Angus King

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Just a moment, Madam President. I am looking for the healthcare bill. I know it is here somewhere. I haven't been able to find it and have been looking all morning. I suspect maybe we will find it in the next couple of days. I wish to talk about Medicaid. Medicaid is often perceived as a welfare program, and it isn't. It is essential medical support. Now, let's talk about who receives Medicaid. Seventy-two percent of the people who receive assistance from Medicaid are children, people with disabilities, and the elderly. Indeed, 85 percent of the expenditures for Medicaid, as opposed to enrollees--85 percent of the expenditures--are for those same groups--the children, the disabled, and the elderly. Particularly, what a lot of people don't realize is that Medicaid is one support--if not the principal support--for nursing home care throughout the country, and especially in my State of Maine. I suspect, if we surveyed people--perhaps some even in this body, but certainly in the general public: How are you going to cover Aunt Minnie's nursing home care when she has to have it later in her life, most people would say: Oh, we have Medicare. People I talk to at home say: Medicare is going to take care of me. No, except in very rare and limited circumstances, Medicare does not cover nursing home care. It doesn't cover long-term care. That is Medicaid. Sixty-eight percent of all the Medicaid spending in Maine was for elderly or disabled people in 2014. About one in three people nationwide is going to require nursing home care--one in three. Nationally, over three-quarters of nursing home residents are covered by Medicaid. So if we are talking in this bill, wherever it is--if anybody finds it, let me know--about significant cuts to Medicaid, we are talking about people's ability to have long-term care in nursing homes. Make no mistake about it. You cannot cut Medicaid by over $1 trillion in 10 years and not have it affect those people. Now, some say we are giving the States flexibility. We are giving the States flexibility to make agonizing decisions between disabled people, children, and seniors. That is not flexibility. To quote the President, that is ``mean.'' That is cruel. The States are only going to have two choices. They are either going to have to cut people off and limit services--and remember that three-quarters of the people are disabled, elderly, and children--or they are going to have to raise taxes on their own citizens. Now, we are claiming we are going to help the Federal budget. We are going to reduce the deficit by $800 billion over 10 years by passing this bill. But we are just shifting the bill to the States. That is nice work, if you can get it. Why don't we shift the cost of the Air Force to the States? That would make the Federal budget look better. But it is not a real savings to our citizens if they have to pay out of their pocket at their home State or in their city, or if they have to pay part in their income taxes. That is no savings. That is a fake savings. That is a smokescreen to tell people: We are cutting government expenditures. No, we are not. We are just shifting them to another level of government where you are going to have to pay for them there as well. But to get back to Medicaid. Seventy percent of the nursing home residents in Maine are covered by Medicaid. Who are they? They are people who can't be cared for at home any longer. They require nearly constant care and support. These aren't welfare recipients. These are our former teachers, police officers, the people who looked after us, the carpenters who built our houses, the nurses who cared for us in hospitals, the wait staff who served us meals, the veterans who served in times of trouble and fought for our freedom. They and their families are simply part of our communities. They are not welfare recipients. They are people who have paid their fair share throughout their lives. They have worked hard. They have done all the things they were supposed to do, all the things that were expected of them. They stayed in their homes, by and large, as long as they possibly could. But at some point, after their assets and ability to pay were exhausted, they had Medicaid to help them in terms of long- term care. I often say when I talk about this that it really frustrates me that we talk about this healthcare issue in terms of ideology and the free market and all of these kinds of things. No, this is about people. This is about Jim and Cora Banks from Portland, ME. They lived in Portland. He was a State employee, and she was a beautician, who worked out of her home and most of her energy went into raising four boys. Cora was a den mother and Scout leader. They worked on projects and-- can you believe it--all four of their boys were Eagle Scouts. That is an astonishing accomplishment, to have four sons as Eagle Scouts. They were active in the Kiwanis and taught Sunday school. One of their sons was involved in Little League. So Cora raised money to build a concession stand on the field, which is still used today. At 55, tragically, Cora began to have memory issues. Because they had health insurance--because they had health insurance--she could get great care at a geriatric practice in Portland. Friends and family were helpful, and Jim was the principal caregiver for many years. But at 70, it became clear that Cora needed full-time care, and Jim could not provide that level of care. The doctors said she needed to be in a residential setting. Her assets were exhausted. She qualified for MaineCare, which is what we call Medicaid. Her nursing home care was covered, and she lived for a year in that nursing home. Two-thirds of the income for all of our nursing homes in Maine come from Medicaid, from MaineCare. What happens to this resource of the nursing homes if suddenly their revenues are significantly cut? What happens? But, mostly, what happens to people like Cora? There is also an idea--and I heard the head of the OMB talk about it: We are not really cutting; we are just cutting the rate of growth. Well, if the demand is growing, the cost is growing, and you cut the rate of growth, you are cutting. Less money will be available than is necessary to meet the need. That is a real cut. All of us know we are facing a demographic bulge from the baby boom generation, who are aging and are going to require more and more medical treatment, and they are going to put a greater demand on our nursing homes. In Maine, we are projecting a 105,000-person increase in the next 10 years of people over 65. One in four Maine people will be over 65 in the next two decades. The Alzheimer's Association projects that 35,000 Maine seniors will be afflicted with the tragic disease of Alzheimer's within 10 years; 25,000 had the disease in 2014. People with dementia are 10 times more likely to live in a nursing home. There is a lot in the bill, I am told. I don't know; I haven't seen it. I have been looking for it. But the central premise seems to be, if it is anything like the House bill, a massive cut in Medicaid and a massive tax cut to the people in our society who least need it. The tax cut is targeted at the very wealthiest Americans. Yet the results of that decision will be to cut essential medical support for elderly people, disabled people, and children. I don't understand that bargain. I don't understand that equation--a gigantic tax cut to the wealthiest and a substantial cut in support for those who most need it. Maybe I will be pleasantly surprised when I see the bill, whenever that is. I hope it is more than a few hours before we are called upon to vote on it. Right now, what we are hearing and what we are learning and what the House bill looked like would be a tragedy for this country and a tragedy for real people. I don't understand the impulse to give a tax cut and to hurt people when we know that is going to be the case. And again, these are not welfare recipients; these are your friends and neighbors. In all of our States, almost two-thirds of the nursing home residents are on Medicaid. We are not going to be able to cut Medicaid in the dramatic way that has been proposed without affecting those people. I hope this body will take the time necessary to analyze this issue, to openly debate it, to argue about it, and to find solutions that make sense and will work for the people of America, not try to ram something through for the purpose of checking a box on a campaign promise made years ago. The reality is, we have an obligation, in my view, not only to solve the problem in a compassionate and rational and efficient way but also to develop and run a process here that respects the institution and respects the American people. This is not the way this place is supposed to run--to have a bill drafted in secret, brought to the floor within hours or a few days of voting, and then force a vote without the kind of consideration, hearings, input, argument, and debate that is supposed to be the hallmark of this institution. This is a very important decision, I think one of the most important any of us will ever make. I, for one, am going to be able to tell my children and grandchildren that I stood for Maine, for our children, for our elderly, for our disabled people. And when the chips are down, the United States Senate is going to do the right thing. I yield the floor.

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize Steve Schley who is stepping down as president of Pingree Associates after nearly three decades of leadership later this month. Eight generations after his descendant initiated this effort, Steve Schley has, in his 32 years of service both to Pingree Associates, of which he was president for 28 years, and to the State of Maine, continued a tradition of leadership in the development and fiscal health of Maine's forest products industry as well as the sustainability of Maine's forests. Steve's retirement provides an opportunity to honor his wide array of accomplishments and contributions to the State of Maine--all achieved in the spirit and essence of his lineage. In the year 1820, Maine, as included in the the Missouri Compromise, was ushered into the Union as a new State. That same year, a prominent Massachusetts shipping merchant named David Pingree initiated what would become a historic and indispensable string of investments in Maine forestlands. Over the next nearly 200 years, sudden growth and advancement of Maine's forest product industry, and thus statewide economic development, blossomed from the easement agreements signed and purchases made of Maine forest land by the Pingree family. Today Pingree Associates is in possession of close to 1 million acres of Maine forest land, bringing a great burden of responsibility upon the president of the association. In every respect, Steve has thrived under this burden. During his tenure as president, he has undertaken initiatives to revitalize Maine's struggling wood-products industry by collaborating with the University of Maine's Forest Bio-products Research Institute to help nurture the next generation of innovators and leaders in the bioproducts industry, setting the stage for the development and integration of sustainable, forward-thinking forest products. By ``paying it forward'' through the youth of Maine, he is ensuring that his integrity and hard work will continue to live on through these kids for generations to come. Steve's sustainability and conservation efforts were not limited to just ensuring a bright future. Back in 2001, when I was Governor, I announced Steve's success in closing the largest forestland conservation easement in the history of the United States between Pingree Associates and the New England Forestry Foundation, which independently protected 762,192 acres from development and opened up the land to recreation for Mainers and all U.S citizens for time immemorial. Because of Steve's hard work and leadership as president of Pingree Associates, Mainers of all ages will continue to benefit from his successes in Maine's forest industry, as well as in conserving land for their recreation. Steve has honored our collective heritage as well as his own, and I thank him for his friendship and his many contributions towards bettering our State.

