward. This is going to be a long process. It is not going to end tonight. Our goal is to get this bridge rebuilt and to get our city moving again. Thank you very much. I yield the floor.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, here is one more indicator of broad- based support for this insurance. A few days ago, a group of law enforcement leaders in my State came together to express their support for expanding the Children's Health Insurance Program. They included Minneapolis Police Chief Tim Dolan, my former colleague Dakota County Attorney Jim Backstrom, and Hennepin County Sheriff Rich Stanek, who also happens to be a former Republican State legislator. They believe that investing in health insurance for kids and their families is one of the best things we can do to fight crime and ensure safe, prosperous communities. The time to act is now. In a few months, the Children's Health Insurance Program will expire. If that happens, our children will suffer. The President should reconsider his threat to veto. My Senate colleagues who say they are against this bipartisan compromise legislation should reconsider their opposition. I thank the Finance Committee for its efforts to bring this bill to the floor and to expand this important and successful initiative. It is not only good for American kids, it is good for our families and for our local communities, and it is good for all of us, because it improves our Nation's health and prosperity. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I am here today to talk about health care. Today, 45 million Americans are living without access to affordable health care. In a nation of such tremendous wealth and opportunity, with such a strong belief in science and research and medical advancement--we certainly have that in our State, the State of Minnesota--one wonders how so many of our fellow citizens can be burdened with the daily worry of what to do should a health disaster strike themselves or a loved one. Health insurance premiums have skyrocketed into orbits unreachable by an increasing number of middle-class families. We have seen this in our State, where we actually have a fairly high level of people covered. But health care premiums for the middle class are so many times out of reach. We have seen nearly a 100-percent increase in the last few years in our State. The foundations of employer-based health insurance are buckling under enormous cost pressures. The result is that ever more Americans are squeezed by health care costs and face awful decisions about delaying or forgoing needed medical treatment and care. I, in fact, woke up this morning trying to decide when my daughter would get her braces because of the health insurance policy we got that makes you wait 2 years to get that kind of care. Well, we are lucky to be able to even have that insurance because so many kids in this country do not have it. In fact, nearly 9 million of the uninsured in America are children. Kids without access to health care are at an enormous disadvantage as they grow up and start to make their life in this world. Children without health coverage are less likely to get basic preventive care, less likely to see a doctor regularly, and less likely to perform well in school. Children without health coverage are also more likely to show up at the hospital sicker and more likely to develop costly chronic diseases. Currently covering 6 million children, the Children's Health Insurance Program succeeded in improving their lives by giving them access to the health care services they need. It is a successful program that deserves to reach even more children. This is important because, first of all, it is the decent thing to do for America's children who, through no fault of their own, are growing up in families that cannot otherwise get affordable health insurance. But this is also important because it is something that is good for all of us. That is because insuring our children is a smart investment. It is a smart investment to make sure America's children get preventive medical care. It is a smart investment to help America's children grow up as healthy as they can be. It is a smart investment to have America's children in school focused on learning rather than distracted by a sickness or an injury that has gone untreated. It is a smart investment to have America's children get medical care through a sensible system of health insurance rather than having them end up in a hospital emergency room as their health care provider of last resort, increasing the bill for the rest of us. I have seen the direct impact at the local level. For 8 years, I was the county attorney. As county attorney, my office represented the largest safety net hospital in Minnesota. That is the Hennepin County Medical Center in Minneapolis. It is one of the Nation's premier public teaching and research hospitals. It has a nationally recognized level 1 trauma center with the largest emergency room in our State. The hospital serves patients regardless of their ability to pay. As a result, in 2006, the Hennepin County Medical Center's level of uncompensated care added up to $38 million--almost double what it was in the year 2000. That is because the emergency room was these people's doctor. People say: Well, they do not have insurance. They cannot get a doctor. Well, they have a doctor. It is the emergency room. The