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, I was in Maine over the weekend, and people said: How do you feel about healthcare? What do you think we ought to be doing? I said: I like the President's plan. I think President Trump has it just right. He says we need healthcare that will cover everyone, low premiums and low deductibles, no preexisting conditions. That is the right formulation, and I hope that is what we can work toward, and that is what we should be working toward. He also said yesterday that the bill that passed the House was mean. Well, a couple of weeks ago I said it was cruel, but I will accept mean; both mean the same thing. It is a terrible blow to literally millions of people across this country and thousands in my State of Maine. By the way, the problem with the House bill is that it is so bad that some kind of compromise has developed here that is halfway, and it is still mean or cruel. Now people are talking about a ``soft landing.'' That is a euphemism for stretching out the crash. It is not a soft landing. Whether we take Medicaid and healthcare coverage away from people in 2 years, 4 years, or 7 years, it is still going to happen, and it is a crash. It is not a soft landing. That is just stretching it out into beyond the next couple of elections, but it doesn't really get to the core of the issue, which is taking healthcare and health insurance away from millions of people. Congressional Baseball Practice Shooting Mr. President, before I began, I meant to acknowledge what happened this morning to our colleagues across the way at the baseball practice--tragic, inexplicable, horrible, and just inexcusable. My heart goes out to the Capitol Police who, I understand, were incredibly brave and met their responsibilities admirably to Representative Scalise and to any others who were injured--a terrible incident and one that we hope we never see the likes of again. Healthcare Legislation Going back to healthcare, I think it is important for people to understand the big picture of what is going on with this issue that is now before both the House and the Senate. What we are really talking about is a massive tax increase on middle- class and lower middle-class people and a massive tax cut for the wealthiest Americans. It is as simple as that. It is a gigantic transfer of wealth--probably one of the greatest in a short time in recent American history--where we have millions of people across the country who have health insurance under the Affordable Care Act and are protected under Medicaid and Medicaid expansion, and we are taking that away. The Affordable Care Act exchange policies are a tax credit. So when you take that away, you are increasing people's taxes; you are increasing the taxes of people who are making between $15,000 and $45,000, $60,000, $70,000 a year, and you are decreasing taxes in a huge way only for people who make more than $200,000 a year. The 400 highest taxpayers in the country will get a tax cut of $7 million apiece. That makes no sense. We are taking resources away from the people who need it--the middle class--and we are giving it to the people who don't need it. It is Robin Hood in reverse. That is the fundamental point of this legislation. It is all about that big tax cut for the rich--for the really rich--and I just don't understand why we are even thinking about that, because the American people need help with the cost of healthcare. If you divide the total healthcare bill in this country by the number of people, you come up with about $8,500 a year per person, on average, or $35,000 a year for a family of four. That is the cost of healthcare. That cost has to be paid, and I would argue that people who are in the middle income can't afford it. They can't afford to pay those costs, and they need some help, and that is what the Affordable Care Act does. But, instead, we are talking about repealing it--knocking those millions of people off. In Maine we have 75,000 people on the exchanges. And then, of course, we have hundreds of thousands on Medicaid. We are talking about severely constricting their access to healthcare. That is just wrong, ethically, morally, and in any other way. We are taking healthcare away from people so we can give a massive tax cut to the people who don't really need it. In Maine, if the House had taken a blank sheet of paper and said ``How can we design a healthcare plan that would really hammer the people of Maine?'' it would have been the AHCA--misnamed the American Healthcare Act; it ought to be the anti-healthcare act because that is what it is all about--taking healthcare away from people. It could not be more tailored to harm people in Maine. We are the oldest State in the country. We have more people in the older age brackets--50 and up--than any other State in the United States as a percentage of our population. We also are a relatively low- income State. You put those things together, and you really get hurt. Also, in Maine, as in the Presiding Officer's home State, we have a lot of hazardous occupations--logging, agriculture, fishing, the iconic Maine lobsterman. This is a guy named David Osgood from Vinalhaven, an incredibly beautiful island off the coast of Maine. Lobstering is an essential part of the Maine economy. It is a part of our way of life. Vinalhaven, where Dave lives, has a population of about 1,200. It is really hard work. It is all-weather, and it is dangerous. You have to haul tracks, repair them, be out on the water in the wintertime, which is no fun. David Osgood has been lobstering since he was 13, like his father and grandfather before him. As of this spring, all three of David's and Elaine's children have finished college. That is amazing. That is a real achievement for any family, but fishing is challenging and tough. The Osgoods are really thankful for the fact that they can get affordable health insurance through the Affordable Care Act. Once, they weren't covered, and David had a back problem that required surgery. Like a lot of people in Maine, he paid it off, month by month by month. But the ACA, according to Elaine, has given them some comfort and peace of mind. I don't think those of us who have pretty much had health insurance all of our lives realize the importance of that peace of mind, of not being anxious about a health problem that could wipe you out, make you lose your house--an illness or an injury. Elaine said: We will be OK. The deductibles are a problem. They are too high. I agree. What we ought to be working on is how to get the deductibles down, how to work on the premiums, how to work on the cost of healthcare. All of this debate about the Affordable Care Act and Medicare and Medicaid and a public option and single payer--all of that is about who pays, when a big part of the problem is how much we are all paying. We pay roughly twice as much per person for healthcare than anyone else in the industrialized world. That is a real problem that we have to start debating. We have to start talking about that because, whoever pays, whatever the insurance plan is, if the underlying cost is something that people just can't afford, then we are going to be arguing about who pays, how much, and what part. We have to get at that $8,500 per person. People say: Yes, but we have the best healthcare system in the world. Yes, we do, for the people who can afford it. But for the millions of people who don't have health insurance, who get treated only in emergency rooms or more often don't want to get treated at all because they don't want to go in because they know they can't pay for it, the healthcare system does not deliver for them. By all objective measures--longevity, infant mortality--we are not first in the world. We are like 20th in the world. We are way below our colleagues, and yet we are paying much more. We have to address high deductibles, high premiums, and high costs, but also, in the meantime, we have to keep people covered. Another couple in Maine, Jonathan Edwards and Jennifer Schroth, live in Hancock County. It is another coastal county. They are farmers, and they raise vegetables. Here is a great Maine story. I have known Jen's mother for about 40 years. I just met Jen at a healthcare forum in Bangor a few weeks ago, but I knew her mother way back. Everybody in Maine knows everybody else. I suspect it is like in Alaska. We are a big small town with very long roads. Jonathan and Jennifer own and operate a farm. By the way, this farm is in a town called Brooklin, but this is the real Brooklin--Brooklin, ME. They grow potatoes, vegetables, strawberries, raspberries, and asparagus. They make maple syrup. They could never afford healthcare until the ACA came along because they were essentially a small business, but they were not a big enough business to have a group plan. They didn't have employer-based health insurance. They just didn't have it. They are both in their fifties, and one of the changes made under the Affordable Care Act was that the ratio between the premiums for younger people and older people can't be more than three times. It reflects the reality that older people have more healthcare needs and cost the system more. So there is a reflection. It is allowed to be a three- times basis. The House bill changes that to five times. That is a huge shift directly toward people in their fifties and early sixties. When Jen was pregnant with each of their two boys, they had no insurance. They paid the hospital. Just like my friend David Osgood, they paid the hospital. That is what Maine people do. But what if there had been complications? They were pretty straightforward births, but what if there had been complications? They would have been wiped out because they had no health insurance. Jen says she doesn't feel it is responsible to go without health insurance, especially when you have a family. It is critical to them that the ACA is affordable, and it is because of the tax credits. They also appreciate that they have real insurance that really covers things. There are no exclusions. People say: Well, I have this really cheap insurance policy, but it doesn't cover anything. It may not even cover hospitalization or it doesn't cover doctor visits or it doesn't cover drugs. It doesn't cover what you really need. That is not insurance. That is illusory. But now, Jen says, they have peace of mind because they have coverage. She told me that face-to-face not long ago. Running a small business is tough. It is tough because you generally can't get group policies. Sometimes you can join a small business association, but generally you can't. This is a way to have coverage that people can afford. Imagine if somebody came to this body and said: I have a great idea for a bill. I am going to raise taxes on the middle class and give a great big break to hedge fund managers. We wouldn't even think about it. It wouldn't even get out of committee. Yet that is essentially what this is all about. How much of a tax increase is it on somebody? Well, in Hancock County, where these folks live, for a 60-year-old making $40,000 a year--these are real numbers from the Kaiser Family Foundation--under the Affordable Care Act the premium is $4,080 a year, about 10 percent of your income. That is still substantial. But under the bill passed by the House, that would go to $17,090 on a $40,000 gross income. It is ridiculous to go from $4,000 to $17,000. Where does that difference come from? It is going back to the people who don't need it. It is going back to the people who make $200,000, $400,000, $800,000, $1 million, $5 million a year--a 300-percent increase in out-of-pocket costs for healthcare. In Knox County--I think David is younger than 60, but if he were 60--his premium goes from $4,080 to $10,590, more than doubled. This just doesn't make sense to me. This whole discussion doesn't make sense to me. I agree that we need to talk about healthcare, and I agree that we need to do something about it, but we are doing the wrong thing. We are making it worse. There are two problems with healthcare in this country. We can boil it down to two issues--cost and access. The Affordable Care Act, although it dealt somewhat with cost, was mostly about access--allowing people who don't have health insurance to get it, whether through Medicaid expansion or through the exchanges. Cost is a bigger issue, and it is one that we also have to deal with. But that is not what is on the floor now, or will be soon, and it is not what is being considered in Congress. But I would argue that we really have to pay attention to that issue as well. So all of this and taking coverage away from my friend David or Jen and John and thousands--we know the number from the House bill, 23 million people in America--to give a massive tax break so a guy making a couple million dollars a year can buy an extra Maserati just doesn't pass the straight-face test for good public policy. I am the first to agree that the Affordable Care Act is not perfect. I think there are things about it that need to be fixed and adjusted, and we need to work on how we do the deductibles, how we improve that, and how we broaden the coverage and maybe make it more of a sliding scale. All of those things are things we can discuss and work on, and I am absolutely willing to do it--but the idea of repealing it just to check a box to meet a campaign promise and to be so divergent from what the President has said over and over in the campaign and since that time--that he wants coverage for everyone, no preexisting conditions, and lower premiums and deductibles. I am for it. But what we are doing is the exact opposite--the exact 180-degree opposite. So let's take a breath. There is no deadline here of next week or the July 4th recess. Let's take a break and back off and start talking about it as Senators and Representatives from all over the country and all parties. I think we ought to be able to come to some agreement here. Now, if there are people who are just hell-bent to provide a tax cut to multimillionaires, then, there isn't an agreement to be had. If that has to be part of the deal, include me out. But if we can start talking reasonably about how we can improve the Affordable Care Act--I don't care if we improve it, change it, tinker with it, and call it TrumpCare or McConnellCare or RyanCare. Call it what you want, but let's provide health insurance, which is so important to the American people. I have told this story a couple of times, but I am going to conclude with why I am so passionate about this. Forty years ago, I worked here. I was a staff member, and I had insurance. For the first time in my young life, I think, I had health insurance. Part of the health insurance was a provision for preventive care, which is also required under the Affordable Care Act. So you could have a free physical. I was 28, 29 years old and immortal. We all were at that age. But I said: What the heck; it is free. I guess I will have a physical. So I went in and had a physical. The doctor looked me over, looked at my eyes, and down my throat. But he happened to notice that on my black I had a black mole. He said: I don't like the looks of that. That ought to be taken off. I didn't even notice it. I didn't even know it was there. He took it off, and it turned out to be something called malignant melanoma, which is one of the most virulent and serious forms of cancer. The thing about malignant melanoma is that, if you catch it in time, you are good. Here I am, 40 years later. If you don't, you are gone. I have had friends in Maine and in other parts of the country who have died of melanoma. It has always haunted me to this day that the only reason I caught it and my life was saved was because I had health insurance, and somewhere in this country there was a young man who also had a mole on his back or on his arm or on his neck and who didn't have health insurance, didn't have preventive care, didn't go to the doctor, and he is gone. That is not fair. That is not right. In a country as advanced and wealthy as this is, it is not right that that guy died and I am here. So don't ever tell me that health insurance doesn't save lives because it does. There is no doubt that it does. That is why it is so important for us to get this right and not just cavalierly and blithely rip health insurance away from people--many of whom have gotten it for the first time, many of whom are small business people--the very people we all talk about wanting to help. We can't do it. It is a dereliction of our duty to serve the American people. We need to figure out how to do it right. We need to figure out how to do it effectively and efficiently. In the end, we are here to help our fellow citizens. I am here for Maine, and I can't let my people suffer under a law that would take something away which they have come to depend upon and that has saved lives and means so much to them. We can do better. I am sure of it. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize Danielle Ripich, who is retiring from over a decade of service not only to students but also to the State of Maine as president of the University of New England, UNE, this month. Even though Danielle is not a native of Maine, she has, in every regard, embraced, cherished, and served the State just as any Mainer would. Under her tenure, UNE grew from 4,000 students to more than 10,000, increased its operating surplus by $127 million, expanded its campuses in Biddeford and Portland while opening a campus in Tangier, Morocco--making UNE the only U.S. institution of higher education to own a study-abroad campus specifically designed for the needs of science students--and launched three new colleges within the university. Additionally, in the midst of a national crisis over student loans, Danielle presided over one of the lowest default rates nationally on student loans at only 2.5 percent, even with 95 percent of students at the university taking out loans. A native of Ohio, Danielle began her impressive scholarly journey on her home turf, receiving her Ph.D. in speech pathology from Kent State University and both her bachelor's and master's degrees in speech pathology from Cleveland State University. She then went on to serve in leadership roles at Case Western Reserve University and later became dean of the college of health professions, as well as a professor in the college of medicine's department of neurology at Medical University of South Carolina before joining UNE. Danielle's accomplishments span beyond her work in higher education. As a result of her successful efforts in expanding both accessibility and opportunities at UNE for Maine's best and brightest, UNE's contribution to the Maine economy has topped more than $1 billion per year, with an annual donation of more than $21 million worth of health services to the community. The university is considered the leading supplier of healthcare professionals for the State of Maine. Danielle was named the 2016 Mainebiz Nonprofit Business Leader of the Year and is internationally recognized for her language research, particularly in the areas of child language and Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia. Adding to her already remarkable and diverse portfolio of accomplishments, she was named a congressional fellow by the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Throughout her years of service to the State, our country, and the world at large in her roles including president of UNE, mentor to student, and trailblazer in child language and Alzheimer's disease research, Danielle has demonstrated remarkable citizenship and a commitment to higher education, medicine, and community progress that is rarely seen. The UNE that has evolved from Danielle's vision is bold, innovative, eager to disrupt the status quo, socially conscious and committed to imbuing its students with global awareness. I am glad to add my voice to all those who are recognizing Danielle's distinguished career, and I thank Danielle for her service and many contributions to our State.

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, today I wish to honor the efforts of Ruth Libby and her work with Ruth's Reusable Resources. Her organization operates in southern Maine and is dedicated to ensuring that students ranging from preschool to 12th grade are adequately prepared with the basic tools of learning. When Ruth Libby's son was in kindergarten, she received a note from his teacher requesting household items such as egg cartons, meat trays, and juice can lids for use in craft projects. Ruth responded to this request in full force and went above and beyond by not only getting supplies to her son's classroom, but also for other classrooms in the school. As time went on, she began receiving, sorting, and stocking products donated by corporations, businesses, and individuals for use by local classrooms. Ruth started by delivering these items to the school, and a few years later, she established a ``storeroom'' in her basement where teachers could come and ``shop'' at their convenience. With financial assistance from the Unum Group and a grant from the State of Maine Department of Education, Ruth was able to create a unique and effective nonprofit organization and relocate to the organization's current 21,000-square-foot warehouse and 7,000-square- foot teacher store in Portland, ME. Since its inception in 1994, Ruth's Reusable Resources has provided more than $60 million worth of surplus furniture, paper, books, office supplies, and computers to nonprofits and schools. They have also received donated furniture, paper, books, office supplies, and computers from corporations, businesses, and individuals across the State of Maine. In turn, Ruth's Reusable Resources allows staff members of participating schools to ``shop'' for supplies at no charge. Ruth, together with a diverse group of hard-working volunteers, ranging from retired teachers, students, current teachers, corporate groups, retirees, court appointed volunteers, civic groups, collegiate ministries, and many more, work to ensure that every Maine student is provided with the necessary supplies to succeed in school. Ruth's Reusable Resources is a shining example of what can happen when you have determination and a passion to make a difference. Ruth is an outstanding example of a hard-working Mainer who is making a difference in her community and across our State. She has played an instrumental role in providing resources for classrooms in Maine which has furthered the education of many students. Thank you. Ruth, for all you have already done for both the students and their teachers in communities throughout Maine. I look forward to following your continued success.