taxpayers are paying for it, and it is the most expensive place to get health care. It is the clinic of last resort for the uninsured, whether it is for minor illnesses or for more serious conditions that went untreated or could have been prevented. Both in the short run and over the long term, expanding health insurance coverage offers a better deal for our Nation's health and for our continued prosperity. The people of my State have recognized this for a long time. Back in 1992, the leaders in my State voted to establish MinnesotaCare to provide children and their families with a new opportunity to secure health coverage. The initiative was created with bipartisan support in our State legislature, and it was signed into law by Republican Governor Arne Carlson. Within a decade--and thanks to the Children's Health Insurance Program--MinnesotaCare had grown to cover more than 150,000 Minnesotans and helped to make my State No. 1 in the Nation for the percentage of residents with health coverage. But we are now losing the high ground we worked so hard to gain, as a growing number of Minnesotans, especially children, go without health coverage. Uncompensated health care costs for Minnesota's urban and rural hospitals have jumped substantially in recent years. Much of this increase in uncompensated care is due to a decline in health care coverage in our State. For example, between 2001 and 2004, the proportion of Minnesotans who had health coverage through their employers declined from more than 68 percent to less than 63 percent. During the same period, the proportion of Minnesota children covered through their parents' employer also declined from roughly 77 percent to 69 percent. Not surprisingly, the number of Minnesota children lacking health coverage increased significantly. Today, an estimated 82,000 Minnesota children are without health coverage. At the time when thousands of Minnesotans are losing coverage from their employers, or they are being priced out of the insurance market by ever-higher premiums, MinnesotaCare's funding has also been scaled back. In Congress, we have the opportunity to do something about this-- starting with the reauthorization of the Children's Health Insurance Program. Recently, the Senate Finance Committee approved bipartisan legislation to reauthorize the Children's Health Insurance Program. Although I believe it could be even stronger, this compromise legislation authorizes $35 billion over 5 years to expand the Children's Health Insurance Program and extend quality health insurance to an additional 3.2 million children who currently lack coverage. This legislation provides much needed funding for States to maintain and expand their programs and ensure that States that have suffered Federal funding shortfalls, including Minnesota, will now experience a stable level of Federal dollars. As a State-Federal partnership, Children's Health Insurance Program has granted States the ability to tailor their programs to meet the needs of their residents. Some States increased eligibility levels for children. Other States allowed pregnant women to be covered under the program. With MinnesotaCare, my State was an early leader in covering children from working families who had incomes above the Federal poverty level but still could not afford health insurance. In 2001, Minnesota was granted a waiver to extend the coverage to parents with incomes up to twice the Federal poverty line. I would like to make one point clear. In no way is Minnesota covering parents at the expense of children. When the Children's Health Insurance Program was established in 1997, Minnesota already had one of the highest levels of covering children. So why did Minnesota include low-income working parents? The reason is simple. Ample research shows that when parents have coverage, children also get coverage, and they are more likely to actually receive medical care. I have to point out the Bush administration agrees--or at least at one time it did. Here is a quote from Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson in June of 2001, when his Department approved Minnesota's waiver. He said: I am thrilled today to extend the promise of health care insurance to parents. We know there is a greater likelihood that kids will stay insured if their parents also have coverage. Agreeing with Secretary Thompson was Mark McClellan, the Administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Testifying in 2006 before the Finance Committee about the virtues of parent coverage, he said: Extending coverage to parents and caregivers may also increase the likelihood that their children remain enrolled in SCHIP. So as recently as last year, top officials in the Bush administration were on record affirming the strong evidence of the role of parental coverage in the health care and well-being of children. Now the President and his allies have backtracked and would prefer to take coverage away from American families, including 34,000 parents in Minnesota alone. I will tell my colleagues what seems odd to me. Both the President and the Vice President were recently in hospitals, and they were covered. That is good. But why would they want to deny millions of kids in this country the same right? Why would they want to deny 34,000 parents in Minnesota the same right? As Congressional Budget Office Director Peter Orszag stated during a Finance Committee markup of this bill: When you remove parents from health coverage, you end up removing kids too. It doesn't make sense. Our goal must be to secure health care access for more--not fewer--Americans. The White House is living in the past instead of looking to the future. Leaders at the State level, including many Republican Governors, have already moved well beyond the President's constricted position and are committed to trying to expand health coverage to their residents. Minnesota's Republican Governor, Gov. Tim Pawlenty, currently the chair of the National Governors Association, recently signed a letter to congressional leadership asking them to reauthorize the Children's Health Insurance Program. I have this letter in front of me and I wish to quote from it: The Nation's governors call on Congress and the administration to reauthorize the State Children's Health Insurance Program prior to September 30, 2007. They talk about how the authorization is critical for the safety net. Then they go on to say: While we have not taken a position on the actual overall funding amount or the sources of revenue used as offsets, we are encouraged by the Senate Finance Committee's efforts to move a bipartisan reauthorization bill that provides increased funding and reflects the general philosophy that State flexibility and options and incentives for States are preferable to mandates. Not only did Gov. Tim Pawlenty sign this, I know the Governor of the Presiding Officer's home State of Ohio signed it. I also see that Governor Schwarzenegger of California signed this. There are dozens and dozens of signatures of the Nation's Governors. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record this letter from the National Governors Association, Gov. Tim Pawlenty, Chair.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Thank you, Mr. President. I am here today to talk about the State Children's Health Insurance Program. I, first, do wish to say I am very pleased we are advancing an ethics bill in the Senate. I am very pleased with the work the majority leader has done on this bill. As a freshman class, we came in with some energy, and we came in with a commitment that we cannot do business as usual in Washington. This ethics bill, as many outside groups have stated, is the most sweeping ethics reform we have seen since Watergate. It is about banning gifts and free meals. It is about not allowing people to take advantage of corporate jets. It is about bringing transparency to the earmark process. I am very glad this advanced. I did not agree with a few of our Members who tried to block this from going to conference committee. I am glad we found a way procedurally to bring this legislation to the Senate. I am very hopeful it will pass the Senate, as it passed the House today.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, the Senate is in its second week of debate on the future of U.S. military engagement in Iraq. It is a very timely and momentous debate which reflects the American people's concerns with events in Iraq, and I am hopeful more of my colleagues will join those of us who have voted over and over again to limit the U.S. engagement in Iraq. I opposed this war from the start, and I have long advocated for responsible change of course in the administration's policy. I believe the best that we can do for our troops, for our national interests, and for the Iraqis themselves is to begin transitioning to Iraqi authority and to begin bringing our troops home in a responsible way, to remove the bulk of U.S. combat forces by the spring of next year. I remember being at the funeral for one of our brave, fallen soldiers in Minnesota and hearing a priest say--he noted that this young man was a strong, strapping boy. He was over 6 feet tall. He said the kids we are sending over there may be over 6 feet tall, but they are still our children. If they are over 6 feet tall, then our leaders must be 8 feet tall in making these difficult decisions. I hope this week this Congress stands tall, this Senate stands tall and makes the right decision.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I am here today to talk about another subject, and that is an accident that happened in Minnesota over the Fourth of July break. It brought home to me and many people in my State that there are many ways that Government must act to protect its citizens. Some of them are larger than life--the debate over the strategy in Iraq. Others are smaller and quieter, a little girl lying maimed in a hospital bed after an accident that a simple law could have prevented. We are in the midst of the summer swimming season in our State and all over the country, a time when children of all ages take to the swimming pools--as they should. Today, I wish to speak about the terrible injury suffered by a young girl in my State only weeks ago. That is why I feel such a sense of urgency about moving the legislation that is currently pending in the Senate--it is going to be considered by the Commerce Committee this week--which would help prevent serious injury or death for other children in the future. Abigail Taylor, known as Abby, is a 6-year-old girl from suburban Minnesota, a girl with big brown eyes and a dazzling smile who loved to swim. Last month Abby went swimming at a local pool. She was in the shallow wading pool when she sat over an open drain hole and