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the 40th anniversary of Longfellow's Greenhouse of Manchester, ME, a family- owned small business and a leader in the greenhouse industry. Longfellow's Greenhouse opened during the winter of 1977. That year, with the help of their son, Scott, owners Lawrence and Mavis Longfellow built 12 large greenhouses and a retail shop on a meadow in Manchester. In the years that followed, the business flourished and expanded. Scott has been integral to that success, applying the knowledge and expertise learned through his studies at the University of Maine at Orono and holding the positions of grower and general manager up until this year. Today Scott's son, Will, carries on the tradition as general manager. Over the course of four decades, the Longfellow family and their devoted employees have built more than a business. They have created a seasonal destination, especially in the spring and holidays, where families can gather to create gardens, landscapes, and traditions filled with flowers, plants, and fond memories. In addition to providing outstanding services and a great experience, they are widely known for giving back to the community through both their time and proceeds. Longfellow's has helped create new ideas that enrich the gardening experience for their customers, all the while placing a special emphasis on presentation and education by holding special events that offer demonstrations, lectures, and hands-on classes. Today Longfellow's stands out with 21 greenhouses, where they produce 40,000 geraniums, 22,000 fall mums, 15,000 flowering hanging baskets, 75,000 perennials, and 25,000 poinsettias. Among the diverse flowers and plants they house are 800 varieties of perennials, 200 varieties of herbs and scented geraniums--over half of which are grown on site--more than 500 varieties of trees, shrubs, and vines, and 100 varieties of roses. Longfellow's Greenhouse has set the standard for horticulture in Maine, and they have done so while promoting civic engagement and practicing honest and ethical business--all of which will continue to make it a special part of central Maine. Not only have they fostered a positive culture around gardening, but their efforts have also engaged the imagination of people of all ages. I am proud and honored to join with all those who are celebrating this achievement and recognizing their high quality of work on behalf of all Maine people. I thank them for their tremendous contributions to our State.

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, I rise to speak for a few minutes on the AHCA, which is the healthcare bill that was recently passed in the House. I believe the letters stand for ``anti-healthcare bill'' as there are many troublesome aspects of this bill--kicking something like 20 million people off of health insurance and compromising essential benefits. It is what I call a ``fig leaf'' preexisting condition provision, which does not provide adequate funding in order to actually protect people with preexisting conditions. Yet what I really want to focus on today are two interrelated provisions--a massive cut to Medicaid and a massive tax cut for the wealthiest Americans. By the way, that tax cut gives a zero tax cut to anyone making less than $200,000 a year. I will talk about that in a moment. Let's talk about the Medicaid cuts, however. This is a part of the bill that has not gotten much attention. It is $840 billion over 10 years. It will be about a 10-percent cut of Medicaid funds in Maine. It is hard to get an actual analysis of that, however, because the House bill was passed without any Congressional Budget Office analysis--none, zero. Unbelievably, the Members of the House voted for a bill that they, literally, did not know the financial effects of--how it would affect the States, how it would affect the people in their States. Maybe, next week, we will get that analysis. Certainly, this body will not act in that way with no Congressional Budget Office analysis. Let's talk for a minute about who is on Medicaid, as 34 percent of the people on Medicaid are children, 20 percent are disabled people, and 18 percent are elderly. In other words, almost three-quarters--75 percent--are children, disabled, and elderly people. Many people talk about and think about Medicaid as some kind of welfare program. This is an essential lifeline for some of the most vulnerable people in our society--children, the disabled, and the elderly--75 percent--and 75 percent of the funding goes to disabled and elderly people. The people who sponsored this bill and who are talking about it across the country talk about flexibility. Yes, there are some cuts, but we are giving the States flexibility. That is nonsense. They are giving the States flexibility to make decisions between funding programs for the elderly and programs for children, between cutting off programs for opioids and providing support for people who are disabled. That is not flexibility. That is just passing agonizing choices off to the States. I was a Governor, and I know about having to make these kinds of decisions. To cut this money by this huge amount--almost $1 trillion over 10 years--and act as though it can all be made up through some kind of fake flexibility is just an unspeakably cruel way to shift this burden to the States. The bill talks about saving on the deficit. It saves on the deficit because $840 billion is shifted to the States. Let them pay it--shift and shaft. That is what it is--shift and shaft. Shift the cost and shaft the States, particularly the people in those States who depend upon these programs--those people being the disabled, the elderly, children, people with disabilities, and those who are struggling to defeat the scourge of opioids and opioid addiction. I want to talk about some people today. I want to talk about this guy, Dan Humphrey. He is 28 years old and lives in a group home in Lewiston, ME. He has autism and is nonverbal. He has some bipolar characteristics and a seizure disorder but is gentle and charming, and you can see his smile. He has very basic functional communication skills. He enjoys jumping on a trampoline and drumming. He performs all of his chores to care for himself, with prompting and guidance, such as laundry and grocery shopping. He is proud of his volunteer jobs. He serves Meals on Wheels to clients through the week, and he takes excess food from a nearby college to a local soup kitchen every Saturday. Daniel needs around-the-clock support in order to maintain this quality of life. When this level of programming was unavailable or is unavailable, he regresses and becomes aggressive. Even at current funding, Daniel is one of the lucky ones, as he is not on a waiting list. Although he qualified for services, it took him 8 years to get a home and a community-based service waiver for him to be able to live the life he does. He is in a group home in the wonderful city of Lewiston, ME, where he lives today. He is contributing. He has a decent life. By the way, this is all about people. It really bothers me that we talk about policy and ideology and free markets and flexibility. We are talking about people. We are talking about real people whose lives are on the line--people who are struggling with opioid addiction, elderly people who have no place to go, and disabled people like Dan and like Lidia Woofenden. Here is Lidia. She graduated from Mt. Ararat High School in June. She turns 21 in August. That is the high school my kids went to. I had two boys graduate from that high school. When she was 4 years old, she was diagnosed with a delayed growth of myelin on her brain, and, at 15, she began having seizures and was diagnosed with a rare genetic disorder. She lives with intellectual disabilities, seizures, and their side effects, as well as with a general lack of physical coordination. Yet, as her mom says, that is not who she is. She is charming and funny. Her mom calls her friendly and goofy and the stubbornest cuss. She was never expected to read but is now on her fourth Harry Potter book. She was never expected to ride a bike, but now she does. She even has a job. After years of volunteering at a local nursing home, she was offered a part-time job and is doing well. She is doing this because she had support from Medicaid. She cannot cross a street by herself, and she needs to be reminded to brush her teeth. She has no sense of money or danger. On the one hand, she is 20 years old; on the other hand, she is 6 years old. In other words, like most young people, she is complicated. Everything she has achieved has been accomplished with the help of dedicated teachers and therapists and has been almost exclusively funded through special education in the public schools and by Medicaid. By the way, Medicaid provides help to the tune of $26 million a year to children in Maine schools who need it. One of the amendments passed at the last minute in the House puts that funding through the schools in jeopardy. She has made monumental gains, but she will never be able to live alone. What happens when we make these cuts? What happens to Lidia? What happens to Dan? In the old days, they were warehoused. They were in facilities that were far away--out of sight, out of mind--or with their parents, who had to bear the burden, who themselves could not work because they had to take care of the children. These are just two people--two examples-- of what we are talking about here. Who will speak for them? Who will stand up for them? I will, and I hope this body will. We are the last bulwark between this terrible piece of legislation that was passed in the House and these people and millions like them across the country. Who will stand up for them? Why are we doing this? Why are we putting States through the ringer of having to make decisions to choose between Lidia and an elderly person in a nursing home and between a child and a young man who is trying to beat opioids? Why are we forcing them to make those choices? It is because we want to give a huge tax cut to the wealthiest Americans, and I am talking about a huge tax cut. It is the most skewed tax cut in history because it only goes to a few people. Seventy-nine percent of the benefit of this tax cut goes to millionaires, which is an average tax cut of $54,000 a year. Now, $54,000 a year to multimillionaires--the top one-tenth of 1 percent, those with incomes above $6 million--would receive tax cuts of more than $250,000 a piece in 2025 under this legislation. We are putting people like this at risk in order to have somebody buy another Maserati. It is unbelievable that this body would even consider making that tradeoff. That is what we are talking about here. Let's be very clear. It is an equation of lost Medicaid benefits, a gigantic tax cut. That is what this bill is all about. If you make between $500,000 and $1 million, you will see a $4,000 tax cut, which is not so egregious as higher up, and if you are under $200,000 a year, you get zero. This doesn't even masquerade as a middle-class tax cut. This is one of the most inequitable, cruel, and unconscionable pieces of policymaking I have ever seen. I think we need to be clear about that. If we don't stand up for Dan, Lidia, and millions like them--old and young, living in the shadows of our society, asking for nothing more than the ability to do the slightest things we take for granted, like crossing the street, having a job, dressing, feeling they are contributing--to take that away, to force States to make those decisions--and make no mistake, they are going to have to make those decisions. You simply can't cut the amount of money that is proposed in this bill--which will expand over time, by the way--and still expect the services to be the same or better through some kind of flexibility. That is nonsense. It would be bad enough, except to do it because of a massive tax cut to the people who least need it--that is what really makes this unacceptable. I know that people in this body are working on an alternative to the bill in the House, and I hope this can be an open process where all of us participate, where we are able to contribute ideas and amendments and thoughts. Particularly, I want us to think about the fact that we are the last line of defense. We are the last line of defense for people who can't speak up. In the case of my friend Dan, he literally can't speak up. We are who they are counting on, between us, and if it weren't for us, they would have no one to think about and demand that they be treated fairly and respectfully in the richest society on Earth. I hope we can do better. I know we can. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, today I wish to honor the Caribou VFW on their 70th anniversary. The Caribou VFW, known as the Lister-Knowlton VFW Post 9389, was founded on May 11, 1947, by veterans returning home from World War II. The post was named after two brave Caribou natives, Private Evan Lister and CPL Edward Knowlton, who served their country during World War II and made the ultimate sacrifice when they were only 23 years old. Their dedication and service to our country will never be forgotten. I also want to recognize the ladies auxiliary, who will celebrate their 70th anniversary on June 19. The ladies auxiliary was formed by women who were mothers, wives, sisters, and daughters of veterans who served in our Armed Forces and whose service made them eligible for the Veterans of Foreign Wars. In addition, the auxiliary includes female veterans who served abroad in times of war. While I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge all of the veterans for their service, I want to make special note of David O. Michaud. David is a World War II veteran and the sole surviving charter member of the Lister-Knowlton VFW Post 9389. I would also like to honor Josephine Bell, an original charter member of the VFW Ladies Auxiliary in Caribou who is still with us today. These 70th anniversaries, of both the Lister-Knowlton VFW post and the ladies auxiliary, provide occasion to celebrate the storied tradition of service, both past and present, that the Veterans of Foreign Wars represent. Each of us is forever indebted to those members of the VFW who served in the protection of the United States and to their families for the care and support they have provided. We are also grateful to the VFW for their continued service, supporting those veterans who have returned, advocating on their behalf at all levels of government, and organizing a variety of community building projects. In closing, I am glad to join with the members of the VFW and the ladies auxiliary in Caribou in honoring this 70th year of working on behalf of veterans, the State of Maine, and our great Nation.