had most of her intestines torn out by the drain's powerful suction. Somehow this little 6-year-old girl managed to stand up and take a few steps before collapsing along the side of the wading pool. Now, nearly 3 weeks later, she remains hospitalized after undergoing several surgeries. She will survive, thanks to a miracle, her parents believe, but it is expected that she will need a feeding tube for the rest of her life. All of this, simply because she spent a sunny summer day at a pool. What happened to this little 6-year-old girl is horrific. My own daughter's name is Abigail, and hearing about this incident brings chills to any parent. When I first saw this story about this in our local newspaper, I had to stop reading because the details of it were so disturbing. They would be for any parent. I look at this first as a mother. Your daughter is enjoying a beautiful summer day having fun playing at the local pool. It is not even a deep pool. It is just a kiddy pool. But suddenly something terrible happens, and your life is changed forever. When it was first reported, like everyone else, I thought this was some kind of freak, one-of-a-kind incident. I never thought I would be spending time talking about it on the Senate floor. But then I learned that, unfortunately, this is not the first time this has happened. As it turns out, although most pools are safe and well maintained, this type of incident has happened too many times before, resulting in the deaths of several dozen children over the past 15 years. It even has a name: pool entrapment. It occurs when a child becomes stuck on a drain and is unable to escape due to the high velocity and pressure of the water being sucked into the drain. Another scenario occurs when hair or jewelry gets sucked into the drain, making it difficult for a child to pull free. According to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the pressure on some pool drains can be as strong as 300 pounds per inch. In fact, several years ago, the Commission produced an educational video on this danger. It showed a muscular man trying to pull an inflatable ball off a swimming pool drain. Using both arms and all of his might, he couldn't do it; the suction force was just too powerful. Two years ago the Consumer Product Safety Commission issued a report saying it was aware of at least 27 deaths and many more emergency room visits and hospitalizations due to this entrapment. Most of these victims were children. It is unclear how many actual entrapment incidents have not resulted in death but severe injury because entrapment is a little-known risk. It is possible that many swimming pool drowning deaths or other injuries have not been classified as caused by entrapment. I think it is curious that I know of three of these incidents: the one in Minnesota, the one I am about to talk about involving Jim Baker's granddaughter, and another one in which former Senator Edwards represented a family with the tragic incident involving a pool drain. You know, it never even crosses a parent's mind that at the bottom of the kiddy pool is something that has enough force and will cause death or severe injury as it did to Abby Taylor. But it should never have happened, and we must do everything we can to make sure it never happens again to any child because it is preventable. There are several simple ways, as we will discuss in the Commerce Committee hearing this week, for manufacturers to reduce entrapment risk at pools: installing antientanglement and antientrapment drain covers; installing multiple drains, reducing suction force for each drain; installing a gravity flow or a safety vacuum release system, that prevents entrapment by automatically shutting off the pool pump. These antientrapment measures are simple and inexpensive, and they can literally save children's lives. I saw a drain today that costs 50 bucks. That, plus adequate monthly inspection, can save lives. There are also reasonable measures that Congress can take to help strengthen pool safety standards and prevent this kind of terrible incident from ever happening again to another child. The Commerce Committee has jurisdiction over product safety. It is led by two of my colleagues, Senators Inouye and Stevens, who have been leaders on this issue. I am pleased to be a cosponsor of the legislation introduced last week by Senators Pryor, Stevens, Dodd, and myself, which would strengthen the safety standards for America's swimming pools and spas so we can prevent the kind of incident that happened to 6-year-old Abby Taylor. As chairman of the Consumer Subcommittee, Senator Pryor has pushed to have this legislation included on the agenda for this week's committee markup. This legislation is called the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Safety Act, named in memory of the 7-year-old granddaughter of former Secretary of State James Baker. It was an honor to meet this morning with Graeme's mother. She was here in her daughter's memory talking to Members of Congress. Several years ago, Graeme died as a result of suction entrapment in a spa. Her body was held underwater by the force of the suction, and it took two adults to help pry her free from the drain. But it was too late. She had already drowned. This tragedy occurred at a graduation party that was well supervised by scores of adults. The purpose of this legislation is to reduce the