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, I rise to speak briefly about the American Health Care Act that was passed last week in the House of Representatives. I thought a lot about this bill over the past few days and over the weekend. I talked to friends, I read about it, and I did as much analysis as I possibly could, given the fact that we don't have a Congressional Budget Office analysis of this complicated and important piece of legislation. I have concluded that it is the most ill-conceived, damaging, and downright cruel piece of legislation that I have ever seen a legislative body pass in my adult life. It drastically cuts support for Americans' ability to obtain health insurance. In Maine--again, as near as we can tell, because we don't have the final analysis--the preliminary numbers are this. Maine, under the Affordable Care Act, through the payments to individuals and other support, is receiving about $354 million a year coming via the Affordable Care Act. After this bill, it appears that the number is $80 million a year--$364 million to $80 million. That is almost an 80- percent cut. No one can tell me the people of Maine are going to have better healthcare with an 80-percent cut in the funds going to support their ability to do so. It just doesn't make sense. The way this bill works is, it is a tax on the elderly. Under the Affordable Care Act, there is a rule that policies for older people, 50, 55, 60, cannot exceed three times the rate of policies for younger people. We all know that younger people's policies do in fact cost somewhat less because they tend to be healthier, but the rule was no more than 3 to 1. Under the bill that was passed by the House last week, it is now 5 to 1. That is an elder tax, and Maine happens to be the most elder State in the United States. If they had taken a blank sheet of paper and said: We want to write a bill to harm the people of Maine, it would have been this bill. There also is a massive cut to Medicaid--$880 billion--and the sponsors to this bill claim that they are helping the deficit. How are they doing it? By shifting the cost to the States--shift and shaft. Balancing the Federal budget by simply taking costs that are now borne by the Federal Government and passing them off to the States is not responsible fiscal policy. Why don't we just have the States fund the U.S. Air Force? That would save us billions of dollars a year--probably $100 billion a year. Shift that to the States--and $880 billion shifted to the States. Then there is what I call the figleaf--the preexisting condition provision which talks about the Maine plan, which was a plan that preceded the Affordable Care Act, which did give protection for preexisting conditions, but it was adequately funded. It cost about $64 million a year to fund our preexisting plan. Again, because we don't have the precise figures--but it looks like under this new bill, that $64 million would be $20 million, one-third as much, a two-thirds reduction. It is not a real preexisting condition plan; it is a figleaf. It is to say to people: We are covering preexisting conditions--nonsense, not true. Of course, the final piece of this bill is a massive tax cut for the top one-tenth of 1 percent of people in this country. They will not even notice it, but the people who lose their healthcare will notice. Now, under the Affordable Care Act, there is a list of essential benefits which includes mental health and substance abuse. That is a big deal. That allows and assures people to have coverage for these very damaging and dangerous, in the case of substance abuse, conditions. Under this bill that passed in the House, States can waive those provisions and the waiver is very easy. The standards for the waiver are very easy, and if the Federal department doesn't respond in 60 days, the waiver is automatically provided. In those States when they have a waiver, mental health and substance abuse services could be covered under a specialized plan which would be very expensive. By the way, this waiver covers both the individual market and employer-based coverage. How many people will be impacted? We do not know because we do not have an analysis from the Congressional Budget Office. I want to talk for the remainder of my time about opioids and what this bill would do on that. We are in the midst of a crisis in Maine and across the country. It is the most serious public health crisis in my adult life. In Maine, with regard to substance abuse and overdose deaths, you can see what has happened in the last 5 years. More than one person a day is dying of an overdose. Across the country, it is four an hour. We have turned ourselves inside out in this country in order to deal with the threat of terrorism, for example, which was entirely appropriate. Yet what if we had a terrorist attack that was killing 37,000 people a year across our country, and we were just sort of going along, business as usual? I have been working on this issue since I got to the Senate. I have been meeting with people throughout Maine--in hospitals and in recovery--and meeting with families and parents and law enforcement. The one thing that comes through loud and clear is that treatment works and that we need it and that we do not have enough available beds in Maine and across the country. This is a terrible disease, but the most tragic thing of all is when someone finally reaches the point at which he is ready to ask for help and he is told ``Sorry, there is a 3-week wait'' or ``There is a 3- month wait.'' That is when lives are lost and families are destroyed. Treatment does work. I have met with people for whom it has worked and changed their lives. I have a friend in Portland named Andrew Kiezulas, who I believe is graduating this weekend from the University of Southern Maine. He has been through this. He has been to the bottom, and he is now on the mountaintop. He knows treatment works, and it has made a difference in his life. Without it, he would not be where he is today. Justin Reid, another young man from Southern Maine, was in the throes of addiction and escaped. He now runs a sober house and volunteers for a program with his local police department. Access to treatment is much easier with health insurance and with sufficient Medicaid support. The House bill simply makes it more difficult to access treatment. It penalizes the very people who have taken the hard step to say that this is what they need. Let me tell you a story. Matt Braun is from Cape Elizabeth, ME, right outside of Portland. In 2009 Matt entered treatment for opioid addiction. His parents, who were strong, middle-class, professional people, purchased what they thought was good health insurance for their family. After 5 days of treatment, they received a call that the insurer was not going to pay for any more. We have decided your son only needs 5 days. His parents argued, and the medical staff argued. They finally won. They got 7 days of treatment. Those extra 2 days made a difference. The insurance company said that it was not going to help, that he was going to be a chronically relapsing, drug-addicted person, so they were going to stop at 7 days. They said he would not make it. His parents did not give up. Matt stayed in treatment and has been sober ever since 2009. He is successful. He is getting ready to take the MCAT. He wants to go to medical school. His goal is to approach addiction from the perspective of a health professional and offer care and support to people who are struggling in the way he did. ``It is frustrating how insurance companies dictate what treatment looks like and what a life is worth,'' said Matt. Getting treatment for substance abuse disorder is not easy, but this bill, the American Health Care Act, which is a misnamed bill--it should be the American Take Away Health Care Act--only makes it worse. On top of all of this, the administration has recently indicated that it is talking about essentially dismantling the Office of National Drug Control Policy--the highest level to be working on this problem in a coordinated way in the Federal Government. Here we are, in the midst of the most serious drug crisis in the history of this country, and the administration is talking about gutting the very office that is supposed to lead the fight. It would have been as if, in the middle of World War II, we had abolished the Department of Defense. It makes no sense. It is moving in absolutely the wrong direction. By supporting this healthcare bill--or non-healthcare bill--in the House of Representatives, which will drastically cut Medicaid, drastically cut reimbursements for health insurance, drastically limit the availability of coverage for preexisting conditions--by the way, drug addiction could be one--and drastically eliminate the essential benefits provisions of the Affordable Care Act, we are just making it worse. The Office of National Drug Control Policy has things like the Drug- Free Community Support Program, which administers small grants to small towns. That can make a real difference. Last fall, 18 Maine programs each received $125,000, and the DFC's 2014 national evaluation report said that there was a significant decrease in the 30-day use of prescription drugs for youth in communities with one of these programs. Prevention is one of the things we need to work on, and it is one of the things we need to understand. Yet talking about this problem is not going to solve it. Treatment is going to solve it. Money for treatment is going to solve it. Beds for treatment are going to solve it. Detox centers are going to solve it. More resources to law enforcement are going to solve it. More resources to the Coast Guard, in order to interdict drug shipments coming into this country, are going to solve it. There is no single answer, but at the core is commitment. Passing this bill from the House, which drastically undermines all of those elements of treatment and prevention, and then talking about dismantling the office that has led this fight in the entire Federal Government, is beyond comprehension in the midst of where we are. If this graph were doing this, if it were going down, I would be OK with it. But it is not going down; it is going up. It is getting worse, and we have to deal with it. As we work through this issue of healthcare--hopefully we are going to start with a blank sheet of paper over here--I hope we will bear in mind that one of the most serious health problems in the country today is opioid abuse. This is not all about ideology, and it is not about policy. It is about people. It is about Matt, and it is about Andrew. It is about the thousands and millions of people across this country who are struggling, who want to lead productive lives, and who want to contribute to their communities. All they need is to have that moment when treatment is available, when a helping hand is available, when caring is available to help them escape the throes of this terrible disease and rejoin their communities and their families. That is what we have to keep in front of us as we work here in this body. We can make a difference in people's lives, but in leaving them behind, we will certainly not do so. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. KING