likelihood that any other child will end up like Graeme Baker or Abby Taylor. This same bill was introduced last year. The Senate passed it by unanimous consent. But in the closing days of the last Congress, it failed to pass the House of Representatives by a narrow margin. Now, what do you say when you talk, as I did, to the father of this little girl, Abby Taylor, who is lying maimed in a hospital bed losing her intestines? You tell them that: Well, we got it through the Senate, but the House just did not have the votes to do it. These parents are so courageous that they have moved on from that. They want her severe injuries to be discussed today. They are not afraid to have us talking about what happened to their little daughter because they want it never to happen to another child. This year this legislation must pass. The legislation has several important provisions. It would take Consumer Product Safety Commission standards for pool drains, which are now voluntary, and make them mandatory. It would prohibit the manufacture, sale, or distribution of drain covers that do not meet the standards established by the Commission. It is important to strengthen the legislation to make sure that not only new pools but all public pools meet the same standard. The legislation also provides incentives for States to adopt their own comprehensive pool safety laws regarding certain water safety devices, that they be installed to protect children. It also would contain grants to create these incentives. There is a saying that when an accident happens that could reasonably have been prevented, then it is not accurate to call it an accident; it is actually a failure. In the case of injuries and deaths caused by pool entrapment, it is not a failure by children or by their parents, it is a failure of our product safety laws. This means it is also a failure that it is within our power to correct, a problem that can be fixed through reasonable measures contained in this legislation. We deal with issues larger than life, as we will today as we debate the war in Iraq. But sometimes a simple, small change in a law will save the life of a small child. Let's never forget what happened to innocent children such as Abby Taylor and Graeme Baker. For the health and safety of all of our children, I urge the Senate to take quick action to approve this legislation.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Oklahoma for acknowledging there is something that is worth staying up all night for, that this is a debate we must continue to have. But this is also a vote we must have. The American people and our troops deserve nothing less than an up-or-down vote. I disagree with the Senator from Oklahoma when he said we would be somehow hurting our troops by not staying the course. I think we need to change the course. I think this idea that we somehow dishonor our troops by having a free and open debate about this is wrong. I think it is wrong to say we dishonor our troops when we talk about a change in course in Iraq, because I think it is what they deserve. We need a smart way to get our soldiers out of harm's way and transition to the Iraqi Government. This is about getting this policy right for our troops in the field, about giving them what they deserve: a simple majority vote. That is what we need today. I hope all of my colleagues will recognize our current strategy in Iraq is not working, that a new strategy based on drawing down U.S. forces is necessary, and this strategy must be implemented now. After 4 years, over 3,600 American soldiers have been killed, over 25,000 have been wounded, and almost $450 billion has been spent. We cannot wait until next year, or until next month, or until September to change our strategy. After 4 years, we cannot wait for the Iraqi Government to demonstrate the progress before we begin bringing our soldiers home, and it has shown no indication of a commitment to compromise and reconciliation. After 4 years, we cannot ask our men and women in the field to continue to risk life and limb indefinitely in the pursuit of a policy that so many of our colleagues across the aisle have now admitted and have spoken out about and said this policy needs to be changed, that it is not working. Talk is talk. But now it is time to vote. Our troops have done what they have been asked to do. They deposed an evil dictator. They guaranteed free elections in Iraq. We all know there can be no purely military solution in Iraq. This has been agreed to by so many military commanders, experts, and Members in this body that it doesn't need to be argued anymore. We recognize true stability in Iraq will only come with political compromise between their various ethic factions. Only Iraqis can reach that agreement. Given that, should our strategy not be transitioning to Iraqi authority now, not some undefined time in the future? We must push the Iraqi Government to assume the duties it was elected to perform, to lead the process in negotiation and deal-making. Our openended commitment is impeding this process and inhibiting the will of the Iraqi people to stand up and take responsibility for their own country. Nine months ago, the Iraq Study Group proposed a pragmatic change of course that focused on political and economic initiatives, intense regional, and international diplomacy that would tie all nations with an interest in Iraq together, and