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

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize Flewelling Farms, who has been designated family farm of the year and McCain's ``Grower of the Year.'' Farms and farm families are essential assets to my home State of Maine--not just for the tremendous economic benefits the agriculture industry has, but also for the rich heritage and work ethic that makes up the communities where generations have plowed the lands. Maine agriculture is more diversified than in many States, and on any given day, you can drive past acres of potatoes, grains, large dairy farms, small truck farms, and even smaller value added farms producing cheese, breads, and maple syrup, as well as conventional farms, organic farms, and even farms raising oysters, seaweed, and salmon. From now until the farm bill is passed, I want to take the opportunity to talk about Maine farms and farmers, their creativity, ingenuity, perseverance, and ability to grow amazing food and fiber on what can often be hard scrabble land with a solid crop of rocks and trees always watching for the opportunity to creep back on to land that was cleared long ago by hard work. I want to begin in the agricultural county of Maine, Aroostook County. The potato is king in Aroostook County, ME--the large farms and relatively flat fertile land produce 16 million pounds of seed, chip, and table stock potatoes on nearly 50,000 acres, generating thousands of jobs and infuse millions of dollars into the economy of the State of Maine. While agriculture is indeed valuable and essential to tables across the Nation and the world, community and farm families are what really makes northern Maine a special place. I am pleased to honor one such family today, the Jerry and Bruce Flewelling family of Easton. The Flewelling family was named the ``2016 Farm Family of the Year'' by the Maine Potato Board and the McCain's ``Champion Grower of 2016'' as well. These recognitions are given for the quality of product and commitment to the industry, but also for the heart and hardiness of the family who, through trials and tribulations of unpredictable weather and markets, keeps their drive for excellence at the forefront of every day. The Flewellings have been doing this for six generations. The first Flewellings arrived in this country from Wales in the late 1800s, entering the United States near where the family farm is today. They have experienced tremendous change in how potatoes are grown, harvested, and stored, but by being ready to implement best practices, new technologies, and innovation, they have grown the farm and its quality and productivity and are able to carry on the strong tradition of agriculture in Maine. In addition to being an exceptional small business, the family members are active community members as well. They serve on municipal boards, Maine Pesticide Control Board, Agricultural Bargaining Council, as well as Maine Potato Growers. They are a strong voice for future generations of farmers and are mentors to other farmers, as well always encouraging others and sharing their expertise. For these reasons and many more not listed here, I offer my congratulations to Jerry and Bruce and their family on the continuation of an exceptional farm and best wishes as they continue to instill a legacy of hard work and exceptional crops for future generations to come.

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Will the Senator yield for discussion?

Mr. KING. Madam President, I believe this is a simple case that could be easily rectified, and I am confident--I am almost confident that it will be. I trust that common sense will prevail and the well-being of our students will be put above minor technical issues in an application that is so important. Thank you, Madam President. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. KING. Madam President, around here we often discuss bureaucracy and regulation and overreach and government getting out of the way. I want to point out and bring to the attention of the Senate and the American people one of the most ridiculous actions of any government at any level that I have ever encountered. There is a wonderful program that provides support for students going on to college, particularly low-income students and particularly in rural areas. Every year our colleges and colleges across the country file applications for this program called Upward Bound. It is one of the most successful programs of the Federal Government that I have encountered. I have met the students in Maine and from other parts of the country. It is a program that helps these students make the transition from their communities to colleges and to gain a college education. Applications are necessary, and applications have rules about the size of the paper and that kind of thing. What has happened in this case, on the application of the University of Maine at Presque Isle-- affectionately called UMPI--the University of Maine at Presque filed its application, which was 65 pages. They met all the requirements, but they made a terrible mistake. The rules of the Department of Education say that the application must be double-spaced. Indeed, the application is double-spaced, except for an exhibit on page 21, which is single-spaced. It is double-spaced in the body of the application, and there was one other infographic in the application which was a space and a half--1.5 instead of 2--and the application was rejected for that reason alone. This is preposterous. This isn't a game. This isn't ``gotcha.'' This is about real people. At the University of Maine at Presque Isle, it is 129 real people, and it is about their access to higher education, their access to a better life, their ability to achieve success. The application of their university was rejected because this little piece on one page and a similar piece on another page was 1\1/2\ spaces instead of 2. This is nonsense. This is the kind of thing that makes people hate government. This is the kind of thing that makes people say: What are they thinking down there? What is wrong with Washington? Why can't they get something so simple as looking at the substance of the application instead of applying what can only be characterized as a bureaucratic rule? I am not one of these people who attack bureaucrats and Federal workers. In my experience, they are good people who are trying to do the right thing, and they make enormous contributions to our country. In this case, somebody somewhere in the Department of Education made a dumb decision, and it is one that is going to impact my people in Maine. I can't just keep quiet about it. Last week, after letters from the Maine congressional delegation, which I will place into the Record, the Department of Education announced: Well, it probably wasn't the right thing to do. This wasn't a very good policy. I guess we made a mistake. The problem is, it doesn't help UMPI; it only helps people in the future. I have worked with my colleague Senator Collins on this. She has done research. Her office has discovered precedents where indeed this kind of thing has happened before and they fixed it. They fixed it so that the application could be considered. By the way, the decision on these applications around the country has not been made yet. We are not prejudicing anybody. We are not making a change after the fact. All they have to do is go to page 1 of the UMPI application and read it and forget about the fact that it is 1\1/2\ spaces in this little exhibit in the middle of the double-spaced application. In fact, we can fix it. We will make this double-spaced. I feel silly even coming to the floor of the U.S. Senate talking about this double-space, 1\1/2\ spaces. What are we doing here? Again, the reason I am so passionate about this is that these are real people's lives. These are 129 young people who will not be able to take part in this program, and very likely their entire lives can be compromised by this. This is a big deal for them. It may be a little deal for the Department of Education, but it is a big deal for the University of Maine at Presque Isle and their students. All I am asking is for the Department of Education and the Secretary of Education to look at this obvious, ridiculous bureaucratic mistake, correct it, and correct it for those who have been prejudiced by it. It is not just the University of Maine at Presque Isle; I understand there are a number of others across the country whose applications were kicked out for similar reasons. I understand there has to be some uniformity. It has to be written in English. It has to be on reasonable paper that you can read, and it is not to be handwritten. To reject an application involving 129 young lives in my State because a little piece out of a 65-page application has 1\1/2\ spaces instead of 2--give me a break. This is something that can and should be fixed, and I assume and believe the Secretary of Education and the people in charge at the Department of Education will find a way to fix it and prove to the people of Maine that the government in Washington is not crazy, that we can make reasonable decisions, and that when we make a mistake--and they acknowledged last week that it was a mistake, that it was not good policy, and they have rectified it going forward. But let's admit the mistake and relieve those who have been impacted by that mistake of its weight, of the obstacle that it places in the way of young people's opportunities. I understand that this issue has arisen in Montana, Wisconsin, Arkansas, West Virginia, New Jersey, Ohio, Washington, Delaware, Alabama, Illinois, California, New York, Massachusetts, Florida, and Maine. It is time for it to be addressed. It ought to be very simple, and it ought to be taken care of in a matter of days--not weeks or months, but in a matter of days--so that those young people and our university can plan and implement and move forward in their mission to enrich and enable the lives of our citizens. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the letter submitted to the Department of Education by the Maine congressional delegation on this subject.