beginning the phased redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq. Since the issuance of the Iraq Study Group report, some conditions on the ground have remained the same, and a number have gotten worse. In the last 3 months, more U.S. troops were killed than in any other 3-month period during the entire war. I urge my colleagues to set aside differences, to forget about past agreements or voting records, and focus on what is best for our troops in the field going forward. We owe it to these brave men and women in the field to get this policy right. I believe the best thing we can do for our troops, our national interest, and for the Iraqis is to adopt the new strategy proposed by my colleagues Senators Levin and Reed that would begin bringing our troops home, removing the bulk of our combat forces by the spring of next year. We know this cannot be done overnight, and the troops will be remaining to train the police and guard our embassies, and for special forces. We also know it is time to send a message to this Iraqi Government that it is time for them to govern. Keeping over 160,000 U.S. soldiers in Iraq is simply not the answer. We need to start bringing them home. In March, I visited Baghdad and Fallujah and saw firsthand the bravery and commitment of our troops. I had a number of meetings set up with Minnesota troops. Of the 22,000 troops who were sent over as part of this surge, 3,000 were from Minnesota. In fact, they are the longest serving Guard unit right now in Iraq and Afghanistan. A number of them are now coming home. We rejoice in Minnesota for the ones coming home to their families. But we know that, sadly, they are being replaced by other soldiers from across this country. I remember one of the Congressmen who had gone to Iraq shortly after I did. He came back and talked, as a House Member, about how it reminded him of--going through the market,--a farmer's market in Indiana. Well, that is not my memory from Iraq. What I remember, first, is our troops and how they didn't complain about the heat, or about their extensions, or about their equipment. They only asked me two things: What the State high school hockey tournament scores were, and then they asked if I would call their moms and dads and husbands and wives when I got home. I did that. I talked to about 50 moms. I have to tell you they told me different stories. They told me about children who were waiting for their dad to come home, that they thought they were going to come home in January, and they were waiting month after month. They told me about how scared they were every time they turned on the TV. They told me about how proud they were of their child but that they wanted him to come home. My starkest memory of that trip was not some farmer's market in Indiana; my memory was standing on the tarmac of the Baghdad airport where nine Duluth firefighters called me over to stand with them. First, I didn't know what it was. They were there to do their duty. They were saluting in front of a firetruck while six caskets draped in the American flag were loaded onto a plane. They didn't know what fallen soldiers were in those caskets. They didn't know who they were. They just knew it was their duty to salute and they knew the lives of the families of these fallen soldiers would never be the same. There is not a day that goes by that I don't think about the Minnesota soldiers I met over there. They never complained. They did their jobs. They deposed an evil dictator and guaranteed free elections. Now it is time to bring them home. One thing that struck us in our State is that this is a different kind of war. Up to 40 percent of the troops fighting in Iraq are members of the National Guard and Reserves. In many respects, the war has involved a different kind of soldier. In Vietnam, the average age of an American soldier was 19 years old. In Iraq and Afghanistan, the average age of an active-duty soldier is 27. The average age of National Guard members is 33. Three- fourths of all soldiers serving in Iraq and Afghanistan have families of their own, and fully one-half of those who have been killed have left families behind. Almost 22 percent of the Guard and Reserve members have had multiple deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. For 4 years, these citizen soldiers have gone above and beyond the call of duty as this war has lasted longer--our involvement has lasted longer than our involvement in World War II. These citizen soldiers have made extraordinary sacrifices. As we see our Guard and Reserve come home in Minnesota, the longest serving unit in this war, we know many have come back injured and maimed. I think I heard it is a thousand in this war across this country who have lost a limb, and 20-some thousand have been injured. Having served and sacrificed for 16 months, these men and women earned their rest and their right to live their lives in peace. But we keep sending them back and we keep sending them back. All across my State, I have heard a strong and clear message from Minnesotans: Change the course in Iraq. Push for the strategy and solution that will bring our troops home and transition to Iraqi governance. They want to see a surge in diplomacy, not a surge in troops. It is a message that was echoed all over this country last fall, from Montana to Minnesota, from Pennsylvania to Virginia. The people of Minnesota, like