Mr. KING. I say to the Senator from Virginia, 48 years ago this summer I joined the national legal services program and went to the State of Maine, where I served people in a very rural area with a whole range of problems. What I came to realize during that time was that the promises of our democracy, the promises inherent in the American idea, are not self-executed. Every morning we pledge allegiance to this flag, and the last phrase is critical: ``with liberty and justice for all.'' That is a promise made to the people of this country. But the U.S. Supreme Court has found repeatedly, as the Senator knows, that you can't achieve justice if you don't have representation, particularly in an age of an overlapping and complex legal system. So I believe this is not just another government program. This is part of the essence of the American idea. I remember being up in Maine in this small town of Skowhegan, ME. I met a woman who was visiting from England. She said: What do you do? I said: Well, I work for this group that provides legal services to low-income people in this region. She said: How is it funded? I said: By the government. She said: Do you ever have to sue the government? I said: Yes, of course. That is one of the things that you occasionally have to do in order to protect the rights of your client. She was amazed that in this country we would fund the legal support of people who might actually occasionally bring cases against the government itself. She thought that was wonderful and really epitomized the idealism of this country. So I commend the Senator for raising this issue during Law Day to talk about the importance of this in terms of its relationship to the overall idea of America. We talk a lot about justice. As you point out, across the street it says: ``Equal Justice Under Law.'' But that often means you have to have competent and professional advocacy and representation. The Legal Services Corporation is not a big part of the budget. It has not grown exponentially over the years. In fact, I suspect in real dollars, it is smaller today than when I entered the service 48 years ago. But I know it is important. It is important in Maine, with the Pine Tree Legal Assistance, the Volunteer Lawyers Project, and the volunteers from law firms around our State who volunteer to give their time for pro bono legal assistance. But the hub of it is the National Legal Services Program. To me, it epitomizes our commitment to effectuate the promises of American life, not just to talk about them but to make them real. So I commend the Senator for his comments.

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize David Holt, who has been a town manager in Maine since 1976, serving four communities. In 1999, David received the Linc Stackpole Manager of the Year Award, chosen by his peers in the Maine Town and City Managers Association in recognition of his exemplary leadership qualities, professional ethics, and commitment to public service. Over the past 40 years, David has been a mentor, trusted adviser, and role model to many younger managers. David was raised in rural western Maine, the son of a farmer. This upbringing instilled a strong work ethic in him at a young age and an appreciation for preserving the natural environment, as well as empathy for the hard-working people of Maine. He has a strong intellect, a keen sense of humor, and is gifted writer, chronicling his life and times in his book of autobiographical short stories ``Man about Town.'' He got involved in local government early by being elected as the youngest member of the board of selectmen in his hometown of Greenwood at the age of 18. His interest in public service was kindled by this experience, and he later attended the University of Maine where he received a degree in public management. David served as the first town manager of the town of Princeton. While there, he developed an airport by receiving grants to move the historic train station to be reused as a terminal building. These efforts resulted in the establishment of regular air service with a local carrier, promoting economic development and easy access to the area by sportsmen. He enlisted the Maine National Guard to do their summer training session in Princeton, and with the work of hundreds of military personnel with heavy equipment, a new mile-long major access road to the airport from Route 1 was completed in just 2 weeks. While serving in the town of Dexter, he prepared successful applications to the Community Development Block Grant Program that resulted in the renovation of the entire downtown area by adding new decorative streetlights, improved sidewalks, better drainage, and related road work. This effort revitalized the downtown area and spurred private investment in the Main Street buildings. In the town of Standish, he worked extensively on the growth management plan, which established a roadmap for future community development. In the town of Norway, where he has served for the past 28 years, David has worked diligently to ensure that the town stays in sound financial condition, as well as keeping the Main Street economically and culturally vibrant. He instituted a sidewalk building program that has resulted in Norway becoming one of Maine's most walkable communities. Perhaps his crowning achievements were the successful grant application and efforts to save the town's historic opera house. David will be long remembered in all the towns he has served for his commitment to community betterment and his forward-thinking positive management style.

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, today I wish to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the Rotary Club of Lewiston-Auburn, ME. There are over 35,000 Rotary Clubs worldwide, with the LA Rotary being the 291st. Since 1917, the LA Rotary has demonstrated a commitment to community and global service by supporting local organizations, awarding scholarships to local students, and providing clean water to communities in Haiti. In their 100 years of service, this exceptional organization has gained members who represent the unique and diverse business community of the Lewiston-Auburn area. The LA Rotary was founded by Captain Frank W. Hulett, who gave his life during WWI on June 6, 1918, at the Battle of Belleau Wood in France. Since Captain Hulett signed the application for membership of Rotary International on March 21, 1917, the LA Rotary has made great contributions to the worldwide Rotary organization of business and professional leaders. The LA Rotary has upheld an international presence by providing humanitarian service, encouraging high ethical standards in all vocations, and helping to build and maintain goodwill and peace throughout the world. I applaud the LA Rotary's emphasis on local and global charity and giving back to their local communities. The LA Rotary is sponsored by the many donors who attend their successful fundraisers, including one that takes place at the famous Lewiston Hot Air Balloon Festival. The money raised from these fundraisers has gone towards several valuable projects like the Autism Movie Events, an ongoing project in partnership with a local movie theatre and the Autism Society of Maine. The LA Rotary has sustained their all-inclusive pattern by donating to the construction of the Lewiston Universally Accessible Playground Project. The playground will be barrier free, with smooth and level surfaces to make it easier for those with physical limitations, and is meant to provide an attractive and meaningful space for all, regardless of physical or sensory development. Another example of their excellent charity work is that, each May, the LA Rotary also gives back to local students by choosing seven high school seniors throughout the State to award $1,000 college scholarships. I wish to join the communities of Lewiston and Auburn, as well as the State of Maine, in congratulating the LA Rotary for this remarkable achievement. I look forward to following their continued growth and service, and I thank them for their commitment to bettering Maine and the world.

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, each year high school student- athletes from across the country compete for their State championship title. The journey of a championship team is not merely a story of glory or success, but rather an aggregation of hard work, sportsmanship, and persistence. Today I wish to extend recognition to a team in Maine whose perseverance and teamwork have made them a force to be reckoned with each season. I am proud to highlight the achievements of the Lewiston High School Blue Devils competition cheerleading team who, on the path to their third consecutive Class A State title for the sixth time in the last seven seasons, have demonstrated a remarkable level of drive, ambition, and pride towards achieving success. Lewiston High School's nationally recognized and distinguished competition cheer program has a long history of talent and teamwork symbolic of the pride felt for the Blue Devils throughout the community. As the eighth consecutive Class A North/East Regional Champions, the cheer team has experienced few losses in recent years, but the program and student-athletes see each challenging loss as an opportunity to work harder and be stronger. The Blue Devils fulfilled that promise and more this past season. After a loss in the Kennebec Valley Athletic Conference, KVAC, the team responded with an impressive display of discipline and grit when they exceeded expectations and won the State title with a score of 95--representative of a nearly seamless routine. The Lewiston cheer program is much more than a team of exceptional student-athletes. These talented and aspiring young people have contributed to a cheer dynasty that inspires young athletes and is recognized as a premier program throughout the State. The pride felt for the program, team members, peers, and the Lewiston community at large shows the level of dedication and ambition that has led to so many impressive successes. I wish to join the city of Lewiston and the entire Maine community in congratulating the Lewiston High School competition cheering team for their well-earned recognition. The program has built a legacy of success, instilling core values of hard work, perseverance, and sportsmanship and imbues all that is significant about participation and competition in sport at any level. For this and so much more, the Blue Devils competition cheer team are true champions.

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, today I wish to honor the work of Tyler Frank and his award-winning company Garbage to Garden--a curbside composting service that was founded in Portland, ME. In August 2012, Tyler Frank was living in Portland and wanted to start a compost pile, but didn't have the space in his urban surroundings. He and his roommates wondered why they couldn't put compost out on the curb like they do with their trash and recycling, and with that, Garbage to Garden was born. Tyler set up a table on Congress Street during a First Friday Artwalk, and by the end of the day, 17 Portland residents had signed on to his curbside composting service. Today one in seven Portland households participates in Garbage to Garden. Tyler and his partners have expanded their service to eight other Maine communities and three communities in Massachusetts. Tyler was able to create a unique and effective composting company, and with more than 8,000 households, schools, restaurants, and businesses using their services, they are the most successful curbside composting company in the country. Tyler has created a sustainable and local experience. Food scraps are composted by Benson Farms in Gorham, and all food waste can be incorporated into Garbage to Garden's compost, due to the high-heat process they use. Garbage to Garden also collects used cooking oil, and Maine Standard Biofuels turns it into biofuel and soap, which is then used to wash the composting buckets. Using clean composting buckets is a key part of Garbage to Garden's process, eliminating the ``ick factor'' that turns many people off from composting. Garbage to Garden even offers free service to those who volunteer for the company or for one of their partner organizations. Every day, Garbage to Garden diverts 20 tons of food scraps from landfills, and over a 3-year period, the average household will divert 1 ton of food waste from landfills. Garbage to Garden is a shining example of what can happen when you have a little determination, a great idea, and passion to make a difference. Tyler is an excellent example of a hard-working Mainer who is making a difference in our State and beyond. I look forward to following the company's continued growth and remarkable service to Maine communities. Thank you, Tyler, for all you have already done for the greater Portland community and our great State of Maine. We are lucky to have people like you working to better our communities.