their fellow citizens around the country, recognize what is at stake in Iraq. As I have traveled around our State, I have spoken with many families who have paid a personal price in this war. I think of Clairmont Anderson, who would drive hundreds of miles to attend public events. Every time anybody even brought up the war, he would start to cry. It is because his son Stewart, an Army Reserve major, was killed in a helicopter crash in Iraq. I think of Kathleen Waseka from St. Paul, MN. In January, her son James Waseka, Jr., was killed while patrolling on foot in an area near Fallujah. He was assigned with the Minnesota Army National Guard First Brigade, the same unit that was extended under the President's escalation. Sergeant Waseka was the third member of his unit to die within a 6-week period. I also think of Becky Lurie of Kerrick, MN, near Duluth. She is the mother of 12 and a former State senator. Her son Matt was killed when the Army helicopter he was piloting went down north of Baghdad. I watched this Gold Star mother--a woman who has adopted 8 children--comfort her grandchildren, hold her shaking husband, and stand tall for hours in a high school gym in Findley, MN, where hundreds of people came together to gather for her son's memorial service. Clairmont Anderson, Kathleen Waseka, and Becky Lurie are parents whose children made the ultimate sacrifice in service to our country. They are among the many Minnesotans who have told me, without apology, that they want to see a change of course in Iraq. They pray that others will not experience their pain. Although I opposed this war from the beginning, I recognize many did support it. But many years later, we are now dealing with a dramatically different situation. What we now know about the events and facts leading up to the war has changed dramatically. The conditions inside Iraq have changed dramatically. Our role there has changed dramatically. We need an up-or-down vote today. If we don't have a regular up-or-down vote, as the American people have asked for, we are not going to get the change of course the bipartisan Iraq Study Group recommended, the change of course that Iraq needs to halt its civil war, or the change of course our military forces deserve. As of Thanksgiving, as I said, this war has lasted longer than World War II. Have we not asked our men and women to sacrifice enough? Recently, at the funeral for a fallen soldier, I heard a local priest say our leaders have an obligation to do right by our children when we send them to war. This particular soldier was very tall and very strong. As the priest talked about him, he talked about the fact that even though this young man was over 6 feet tall, he was still our child. He said our children may be over 6 feet tall when we send them to war, but they are still our children. If the kids we are sending to Iraq are 6 feet tall, he said, then our leaders must be 8 feet tall. I add that if these soldiers are willing to stand up and risk their lives for our country, those of us in Congress must be brave enough to stand up and ask the tough questions and push for the tougher solutions and not be afraid to have an up-or-down vote on a change of strategy in Iraq. Clairmont Anderson, Kathleen Waseka, and Becky Lurie are standing tall. The parents with whom I met, whose kids were supposed to come home back in January, have been waiting and waiting for that telephone call, and waiting and waiting for those letters. They have been standing tall all these months. The members of the Minnesota National Guard whose deployment ceremony I attended a few months ago in Duluth stood tall. The teenage brother and sister I met there who saw their dad and their mom deployed to Iraq at the same time stood tall. The injured soldiers in the VA hospital in Minnesota, recovering from traumatic brain injuries, and in their wheelchairs, with their strength and their spirit are standing tall. I say to my friends across the aisle, by having an honest and open debate about the war as we have done tonight, we in Congress can stand tall, but we can only stand tall when we allow for a fair and honest vote about the strategy in Iraq. Our Constitution says Congress should be a responsible check and balance on Presidential power. Congressional oversight of our Iraq policy is long overdue. On behalf of the public, Members of this body have a responsibility to exercise our own constitutional power in a fairminded, bipartisan way, to insist on accountability and to demand a change of course. Ultimately, the best way to help our soldiers and their families is not only to give them the respect and the benefits and the help they deserve, but also to get this policy right. I hope my friends across the aisle will see the merits of this debate and allow for an up-or-down vote on the Levin-Reed amendment. Our troops and our families deserve nothing less.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of S. 975, and that the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 268, and that the Senate then proceed to its consideration.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, en bloc, and that any statements relating to the resolution be printed in the Record.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 271, submitted earlier today.

Ms. KLOBUCHAR

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 272, submitted earlier today.