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize and to congratulate the students of the Clan of Mor'Du team for their recent State competition victory and their invitation to participate in the FIRST LEGO League World Festival. As we enter a century of fast-paced innovation where science and technology continue to be at the epicenter of our daily lives, it is important to promote STEM education so that the next generation of engineers and entrepreneurs can fully harness the opportunities these new advancements bring to our society. Therefore, it is my honor to bring to the attention of the Senate a group of astounding young students and their coaches from Spruce Mountain Middle School who have stepped up to the plate to accept this challenge. These outstanding students compete in the State's rigorous LEGO league, where teams must build and program robots made from LEGO NXT kits to solve missions. Their dedication to excellence and their perseverance against teams from more prominent school districts has already lead them to two well-deserved statewide championship victories. In honor of their tireless efforts, the Clan of Mor'du have been invited to attend the FIRST LEGO League World Festival in St. Louis, MO, this spring. For most of these curious young students, it will be their first trip outside of Maine. I wish to join the communities of Jay, Livermore, and Livermore Falls, as well as the State of Maine, in congratulating the Clan of Mor'du for their pioneering spirit and remarkable achievements. Their willingness to challenge themselves and work together as a team is a testament to the tenacity and ingenuity of Maine's great people.

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the Senate's historic vote to ratify Treaty 114-12, Protocol to the North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 on the Accession of Montenegro. This represents an important step forward in Montenegro's bid to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO. Maine has strong ties to Montenegro through the National Guard's State Partnership Program, which pairs State National Guards with partner nations around the world. Both parties forge an enduring relationship over the years through training exercises, military-to- military engagement, and security cooperation activities. These relationships are critical to our national security; they improve the capacity of friendly militaries, enhance our interoperability as allies, and allow us to promote our values in emerging nations. Furthermore, they provide members of the Guard with unique opportunities that make them more skilled military professionals and more experienced citizens. The Maine National Guard partnered with Montenegro in December 2006, just 6 months after Montenegro declared its independence. In the decade since, the Maine National Guard has advised and assisted Montenegro as the young nation has transformed its military, transitioning to an all- volunteer force and contributing troops to the coalition fighting in Afghanistan. This relationship has expanded beyond the military dimension: the Maine Marine Patrol has trained with the Montenegrin marine police, and Mainers have worked with numerous Montenegrin governmental agencies to improve their disaster preparedness and response. Through numerous joint exercises each year in both Maine and Montenegro, Mainers have developed close, lasting relationships with their Montenegrin counterparts. Montenegro joined the State Partnership Program expressly as a means of achieving their desired accession to NATO. The Senate's ratification of Montenegro's membership bid reflects the hard work and enormous growth that Montenegro has achieved in the last 10 years. Mainers should be proud of the support and training that they have offered during this time. Maine stands beside Montenegro as it takes a major step toward NATO membership, pleased to continue our partnership in the future.

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, this month Togus VA Maine Healthcare System will observe the 50th anniversary of the Vietnam war by honoring veterans of the Vietnam war era and their families. Togus will welcome veterans, their families, and communities in a ceremony at the Togus Theater in Augusta on March 23, 2017, to commemorate their service and sacrifices and to thank them for dedicating both strength and service in defense of our freedom. Throughout the war, the United States deployed nearly 3 million servicemembers to Vietnam. Over 58,200 Americans made the ultimate sacrifice, and more than 150,000 were wounded during the conflict. Our veterans selflessly served this country, and they deserve to be recognized for their unwavering patriotism, courage, and resilience that exemplifies the strength of the American spirit and our Nation's commitment to democracy worldwide. Maine played a critical role in the war effort. Those who served in the Vietnam war represent the largest contingent of veterans in Maine, and their record of service has earned them our eternal gratitude. Nearly 48,000 soldiers from Maine served in Vietnam, and almost 350 Mainers lost their lives or went missing in action during the war. For this observance of the 50th anniversary of the Vietnam war, I am proud to recognize the brave Americans who served, both overseas and here on the homefront. Their service makes this country great, and their countless personal sacrifices to protect our freedoms can never be fully repaid. It is my honor to express my gratitude to our veterans for their service during the Vietnam war and their many contributions to the State of Maine and our great Nation.

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the Jewish Community Alliance in Portland, Maine, for their longstanding service and commitment to Maine's Jewish community across southern Maine. In 1999, the Jewish Community Alliance of Southern Maine, JCA, was founded following a merger of the Jewish Community Center and the Jewish Federation. With a strong commitment to upholding Jewish values and culture, the JCA provides diverse programs for the entire community, educating children, teens, and adults to better connect with their community and learn from one another. The organization welcomes citizens of all backgrounds, encouraging a deeper understanding of Jewish history, practice, and culture. The JCA understands the importance of supporting and educating future generations through high-quality programming for children offered throughout the year. The JCA administers a nationally accredited preschool program, now in its 24th year, which provides children with the opportunity to grow and learn in a safe and positive environment driven by Jewish values. Additionally, each summer, the JCA welcomes children of all faiths to the Center Day Camp, along the shores of Sebago Lake in Cumberland County, ME. Heading into its 68th summer, the Center Day Camp encourages Maine's youth to explore new interests, build confidence and friendships, and develop new skills. The JCA also offers adult education classes to engage both Jewish and non-Jewish individuals, and to provide opportunities to learn about a wide range of topics relating to Judaism and Jewish life. One such program, NextDor, offers peer-led social, cultural, and educational engagement guided by Jewish values to adults in their twenties, thirties, and early forties. The program is dedicated to engaging members in a variety of settings that are accessible, inclusive, and uniting to help encourage Jewish and non-Jewish participation. I would like to recognize the positive impact that the JCA has had in the lives of Maine's citizens and its positive impact in strengthening the Jewish community. Their ongoing commitment to a better and more prosperous tomorrow is to be commended, and their message of inclusiveness and engagement is a model for the entire State. I look forward to the continued success of the Jewish Community Alliance of Southern Maine, and to watching their community grow and thrive.

Mr. KING

Mr. KING. Mr. President, today I wish to honor two exceptional women, Dr. Ann Koch Schonberger and the late Clara Swan, who are the new inductees to the Maine Women's Hall of Fame. Ann and Clara have made a vital impact on the lives of women in their communities and across the State of Maine. We celebrate their dedication to improving the lives of women in Maine. Dr. Arm Koch Schonberger, from Bangor spent more than 20 years as the director of the women's studies program at the University of Maine and now serves as faculty emerita, focusing on women's, gender, and sexuality studies. Ann also spent many years as a mathematics professor. Ann has published numerous papers and presented at dozens of conferences on her research and experiences on the intersection between STEM careers and gender. She has also spent countless hours volunteering at the Spruce Run Womancare Alliance, helping women heal from domestic abuse and other forms of violence. Ann strives to bring to Maine the Spruce Run mantra of ``imagining communities without isolation, violence, abuse and fear.'' The late Clara Swan was born in Princeton, ME, and spent her life serving-as an educator, administrator, and coach. Clara touched the lives of thousands of students during her 30-plus years at the Husson University campus in Bangor. Clara herself was a graduate of the school, known as the Maine School of Commerce when she graduated in 1933. She returned to Husson in 1939, and spent 34 years as a professor and administrator. She was also a women's basketball coach for 19 years, amassing a record of 240 wins, 34 losses, and 7 ties, which included two undefeated seasons. Clara's legacy will not only live on in her former students and players, but at her former institution as well. In 2002, Husson named its fitness center in Clara's honor. She somehow found the time to volunteer at St. Joseph's Hospital, and she delivered meals to seniors' homes as part of the Meals on Wheels program. Clara lived an active life until she died at the age of 104 this past January. Congratulations to both Ann and Clara for their induction into the Maine Women's Hall of Fame. With this well-earned honor, Ann and Clara join the ranks of Senator Margaret Chase Smith, Senator Olympia Snowe, and Senator Susan Collins, remarkable women who have inspired women in Maine and across the country. Maine is lucky to benefit from such outstanding leaders and pioneers for women in higher education. I thank Ann and Clara for their service and their many contributions to the women and communities of our State.